RepMan

You da man!

I had a fascinating conversation the other day with Northeastern University President Joseph Aoun and his senior communications strategists. We were discussing the subject of trust, the erosion of trust in virtually every segment of society, and the need for current and future generations to re-adjust their definitions of success as a result.

I volunteered that I’d noticed quite a few Millennial-focused surveys of late in which respondents seem to accept the very real possibility that, due to the economy, limited job options, staggering student loans and global competition, they may never attain their parents’ level of success. But, many seem undaunted and, in fact, point to new, and different, definitions of success, including: 

-      Achieving a work-life balance

-      Feeling fulfilled in one’s occupation

-      Believing one’s contributions are somehow making a difference for the better.

That’s very different from the definition of success when I grew up.

We were told one wasn’t successful unless one at least earned one’s age (i.e. $25,000 per annum if one were 25 years old, etc.). We were also led to believe that success meant getting married, fathering 2.4 kids, as well as owning a dog and a house with the requisite white picket fence (I scored with the wife and two kids, and now am pleased to say I report to two pooches: Mick and Rooney, respectively).

I also came of age in the Me Generation, monster-of-the-universe Gordon Gekko ‘Greed is Good’ Wall Street era. In fact, I distinctly remember a great example of success in the late 20^th century. We were dining with my next door neighbor who, at the time, toiled at the now defunct Lehman Brothers. He was boasting about a huge raise and year-end bonus. Then, he glanced down at his PDA and shouted: ‘Look at this! ‘My boss just e-mailed saying, Jimmy, you da man!’ It was nauseating to say the least.

Well, with Wall Street, Main Street and just about every other street either stagnating or in full retreat, the You Da Man moments seem to be dwindling in an inverse ratio to our country’s budget deficit. That doesn’t mean there won’t be some incredibly successful executives rising through the ranks in the near and long-term future; it just means there will be fewer masters and mistresses of the universe.

So, knowing that, how have you personally re-defined success? I’m especially interested in hearing from my Millennial readers (as well as the Generation X and Baby Boomers who have been forced to re-set their expectations as a result of the New Normal). Success is still there for each and every one of us. It just may no longer look like a million dollar paycheck, a trophy wife, two kids, a dog, a house and a picket fence anymore.  

What will it look like to you, and what do you envision prompting a boss or peer to text a message saying, ‘You da man!'

 

Agencies look for rising stars, not waning ones

Advertising Age's cover story about 55-year-old creative director Dave Shea's trials and tribulations in finding full-time employment should be a cautionary tale to any reader of any age.

Shea was a successful copywriter and creative director at such blue-chip advertising agencies as the legendary Dancer Fitzgerald Sample, the equally legendary (and the original) Saatchi & Saatchi, Campbell-Mithun and, most recently, Geppetto, a small agency within the vast WPP network (where Ed and I once toiled).

Geppetto canned Shea (and refused to tell Ad Age why) about 15 months ago. He's been high and dry ever since.

Shea's epic odyssey to find full-time employment is a positively spell-binding story. According to Ad Age, no matter how hard he networked or how many cold calls he pursued, Shea simply couldn't get to first base. Every agency ignored him because, at the age of 55, Shea was untouchable. His gray hair was a red light.

Source after source told Ad Age that firms turned a blind eye to the eminently qualified Shea. One summed it up beautifully by saying, 'Agencies look for rising stars, not waning ones.' (Ouch. I hope you have a nice day as well).

The Ad Age article confirmed what I'd already suspected: advertising agencies are positively spellbound by the digital revolution, Mark Zuckerberg and the next, bright shiny object. As a result, they mistakenly believe Millennials are the ONLY ones who get the hottest trends, technologies and talk. As a result, experienced veterans like Shea have no chance whatsoever of landing a decent job.

The article was a show-stopper for me for a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to, the following:

• Ad agencies STILL don't get that social media, digital, Web 2.0, or whatever one chooses to call it, is nothing more than a communications channel. Guys: Hello! It's not about the technology. It's about the conversation and how best to engage in it. Happily, that's what PR firms do best. It's also why we're winning more and more of the client's overall marketing spend.
• However gifted and uber cool they may be, Millennials lack the broad perspective and innate understanding that's fundamental to deciding what to say, when to say it and to whom. Sorry kids, but you don't get it. Not yet anyway.
• Age discrimination is not limited to advertising agencies. There's no doubt in my mind that PR has just as many 55-year-old Dave Shea-types who have been shown the door by WPP, Interpublic, Omnicom or Publicis, and find themselves permanently unemployed. PR trade publications simply choose to ignore it:

Reporter: 'We really should do a Dave Shea-type story.'

Editor: 'Age discrimination in PR? No way, Jose.  So, how many new accounts did Edelman win this week?

Reporter: 'The usual. One every 13 seconds.'

Editor: 'Great. There's our headline!'

I count my blessings that, unlike Dave Shea, I decided to bid adieu to my holding company mother ship in 1995 and, along with Ed, build my own thing. If I hadn't, the odds are good I'd be just like Mr. Shea; mailing my resume, placing phone calls and sending e-mails to headhunters and holding company recruiters alike. And, there's no doubt I'd receive the same response as Shea: deafening silence.

A quick after word for my Millennial readers: you'll be dealing with your very own age-related issues faster than you can say Father Time. So, enjoy your time in the sun while you can.

As Sir Mick & The Boys once sang, 'Time waits for no one, and it won't wait for me.' Or, you either.

Re-branding pure evil

I guess it's another sign of the bizarre times in which we live, but Al Qaeda just announced it's re-branding itself.

