Marketers may not realise the amount of information that is out there and collected by the major platforms. Information that can be used to do precision targeting of messages.
Below I focus only on the Google platform, and use a semi fictitious example using Singapore as a geographic location..
User name, as he has a google account.
User accesses the net largely from 2 locations. River Valley Road and 50 Scotts Road.
Google infers: River Valley Road is residence
Google knows 50 Scotts Road is a WPP office.
Google infers the user is a WPP employees
User accesses the net from Changi a lot, as well as Hongkong, Tokyo, Vietnam, Melbourne.
Google infers the user has a regional travel job.
Given the frequency of travel, Google infers the person is pretty senior in WPP.
On weekends the google network is accessed in zoos, botanical gardens, movie halls, family restaurants. Google infers the user is a family man, with a little kid.
User has an iphone 6.
User searched for iphone 7. User frequently searches for tech gadgets.
Google infers the user is interested In gadgets and likely buyer of the iphone 7.
When in a new location the first google searches are for restaurants nearby.
Google infers the user likes food.
User phone is then pinging at high quality eating restaurants.
Google infers the user is a connoisseur of good food.
Most frequently searched words are related to motor cars, gadgets, toys and holiday destinations.
Google infers a car lover.
Google reconfirms gadget junkie.
Google reconfims a frequent traveler.
Most searches start at 6.00 am and taper off by 11 pm.
Google infers sleeping patterns.
Pictures taken on phone are uploaded to picasa/google drive.
Google knows the family members include a wife, a daughter and a dog.
Analysing the pictures, google infers the age of the daughter and the family’s interests.
Further analysis reveals the kinds of locations the family prefers to be in. Water/F&B/Hills/adventure sports and so on.
The user has only watched two ads in full on youtube. Both of cars.
Google infers user is interested in cars.
And so on..
And this is just google.
The cookie trail we leave on line are manna for advertisers. The smart ones have picked up the scent it and using it already.
Programmatic advertising is going to start leveraging the various bits of data from first party, and third party data to create customer idss enabling targeting of highly customised communications. Some brands are on it, many more will follow, soon.
If you are a user, be scared.
If you are a marketer, well here is the pot of gold
On radio here in Bangalore there is an educational institution that runs a campaign that has one ad that goes something like this.
Boy: Why did a tree not fall on Newton, instead of just an apple. Then I wouldn’t have to learn about gravity.
VO: Don’t hate studies. Come to us, we’ll make you enjoy it
Boy: Oh Newton, I did not know you were so great.
Or something close to that.
While the insight is interesting the execution is HORRIBLE.
It is the one campaign that makes me reach for the mute button each time the ad plays.
While the execution is bad, what irritates me is that they run the same ad some 20 times a day.
Now, I know that it is radio and they have no idea who has heard the ad, whether the person who has heard the ad has acted on it so they have to keep harassing the unsuspecting public.
Then I turn on my laptop and when I log on to youtube, shows up another ad for a leading telecom that says… Well I don’t know what they say because I ‘skip ad’ each time. But each time I turn youtube on, this ad comes on. And each time I ‘skip ad’. That is the best part of the ad..the option to Skip Ad. (There is another telco that doesn’t give me that option)
What I don’t understand is this.
Google knows who I am because I have logged on.
They know my demographics, where I am, whether I am this telco subscriber or not. Additionally, they know that I have never viewed this ad beyond 5 seconds.
Now, what are they doing with this information to ensure that I don’t see an ad that I have not interacted with at all? Seems like Nothing. Might as well be like the educational institution I referred to earlier
So advertisers are bringing old media thinking to new media.
Perhaps they work on a cost per click deal so they see no cost to them for showing the ad. Perhaps.
But there is a cost. My time. My favorability impression. My loyalty.
The media agencies need to step up and guide the advertisers through the intelligent use of data because it is available and should be used.
Else old media behaviour is going to drive the emerging consumers to turning off ads, installing adblockers and the type. And we don’t want that, do we?
This weekend the world woke up to the sad news of Muhammad Ali, passing away at the age of 74.
And everyone’s facebook timeline was overtaken by words, pictures and video tributes. Quite a few of the posts that I saw actually referred to the fact that they were not even fans of boxing. Yet they felt sad, and moved to share their ‘on-line grief’.
