| ||||||||||||
PRINT
COMMENT
SUBSCRIBE
RSSDuring this discussion I had an epiphany that not all of you will agree with, but is still worth stating for debate. Waving the flag of brand-building in an accountable marketplace is akin to saying "you have no idea what you're doing." Building a brand is not the end goal of your marketing, so don't pretend that is how you are spending your money when you can track far beyond that goal.
The epiphany came about because we all had examples of clients who came to us proclaiming "brand, brand, brand" -- but we all ended up assigning them interim or proxy metrics that measured interaction in one way or another (in some cases it was click rate, in others it was actions), and used those metrics to translate to customers.
The fact of the matter is that in an era of accountability where digital media can almost always be used to measure some element of response, all marketing is either direct or indirect marketing. All marketing should be and can be accountable, and any marketer that's still out there proclaiming "brand, brand, brand" hasn't done their homework to fully understand their consumers -- or to fully understand the medium in which we work.
I'm not saying that brand advertising is not necessary, but I am very clearly stating that brand development is a transitional metric. Building a brand is not and never was the end goal of marketing. Building a brand is a transition metric to driving sales or increasing market share -- and that is the goal of all marketing. There is not one example of any marketer in the world that spends money with no expectations on ROI, so why should we pretend any differently?
In the old world of marketing and advertising, we used brand building as a metric of success because we lacked the ability to create unique patterns of accountability in media. But media has now progressed to a state where you can almost absolutely attribute performance in your campaign to individual media tracts. The creative is a variable that can be worked with and performance-affected, but simple multivariate testing can be performed and ROI can be increased. Not all marketers are savvy enough to manage all of these variables effectively, but the tools are there; with the correct process and parameters in place, it can be done.
As belts tighten in the next six months, I believe we will see the end of spending against non-accountable media. As Wall Street becomes accountable, so will all the companies that are involved -- and marketing as a whole will be forced to embrace the tools and services that prove effectiveness. Of course, many of you will read this and say, "Great -- he's saying that click rates are important." They are not the primary measure of success. Interaction rates and click stream and repeat visits, as well as consumer interactions with all your marketing components, are what I profess you should be measuring. Isolate the variables and test appropriately across media vehicles, but measure the entire track from exposure to acquisition, and your efforts will be rewarded. Oh -- and be sure that you know how much you spent, and what increase or decrease you saw in sales -- because that is the most fundamental strategic metric you can measure.
For publishers: You need to start understanding the relationship you have with your audience. You need to start understanding how your site affects, if it does at all, the behaviors and patterns of your audience. Understand how exposure to advertising on your site can affect the business your clients are running.
Brand-building is dead, but marketing is not. You may still measure brand awareness and favorability, but only in their direct correlation to intent and purchase. Those are your true metrics for success, so focus your attention against those, and you will succeed in the coming six months.
Do you agree -- or do you think we missed something last Saturday morning?
1 person recommends this article.
RSS FEEDS
If earlier, they were spending on four to five media, they will now gon in for the top 2 or 3 which have yielded the best results in the past. However, once this shortlisting is done, the money will be obviously spent on brand building.
What you missed on that Saturday? "If everyone goes in for ROI driven maketing, how will marketers differentiate their products?"
I'd love to hear any feedback you may have on how this platform fits within the digital marketing ecosystem based on our new realities.
Brendan (bg@tumri.com)
Feel free to reach out with any feedback to bg@tumri.com
If you want to measure how your marketing is working, ask the lowly salesperson on the streets who selling to either the end user or the person who is selling to their end user. Many of in the commissioned salesforce are the people who use all of the aforementioned skills to justify the marketers' existence.
To your point: "Brand-building is dead, but marketing is not. You may still measure brand awareness and favorability, but only in their direct correlation to intent and purchase. Those are your true metrics for success . . " I want to support the idea that marketing is the costume, the lyrics, the billboard and everything that touches your "show." Metrics are essential however, if we're not measuring what matters, it's a charade.
Other elements to consider: 1. How about repeat business or referrals gained? 2. Positive vs. negative customer feedback. 3. Redemption of offers through all channels.
Ever since I became an "official" marketer, my sense was that marketers were attempting to justify their existence. Therefore, the natural adversarial relationship with sales, non-revenue vs. revenue producing. Try running a business without marketing and let me know how it goes.
Companies need a plan. A plan to go to market, a plan to build business. Of course creating a tactic around DM is part of that plan. But that's a tactic, not a strategy. Marketers create strategies to build a brand. Once that's in place, building the tactics become a commodity. Building tactics generate sales, but then all you are is a sales person trying to find your next lead. To get people to find you, you need a brand.
