We’re always trying to find new ways to humanize our brand. This is a timeless concept.

One of the basic foundations of marketing is to humanize your brand – to make it known, trusted, and, well, accessible.

If you’ve been paying attention (and I’m sure you have), humanization is going a step (or more of a giant leap) forward. It’s no longer enough to have a TV (or Hulu) commercial depicting a humanization of your brand (does anyone actually watch the commercials any more?) or to have a banner on the side panel of Facebook (have you clicked on one of those ads lately?). What you – what we all – need to do is build relationships.

It’s sort of like Sales 101. A customer doesn’t want to be seen as a bottom line; they want to be seen as a person, because, in fact – the customer is a person. We cannot forget this important reality.

And in today’s socially-infused-technological world, what brands need to do is build relationships through social platforms. A couple months ago, I hit on this idea briefly, but I mainly focused on utilizing Twitter. Since I’ve noticed a lot of related buzz lately on various blogs, I wanted to further highlight some great relationship-building tips.

1) Prepare to Take Time

It’s no longer as “simple” as strategically planning a great marketing campaign, and letting go once it hits “the presses;” you have to invest in your customers for the long haul. Mikel E. Belicove of Entreprenuer.com explains: “An entire generation of advertisers will need to plan their marketing scenarios around the concept of building relationships.” This means planning on taking more time on the social scene – getting to know people through blog comments, helping customers on Twitter, and gaining an [interactive] following on Facebook. You can’t just hope your marketing campaign will do the trick; you and your employees have to do the trick – the long and hard way.

2) Offer Something (for Free)

In other words, as Chris Brogan said in a recent post, “Be helpful.” It could be a free e-book, webinar, or blog. Whatever your means, be sure to provide something useful – answering a question, solving a problem, or stimulating new ideas. Being helpful by offering something that someone needs will build your base. It will start conversations. It will get people talking, and you can begin to build trust with people. But don’t forget to be helpful for free – this is key. You need to prove yourself before someone will trust you. Chris Brogan calls it “earning your way in.”

3) Be Human

This sounds so simple that it seems laughable, but it’s often overlooked. When a marketing team is developing their social strategy, sometimes they lose touch of the importance to remain human. A customer wants to build a relationship with another human being – not a product. Olivier Blanchard of The Brand Builder’s blog puts it this way: you don’t “see people hanging out a Starbucks with their favorite coupons.” Maybe this means adding a picture to your Facebook profile to introduce the employee your customers will be interacting with. Maybe it means your employees being knowledgeable enough to recommend solutions to your customers. It depends greatly on your specific product or service, but the bottom line is the same: be human. Your customers are people, yes – but you and your employees are people, too. And your customers need to know it.

• What other strategies are you using to build relationships with your customers?
• What companies do you see excelling at building relationships? How are they accomplishing it?

Original Post: When Should Domain Names Match Company Names?
by Karen E. Klein | May 11, 2012

“With so many startup companies building their business models around Web traffic and online sales, you might think domain names would be the top priority for a startup. But branding and naming experts disagree, particularly if yours will be a business-to-business company rather than a business that sells directly to consumers.”

My Quick Take:

What does your domain name say about your company?  And does it serve your consumers?

With nearly every domain name already taken, it can seem daunting for a start-up to match their company name with a dot-com website. Quite honestly, it just might not be possible. But it’s important to closely align your brand name to your domain name — yet not at the cost of the brand name. Here, Karen E. Klein gives great tips about knowing how to creatively snatch up a sensible dot-com name, while perhaps waiting for your preferred domain name to become financially feasible.

In my opinion, if you’re B2C, it’s a lot more important to closely align brand and domain names, because there is not as much direct-sales technique involved. B2B can breathe easy and become a little bit more creative.

What about you? How did you secure a domain name that makes sense with your brand?

By now, I’m sure you’ve heard a lot about The Avengers. Actually, it’s been virtually impossible not to hear a lot about it. In the wake of the flop known as John Carter, Disney is pulling out all the stops to market this blockbuster – relying on tried-and-true methods (trailers, posters, etc.) as well as unprecedented ones (an online social game, XD cartoon, etc.).

Much has been written about both The Avengers and John Carter, especially on entertainment sites and magazines. But what do their corresponding marketing campaigns teach the company trying to market a chemical analyzer or Droid-based phone?

A lot, as it turns out.

LESSON ONE: EXPERIENCE MATTERS

Do you know who directed John Carter? Andrew Stanton, of WALL-E and Toy Story fame. Although he didn’t possess a speck of action-film experience, with two Oscars under his belt, I suppose he was a reasonable, calculated risk. Sure, it was a bold move – but his inexperience was not the real mistake.

The entire team behind John Carter was inexperienced. From newly-hired (and as of April 20, 2012 – newly fired) studio chief Richard Ross (a former TV executive) to Sean Bailey (head of production) and MT Carney (marketing chief), not one person had the necessary experience to navigate their jobs.

To add push to shove, two key people were shifted out of the team mid-course – Richard Ross replaced Dick Cook, and Carney was eventually replaced by Ricky Strauss. Peter Sealey, former marketing president at Columbia Pictures, told The LA Times, “The worst thing that can happen to a movie is the marketing team changes midstream… It’s disheartening for the filmmakers, for the talent. They lose belief in the film.”

I’m not saying that everyone on your team needs to have a massive marketing portfolio under their belt – and I have certainly witnessed first-hand the benefits of using a fresh (some would say inexperienced) perspective – but there’s got to be at least a couple of key people on the team that know what they are doing. This will also help keep the marketing campaign from unraveling should you be forced to alter the team.

