Note to CMO: Beijing & Connecting Emotions to Actions

Dear CMO:

The Beijing Olympiad scored a higher worldwide rating than any other television event since the great flood. Good for NBC for doing a great job both on air and via their website, for China for throwing a perfect party, and for the Olympians themselves who provided a new highlight reel of inspiring achievements for all of us. What did we learn?

1. We all thought China was the evil empire until the Evil Empire took center stage on opening night. The contrast phenomenon, played out on a world stage. It wasn’t too long ago that protesters disrupted the Olympic flame’s progress around the world; now, we’re watching as Soviet tanks roll into a sovereign country.

2. Trash talking sure is a slippery slope. Nes ce pas?

3. We all saw plenty of jackassing during the Winter games, with US athletes falling left and right whenever they incorrectly felt entitled to a medal. This US team looked very prepared and down to
business.

Lessons enough for a full post, but enough – let’s talk marketing for a moment. We saw millions upon millions spent by the likes of Coke, Bud, Lenovo, Visa, Home Depot, McDonalds, and others. We had Olympic sponsors, sponsors of individuals and teams that snuck in, and outliers. I won’t try to critique the entirety of the fortnight here, but a few grabbed my attention.

Commodity brands have a different problem than many: a payment system like Visa works the same way American Express or MasterCard does and is remarkable only when it fails. Connecting to the Olympics, and to the US Olympians and the team in general, taps into that brief moment that happens once every four years where we actively and sincerely care about helping our athletes excel. This is a meaningful call to action. Good on them. Plus, their commercials were beautifully done and served as fine art for the broadcasts.

Lenovo – a Chinese brand, not for nothing – makes an outstanding PC with differentiating features, several of which were presented during the Games (heavyweight feature sets without the ‘heavy as a sewer lid’ chassis, one-button crash protection). I’m a big fan of metaphors ever since reading Gerald Zaltman's "What Customers Think." But truth be told, I like my metaphors, like my trash talking, at a more subtle level.

The most memorable (marketing) moment of the Games was the wonderful Nike ad with Marvin Gaye singing the national anthem. Forget the fact that this is an iconic singer, now deceased, singing the song we expect to hear when America stands atop the podium. When viewed in the broader context -- this place and time, these people assembled for this purpose, practicing (not playing), with this song being sung by this person -- the spot is very powerful. Marvin Gaye's singing of the national anthem allows us to hear it anew and reflect on its meaning and how these words relate to this moment in history - both on and off the basketball court. I've linked to the full 2:30 length version here, and it's worth seeing if you haven't already.

* * *
Key Takeaways:

> Sponsorships, branding, and all investment in marketing needs to be grounded in what we want our consumers to do today, right now. Bringing it home and giving customers a reason to act today is what defines high ROI campaigns from unsupported "buzz."

> Metaphors tap our deepest psychological beliefs and are some of the most powerful branding tools we have at our disposal. If done well, that is.

* * *

There’s more to talk about when we reflect as marketers on the Beijing Olympiad. What did you take away?

Regards.

Photo courtesy of Flickr.

Note to CMO: Separating Leaders from Ideas (and the Aikido of Consistency)

Dear CMO:

Once our snap judgments paint the Rorschach test-like image of a person or an idea in our minds, it’s hard for us to objectively change our minds. If a new player is deemed to be “good,” then they are given wider latitude and their actions are viewed with more forgiveness than those deemed, “not so good.” Interestingly, once our snap judgments have solidified, our mental frameworks require that our subjects behave in a manner consistent with our own preconceptions: it’s easy to understand that we’re angry and conflicted when our so labeled “good” person behaves in a “not so good” way. What’s harder to understand, given a moment’s objective reflection, is that we are equally conflicted when a C- player turns in A+ work. We don’t expect it, we can’t easily process it, so we kick it out of our mental systems. You’d think we’d be smarter than this, but frankly, we’re not.

Furthermore, we’re all wired to be consistent. We are affected by significant personal and interpersonal pressure when we deviate from a public stance. We don’t like to do it and we’re instantly called on it when we do (are we in a political season right now?). So the idea of “change” is a highly charged one. We feel a need to make our mark, yet those of us not leading change may find a hard-wired reluctance to accept a shift in direction as suggested by another – particularly a new guy, particularly in marketing.

This takes on deeper significance when we look at ideas and the leaders that champion them. Marketers are idea people. If the average CMO lasts less than two years, this is probably why. Lewis had an interesting discussion at his blog this week that sparked this thought, and it resonates with other discussions I’ve had over the past few weeks. Often, the bigger the idea, the worse it is for the person bringing it to the table. Big ideas – often great ideas that can ignite a moribund company and turn around a failing enterprise – are often buried in corporate hubris because they “aren’t invented here.” Ideas, and those presenting them, are alien and hostile to our own consistency.

