Posts Tagged ‘web 2.0’

May 11th, 2009

New Rules of Marketing and PR / Direct 2.0?

I spent the quieter moments of the weekend breezing through David Meerman Scott’s New Rules of Marketing and PR.  Before I read this book I was convinced that digital content and PR are going to be increasingly vital components of the modern marketing mix.  Now that view is further reinforced.  It’s a great read, dealing not only with the transition zone between old and new marketing but also offering clear sight of what lies ahead.

Scott argues that “the old rules of marketing and PR are ineffective in the digital world” and I broadly agree. To his credit, he rightly resists the temptation to make ill-informed and poorly thought-out “advertising doesn’t work” arguments. Unlike many web commentators, he recognises that mainstream media still has an important role to play for mainstream brands, and that niche media can still work well for niche brands. So,  if you’re a beer brand then it still makes sense to advertise on TV in football games. Or if you sell deck sealant, then Professional Deck Builder Magazine is probably still right for you.

There are a couple of areas where my experience differs from David Scott’s. One is in his view that “marketing meant advertising” and that “advertising was one way: company to consumer”.  It’s true that for some companies, marketing does mean advertising, but for many companies marketing also includes direct marketing. Moreover,  two-way dialogue has been the DNA of direct marketing for decades. Lester Wunderman and others pioneered the development of response-based customer dialogue over fifty years ago, albeit from within the restrictions of static print / direct mail.

Direct marketers have a suite of skills that is incredibly well suited to marketing in the Web 2.0 era. They collect behavioural data from customers and apply it to marketing decision making. They use data to understand customers, track purchase histories, segment databases and predict future customer behaviour. They build models which can predict how likely it is that consumers who purchase product A will go on to purchase products B, C and D.  They use customer data to establish when customers buy products and the length of the purchase cycle enabling them to identify the best time to talk to prospects. They learn how to identify valuable customers and build reward programs to strengthen the relationship between buyer and seller. Most importantly,  direct marketers focus on building relationships that turn first-time customers into long-term advocates.  Direct marketing has much to offer to the data-enabled world of Web 2.0.

Nigel Sharrocks, CEO of Aegis in Europe recognised all these points when he observed that “it only takes a moment’s reflection to see that direct is a highly effective training ground for Communications 2.0.”  Whilst dealing with deluges of customer data may unsettle advertising practitioners, working out what to do with data is, according to Sharrocks,  “second nature to direct people” who are also “highly unlikely to assume that every campaign must begin with a TV ad”.

For many years direct marketers argued that they could make better use of a marketing £ or $ than an ad agency, in much the same way that web marketing specialists do now.  In my view the best return can be achieved by merging the best of web marketing - and particularly content marketing - with the best of direct marketing. Direct marketing can provide a robust platform upon which highly effective content marketing projects can be built.  To me, direct marketing and Web 2.0 communications are two things that fit together extremely well - like yin and yang, steak and chips or bread and butter.   Perhaps it’s time we started talking about Direct Marketing 2.0.

April 24th, 2009

Marketing strategy is in the bottle

smoothie_bottles_three_med1

I recently heard Richard Reed, one of the founders of Innocent Drinks remark that “ninety percent of their marketing strategy is in the bottle”. It does remind me that excellent products and services will often sell without the aid of any advertising or other paid for promotion at all. Google, Microsoft, Body Shop, Innocent and Yahoo! to name but a few built their brands without reliance on traditional advertising. Google went one step further and targeted its initial product diffusion across the academic sector knowing that it would be promoted by academics to students and so into the wider educated community. All all cases, these brands relied on a superior product experience to drive word of mouth promotion.

Some might say, well, they’re the lucky products, but for the rest of us, we have to fight to maintain our position in the market. They’d argue it’s not that their products are bad, it’s just that they have to complete with many similar products in the same market space.

But this is where we get into what Web 2.0 really means for marketers.  In the web enabled world everyone can review a product on either online retailer sites or on third party sites that encourage user review content. These sites are the territory where brands reputation will be built and lost.  In the world of Web 2.0 and beyond, the product takes centre stage. Promotion will no longer be provided by third party marketing communications alone, but through the distribution of user advocacy based on user experience.

The logical extension of this, and certainly my hope, is that renewed focus on product development will in turn drive the emergence of new and more effective products and services which benefit all whilst, in a Darwinian sense, weaker products and services are gradually marginalised out of consumer markets.


June 9th, 2008

What is Web 2.0?

Requests for a definition of Web 2.0 are still made by clients - for some this is still a new subject. Here’s a summary of the points I recently used to describe Web 2.0 to an FMCG advertiser.