The bottom line: Make sure you have a couple of experienced people spearheading your team. Even better – have a mix.

LESSON TWO: COHERENT MESSAGING MATTERS

Make sure your marketing messages make sense – with what you’re trying to sell, with what you’re trying to say, with what you want your audience/client to take away, etc. It’s best to keep your messages consistent, if at all possible. If you do decide to change course mid-launch (which, although not ideal, sometimes cannot be avoided as we all attempt to remain adaptable, right?), make sure the change makes enough sense to outweigh the complications of that change. The worst thing you can do is confuse (and thus alienate) your potential customer.

It’s the difference between these two trailers:

The John Carter trailer – although beautifully constructed and somehow intriguing – didn’t explain the story or sell the movie. The movie’s director, Stanton, was given the reigns for marketing and (allegedly) refused to listen to the advice of the marketing team. The New York Times reported that Stanton “insisted, for instance, that a Led Zeppelin song be used in a trailer, rejecting concerns that a decades-old rock tune did not make the material feel current.” And I have to admit: it’s a bizarre choice.

The trailer for The Avengers, on the other hand, leaves no room for debate. It’s straightforward and to the point – full of intrigue, explosions, and superheroes fighting the evil guys (plus a few snarky one-liners). The marketing team for The Avengers seems to know its niche, and they capitalize on it. No, it’s not Oscar-worthy, but that’s not the point. The point is to get the right people in the theatre. And with such a trailer, they are ensuring that their customers will come out in droves to see what they expect to see: a great superhero action movie.

The bottom line: Don’t try to be something you’re not. Market your product in a way that makes sense – both for the product and to the consumer.

LESSON THREE: DOING YOUR RESEARCH MATTERS

In other words: don’t make assumptions – especially about your target audience.

Stanton thought everyone knew John Carter and it needed no explanation – hence the mystique of the first trailer. But he assumed wrong, and that cost him. Had he done the research – or at least listened to those who had – he would have quickly discovered that no one under forty really knows the John Carter character. Since he grew up reading the novels, Stanton believed that John Carter was an iconic character. Now, I personally remember picking up these pulp classics by Edgar Rice Burroughs (“father” of Tarzan) at the store for 79 cents – I get that it’s nostalgic. But Stanton let his nostalgia get in the way of reality – believing that, as Andrew Sullivan of The Daily Beast pointed out, “audiences would gasp in delight at John Carter’s very appearance in much the same way that a Batman teaser might only need to flash the Bat Signal.”

The bottom line: Do your research, don’t make assumptions, and do not base your entire marketing strategy on personal feelings. After all, in marketing terms, you are only a sampling of one!

LESSON FOUR: STRATEGY MATTERS

So what’s the big deal about doing your research? Once you have the research, you can decide on the best marketing strategy. Not only did the lack of research on John Carter cost them, but Disney could not even decide on a marketing approach for the film. The LA Times aptly observed, “Posters that at one point had been adorned with a mysterious figure under the letters ‘JC’ were replaced by ads that featured a shirtless man fleeing giant white apes and left prospective moviegoers scratching their heads.”

The Avengers team has a clear strategy, and it’s grabbing attention. It started at the Comic-Con International convention in July 2010. The movie’s director, Joss Whedon, and stars showed up to make a splash. And they’ve been splashing ever since. (OK, in fairness to John Carter, The Avengers really started marketing back in 2008 when Samuel L. Jackson, as “Nick Fury,” gave hints that he was recruiting a team in Iron Man. This stirred buzz with existing fans, who took it viral from there, and Disney capitalized on this build-up after buying Marvel in 2009.)

Part of your strategy needs to be knowing when to go full-scale and make a big Avengers-type splash, and knowing when to be stealthy. There’s not an exact science or a formula to it – part of it is research, part of it is luck, and sometimes it’s just a matter of merely working with what you’ve got. But it is a skill and can be honed and applied. Like hitting a baseball, success is not a 100% of the time thing – but a better than the other guy (competitor) thing.

Take The King’s Speech, for example. Since they had budget constraints and the movie was a tighter, art-house, serious movie, there’s no way they could market as loudly as The Avengers. And you know, it probably wouldn’t have been the right approach anyways. It quietly premiered at the London Film Festival, and relied on word-of-mouth marketing. And it worked all the way to the Oscars!

The bottom line: Make sure you have a strategy in place before you start marketing.

• What other lessons can we learn from the movie industry?
• What other movies had a notoriously awful marketing campaign or an outstanding one?
• What else can you learn from looking at an industry other than your own?

“Aspiring ‘to be the market leader’ or ‘to be seen by our clients and partners in their success’ is admirable, but lacks the specificity and clear linkage to action and measurable results to propel go-to-market efforts.”

— IT Industry research leader, Gartner, Inc.,
on the importance of tying goals to actionable strategy and results.

On December 3, 2001, the Segway was unveiled to the public. Dean Kamen’s new invention, the now-infamous self-balancing motorized scooter, was surrounded by buzz twelve months before its release. After the built-up hype, the Segway was expected to sell 10,000 machines a week, instead of the actual 24,000 sold in the first year.

On January 27, 2010, the iPad was revealed to the world. The revolutionary tablet computer was also released amidst a flurry of anticipatory buzz. Within 80 days, Apple sold three million iPads, and once again changed the way people use technology.

Two products. Two releases. Two (drastically) different outcomes.