That got me thinking about what is it that makes for a legend. What is it that separates greatness from legendary.
In my opinion it is a unique combination of 3 factors. And I will use Ali as support for my example:
- Good at your job: I believe the foundation of a legend is a core competence in an area. With Ali it was boxing. Factually speaking he fought 61 fights over a professional career lasting 21 years, recording 56 wins. These included 37 knockouts. He was crowned World Heavyweight Champion thrice and won the Olympic gold medal once.
- Stand for something meaningful (at personal risk): Ali was a boxer yet he stepped out of the ring to take a stance on the matter of race. He refused to be drafted though it meant that he would be stripped off his boxing license and medals. He made it very clear that he’d rather fight for the freedom of blacks than the freedom of people unknown, thousands of miles away. For this he was convicted of draft evasion, sentenced to five years in prison, fined $10,000.
- Create sound bytes that live on: Ali had a lot to say about many things. All perfect to remember and pass along. Some of his more famous quotes were
- Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.
- I am the greatest, I said that even before I knew I was.
- I know where I’m going and I know the truth, and I don’t have to be what you want me to be. I’m free to be what I want.
And longer statements like “Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go 10,000 miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on Brown people in Vietnam while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated like dogs and denied simple human rights? No I’m not going 10,000 miles from home to help murder and burn another poor nation simply to continue the domination of white slave masters of the darker people the world over. This is the day when such evils must come to an end. I have been warned that to take such a stand would cost me millions of dollars. But I have said it once and I will say it again. The real enemy of my people is here. I will not disgrace my religion, my people or myself by becoming a tool to enslave those who are fighting for their own justice, freedom and equality.… If I thought the war was going to bring freedom and equality to 22 million of my people they wouldn’t have to draft me, I’d join tomorrow. I have nothing to lose by standing up for my beliefs. So I’ll go to jail, so what? We’ve been in jail for 400 years.”
I believe it is a perfect combination of these three elements that makes for legends.
- Being good at your job
- Taking a stance on a social matter, at personal risk
- Having the ability to communicate in quick sound bytes that will travel well and be remembered
Those who have 1 or 2 of these will be remembered as being great. So will having all three.
But in the case of Ali, they were in perfect harmony. And that is what made him a legend.
Last evening I was watching something on TV and this ad appeared. It’s an ad for a phone brand called LYF.
I don’t know about you but I found it cringe worthy. No I am not talking about the lack of an idea or even the poor execution or anything like that. Here we have a bunch of guys sitting around watching a woman taking off some item of clothing and then dancing to an item number.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I found the ad offensive. Then again, I do see many offensive ads. But when we have someone like a Virat Kohli, MS Dhoni, R Ashwin and so on, watching Kangana Ranaut do a number it gives permission to a whole bunch of men around the country to expect women to do the same.
I know there will be a lot of people saying that I am over reacting, but we are a country where people even copy hair styles of their heroes. And at a time when we are rocked pretty regularly with horrible stories of how a woman got mistreated by a guy I strongly believe that brands that can, should be more responsible, than only trying to sell their product.
And we have examples of brands doing just that..marrying a social message with a brand one.
Started in Canada but quickly became a global phenomenon was Dove.
They have continued with the same message in many countries. Their campaign for real beauty has consistently tried to reinforce the idea that one should be proud of the way one looks and not be forced to align to stereotypes.
Closer home is Ariel. With their campaign #Sharetheload they have tried to ask the Q: Why should laundry (and indeed housework) only be the woman’s duty.
There are many more examples, of brands that have risen above the short term need to meet a quarter’s numbers to deliver a higher message that tries to change the way society behaves.
I believe all brands have this responsibility. The bigger brands more so, as they have the ability and credibility to do so.
Brands are not just what you see on a shelf. Celebrities are brands too.
Celebrities that endorse brands should keep an eye on the script and have a point of view on whether they support the point of view of the ad. After all if a Virat Kohli refuses to do an item number ad, he also sends a message to his peers and the brands that seek his endorsement that he expects a certain behaviour.
The same is true with our movie stars. As long as they are shown, on screen, killing people, beating their women and children, smoking and so on, we are going to have millions of people who ape them blindly. I am, not for a moment, blaming society’s ills on them of course, but we all have a role to play if we want to rid society of the demons we have.
