2010 is already turning out to be a banner year in terms of organizations putting digital first in their marketing priorities. For those of us who service the industry, it’s a blessing. The digital marketplace has been woefully underfunded, and everyone knows it. I mean, everyone. The problem wasn’t about tools or technology, it was about knowledge and understanding. That gap is closing.
There are key differences between the companies that are on the right track and those who continue to struggle. They’re concerned about fundamentally different challenges. Let’s pursue those from the positions of The Strugglers and The Advancers.
Challenge: Websites vs. Content
Ah, websites. We love ‘em. But what are they? The Strugglers are concerned about having to do a “site redesign.” They are concerned mainly with how to drive web traffic, freshen up their content, and increase page views. They’d love transactions! (I mean, who doesn’t?) The Strugglers spend a lot of time on a few key areas that are concerning. First, their point of view is more towards themselves and what they’d like to communicate, rather than the needs of their visitors. A website should not be a reflection of an organizational chart, rather a lens into the needs of consumers. This viewpoint creates conflict as competing internal wants and desires replace a keen understanding of their intended audiences. Second, The Strugglers often begin with and gravitate towards their site’s new aesthetic. As such, they are often times enamored with design concepts either produced internally or by their agencies. The teams here tend to galvanize around how a new site may “look.”
The Advancers are less concerned about websites these days and more concerned about how their content and relationships live outside of their sites in the world of distributed content and industry conversation. A “website” to The Advancers consists of several dynamics: incredibly efficient transactional processes (shopping carts, lead forms, sign-ups, etc.), content management that allows for all-content to be sharable and syndicated, and easy-to-follow instructions for conducting business.
Challenge: Brands Are Human
This morning, I had the pleasure of reaquainting myself with an old friend Dan Wallace of IdeaFood. He made an interesting comment in our discussion. “Brands were invented to replace personal relationships between customers and tradespeople.” Prior to the industrial revolution, “brands” consisted of tradespeople who assigned their names to their companies. The shoemaker, the barrelmaker, the tailor all were known to their markets as individuals. As mass production replaced local manufacturing, consumers lost touch with the human element of their transactions. As a result, the Brand was invented to fill the gap.
The Advancers are recognizing that the digital markets offer an opportunity to rehumanize their brands. It’s possible now to offer consumers access to the real humans behind their products and services they buy. Brands like Best Buy are launching programs such as Twelpforce that make the relationship between customers and customer service more individualized and transparent. Another Advancer is Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage (disclaimer: a client of mine) who recognizes that home buyers buy homes from agents not brands so they’re training their agents to be sophisticated and helpful users of social networks.
The Strugglers, on the other hand, continue to try and centralize their social efforts within marketing, rather than organizationally develop strategies that take into account how consumers actually interact with them across various disciplines.
Challenge #3: Earn vs. Buy
Here’s where current challenges hit your pocketbooks. Increasingly, The Advancers have hit their stride in their abilities to earn new customers and make existing customers more loyal by being more open with their content and relationships. The Strugglers continue to need to pay for their relationships. To put this in a very simple example, take the difference between search marketing and search optimization. Search marketing relies upon The Strugglers bidding against each other for placement within the paid listings on Google and the other major search engines. And there are a lot of people bidding on these finite terms, thereby driving up prices, often times outside the realm of positive ROI. Don’t get my wrong: there are plenty of circumstances in which paying for traffic makes sense — time constricted campaigns, message testing, etc. — but to be completely reliant upon paid media certainly does not take into consideration the many opportunities to earn relationships.
Search optimization, on the other hand, is the result of creating great content that, increasingly, has social connections to it. The Advancers are building strategies that take into account that Google, in particular, is indexing social content (Tweets, reviews, blog commentary, and other co-created content) at such a rapid pace that “branded” content is getting pushed off page one. Google hasn’t made this change because it’s trying to be some sort of social Overlord, rather because myriad data indicate that’s the type of content you and I trust. The Advancers are encouraging customers to review their products and services. They’re participating in online discussions about their industries. They’re creating sharable content left and right, not just because they’re good people, mind you. They’re doing this because that’s where the action is. The Advancers recognize that earning people’s admiration through being more open is a hell of a lot less expensive than having to pay for it.
So, where are you on the spectrum? Are you asking the right questions? What’s getting in the way? At the center of all of these challenges is the transition from the Industrial Age to the Information Age. That’s all.
Easy, huh?