These stories remind us of the basic questions: What are the key ingredients to a successful product launch? How can you protect your product from failure?

One quick Google-search of “Product Launch Strategies” will reveal that these are the questions people are asking – no matter the business, no matter the product, no matter the current strategy. Although there are a variety of ideas and quick tips out there for perusal, I really think your Go-To-Market strategy can be boiled down to three simple rules. Now, there’s an important distinction between the terms “Go-To-Market” and “Marketing” – at least in the common understanding of most professionals I deal with. “Go-To-Market” captures the thought of introducing a specific product into a specific market context. It is more “action-y” than “marketing,” which can be applied more broadly to all the activities traditionally associated with strategy, pricing, positioning and so on. “Go-to-Market” can serve as a rallying point for your team as it is generally seen as very time-bound (“now”) and results oriented (“launch this product”). (I realize this is not exact – but it is a reflection of how I’ve heard these terms used over the years.)

So here are the three overarching principles for effective Go-To-Market strategy:

1) Define Your Objectives Carefully

If you don’t know where you’re going, it doesn’t much matter which direction you take the organization.

Objectives are necessary in order to have a clear and clean-cut view of where the organization is going. They should be built around a central concept of messaging, representing a set of promises that your target market will agree is innovative, indispensable, and inspiring (I³). Keep objectives as clear and specific as possible. Use time-bound targets that are measurable. (For example: Sell 100,000 units by May of 20xx for revenue of $$$ million.)

• Strategic objectives are the high-level goals that drive strategy and long-term direction. These include corporate goals, financial goals, and market impact goals.
• Tactical objectives aren’t tasks, per se, but are more immediately tangible than strategic objectives. They reflect the key areas of project management, overall efficiency and time management, and translate easily into “to-do list” items.

2) Ask the Right Questions

Throughout the formation of the your go-to-market strategy, four question areas will arise:
• What major issues must be faced?
• What key decisions must be made?
• What information are we missing?
• What expertise or “know how” will we need to carry out this plan?
   

First, identify major issues as they surface, noting where “gaps” still exist. These issues are either internal or external roadblocks to success. Some issues will require conversations or actions to mitigate their impact on your plans. In other cases, these issues might not be obstacles but rather create other, unintended complications. For example, a particular launch may negatively affect a long-term partner because it has competitive elements within it. This doesn’t necessarily hinder your go-to-market efforts, but it has ramifications in other aspects of your business.

Next, make the necessary decisions. All issues require one or more decisions – even “do nothing” is a decision. So, break down these major issues into key decisions that need to be made while going to market. Frame the decision along with its stakeholders and its impact on the key factors in the overall strategy.

Finally, determine what information and expertise is needed to execute your plan. How will you fill these gaps? All elements should be articulated and measured in terms of their relationship and interrelation to the strategic and tactical objectives of your go-to-market messaging process.

3) Don’t Get Stuck

Ironically, the most difficult task for companies is often not development of go-to-market strategy, but actually the execution of those plans. It is critical that you keep the elements of your overall strategy at the center of your conversations and current strategic discussions.

When you consider new business opportunities that might interfere with your current go-to-market tasks, ask: Is this consistent with our overall objectives? Our timeline? Our goals? Will this take the focus off of our strategic business initiatives?

Also, go back to the four question areas. They are simple yet valuable tools. Consider the simplicity and power of asking:

• Is this an issue that really requires more discussion and understanding?
• Do we need to make a decision which presupposes a defined set of outcomes to choose from?
• Is this an information gap (a lack of appropriate or sufficient information)?
• Do we have a “know-how” gap (the lack of a specific skill or domain expertise to fulfill the mission)?
   

Teams can develop a “shorthand” that moves them quickly from an emotional read of the situation to an objectively based one. Be sure to round out your discussions and conversations with an action orientation. You should always “map back” to your overall project plan, and stay rooted in your overall messaging strategy.

Do you have any success/horror stories about product launches?
How have you seen marketing strategies either help or hinder the product’s success?

Alright. Maybe I was a little harsh in the last post. But I promise I’m not heartless. Even though I believe there were a lot of crucial missteps on behalf of Microsoft, I can also see their perspective. There is a need for competition in the closed-systems smartphone market. There is a need for better cohesion in closed systems. It’s just a matter of playing the game well – and smart – enough.

The bottom line: there is still hope. More specifically, I believe there is still hope for Microsoft.

Innovation is Not Dead

Remember AOL? Dial-up modems? Palm Pilots? Floppy disks?

To throw in the towel and declare that innovation in a certain market is over is a mistake, and every entrepreneur knows it. But the thing with innovation is that it’s exactly that – innovative. Good, strategic innovation has to at least change the rules ever-so-slightly – not too much that people fear the change, and yet dramatically enough for people to take notice. In order to change consumer habits, innovation – especially in the smartphone market – needs to cause people to stop and say, “Hey – this is clearly better.”

Innovation is not dead in the smartphone market – I’d say it’s just beginning – and Microsoft should be able to think through their smartphone product to create a somewhat different paradigm.

Closed-System Competition

Monopoly is only fun if you’re winning, and if you’re the consumer, you’re usually not winning when a company has the monopoly on a market. Apple has arguably earned their place as the king of closed systems, but there’s no reason it can’t be challenged. If Microsoft finds the right strategy, it could become a game-changer.

We need a little closed-system competition – for the sake of the consumer and at the very least, to ensure that Apple stays on their “A” game.

