Comments

Interesting example with the stalker. Of course a guy from Ad Age is going to think it is a creative issue, it's much easier for an 'Ad Guy' to wrap his head around that.

A shift in a paradigm in any indsutry is harder to adjust to and even accept. There are so many more channels, some really small (a blog with 50 hits a day) or really big (Adam Curry podcasting) the natural response is to try and stand out in the channels you understand and take risks in the channels you don't understand.

Posted by OneMan at March 3, 2005 12:09 AM

Good post. It is easy to stay with your set thinking and say ad is central and so blame bad creative, bad execution etc. But as Steve says, Ad agencies and marketers are forgetting to understand what does the customer want! With the internet, advertising is just one approach to the customer.

Posted by R.Srinivasan at March 3, 2005 1:47 AM

CUSTOMERS ALSO ARE LOYAL ONCE THEY adopt products and services - NORDSTROM, NIKE, AMAZON, ZAPPOS, STARBUCKS - they perform consistently and rake in the profit.

Posted by Mike at March 3, 2005 7:18 AM

STEVE - HERE IN Albuquerque - Albertsons dominates because of CUSTOMER SERVICE AND FAMILY TIES PRODUCT AND SERVICE DELIVERY. Plus they have Bank of America in their supermarkets ... so that makes things CONVENIENT!

Posted by John at March 3, 2005 9:47 AM

Your hyperlink seems to be pointing to a reference on your local drive, not a web reference.

Posted by Tim Almond at March 3, 2005 10:22 AM

Steve, happy to know you are there. There´s a great article in Ageless marketing about the experiential basis of life meaning. Despite it talks about aged people I think it is very valuable for any niche of market.

There is also another article in What´s your Brand mantra about the idea of co-constructing the product/Brand.

Finally in my blog I am recovering the idea I worked in the Brand Cafe about the evolution of Branding considered as an artistic discipline, (Branding as art article, there will be more in the following days) from thing to idea and from idea to experience.

The idea seems a bit excessive but both Branding and Art pursue the emotional involvement of people, something missing in many advertising works.

Posted by felix gerena at March 3, 2005 10:26 AM

Maybe it's not bad creative, but it may be bad creativity. As a marketer, why would you continue to pour your budget into one-way communications?

I think the truly CREATIVE marketers are creating dialogues, not monologues. They're engaging the customer in meaningful conversation, not blaring at them through a megaphone. They're inviting the customer to not only peak behind the curtain, but to participate in co-creation as Felix referenced (Brandshift and Brand Mantra both address this via Jennifer Rice).

Posted by Dustin at March 3, 2005 11:07 AM

You can have the "strongest" creative in the world, but if word of mouth gets out on the web that your product doesn't deliver what it promises, or that your customer service is lacking... then the only people who "win" work for the ad company who you paid to make a creative ad (which probably won them an ADDY award and brought them more business, but did nothing to sell your product).

Customers are more informed now than they ever have been. Educated customers have created a consumer environment where creative advertising just ISN'T ENOUGH ANYMORE. Blaming a mass market dip on "weak" creative (what does that even mean?) is ridiculous. Blame bad products/services and one-sided "Here's my great product, now come to me and give me your money!" mentalities.

Posted by shua at March 3, 2005 11:21 AM

True that!

The schizphrenia with advertising is that creativity is the realm of the soul/right brain/heart--where faith, love, belief and understanding rule the roost--while business (especially our western, go-go, style) is the epitome of the rational mind/the left brain/gut--ruled by competition, doubt, force and notions of scarcity. In a very real sense we choose where we stand every moment. And good ad people can tell you in a second which gods a given ad serves--and to what effect. The former is sticky long-term (religions being the most durable brands in history) and the latter is sticky short-term (good at delivering quarterly results). Advertising can be love--you are giving something away--the question is with what intent and to what extent.

What I'm excited about is that it seems that even business is starting to have to deal with the right brain, love, creative--to even make money. So we've finally got their ear. Once they turn around they'll find its much easier (and vastly more fun) to make money by being a cultural producer/magnet--by being artists and wonderful people instead of killer businessmen and women. Traditionally, we've thought these two camps to be in opposition--but that's not true. You have to pick a master, yes, but that doesn't mean you give up everything else you know. It is a revolution, but a very quiet and peaceful one--maybe that's what scares us--so used to noise and motion we are.

The world is now transparent--it's not very surprising that no one wants to hang out with people who only care about money (not that pretending we don't will get us anywhere either--this time around it's the whole enchelada: we're going to have to be ourselves).

Lots of love.

Posted by Eben at March 3, 2005 1:09 PM

STEVE - for the TV Neilsen ratings: Why the focus on 18-49 year old demographics [they always break out that segment] if boomers and geezers and NEW AGE WOMEN ARE THE BIG BUCK DEMOGRAPHICS to richly market to?

Posted by Jack at March 3, 2005 9:17 PM

Amen, Steve:

One more thought...people listen to those they trust. Folks no longer pay attention to companies hyping their own products because they've learned that the message (creative) sets-up an expectation rarely met. We just don't trust ads anymore...so why spend so much money on them.

Posted by Michael Chaffin at March 4, 2005 12:07 AM

I agree, Steve. I think that advertising is less and less effective and it has nothing to do with the lack of creativity. As you have mentioned in previous posts, awareness doesn't count for much anymroe... Now a person sees a great ad - may become intersted in a product, but will jump on the web to explore similar products or services out there...

Posted by Caroline at March 4, 2005 1:06 PM

Traditional advertising doesn’t very well anymore. It’s all about relevance. Is the product or service relevant to the consumer? The trick is delivering relevant advertising to each consumer in a truly personalized way. I not talking about putting their name on a direct mail piece! The entire message and content needs to be personalized just for them.

This is possible to do today. It’s called one-to-one marketing.

Posted by John Zito at March 4, 2005 2:09 PM

The last chapter in my book, Brand Harmony, is called Marketing's Copernican Revolution. The premise is that marketers need to recognize that they are no longer at the center of the marketing universe, in much the same way that Copernicus showed us that we humans are not at the center of the universe, or that Darwin showed us that we are not the highest form of life on earth. Many things we learn about ourselves are actually humbling, in a constructive way.

Why are marketers no longer at the center of the marketing universe? Because customers are way too savvy, skeptical and self-reliant to let marketers dictate the terms of their relationship. Rance focusing on bad creative is mypoic in a way that is reminiscent of those who resisted Copernicus and Gallileo while focusing on their own anachronisti dogma.

Posted by Steve Yastrow at March 6, 2005 8:53 PM