It is not hard for big brands to align their brand messaging to a higher purpose creating a movement that they can ride on. From Dove’s case we have seen that it is global, sustaining over time and beneficial to the brand.
Brands should lead society, not just reflect them.
When I was growing up my dad had a Fiat car, which we had for most of my growing years. The toothpaste of choice was Colgate. The TV at home was a Crown. School shoes were from Bata.
These are the brands I call legacy brands. All solid brands of their time but not really king of the pond any more, if they are still around that is.
I believe all brands face three kinds of challenges.
- Functionality: As time goes by consumer expectations from their products change. TVs to be HD, Smart etc. Shoes to have modern designs. Laptops to be thinner and so on.
- Values: With the new generation coming into the market place they have different expectations from their brands. It seems to be less about life long loyalty and more about experimentation and social imagery.
- Disassociation: This is connected to the point above but probably a little more illogical, if I can use that word. The need to not be seen using the same brands as one’s parents/previous generation and thereby being seen as ‘old fashioned’.
Brands need to address the above three challenges to survive the generations of new consumers who have evolving functional and emotional needs from their brands.
Brands like Bata just completely missed the boat on all of these. They, briefly, caught my attention with the introduction of North Star and then they faded away from my attention. The landscape is littered with such brands. Think Philips, HP, Nycil, FM jeans and so on. I would argue even a brand like Jet Airways has entered a similar zone.
Staying relevant therefore needs brands to work on the 3 challenges:
Functionality: People evolve their needs evolve. Or technology evolves making better product possible. Or the environment changes making product tweaks necessary. So shampoos need to do more than just clean hair. Fixing Split ends, falling hair, dry hair and become expectations from shampoos. Better product forms become expectations from toothpastes. Cars need to be more intelligent etc
Values: The current generation views brands differently from their parents. Beyond the willingness to experiment, they are a little more attuned to concepts like environment-friendliness, sweat shop production issues. Not for them a brand that just washes well. But it needs to also talk female empowerment, for instance.
My father’s brand: This is the tough one. Brands that have been around for generations need to balance the solidity and stability of time with the ‘cool-ness’ of today. One of bosses used to always warn us of running the risk of ‘granny in mini skirts’ when trying to wrap modern imagery on an old brand. As a brand Cadbury’s comes to mind as one that has done this successfully.
Sometimes one is in a category that can exploit its legacy to its advantage. Hotels come to mind immediately. Taj is in the ‘legacy’ business. They operate with heritage properties and charge a premium for it. On the inside though they have continually upgraded their services to ensure that guest needs are being met.
The legacy brands challenge is especially acute in the tech space where the functional needs/expectations change far more frequently than in FMCG.
One brand that stands out for me here is IBM. It’s a 100 year old company and, quite frankly, falls squarely in the ‘how comes it is still around’ category.
Yet every 25/30 years (a generation) it reinvents itself to ensure relevance. Functionally and at a brand level.
About 20 years ago with the internet taking off IBM came to the party a couple of years late with e-business. And changed the way people used the Net. More recently, with it’s cognitive business messaging it is again trying to ride the wave of cloud, but integrating it with data and analytics to ensure it is able to gain momentum in that rapidly growing space. That is how they addressed the functional challenge.
From an imagery perspective IBM has always been deeply involved in ‘social’ issues. Be it health of administration, you will always find that IBM is playing a very active role. It is not charity, but it strongly believes that technology should do good. You can read about IBM’s contribution to education with it’s P-TECH program. IBM did Smarter Cities, tied up with Manipal Hospital to help with cancer screening and so on. Things that every generation believes strongly in. Doing good for the world.
And of course the new advertising from Ogilvy talks about Watson in such a cool, fun way. It makes the brand more human. More relatable for a younger generation. It moves it out from ‘my father’s brand’. It is never going to be the ‘millenial’ google or amazon , nor do I think it can be, given its heritage and the kind of business it is in. But it has managed to reinvent itself for today’s companies.
We have to wait and see how this pans out for IBM over the next year or so, but initial reports seem favorable.
If brands want to last generations they need to have some folks who are looking across larger time frames than a year to understand the functional and generational shifts taking place and then adjust both product and messaging to not just continue to be relevant, but also get their fair share of the new market.
After all brands do want to be …
In my travels to the US, I often prefer the food in diners, to the posher places. Largely, because it gives me a chance to see and engage with the local folks. Normal people, if you like.