Surprise Attack

In the last post, I was very fond of the phrase, “too little, too late,” but Microsoft could use their late arrival to their advantage. It’s possible that Apple and Android feel invincible, and now could be Microsoft’s chance to come in from [way] behind and make a sneak attack. Microsoft should take bold chances – and I’d say, the bolder, the better.

You know what they say – “Never underestimate the element of surprise!”

The Secret Weapon

Microsoft could also gain an edge by jumping on the biggest chance they have: INTEGRATION. People are still looking for a cohesive way to jump between tablet and phone and computer without searching for their information, and neither Apple nor Google has successfully wielded this “secret weapon” (although they sure are trying).

Dan Lyons, technology editor at Newsweek, said in regards to this type of integration, “So far, no tech company can deliver this [type of integration]. But Microsoft has all the pieces. It just needs to bring them together.” And if anyone can speak with authority on this subject, it would be Lyons. He recently conducted an experiment in which he used only Microsoft products for a month. His conclusion? Well, I’d recommend reading the full article, but I especially liked his ending insight. He acknowledged that despite being impressed by Microsoft, he wasn’t about to switch his iPhone for a Windows phone; however…

“…later this year or early next, when Lenovo comes out with that slick Windows 8 tablet-slash-laptop, I might just buy one. That’s how change begins. That’s how Apple won people over, including me, over the past decade. It started with iTunes and an iPod. Then I got frustrated with Windows and tried out a low-end Mac Mini. That worked, so I made the leap to an iMac. Then an Apple TV box. Then a MacBook Pro. Then an iPhone. And on and on. So that’s what Microsoft needs to do. Find a product that gives it a toehold and build from there.”

So, Microsoft: hope is not lost. As harsh as the smartphone landscape may appear – and even as harsh as I may have been in the previous post – I firmly believe that you have a fighting chance.

And I can’t wait to see what you do with it.

• How do you think Microsoft can “come back swinging” with a fighting force?
• What is Microsoft’s best bet when it comes to strategy to win the market?
• Do you think there is still hope for Microsoft, or are you more apt to agree with the previous post?

Original Post: The Promise and the Reality
by Chris Brogan | April 3, 2012

“What are the promises you’re making, and what is the reality of what is delivered?”

My Quick Take:

Chris poses a simple yet brilliant question.  It’s so important to create marketing messages that properly align with what your business or product represents and actually does.  I remember there was a brief time when TD Bank had a marketing campaign about their “creativity.”  As a customer, I was scratching my head over this word choice, knowing that I didn’t really want my bank to be “creative,” but “convenient.”  Their current branding — as being “America’s most convenient bank” — resonates with me and aligns more appropriately with what they deliver.

This is a great reminder to ask ourselves if we’re properly aligning our messages with our offerings.

Disclaimer: I am fully away this article might make me a few enemies. But it must be said. Because really, it’s what we’ve all been thinking anyways.

What’s the point of the Windows Phone?

I’m not trying to be unnecessarily biting here. Really – I’m genuinely curious.

What’s the point?

I’d love to pose this question to Microsoft’s development team. Or rather, I wish I could have been in the room during their stage gate process. What was their marketing team thinking? How did they answer the question, “Should we bother making it?”

Because the brutal answer, I’m sorry to say, was NO. No, Microsoft, you shouldn’t have made the Windows Phone.

And it’s not because it’s a poorly made product. It’s because the closed market has already been taken – cornered and conquered, as it were – by Apple.

Let’s unpack this a bit more: Apple is undeniably the king of closed systems-based phones. Android came in and said, “We can’t have another closed system,” and competed by working with an open system. They gave it away, in a manner of speaking, and have since posed a substantial threat to Apple’s dominance of the smartphone market. And let’s not forget that early on in the game – when the timing was right for closed competition – the Palm Pre was released on a closed system and it was crushed by Apple.

So then, Microsoft enters. Way, way late. Too late. This is not a case of “making an entrance” and being fashionably late; this is a case of missing the boat entirely. Microsoft thought, “Hey, we’re the king of closed systems – we’ve got this one in the bag,” but this “in-the-bag” thinking has failed for them as a strategy.

To add insult to injury, Microsoft’s attempt at a clever marketing campaign completely backfired. By now I’m sure you’ve heard about the “Smoked by a Windows Phone” challenge, in which customers were encouraged to bring their smartphones into the store and compete against a Windows phone. Basically, the faster phone would win, and there were prizes to be gained.

Well, Sahas Katta of Skatter Tech met the challenge, and his standard-model Android won. But instead of losing gracefully, the Microsoft store employees acted like 10-year-old kids on a school playground. Not only were they sore losers, they (initially) refused to accept defeat. Microsoft’s Ben Rudolph contacted Sahas – not to give him the prize, but instead to offer a rematch. However, since Sahas is a blogger, the unfortunate experience had already viral, and Rudolph eventually sent out a tweet to offer him the winner’s prize. But the damage had already been done.

Again: too little, and way too late.

Please understand, I’m not saying that the product is garbage – it’s a good product. Maybe it’s even superior to what’s already out there. But if you’re going to enter into the smartphone market a little late, then you’ve got to be radically superior in order to replace what’s already out there. And the Windows Phone has yet to prove that it’s radically superior.

If you don’t believe me – if you’re fired up from this post and think I’m wrong, then just answer this single question: Do YOU know anyone who has a Windows Phone (and isn’t trying to auction it on eBay)?

Also, please stayed tuned for The Windows Phone, Part 2: A New Hope.

What do you think about the Windows Phone? Do you think they could have had a fighting chance at a different point in the game? Do you think they still have a fighting chance?