Web 2.0 is an inclusive phrase that covers the new web based networking, customisation and data management functionalities that have emerged since 2000. 2000 is a significant start point because it played host to two important events in the gestation of Web 2.0. First, 2000 was the year of the dotcom crash which, in an almost Darwinian sense, extinguished poor performing technologies and ideas and created the intellectual, technological and financial ‘space’ for something new. And second, 2000 was the year that Google began real take-off after receiving $25m of venture capital in 1999. This investment paved the way for Google to expand globally and redefine the way web information is catalogued, ordered and retrieved worldwide.

It’s important to note that the web as a technology platform remains largely unchanged, but in Web 2.0, the way that platform is being used has changed dramatically. Web 2.0 is about moving web content from being information on a news stand to being customised information solutions for individual needs. This individual customisation is the essence of Web 2.0. The guys who coined the phrase Web 2.0* cite a number of examples to illustrate how Web 2.0 is an evolution from Web 1.0. Here are two examples that really sum it up:

1) Encyclopaedia Britannica versus Wikipedia

Britannica was - and remains - an online encyclopedia written and researched by the Britannica editorial team. It’s a huge compendium of information, but it remains under the tight control of Britannica. Wikipedia on the other hand is open to editorial contributions from almost anyone at any time. It is therefore never the same across any two days. That makes it a living and evolving entity. Where Britannica is ice, Wikipedia is water. Britannica is Web 1.0 and Wikipedia is Web 2.0.

2) Personal Website versus Blogs

Personal websites are generally static and non-interactive. Content is uploaded, pages are then fixed and remain unaltered unless the webmaster decides to make changes. Change is cumbersome, requiring changes in HTML source code. Blogs on the other hand are a platform designed to have content updated frequently. New content can be posted every minute and uploaded from PCs or mobile phones. Readers can air their views by posting comments. Content can be emailed to others. Blogs can be “claimed” at Technocrati where all registered blogs are brought together in a searchable blog universe or blogosphere. Personal Web sites are 1.0 and blogs are Web 2.0.

Other ways of defining Web 2.0

There are other ways of defining Web 2.0. Think of drinking in a highly social pub rather than having a glass of wine at home alone. Think of videoconferencing rather than watching the TV. Think of CB radio with its network of “breakers on the side” rather than a one to one linear telephone call. Think in terms of the Internet versus the printing press or conventional TV versus You Tube. Web 2.0 is Facebook where 1.0 is a printed membership directory. Web 1.0 is one dimensional, non-network based, comparatively static and delivered to “mass” online audiences. But Web 2.0 is about being multi-dimensional, connected, highly dynamic and delivered on a customised one to one basis.

What are Web 2.0’s component parts?

Web 2.0 is many things and the list is potentially endless – there are already about 9m references to it in Google. Even the guys who defined Web 2.0 had to say “Web 2.0 doesn’t have a hard boundary, but rather, a gravitational core”. Here are some of our examples:

Blogs / Blogosphere
Broadband
Comments
Communities
Content
Databases
Democracy of information
Facebook
Google
Google Adwords and Adsense
i-Tunes and i-Pods
LinkedIn
Networking
Tags
The “People who bought this, also bought this” feature in Amazon (A web 1.0 survivor)
Technocrati
User Generated Content
Widgets
Wikipedia

These examples are component parts of a totally new media age. It’s a new form of media (indeed media may no longer be the right word) with a new set of rules, a new language, a new functionality and it’s a world that puts the consumer, as the scheduler, at its core.

* O’Reilly Media and MediaLive International

March 31st, 2008

BA should create a Terminal 5 community

I read today that Sir Tim Bell has suggested that BA or BAA close Terminal 5 for a couple of weeks in order to prevent the piling of this week’s new woes on top of those from last week.

In my view, BA or BAA should go one step further and use digital media to create a community area which can be used to restore relations with travellers. My suggestion would be a database-driven solution which links up with booking details and allows travellers to register their experience on a multiple choice questionnaire. Answers could be matched to ticket type and traveller type and “bespoke” compensation offers made. Customers could be segmented by:

1. Ticket type
2. Ticket value
3. Customer value (if known) or stated frequency of flights in last year
4. Amount of baggage lost (items or weight)
5. Type of contents (Holiday, business etc)
6. Time without baggage
7. Whether departure was prevented or trip cut short

Why bother with all this you may ask. Well the digital age means that disgruntled travellers can form themselves into communities and create havoc with brands. As in all marketing, and particularly service marketing, a failure presents an opportunity to either a) lose a customer and make a “brand enemy” or b) create a life-long brand advocate.

In short, failures give marketers and their companies an opportunity to shine and show just how much they really love their customers. BA/BAA should get to it now, before the sentiment of many travellers swings irreparably against them.