Last month was no different.
I visited a diner near my hotel called Scotty’s.
As you know a diner is a simple, no frills place where you get eggs done a 100 ways, pancakes done 50 ways and so on and endless flow of coffee. Simple, basic food.
The customers typically tend to be regulars from the neighborhood, or people working near by. About 25% tend to be people like me. Who are visiting and popping by for a bite.
So when I went there last month, it was the typical bunch of people around. As I sat down, a couple walked in who were guided to their booth. Now, the first question asked of any new customers is ‘would you like coffee?’. It was not different this time too. And in a strong Australian accent came the response ‘ Can I get a latte?’. It was probably the first time this year someone had asked for a latte, but it didn’t faze the waiter who said ‘Sure, of course’ and went off to get the order. Food was a similar complicated one ‘Can I get my pancakes, with strawberries and berries, on the side, with a topping of cream and honey, and some nuts and…’ I think that was sorta the order. The loud voice of the guest rang through the diner, so we all could hear.
Now, this is not a typical diner customer. Diners operate on pretty much standard fare and get customers in and out. And here was a customer who was asking for the unusual and getting it with a smile.
Contrast this with my check in experience at a luxurious 5 star hotel 24 hours earlier. I had arrived after a long flight from India. I was going to be staying in the hotel for 5 nights. Quite a long stint, I expect, compared to the average stay. I asked for what I always do when I check in. ‘Can you please ensure I get a good room? On a higher floor, with some sort of view?’ The guy at the counter went ‘Well you have been booked in the standard room, but for $30 I can upgrade you to a bigger room, on our 30th floor, with great city views’. In my state of exhaustion, I said ‘I’ll take it’, figuring I can get approvals for the increase cost later!! 5 minutes later I was in my room. Didn’t look all that big and when I opened the bathroom door, I found, that I could barely fit in. Figuring paying $30 more for a room that seemed like any other room and having an exceptionally small showered made no sense, I trudged back down to talk to the guy. He had already forgotten that he was the one who had checked me in, literally, 5 minutes earlier. On hearing my issue, he responded’ Well I can put you back in the room previously booked. It’s not very good and has no view’. I was really tired and all i wanted was a shower and change of clothes urgently so I agreed, and off I went. Feeling rather pissed off and irritated, if I may add.
The check in counter guy’s remarkable unwillingness to do anything to make my stay better, contrasts significantly with the attitude displayed by the waiter at Scotty’s.
I know many of you will say that, that’s the difference between a small organisation where there is a lot more flexibility than in a large organisation where the room to maneuvre is low, if at all. Processes and systems come in the way.
And you would be wrong.
See, the reason I checked into this hotel the second time, was my experience the first time. That time, when I was standing in line to check in, there were 2 people in front of me. A lady came up to me asked me to follow her to a new counter she opened up. I asked for the usual ‘Can you please ensure I get a good room? On a higher floor, with some sort of view?’. She went : ‘Of course, let me see what I can do.’ After a couple of minutes of searching, she cam back with ‘Ok here you go. I’ve moved you into a corner room, which is slightly bigger. It has good views on both sides. Here are a few bottles of water for you. I see you are a member of our loyalty program, so you get free wi fi reserved for the loyalty program users as opposed to the free one available to other guests. Wishing you a god stay, and if you need anything when you are here, just buzz guest services and ask for Natalie’.
It’s the exact same hotel. But because of the person at the counter, they were delivering two completely contrasting experiences.
And this is a challenge that large organisations face. As they become big in terms of numbers of people and locations, the only way to manage it, is to ensure there are processes. This way, a location in Vietnam is operating the same way as a location in Sao Paulo. It makes for consistency. And takes away the humanity. Especially, if you are in the service business.
The opportunity before leadership is to wrap a strong culture around the process. A culture that reinforces the primary purpose of the business. A culture that ensures, employees don’t forget that the process is only there to ensure that there is a skeleton to keep the muscles and flesh in place. Processes are created by management consultants and procurement people and people like that. To keep things moving. But they don’t run the business. That is the job of leadership. Business leaders in large companies, especially, need to ensure that the culture they create is stronger than the processes in place, to ensure that innovation, flexibility and agility flourish and everyone gets a Scotty’s experience.