“Don provided good insight into progressing our marketing department through excellent facilitation of "ideation" sessions with the team as well as one to one interviews. His marketing acumen is rich and he offered a knowledge base and expertise that added credibility to our process.”
Gail Stepanik-Keber
CMO
Servus Credit Union
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Monday, September 26, 2011
Rock 'n Roll and Beer Advertising
In the 1990's I was lucky enough to be part of a great creative team at Scali, McCabe, Sloves in Toronto. I was an account guy on Labatt's Blue (it was Labatt's back then) and we were facing a surging Molson Canadian brand in most provinces in Canada. Molson had smashed the ad world with their "What beer's all about." campaign, and classic rock music was integral to their success. However, we believed that Blue could find an opening in Molson Canadian's music flank because they never tapped into the Canadian music scene, which was shocking given their name was "Canadian". So we developed a series of radio spots based great Canadian music that won a pile of national and international awards.
Now beer advertising and rock have had a great relationship for years but in Canada, the late 1980's and early 1990's were the heyday of this relationship in Canada.
Click on the link for a sample of Labatt's Blue award winning radio in 1990.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
The Good, The Bad, And The Strategy.
For a few years now I have been telling my clients and students that success and brand relevancy comes from strategies and positions based on real insight. Today I came across a great article on McKinsey Quarterly based on a new book from Richard Rumelt called Good Strategy/Bad Strategy.The Difference And Why It Matters., that so easily drives this point home.
I love Richard's style and experience, both proven and to the point. You see Richard is fed up with bad strategy masquerading as good strategy. In short he says that "bad strategy embraces the language of broad goals, ambition, vision and values'. Wow I have seen a pile of broad strategy statements in the recent past. That's why I believe the Heath brothers book "Made To Stick" is bang on. It has taught us about creating missions and visions that will stick, not just sit there and cause nothing good for the company to happen.
Too many organisation are not taking the time to uncover insights that will lead them to better understand their barriers, and then take actions to overcome them. Instead as Rumelt says, they are doing one or all of the following bad strategy hallmarks.
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/The_perils_of_bad_strategy_2826
Too many organisation are not taking the time to uncover insights that will lead them to better understand their barriers, and then take actions to overcome them. Instead as Rumelt says, they are doing one or all of the following bad strategy hallmarks.
- Failing to face the problem.
- Mistaking goals for strategy.
- Bad strategic objectives.
- Fluff.
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/The_perils_of_bad_strategy_2826
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
How Dangerous Is Safe Advertising?
About 25 years ago when I was working at my first advertising agency in Toronto, I came across a great little sell piece for an Agency in London called Davis Wilkins. Now I doubt this agency even exists today but their sell piece still resonates with me today. It had to do with safe advertising and how dangerous it can be. What follows is the copy from the piece which basically talks about taking the safe road in advertising and mushrooms, can kill you.
This should be mandatory reading for everyone who touches content development.
"One of the species of fungus opposite is the most dangerous mushroom known to man.
It is lethal even in amounts as small as 20 grammes. That's about the weight of a Brussels sprout.
Between six and fifteen hours after eating it, gastroenteric symptoms are present, and severe liver damage occurs within three days, followed by death.
It is a fairly common British variety, found in oak and beech woods between July and November and when fresh it smells faintly of honey.
The two other mushrooms illustrated are, by contrast, highly palatable.
One of them is quite rare, with a subtle mild flavour much prized in certain mountainous regions of Scandinavia.
The other is a Chanterelle, which smells slightly of dried apricots and is regarded in France as something of a delicacy.
DO WE PICK ADVERTISEMENTS LIKE WE PICK MUSHROOMS?
Given the element of risk involved in gathering our own mushrooms most of us prefer to buy them in shops with our hard-earned cash.
Which means that most of us end up eating mass-produced cultivated mushrooms. The taste may be bland and predictable, but at least we know they wont kill us.
Sadly, the same cautious attitude can easily be applied to the selection of advertising.
Anything, which looks unfamiliar, different or unusual, is regarded with understandable suspicion and anxiety by many advertisers.
As a result, advertisements end up resembling one another much as cultivated mushrooms do.
But although instinct may tell us that danger lurks in the unknown, it is the apparently familiar which threatens the greatest peril.
Partly because it looks so safe.
WHICH MUSHROOMS WILL KILL YOU?