Branding is not actually "dead", however it is NOT the end goal. You do not spend money to "build a brand". You spend money to drive sales! Building a brand is one metric on the way to sales and hopefully translates into sales, but it is not the end oal of your marketing.
Does that help clarify the point I was trying to make?
Don't be so literal gang :-)
Brand building is now UX. Brand building is now relevance.
Google, Craigslist, Facebook all built great brands without a dollar of ad spend. Lots to learn from them.
Last, we every DM knows brand drives performance. How many of us would hit CPA goals with buying brand keywords or using logos on our affiliate pages?
I think talking about each and every advertiser like they all sell the same widget doesn't take into account the complexity of our chosen field.
I've seen too many campaigns launched with no real set goal other than 'brand awareness'. If you set goals that you can't accurately measure how will you really ever know if it worked or not?
To save reading this entire thing...my own epiphany went like this... you can do a LOT of things online to build awareness and spread the branding, but you can only do so much if the brand doesnt DELIVER, then we're all french toast.
Seems obvious, but in the case of my own little business, to actually see is to believe. I do email marketing for a group of restaurants in an expensive, up-scale state near New York. I've designed programs that grab birthdays, anniversaries and event preferences one customer at a time, one response card at a time.
Sunday was admittedly one of the grayest, bleakest days of the decade, financial meltdown, rain, the first frost of winter.... Four of the restaurants were on a single street, so it was possible to visit them all in a short, chilly walk.
One, a seafood place, had decided to get active and had started their Sunday brunch that very morning after a long policy of always being closed on sundays. At 1:00PM, a solitary table of four was surrounded by the entire, expectant staff. 1500 e-mails, 50% open rate, a great menu and NOBODY showed... the staff that wasn't hovering was playing fantasy football, messaging one another to the comparatively exciting rhythms of the Giants game on the plasma screen over the bar and shivering in the cold.
Next door, at an Italian bistro, I stopped in to see how it was going, and lo and behold, the place was jam packed, white hot and full of diners, drinkers and conversation. The owners were in their basement office correcting some errant waitperson, but I couldnt wait, simply because there wasn't a single seat in the restaurant. Discussing the world's events, the SAME plasma screen, the SAME Giants game was going completely unnoticed by the horde.
The third and fourth restaurants were empty. One hadn't sent any emails or done any advertising for its overpriced Sushi in four months and the other aggressively and religiously emails 2500 customers every month with significant discounts and generous birthday incentives. No differ3nce, both were cold and empty.
So, the Italian place, by word of mouth and by a steady kind of mailing program that never gives anything away, but only builds brand by sending notices for imaginative beer dinners and wine events, was seen by its customer's as fulfilling its' "Brand" promise of a good-times kind of place, to hang, party and talk to friends... oh and to eat... which was apparently the needed thing on a bleak Sunday morning after an epic financial meltdown.
People still need to identify on an emotional or gut level with products and services in order to consistently return to, purchase or engage with the same companies. With so many choices available and more choices added every day, people need to be almost neurologically hard wired to stick with a certain product.
Yes, I think traditional forms of advertising are going to change and possibly bite the dust. Queensboro does not engage in much of what I would consider "Traditional Advertising," and has not for years. We do have a solid brand that is recognizable to our highly loyal customers, and differentiates us from our competitors in terms of new customer acquisition and retention. That is the point of marketing--not file counts or recognition in surveys. You don't want just recognition. You want customers that keep coming back over and over again. The brand does not need to be just recognizable, but it needs to stand for something that is religiously backed up by the company's output and service.
I think that social media is making brand awareness more important, not less. The brand needs to extend beyond just a logo and be more than a status symbol. The brand needs to be a comprehensive (two-way) communication and execution of a valuable product or service. Queensboro does logos, and we do them well, but we recognize why our customers need logos on shirts, hats, bags and other customizable products, and we offer those products and services to help them build their business brand style and recognition. That is our brand.
"Brand marketing" has long been used as a scapegoat for any marketing that doesn't actually impact sales figures. It's unfortunate that so many agencies use the excuse, "Well, it didn't bring in any customers, but your awareness levels are up." It's not just awareness that's the issue, it's also preference. That's what branding is supposed to be: awareness AND preference. True branding not only changes people's impression of a brand, but ALSO spurs the desired action from the target audience.
Ads without specific product offers (e.g., come in now and save $X) can and should boost sales. Similarly, offer-specific drivers should be brand-building. The two are not mutually exclusive. It's time to embrace this so that marketing serves its chief goal: increasing sales, both immediately and for the long haul.