Are you riding trends or are you setting them?

Even more importantly: have you even asked yourself that question lately?

Sure, it’s easier to jump on a bandwagon of the latest trend, but that’s not the entrepreneur’s way. The entrepreneur must seek to stand out in the crowd – a head above the rest. Of course, that’s easier said than done.

Think to yourself: When was the last time you heard/read/seen something that was setting a trend? When was the last time you were in a position to set the trend?

Recently, I’ve been struck by the amount and scope of trendsetting going on in the world. Have you noticed it too? I think it’s important to highlight these stories because they are so different from each other. It’s inspiring – reminding me that trendsetting can come in all shapes, sizes, and spheres. Paying attention to the different types of trends can help us pick apart what exactly it takes to be a trendsetter, no matter the business.

Trendsetting in Quality

CNN Money ran an article about Trader Joe’s, the crunchy grocery store chain known for their neighborhood-grocer feel and eclectic collection of food. The article states: “Trader Joe’s doesn’t pick up on trends – it sets them.” In their case, they set the bar of quality so high that customers don’t mind that the store has, say, only ten different kinds of peanut butter (as opposed to a regular grocery store’s 50 brands) because their customers trust that the quality of the product will be good.

• Ask yourself: How can I raise the quality of my product/service so that my customers trust me MORE?

Trendsetting in Innovation

FastCompany recently highlighted Nike’s newest innovation: the sock shoe – officially called, “Flyknit.” After interviewing athletes (in other words, their customer base), Nike found that what these customers wanted was a shoe that felt like a sock. Nike’s director of footwear innovation, Tony Bignell, explained, “A sock fits great, feels snug, goes unnoticed, and you get no irritation… So the idea was, how do you engineer a sock into a high-performance shoe?” In order to get this product to the shelves, Nike had to develop an entirely new way of engineering a shoe design. Just do it? Oh, they did.

• Ask yourself: How can my customers help me innovate things THEY want?

Trendsetting in Production

Yet another article from FastCompany highlighted what could possibly be the next wave of trendsetting in publishing. Alan Goldsher wrote and published an e-book on Jeremy Lin in 72 hours. That’s 15,000 words ready-to-read in 72 hours. I’m still scratching my head over the reality of this type of production (no doubt this guy has a Keurig station within arm’s reach), and I think it’s worth noting as more and more consumers will expect their products/services to be produced faster.

• Ask yourself: How can I produce my products/services in a more timely and efficient manner (without sacrificing quality)?

So why highlight these three types of trendsetting? If you emphasize the quality, innovation, and production of your service or product – and if you’re asking the right questions along the way – you’re on the right path to being a trendsetter.

There is, however, one more vital ingredient: selling to the right customer. You need to get your product into the right hands. When asked if one could predict what would become a new trend, Henrik Vejlgaard, author of Anatomy of a Trend, recommended looking to the major cities. Since we’re more focused on trends in marketing and business than in fashion, think to yourself: What are the “major cities” of your business that help spread products to other businesses? The vital customer/hub will be different depending on the business, but it’s your responsibility to figure out who and where they are, and into whose hands you need to get your product.

Although it can seem daunting to think about trendsetting in an age of Apple, Google, and Facebook, it’s important to stay on top of your business and try to be on the forefront of the next big trend.

• What other questions do you think are vital to becoming a trendsetter?
• What other inspiring trendsetting examples have you heard of recently?

When did Pop-Tarts start selling as fast food?

When I was a kid (apparently back in the Stone Ages, as my kids like to remind me), they were sold as something that had to be toasted first. Pop-Tarts were only for breakfast – end of story.

Today, Pop-Tarts are anything but “only for breakfast.” Here in our office, they are a staple snack item. And I’ve learned we’re not the only ones.

In 2010, Kellogg (owner of the Pop-Tarts brand) opened a Pop-Tarts store in Times Square, joining M&Ms and Hershey. This bold move, as the NY Times points out, is focused primarily on “marketing and visibility.”

And Pop-Tarts wants to be visible, but not as a breakfast food. At the Pop-Tarts store, not only can you simply enjoy your favorite Pop-Tart variety as a snack, but you can create your own Pop-Tart, eat a Pop-Tart sandwich, and (I kid you not) try something called Pop-Tart “sushi” (but don’t ask me what that is, because I’m not quite sure – although I’m fairly certain raw fish is not involved).

So this is the Pop-Tarts evolution, and I have to say: hats off to their marketing team. If Pop-Tarts were merely a breakfast item, I certainly wouldn’t be a customer any more – trading my childhood breakfast items for grownup things like oatmeal and eggs. Yet since they’ve been marketed as a snack, I have been a loyal customer – I, and the rest of the “grownups” in my office (yes, in spite of the carbs and calories – after all, genius needs fuel).

The Pop-Tart brand is a perfect display of what can best be called “evolutionary marketing.” Instead of remaining in their proverbial box, they’ve reached out and redefined their brand in order to make Pop-Tarts more widely marketable.

Without changing the product, they changed its purpose.

Surprisingly, the term “evolutionary marketing” doesn’t yield as much on Google as I would have thought. It appears to be a potential business buzzword that has yet to take definite shape. However, there were a couple (read: exactly two) posts out there that started a good conversation.