Not, of course, the peculiar looking orange one, number three. Life would be much too easy if that were the culprit.
No, that's a Chanterelle. And like the very best advertising, it is distinctive, visible and has an entirely desirable effect on the consumer.
The killer is one of the others. One of them is the safe choice, the other choice just looks like the safe choice.
Confusing, isn't it.
But so it is with Advertising. How can you be sure that a new campaign really is safe? With the deadly mushroom, the effects are felt within days, with advertising, the poison acts more slowly.
Who knows how many products are dying a lingering death right now because somebody took a decision years ago to run advertising that looked as though it couldn't do any harm.
WHICH ADVERTISING WILL KILL YOUR COMPETITOR?
All great advertising looks safe and familiar.
In retrospect.
But the famous and successful campaigns we now admire looked strange and disturbing when they were originally presented.
Many of the clients who bought that work can still recall waking up in a cold sweat at three in the morning, asking " My God, what have I approved?"
New ideas are scary.
But they're nowhere near as dangerous as almost-new ideas, which are familiar to everyone.
If it's been done before, your competition will be ready for it. Your only chance of killing him with your advertising is to hit him with something he's never seen before.
Which means you won't have seen it before either.
WHAT IS THE REAL KILLER?
The advertising to avoid is the kind that looks safe and isn't. The mushroom to avoid is number two.
Advertising which looks strange and distinctive is a much less-risk proposition, if you know what you're doing, than advertising, which is bland and comfortable.
But only if you know what you are doing.
Which is where we come in.
Tim Davis and Chris Wilkins bring more than 36 years of experience to their new agency. Experience not only of creating original and surprising advertising ideas, but also of recognising and weeding out the ones that are dangerously wrong.
If you're an advertiser who would dearly love to have startling and original creative work, without having to lose sleep over it, think about what we have to offer. It wouldn't kill you to give us a call."
This should be mandatory reading for everyone who touches content development.
"One of the species of fungus opposite is the most dangerous mushroom known to man.
It is lethal even in amounts as small as 20 grammes. That's about the weight of a Brussels sprout.
Between six and fifteen hours after eating it, gastroenteric symptoms are present, and severe liver damage occurs within three days, followed by death.
It is a fairly common British variety, found in oak and beech woods between July and November and when fresh it smells faintly of honey.
The two other mushrooms illustrated are, by contrast, highly palatable.
One of them is quite rare, with a subtle mild flavour much prized in certain mountainous regions of Scandinavia.
The other is a Chanterelle, which smells slightly of dried apricots and is regarded in France as something of a delicacy.
DO WE PICK ADVERTISEMENTS LIKE WE PICK MUSHROOMS?
Given the element of risk involved in gathering our own mushrooms most of us prefer to buy them in shops with our hard-earned cash.
Which means that most of us end up eating mass-produced cultivated mushrooms. The taste may be bland and predictable, but at least we know they wont kill us.
Sadly, the same cautious attitude can easily be applied to the selection of advertising.
Anything, which looks unfamiliar, different or unusual, is regarded with understandable suspicion and anxiety by many advertisers.
As a result, advertisements end up resembling one another much as cultivated mushrooms do.
But although instinct may tell us that danger lurks in the unknown, it is the apparently familiar which threatens the greatest peril.
Partly because it looks so safe.
WHICH MUSHROOMS WILL KILL YOU?
Not, of course, the peculiar looking orange one, number three. Life would be much too easy if that were the culprit.
No, that's a Chanterelle. And like the very best advertising, it is distinctive, visible and has an entirely desirable effect on the consumer.
The killer is one of the others. One of them is the safe choice, the other choice just looks like the safe choice.
Confusing, isn't it.
But so it is with Advertising. How can you be sure that a new campaign really is safe? With the deadly mushroom, the effects are felt within days, with advertising, the poison acts more slowly.
Who knows how many products are dying a lingering death right now because somebody took a decision years ago to run advertising that looked as though it couldn't do any harm.
WHICH ADVERTISING WILL KILL YOUR COMPETITOR?
All great advertising looks safe and familiar.
In retrospect.
But the famous and successful campaigns we now admire looked strange and disturbing when they were originally presented.
Many of the clients who bought that work can still recall waking up in a cold sweat at three in the morning, asking " My God, what have I approved?"