February 15th, 2008

Scrabble, Scrabulous and Facebook

It has amazed me that Hasbro and Mattel have demanded the removal of Scrabulous, the online Scrabble application, from Facebook. Scrabulous was a social marketer’s dream; many agencies spend endless hours developing Facebook applications hoping to catch a big social media wave, but very few ever make it. The “stars” reach more than 500,000 active users. Scrabulous was one of that elite group; it reached over 650,000.

So, given that Scrabulous was effectively a social marketing campaign to die for, why did Hasbro and Mattel ban it? Their lawyers have argued copyright was being infringed. Executives at these leading toy companies probably felt that players playing Scrabulous would dent or damage sales of the original Scrabble board game. Let’s not forget that before all this happened, Scrabble was a tired brand. It was a fifties product owned by an over fifties audience. It needed a shot in the arm. I can just imagine the agency brainstorm convened to resurrect the brand. It might go something like this:

Q. What’s the business problem?
A. Sales are going down

Q. Why?
A. Scrabble is getting old. The players who bought it in the 60’s and 70’s are either dead or in retirement.

Q. What shall we do?
A. Let’s attract a new, younger audience and show them what fun Scrabble can be.

Q. How do we do that?
A. Well younger and educated audiences are piling into social networking sites like Facebook. Ideally we’d have an effective social marketing campaign on Facebook.

Playing the Facebook application would raise both awareness and consideration of the traditional board game amongst those consumers who’d either forgotten about it and even those who’d never heard of it. There’s a very good chance that with the game back on peoples’ radar screens and shopping lists, sales would have increased.

It’s worth observing that Scrabble has been the beneficiary of outstanding good fortune before. Launch sales back in the 1950’s were initially sluggish until the Chairman of Macy’s noticed that the store didn’t stock the game and placed a bulk order in 1952. Sales then took off. Scrabulous was a chance of similar magnitude. The Scrabulous Facebook application was one of the best free gifts ever given to a brand. After all, what other ways are there to reach that highly elusive younger and educated target audience free of charge and with such potent credibility? It could have been Scrabble’s second coming.

January 14th, 2008

Online revolutionises SME marketing

Targeting Small and Medium sized enterprises with less than 250 employees (SMEs) has been a notoriously difficult area of marketing and communications planning for many years. Even though there are nearly two million UK businesses employing between 1 and 250 people, the available communications options were based around four areas:

1. Direct communications: Direct Mail, telemarketing and email
2. Trade journals (i.e. verticals catering for a specific area of SME activity)
3. Business sections in broader newspapers and magazines (i.e. horizontal targeting of management and business owners)
4. Sponsorship of trade exhibitions and events

Creating something new within these options was a bit like seeing how many different ways one could fold the same piece of paper. Even more difficult was reaching buyers through these channels when they were active and at the point of making a purchase. But now the growth and maturity of internet has spawned a large number of new, highly targeted and relevant opportunities for marketers targeting SMEs. Two new areas that are worthy of strong consideration by those targeting SMEs are:

1) Information Channels - by their nature many SMEs have to solve their own problems when it comes to IT, infrastructure, mobile communications, VAT, finance and email. Because they don’t have many traditional office functions like IT support or finance SMEs have to solve it themselves using access online help sites and user forums. These environments present an excellent targeting opportunity for SME marketers for two reasons. First, they offer good targeting opportunities in terms of audience delivery, but second, they deliver these audiences when they in the all-important ‘problem-solving’ mindset.

2) Business E-Commerce sites – SMEs have to make regular online purchases including IT hardware, software, office equipment and office consumables. It’s easier for SMEs to review products, make purchases and organise delivery online. By shopping online they are able to assure themselves that they have got the best value possible – however they choose to define it. Many of the business shopping sites carry advertising and these offer a new and exciting opportunity to target SMEs when they are in “buy” mode.

Screwfix in the UK offers a great case study in leveraging online for SME targeting. The company is a leading supplier of fasteners (nuts, bolts, brackets, tools etc). They have created a forum which has 12 talk areas - one for plumbers, one for builders, electricians, tilers etc. It’s got 54,000 topics and 540,000 messages across over 1,500 content pages. All the talk areas were active with most showing posts from the last hour as I wrote this post. Screwfix have created their own SME media channel.

Mobile display advertising is going to present the next big SME opportunity. A lot of these guys are glued to their phones. It’s not surprising when you consider that they have to work in a virtual office, taking their phone or Blackberry with them wherever they go by car, truck, van, tube, train, bus or even abroad. Networks are still developing mobile opportunities into commercial packages, but the close “personal space” communication they offer promises to bring an additional set of developments in SME targeting. If these developments are combined with the community based principles of Web 2.0 / 3.0 then we will be witnessing a revolution in SME marketing, that’s if we haven’t already.