Let’s step back for a moment and consider this – and please forgive my lack of footnotes on this subject, as the original texts and studies that I’ve come across that illustrate many of these points are out there somewhere, just not linked here – and perhaps even find a way out for those of us who do consider ourselves to be fairly creative. If consistency itself is to blame for our DNA-level resistance to changes in direction, could we not use consistency itself to get ourselves out again? I think so. Here’s how.

· Any change we champion should, if properly constructed, mirror the needs of the company. Deciding “we’re sinking, and only I can save us,” is not the kind of thinking that will win many converts. Understanding and synthesizing that “we need to penetrate the office market with enterprise-quality mobility solutions,” is the kind of thinking that will keep you on solid ground.

· Any change we champion should also mirror the strategic direction – however conceptually described – of the CEO and Board. Knowing that management has specifically, publicly, clearly stated that improving inventory turns is an important acknowledgement, particularly when your idea can help achieve the goal.

· Bold ideas that don’t conform to the needs of the company (in our own opinions) or to the goals of the management of the company can be considered “interesting ideas” at best and “wild goose chases” at worst. Perhaps we should treat them – and frame them – as such. These are ideas that are presented one to one, properly couched in the right settings and with the right words, so as not to completely jump from terra firma onto the ice flow of your unsupported idea.

· Bold ideas that do conform to the needs of the company and leadership are to be treated very carefully: bursting into the board room full of adrenaline and vinegar (to paraphrase) is a sure fire way to get shot at a later date. No one else will share your enthusiasm, but many will enjoy your funeral.

· Carefully constructing the framing of your idea is a more important implementation plan than your idea’s roll-out. Specifically, how will you remind everyone of their previously stated goals and objectives? It should be simple enough if you’ve got a mission statement, an annual report, or a budget deck that lays these ideas out. How will you focus everyone’s attention on the specific square inch of intellectual real estate that you intend to revolutionize? How will you prime your audience as to the extreme need to fix the problem that you’ve just solved? And over what period of time will you bring people into this frame of mind?

Launching dangerously provocative ideas is more like chiropractic therapy and less like surgery than many think. Sure, we’re all in love with speed, unless it’s someone else’s idea. Then, we’re the soul of caution.

We’re all slaves of corporate culture, hierarchical thinking, and our own psychological wiring – most of which hasn’t changed since we descended from the trees. We want the troop to be strong – so long as we don’t lose our position within it. And renegades that emerge from the pack and challenge our carefully constructed social structures don’t last long in the wild, unless, of course, they emerge in such a way that they threaten no one and are viewed as “good,” and not as “dangerous.”



Regards.

Photo courtesy of Flickr.

Note to CMO: The Dubious Strategy of Apologies and Retractions

Dear CMO:

We're marketers. We're edgy. We love cool, we live hip, and swing for the upper deck. That's why we usually dress in black, which is a subject for another post on another day. But this is also why we love to go out on the absolute edge of creative license and pick up our customers by their narrow lapels and shake them out of their DVR-induced stupor. Breakthrough. Edgy.

Unless anyone gets offended, of course, in which case we'll apologize and pull the ad, pronto.

Am I the only one in the room who says we should never, ever apologize for our work? Look. One of two things usually happens. The first is that we didn't do our homework up front. We created a piece of work that didn't just fail to resonate with our audience, it actually made them angry. That's a not very fine line. That's called "blowing it completely" by many, including the CEO. The second likely reason is that we're just spineless wusses. We did our homework, created solid work that sold who we are and who we're not -- and when a group of people who don't even buy our products complains, we retreat like a pack of yelping Chihuahuas.

**********************************************************

DISCLAIMER:

NO CHIHUAHUAS, ACTUAL OR VIRTUAL, WERE HARMED IN THE IDEATION, CREATION OR PUBLICATION OF THIS BLOG POST. VIVA LA CHIHUAHUA. YO QUIERO TACO BELL.

**********************************************************

Thankfully, here at Note to CMO, we buy Offensive Post Offsets, allowing us the latitude to put up posts like this one. Other bloggers, often in the developing world, will then write less incendiary posts to balance the blogosphere out a little. It seems to work fine and is completely above board, so I'm told, so I can't see what's wrong with that.

* * *

Key Takeaways:

> Messaging isn't accidental. At least it shouldn't be. If you've done your homework, stayed on message, and tested your creative, you shouldn't have much to fear. If you haven't, then you've left yourself open, haven't you?

> Understand that special interest groups are well organized and can generate more emails based on less understanding than in any other time in history. Look at the Verizon ad again. Urban junk yard pit bulls are chained up for a good reason. Is this really offensive, PETA? Really?

> You stand to gain more by sticking to your guns than by surrendering to the appearance of resistance. Backing down rarely wins converts. So it's important to actually do your homework up front, isn't it?

* * *

Clearly, this past week has seen more than the average number of full scale retreats. Ad Age and others have mentioned the not very high profile campaigns by Snickers, Nike and Verizon that have been pulled in the face of complaints vaguely associated with the complainers. After looking at all of them, I still don't get it.

If you're apologizing, you didn't do your homework.

Regards.

Photo courtesy of Flickr.