New ideas are scary.
But they're nowhere near as dangerous as almost-new ideas, which are familiar to everyone.
If it's been done before, your competition will be ready for it. Your only chance of killing him with your advertising is to hit him with something he's never seen before.
Which means you won't have seen it before either.
WHAT IS THE REAL KILLER?
The advertising to avoid is the kind that looks safe and isn't. The mushroom to avoid is number two.
Advertising which looks strange and distinctive is a much less-risk proposition, if you know what you're doing, than advertising, which is bland and comfortable.
But only if you know what you are doing.
Which is where we come in.
Tim Davis and Chris Wilkins bring more than 36 years of experience to their new agency. Experience not only of creating original and surprising advertising ideas, but also of recognising and weeding out the ones that are dangerously wrong.
If you're an advertiser who would dearly love to have startling and original creative work, without having to lose sleep over it, think about what we have to offer. It wouldn't kill you to give us a call."
 |
| #1. Rozites Caperata |
 |
| #2. Amanita Phalloides |
 |
| #3. Cantharellus Cibarius |
The only point I will add to the brilliant copy above is that it works because Tim and Chris had insight about advertising and pretty and deadly mushrooms, which they turned into a great idea and execution. With out real relevant insights, you just can't get to the point where creative content can be scary but safe.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Client-Agency Relationships
I recently came across a blog from an old colleague of mine from McCann Erickson India named Chinta Rao. Chinta, like I, moved on from McCann several years ago and now runs a consulting practice and blogs every so often about things in the marketing communications world that compel him to speak. The blog of Chinta's that caught my attention dealt with the recently released CMO Council's 2011 survey of Chief Marketing Officers. Below is the link to Chinta's Blog and to the CMO Council's report.
http://chintarao.blogspot.com/2011/07/state-of-marketing-is-worrying.html
http://cmocouncil.org/images/uploads/pdf/207.pdf
The blog forced me to read the actual report, and while it is packed with much learning, I took away 4 key things that CMO's seem to have on their "to do" list in 2011.
1. Connect the measurements of multiple channels that reach across, social, digital and traditional media.
2. Redefine the customer experience. Bridge the gap between art of marketing and science of analytics. Better understand the impact marketing and technology can have in making better customer experiences.
3. Better understand the paradigm shift from BtoC to CtoB.
4. Better pull insights from reams of on-line and off-line data now being collected.
In short agencies of any kind that are hoping to do, and continue to do, business with marketers, need to have talent that can integrate all content delivery methods and be able provide real insight.
I wanted to explore the changing landscape needs between agencies and their clients further, so I focused on it in my latest BrandVertising webTV show. I invited one of my first bosses in the agency business on the show, as I always remembered Tony Altilia to have a strong point of view about how to build successful Client-Agency Relationships. So click on the link below to see the show and please give me your comments on the CMO council's report and the show.
http://chintarao.blogspot.com/2011/07/state-of-marketing-is-worrying.html
http://cmocouncil.org/images/uploads/pdf/207.pdf
The blog forced me to read the actual report, and while it is packed with much learning, I took away 4 key things that CMO's seem to have on their "to do" list in 2011.
1. Connect the measurements of multiple channels that reach across, social, digital and traditional media.
2. Redefine the customer experience. Bridge the gap between art of marketing and science of analytics. Better understand the impact marketing and technology can have in making better customer experiences.
3. Better understand the paradigm shift from BtoC to CtoB.
4. Better pull insights from reams of on-line and off-line data now being collected.
In short agencies of any kind that are hoping to do, and continue to do, business with marketers, need to have talent that can integrate all content delivery methods and be able provide real insight.
I wanted to explore the changing landscape needs between agencies and their clients further, so I focused on it in my latest BrandVertising webTV show. I invited one of my first bosses in the agency business on the show, as I always remembered Tony Altilia to have a strong point of view about how to build successful Client-Agency Relationships. So click on the link below to see the show and please give me your comments on the CMO council's report and the show.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Staying Marketing Oriented Is Everyone's Job
As I watch the restructuring of marketing departments to deal with the reality of customers demanding more relevant and rewarding engagements, I recognise that holding true to the belief that a company is really marketing oriented is tougher that ever. Marketing has always been about a philosophy that everything a company does is with the customer's drivers fully in mind. However rapid change in technology is highlighting the reality that the entire organisation must now, more than ever, be involved in "marketing".