One article on Thoughtlead was written by Seth Rosen, in which he defined evolutionary marketing as, “seeing all available marketing strategies and tactics as potentially valuable to our efforts to sell our products, services, or messages; and … pursuing all of them with an eye on where we can go as a culture, and as a human race.” In response to this post, Kathy Bayer of KB Marketing & Consulting added her own thoughts to the idea of evolutionary marketing. I especially liked what she had to say at the end: “Evolutionary Marketing by definition has to be constantly changing and evolving, so anyone can jump into the conversation any time and take it forward.”

Well, allow me to “jump into the conversation,” “take it forward,” and suggest yet another definition.

I would venture to argue that this new term moves beyond the evolution of marketing strategies available (with a heavy focus on SEO and social media). I believe evolutionary marketing can describe the evolving branding strategy of a product or service. It’s about the way a product evolves over time, utilizing the technology and trends available, but strategically revamping its brand and purpose, to keep it relevant.

In other words, it’s the difference between Pop-Tarts and Kodak. Pop-Tarts kept its competitive edge, and even brought it up a notch, to remain relevant in today’s market. Kodak – arguably a more versatile business than Pop-Tarts – failed to evolve (and we all know what happened there: extinction).

Brian Solis recently posted about Digital Darwinism, and discusses how to avoid extinction in a world where, as he cites from a Babson College commercial, “Over 40% of the companies that were at the top of the Fortune 500 in 2000 were no longer there in 2010.” That’s a sobering thought, and hopefully a wake-up call to those of us who believe ourselves immune to extinction. As always, Brian adds an insightful take to this idea, and the following quote is an apt description of evolutionary marketing: “Everything begins with embracing a culture of innovation and adaptation – a culture that recognizes the impact of disruptive technology and how consumer preference and affinity is evolving.”

So as I grab for yet another 3-o’clock-Pop-Tarts-pick-me-up, I ask myself the question: Am I evolving with the market, or am I in danger of becoming extinct?

What about you?

• How would YOU define “evolutionary marketing?”
• What other products have you seen evolving with the times in an effective way?
• What other products have you seen becoming extinct?

Original Post: Social media is about social science not technology
by Brian Solis | March 14, 2012

“There is no good reason or explanation for why we are not engaging or learning from customers. As it stands today unfortunately, the chart above says everything about how businesses see and value customer relationships. This.must.change.”

My Quick Take:

Have you looked at the companies that are doing this well? I think of two off the top of my head – Keurig, who use their customer’s insights to drive their product development, and Starbucks, who have an easy, promoted way for customers to offer suggestions to the company (called MyStarbucksIdea). And then, of course, there’s the infamous example of the company (*coughNetflixcough*) that assumed something about their customers to great peril.

The bottom line is that we see the results of companies who are successfully engaging their customers, and the results of the companies who are not.

Which result do you want?

Here’s an unusual success story: two Italian clothing designers, Giuseppe Albarelli and Andrea Pensiero, thrifted a sweatshirt with the Franklin & Marshall logo. Not realizing that Franklin & Marshall is, in fact, a small liberal arts college in Lancaster, PA (and not doing their homework to find out), they decided to take the logo and just market it as the centerpiece of a high-end fashion line.

And they were met with great success.

As reported by MSNBC, the Franklin & Marshall clothing line sells sweatshirts for upwards of $205 – a vast difference from the $37 Champion-brand shirt you can pick up at the college bookstore. Seems hard to believe, but I’m not a fashionista.

But what about the college?

Initially, the college was (understandably) upset that the clothing line used their school’s name and logo without permission. However, the school’s thoughts on the subject changed, reasoning “it doesn’t hurt” to have their name “out there.” Additionally, the clothing line is donating $130,000 over four years to scholarships – which I’m sure took the sting out of the “no permission” thing.

Reading this story prompted a few thoughts:

For one, I think it’s pretty basic for any business to know the importance of doing your research before claiming a brand (or domain name). In the case of the F&M clothing line (and the college, for that matter), things worked out, but that’s not always the case. PCWorld ran a great article citing Nine Tech Patent and Trademark Oddities – in other words, companies that tried to claim a brand even though a strikingly similar brand was already out there. Some guilty parties include Apple (in dispute with The Beatles’ Apple Corps Ltd.) and Android (in dispute with – well, you know this one – Lucasfilm).

Another thought is that, as an entrepreneur, you never know when inspiration will hit you. These Italian designers chose a brand based on something they found in a thrift store and, despite using the college’s brand without permission, this situation somehow worked in their favor.

• What other unusual success stories do you know?
• What other unlikely partnerships can you think of?
• Where’s the most unusual place where inspiration has hit you?

Do you Yahoo?

If the numbers are any indication, then you probably don’t – you’ve probably taken your search to Google, your social interaction to Facebook, and your entertainment to YouTube. Over the last few years, Yahoo! has been floundering to find its identity, to say the least.

Enter new CEO Scott Thompson (former executive of PayPal) to save the day. His previous experiences make him an odd choice for a company turnaround: he’s been a product manager instead of a media executive, he helped a small-but-healthy business grow – but has no experience turning around a flagging business, and he unabashedly confessed to knowing barely anything about advertising. And yet he is the chosen one to relaunch the suffering search engine company – he is the one responsible for branding Yahoo! with a new identity.

And what will that identity be, exactly?

It’s hard to say, but Yahoo! seems to be focusing its efforts on online entertainment. The close of 2011 brought announcements of partnerships with Bill Maher and Funny or Die comedic videos, as well as launching original video content. A few days ago, Yahoo! also reported their sponsorship of the Sundance Festival – mainly by partnering with the festival to air 12 short films on their website.

