Janet Lee Johnson | The Art of Marketing

Andrew Graham of Bear Sterns posed a fascinating observation last week in his Friday “Morning Note” (emailed only, such a shame) when he said:

“The bottom line is it appears that we need to hit Control-Alt-Delete on the economy, and before investors “buy” into the new paradigm, they need to know what the new operating system will be:  The New Deal 2.0, Capitalism 3.1 or the Overlapitalism beta v1.  At least its on sale for the holidays.” 

That got me thinking about marketing in a down economy, and made me ask the question:

Is it Finally Time for Marketers to Hit Control-Alt-Delete on Traditional Marketing?

Unfortunately, marketers control (and live by) the largest discretionary budget in any organization. Programs and people are getting cut or will be victims of “planned obsolescence” as 2009 budgets are being drawn and redrawn.

The harsh reality of the day is that Darwinism has come to every part of every business: adapt, change or die.

At the same time, there are some truisms that still exist:

• Those who continue to market through economic downturns are far more likely to benefit than those who cut their marketing budgets too much during troubled times.

Think about it - the best time to gain visibility with your prospects is when your competition is cutting back. And because so many are cutting back, your messages have more opportunities to get through.

• Those who adapt to the demands of today’s marketplace - I see trends in authenticity, transparency, connectedness and simplicity being demanded all around - will be much more effective in their efforts.

Gone is the ‘coolness’ of excess - look at the automakers reception on Capital Hill as they flew in and out in their corporate jets - even the assumption of a sense of humor (hello, Motrin?). Our bullshit detectors are on high alert as we watch and listen to those who’ve driven our economies and futures to the brink, and even well-researched campaigns aren’t guaranteed to hit the mark.

Everyone suffers when people are inauthentic in their approach to marketing. (Check out Koifish Communications’ excellent post, “The Ethics of Advocacy” for even more fuel for that fire.)

As a result, we are increasingly shutting out “marketing” and “news sources” and turning to our friends and families - our smaller, more intimate and immediate circles of influence - and appreciating them more, sharing information with them, and (likely as a result) bullshitting less.

So are there any bright spots in the marketer’s toolkit?

I’m happy to see more and more explore the notion of marketing through social means. Let’s face it. People trust people they know. And (aside from searching for products and services online) most people ask around of family, friends and (now) their followers for advice when researching and buying pretty much anything… from food to fuel to Facebook.

We’re leaning on each other like never before in my lifetime.

Marketers, listen up. We’re about more than spray and pray messaging… we’re about more than behavioral targeting… it’s time to ask ourselves:

• How are you entering in ongoing conversations about your company, your products, your services?
• Is your entire company (from customer service to product management to sales) listening for mentions of your brand?
• If they hear something, do they know what to say or do?

Whether they occur online or in your local restaurants, malls, offices, hospitals or schools, it’s time to join the ongoing conversations. As marketers, it’s time to:

• Listen more than we speak
• Offer expert service more than braggadocio
• Engage rather than cajole
• And show rather than tell…

Are you ready to rethink everything? I believe it’s finally time to take advantage of a reset.

There’s an entertaining article today over on the ClickZ network called “Participating in the Visible Backchannel” by Dave Evans. That fabulous phrase, “visible backchannel,” was coined by Ymena Magnum, product line manager of Cloud Computing at Sun.

In the article, Dave started by saying how important it was that a company’s marketing and operations are aligned - because the speed with which information spreads about brands is exponential. He referenced a brand survey conducted on Twitter by Peter Sorgenfrei and Warren Sukernek (a colleague of mine from the Marqui days, with whom I recently reconnected on Twitter), where Twitterers profiled their expectations about brands within Twitter.

Turns out I participated in the brand survey, the results of which were published last week. Here are the highlights (directly from Twittermaven):

• Not surprisingly, most users (89%) agree that brands should engage their customers on Twitter. The majority also have a better impression of brands that use Twitter for customer service (81%).
• Proper usage of Twitter however, is paramount as almost 90% of users would frown upon poor or inappropriate brand use of Twitter.
• The power of a relationship is extremely strong on Twitter. 60% of respondents would recommend a company based on their presence on Twitter and 80% of Twitter users will reward those brands they have key relationships by being more willing to purchase from them.
• Influencers: More than 60% of respondents have 100+ followers and almost 50% of respondents have posted more than 1000 Tweets since they signed up for the service.

So back to Dave’s article… in it he recounted several interactions with the Starbucks brand in real life and in the digital world (they’re blending more and more). Starbucks is on Twitter, and helped him with a problem he was encountering in the stores. (Head on over and read it, you’ll probably have experienced something similar to the stories he told.)

Anyway, he summed it up perfectly for me:

“As you consider the social Web and the impact it has on your brand, consider the survey’s audience: 60 percent are male and the largest age concentration (just over 41 percent) in the 35 to 44 age group. It’s a decidedly mainstream audience, meaning that channels like Twitter are not fringe or youth.

The social Web, and Twitter in particular, can provide valuable, actionable insight. Ignore at your own peril. Get involved, participate, and take the time to assess your organizations’ ability to consistently deliver an excellent experience — across the entire frontline — in service of the brand you’re building.”

In my email today came an interesting bit of research: the 2008 Presidential ImagePower Survey by Landor Associates and Penn, Schoen & Berland. It describes the two presidential tickets’ brand associations, as selected by a survey of voters:

Click on the thumbnail for larger viewing,  the PDF of the results as announced by Penn, Schoen & Berland is here.

I found it interesting that the candidates complemented each other so well… and that Obama and Palin were more similar than not, in terms of brand perception, especially in being “different.” She was a Wendy’s in a sea of McDonalds, he was an iPhone in a bunch of Blackberrys.

The survey was conducted in early October, where 1002 Democrats, Republicans and Independents voted their brand associations.