I think the term "customer experience" can play a key role to helping companies simplify as they battle to stay a true marketing oriented company. As a recent article from McKinsey points out, "In today’s marketing environment, companies will be better off if they stop viewing customer engagement as a series of discrete interactions and instead think about it as customers do a set of related interactions that, added together, make up the customer experience."
I think if you keep in mind that to engage with people you need to understand the experiences they want with all aspects of the company, and then build engagement strategies that meet those insights. As I have been saying for sometime now, the key is to uncover insights into how people experince things, and usually this is on an emeotional level. The McKinsey article also reinforces this points by stating, "A premium will be placed on problem-solving and strategic-marketing skills, rather than on traditional market research capabilities such as designing surveys and commissioning focus groups."
I highly recommend reading the McKinsey article that I have linked to below. It serves as a timely reminder that staying marketing oriented in today's climate is not just business as usual and some innovation in structure is a likely need.
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Were_all_marketers_now_2834
I think the term "customer experience" can play a key role to helping companies simplify as they battle to stay a true marketing oriented company. As a recent article from McKinsey points out, "In today’s marketing environment, companies will be better off if they stop viewing customer engagement as a series of discrete interactions and instead think about it as customers do a set of related interactions that, added together, make up the customer experience."
I think if you keep in mind that to engage with people you need to understand the experiences they want with all aspects of the company, and then build engagement strategies that meet those insights. As I have been saying for sometime now, the key is to uncover insights into how people experince things, and usually this is on an emeotional level. The McKinsey article also reinforces this points by stating, "A premium will be placed on problem-solving and strategic-marketing skills, rather than on traditional market research capabilities such as designing surveys and commissioning focus groups."
I highly recommend reading the McKinsey article that I have linked to below. It serves as a timely reminder that staying marketing oriented in today's climate is not just business as usual and some innovation in structure is a likely need.
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Were_all_marketers_now_2834
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Mick Jagger, Rolling Stones CMO
Today from a facebook connection, I viewed this classic letter from Mick Jagger to Andy Warhol about artwork for a greatest hit cover back in 1969.
The letter reminds me of my time at Scali, McCabe, Sloves in Toronto in 1989, working on the advertising for the Labatt's Blue/Rolling Stones Steel Wheels Tour. The Jagger letter shows how much of a businessman Jagger is, and that everything about how the band is positioned really sits in his hands. He is the CMO of the Rolling Stones brand.
When we were developing creative to launch the Steel Wheels tour across Canada in 1989, Jagger had final approval on everything. All our script ideas and music background choices went past Jagger. In fact the launch TVC of the tour originally ended with the famous Stones tongue turning from red to blue, to subtly indicate Labatt's Blue was promoting the tour in Canada. Well Jagger as acting as CMO for the Stones brand, quickly killed that idea because nobody, but nobody screws with a key visual property of the Rolling Stones. He was right of course but hey we at the same time were just trying to build even more depth into the Blue brand.
As Labatt Blue's slogan of the time was alluding to, in 1989, it was the way we played. Those were great times, and as this classic letter indicates, Jagger is a great CMO, and not a bad frontman either.
The letter reminds me of my time at Scali, McCabe, Sloves in Toronto in 1989, working on the advertising for the Labatt's Blue/Rolling Stones Steel Wheels Tour. The Jagger letter shows how much of a businessman Jagger is, and that everything about how the band is positioned really sits in his hands. He is the CMO of the Rolling Stones brand.
When we were developing creative to launch the Steel Wheels tour across Canada in 1989, Jagger had final approval on everything. All our script ideas and music background choices went past Jagger. In fact the launch TVC of the tour originally ended with the famous Stones tongue turning from red to blue, to subtly indicate Labatt's Blue was promoting the tour in Canada. Well Jagger as acting as CMO for the Stones brand, quickly killed that idea because nobody, but nobody screws with a key visual property of the Rolling Stones. He was right of course but hey we at the same time were just trying to build even more depth into the Blue brand.
As Labatt Blue's slogan of the time was alluding to, in 1989, it was the way we played. Those were great times, and as this classic letter indicates, Jagger is a great CMO, and not a bad frontman either.
 |
| Labatt's Blue Rolling Stones 1989 Tour Poster |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