So, judging from the recent press releases, I gather Yahoo is re-branding itself as… an online media giant? …a social-networking culture hub? …generally cool and relevant? Or… what? To be honest, I can’t really make heads or tails of their re-branding scheme, and I think that’s a problem. There’s no clear indication of the direction the company is heading in, and I’m fairly certain the audience they’re attempting to reach out to (the young, hip, “YouTube generation”, I presume?) won’t be taking this [vaguely positioned] bait.

And not to beat a dead horse, but doesn’t this seem all-too-familiar? –A little too much like Yahoo! re-branding déjà vu?

Need I remind everyone of former Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz – who, with her ascent to executive power, brought a massive re-branding campaign to Yahoo in 2009? The “Y!ou” campaign sought to humanize the company – playing off of the rise of me-centric internet browsing (made popular, if not invented, by Facebook). That campaign made much more sense than the current one: it was streamlined, seemed relevant, and was bound to work.

Except it didn’t.

So why does Yahoo! think their current re-branding efforts will work? What’s the difference?

If they’re hoping for a new audience from the Sundance folks, they’re probably out of luck. YouTube partnered with Sundance only two years ago, allowing viewers to watch full-length Sundance films on streaming during the festival events. The films chosen were obscure, the audience drawn in was smaller than anticipated, and YouTube has chosen not to partner again with Sundance in this way. If YouTube – an internet giant with branding built on online videos – couldn’t snag the hipster Sundance audience, how will Yahoo! attempt this feat? Unless Yahoo! has some blockbuster short films up their sleeve (does such a thing exist?), it seems doubtful that the Sundance partnership will do much, if anything, to turn the company around.

Yahoo! keeps missing the mark on re-branding because they are failing to capitalize on their current strengths. The fact is that they still get 700 million visitors each month as an online leader in news and sports. They would do better making efforts to become innovators in the world of online news – to re-brand themselves as a “trusted online news source.” They should attempt to cater to their current audience – perhaps offering specialized sports programming, such as the UFC (which, with 50% of their audience between the ages of 21 and 34, is just the type of demographic Yahoo! seems to be coveting[i]).

Instead of focusing on completely changing their identity, Yahoo! should stick to what they’re already doing that’s working – and bump it up a notch. Attempting to copy Facebook and YouTube (or trying to make a new hybrid) is not smart re-branding. The mistake here is that their overhaul will leave people scratching their heads, wondering why exactly they should even consider using Yahoo! in the first place.

Listen, I’m interested to see how this all plays out. Maybe there will be a sudden resurgence of loyalty for Yahoo!… but it doesn’t seem likely. Unless and until we see a miraculous turnaround for the company, there a few re-branding lessons we can take away from this whole situation:

• Innovate – Don’t Copy: Facebook and YouTube became internet giants because they offered something new to the internet consumer. The reality is that, for the time being, they are ahead of the game. Unless your company can offer something truly new to these audiences, don’t attempt to become a copycat. Instead, find a new way to deliver what your company has to offer. Simplify it, humanize it, and streamline it.
   
• Know and Capitalize on Your Strengths: Yahoo! has an audience through its news and sports offerings, and yet they seem to be ignoring this strength staring them in the face. The only justification (if you can call it that) for this is that they must not realize their strength in this area. Don’t follow suit. Figure out who your best and real audience is, what they want, and then give it to them – pronto!
   
• Make Re-branding Clear and Focused: Let’s say you’ve come to the conclusion that you must completely overhaul your company’s branding. Fine, but make it clear. Don’t be vague, and don’t be irrelevant. Re-market your brand in such a way that anyone who sees your company’s logo and messaging will know exactly why they need you.

What do you think of Yahoo’s recent re-branding strategy?

How would you re-brand the company?

With so many top-notch thought leader business blogs on the web, it can be a challenge to find one that really stands out. So, we figured, with so many good ones out there, why limit greatness? And why neglect the valuable opinions of our peers? Instead, we want to find out who are the most influential thought leading bloggers in business – by asking you to share your experiences and vote to help us select:

Take this survey

“Strategic Propositions’ Most Influential Business-Blogging Thought Leaders.”

Here’s where the reward comes in. By taking a few minutes out of your day to take this short survey, we’ll enter you in a drawing to win a brand new set of high-performance Bose QuietComfort 15 headphones with a $299 value.

Just like the thought provoking subjects of this survey, these innovative headphones set new standards [in noise-cancellation technology and quality personal audio] and we’d like you to have one, if your entry is selected to win*.

Can’t wait to participate? Get started now. Go ahead and tell us your thoughts.

Take this survey

Thank you for your participation! We look forward to your responses!

Sincerely,

Jose
Strategic Propositions
Value Prop Interactive

How specific should you be when positioning your brand? And let’s just say you have chosen utmost specificity, then how do you reach your niche market effectively?
These questions hit me as I was driving the other day and happened to hear an ad on the radio. It was one of those ads that normally would have fallen into background noise, but there was something about it that stood out. Allow me to elaborate: It was an ad for a divorce firm (like I said, usually background noise to me), but they spun it a different way. The radio ad positioned the firm squarely as the divorce attorney for men on whom divorce was forced upon – men whose wives left them and put them in this position of divorce.

What was fascinating about the ad – from a positioning point of view – was the art of storytelling to a very specific, male-centric audience. Did you notice the italicized verbs? Forced. Left. Put. The firm’s ad painted a very vivid picture. They labeled themselves as a friend. They successfully characterized themselves in such a way that would cause a [soon-to-be-divorced] man listening to think, “Hey, these guys get me.”

Here was this divorce firm, with a (very specific) niche market, and they were incredibly successful at connecting with that audience.

How did they do it?

• They were specific: At first thought, this seems counter-intuitive. Companies sometimes shirk from the idea of narrowing their target audience, worried of losing countless other customers. But as anyone with at least one campaign in them will tell you: before you start selling, you must know your audience – down to most minute detail possible. See for yourself – a simple search of “niche marketing” on any of the major business websites (Inc.com, FastCompany, and BusinessWeek, to start) will tell you the same thing: niche marketing = success.
   
  It’s the difference between a car commercial showing an unidentified [professional] driver whipping fast around mountain cliffs, and a car commercial highlighting a family’s [hectic but fun] adventure to the Grand Canyon. Be honest: which one do you connect with more?
   
• They were storytellers: Sure, this is Marketing 101, but creating an authentic, meaningful story anywhere – let alone in an ad format – takes work. It takes time. It takes a team of people ready to put themselves in your customer’s shoes.
   
  The result must be a humanization of your brand – a humanization so powerful that the customer will stop and think, “Hey, these guys get me.” Like the divorce firm’s radio ad. Or the recent Huggies slip-on diaper commercial (seriously, anyone with kids can relate to this one).

The thing about these two components is that for successful marketing, you need both. They go hand-in-hand. How can you tell a good story if you don’t know the major characters (your niche audience) inside and out? You can’t. As Inc’s Michelle Miller writes, “You may have the greatest company in the world. But if you don’t know how to convey that to customers, you may as well not exist.”

• What other examples of great storytelling do you see in the marketplace?
• Have you ever had to narrow-down your target audience? How did it help your business and marketing strategy?

Who do you think of when the term “thought leader” comes up? Steve Jobs? Seth Godin? Tom Peters? Thomas Friedman? Chris Anderson? Jill Konrath? Malcolm Gladwell? Who else?

You’ve heard the term, I’m sure, and you’ve undoubtedly been influenced by many thought leaders – but have you ever stopped to think about what actually makes a thought leader? What makes them tick? How do they do what they do? And most importantly: how can you become one?

Well, thought leaders are thought leaders because they bring their experiences, their knowledge, their contacts, and their continuous thirst for new knowledge together and synthesize it. And what comes of such synthesizing? New ideas, new approaches, and essentially, new avenues for solving some of the biggest problems that we all have, whether or not we realized we had a problem in the first place.

In some cases, the synthesis is so strong that it goes beyond synthesis and really enters into a world of epiphany – and true breakthrough thinking happens (think: Apple, Hulu, Amazon, Facebook, etc.)

However, that’s not all a thought leader does. The greatest thought leaders have certain habits – habits that can be taught, learned, and practiced. These five habits (or strategies) provide the foundation for this “thought leadering” process to take place. It looks something like this:

1. Thought leaders carve out a set amount of time every day to be plugged into the world of other thought leaders. In other words, they are becoming experts in their area. That is to say that their first hour or second hour of the morning – before they get busy with appointments and work and whatever else they may do to earn a living – is devoted to reading a certain set of bloggers. And news sites. And business sites. Marla Tabaka of Inc.com puts it this way: “Do your research, and then do more research.” Thought leaders can’t read everything, but they do stay up to date on major things. They are constantly learning, and they are constantly being challenged.
    
2. They engage in social media not for the sake of promotion but for the sake of engagement. Tabaka writes, “Social media has opened the doorway to a whole new level of leadership and influence… in 2011 one can be considered a thought leader without being at the helm of a multi-billion-dollar corporation.” Thought leaders want to be part of powerful conversations that are linked in groups. They want to add their voice to comments on thoughtful blog posts that make a difference.
    
3. They talk to other thought leaders and people who influence others – people who are leaders in their fields. They do this through phone interviews, in-person interviews, and written interviews. They want to talk with the influencers in their field before reading about them second-hand; furthermore, they want the connections. Strategy consultant and HBR blogger Dorie Clark agrees, and writes, “If you’ve got well-known connections, flaunt them and leverage them.”
    
4. They challenge their own assumptions. Another way to say this: “Stay open and don’t rush to conclusions.” Thought leaders do this in their own writing through their blogging, developing, white papers, crafting articles, and so on. They are constantly questioning and discovering.
    
5. And finally, thought leaders are thought leaders because they don’t merely live in the world of ideas but they match their ideas up to the real world. In other words, they make sure the ideas have validity – that they are practical and actionable. In order to do this, they have to make strategic choices. Entreprenuer.com says, “Often people are more comfortable generating ideas than winnowing them down to ‘the one’ that meets the need.” Thought leaders make the difficult choices that the average Joe doesn’t want or know how to make, and these choices propel them to the top. Nowhere have we been given a better example of this type of leadership than from Steve Jobs.

These five strategies are the common thread that makes thought leaders into the great leaders that they are. Someone could be an innovator at heart – dreaming and scheming grand ideas – without harnessing the know-how power to make their innovations succeed. By practicing these five strategies, thought leaders bring about those “Ah-ha!” moments in business (and life) that make us wonder how we ever got by without their insights and inspiration.

(for another take on thought leadership, check out David Newmans’ 5 BIG-Reasons Thought Leadership Marketing Matters!)

• What are some other habits or strategies you think are essential to a thought leader?
• Have you put any of these strategies into practice? What were the results?
• Do you see any up-and-coming thought leaders in today’s world? Who are they, and what makes them stand out from the crowd?