Trying to distance the heinous organization from its terrorism tag, Al Qaeda is now officially calling itself 'Ansar al-Sharia', which means Army of Islamic Law.

An organization official said the re-branding was necessary in order to attract more foreign fighters to the cause. An anonymous diplomat said the Al Qaeda name 'seems to have negative connotations and baggage'.

You think? That's like saying Hitler had some emotional issues.

I wonder if Ansar al-Sharia will also re-brand some of the Al Qaeda key words and tactics? Will:

- Jihad now be 'population redistribution'
- Suicide bombing now be 'a one-way ticket to 76 virgins'
- A roadside bombing now be called 'an infrastructure upgrade'

On a slightly lighter note (as the morning talk show buffoons like to say), Blackwater, the sleazy U.S. security firm to whom W, Cheney and Rummy handed over many Iraqi government tasks previously handled by Sadam Hussein's soldiers (and, then, went rogue, wiping out scores of innocent Iraqi civilians) announce its SECOND re-branding.

Initially, Blackwater had changed its name to Xe Services. Alas, though, their gung-ho, paramilitary culture was firmly entrenched. So, new management was put in place and a second name was announced: Academi. Are they now the 'institute of black ops'?

I'll be interested to see which re-branding proves more successful.

Being the altruistic blogger that I am, I'd like to help. In fact, I've devised taglines that, I believe, will speed the re-branding education process:

Ansar al-Sharia: 'Years of training for a moment of terror'

Academi: 'Kicking ass and taking names in puppet states'

I'd like to end by asking Repman readers to suggest their taglines for these two inherently evil organizations.

Many of you are PR and marketing specialists, so why not give it a shot?

I'll pick the funniest ones and, if you're in town the same day as one of my stand-up comedy performances, will give you two free tickets for a show.

Maybe we can even discuss a re-branding for Repman? FYI, I'd like something that is synonymous with pure fun.

And a tip o' Repman's climbing helmet to Tucker Greco for suggesting this post.

A leader showing playfulness? What IS this world coming to?

It seems the most famous leaders are those who also possess the loudest voices, inspire the most fear and take themselves the most seriously. I'd include Yahoo's Carol 'F-bomb' Bartz, the late Steve Jobs and GE's legendary 'Neutron' Jack Welch in any list of notoriously nasty nabobs of negativity.

So, imagine my surprise when I received not one, but two, videos of Northeastern University's president Joseph Aoun, allowing himself to be playful, funny and, dare I say it, self-deprecating.

The videos were the brainchild of my alma mater's crack public relations team but, as Renata Nyul, director of communications at Northeastern, tells it, Joseph was the guy who took the original concept and incorporated improvisational steps that would make Will Ferrell, Steve Carrell or Amy Poehler proud.

Created to promote the university's ‘Profiles in Innovation Presidential Speaker Series’, the first video featured Joseph literally dancing with iRobot's legendary Roomba vacuum cleaner. Clearly, the man is no Fred Astaire. But, talk about an innovative way in which to hype iRobot CEO’s Colin Angle’s upcoming address!

Not content with cutting the rug with a robot, Joseph went on to record a second video that was even more obtuse. Its intent was to promote an upcoming presentation by Janet Echelman, a world-renowned ‘airspace sculptor’ who uses humongous nets to accentuate urban buildings, parks and public spaces (kind of a latter-day Christo, if you will).

Ms. Nyul says both videos have been spread far and wide on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube by the school's students, faculty and administrators. She says they've been genuine to Northeastern's commitment to innovation while also showing a human side to the leader of a top academic institution. So human in fact that undergrads are now routinely approaching Joseph to appear in their videos. Could you imagine trying that with your college president (or any Fortune 500 CEO, for that matter)?

But, Joseph's Amazing Technicolor Video Series has just begun. He has a third one scheduled for March with Dr. David Ferrucci, the principal investigator and lead creator of IBM's Watson.

I've checked with Joseph, and the school's PR team. They're cool with crowdsourcing the idea for the next video. So, here's your chance to suggest anything (and, I do mean anything) you think Joseph, president of Northeastern University, should do on video to promote the Ferrucci/Watson speech.

Personally, I think he should just riff on Watson's legendary Jeopardy TV show appearance. This time, though, I'd have the computer take on N.U.s three brightest students in a winner-take-all lightning round. As for Joseph? Why he'd play Alex Trebek, and come across as slightly patronizing, just a little bit smarter and a tad more sophisticated than Watson or the students. On the other hand, that wouldn't be Joseph's style, so scrap my idea.

What would you suggest instead?

I'll provide a slightly worn Peppercom baseball cap for the best idea (and I'm pretty sure Northeastern would be willing to toss in a clean, unused T-shirt). So, let the brainstorming begin.

What a REAL Steve Jobs presentation must have been like

Wednesday's CommPR.Biz contains a blog authored by Makovsky's Gene Marbach and entitled, "The Art of the Presentation (and What I Learned from Steve Jobs).

As might be expected, the blog contains all the smart things great presenters already know (i.e. Jobs strict adherence to The KISS principle, his not relying solely on PowerPoint slides, etc.). And clearly, in his public performances, Jobs was, indeed, a master presenter.

But, as is now finally becoming abundantly clear, the real Steve Jobs was a total perfectionist who terrorized everyone from Apple employees to hapless restaurant waitresses. By all reports, Jobs didn't suffer fools gladly; he actually pulverized the bejesus out of them.

So, knowing the real Steve Jobs for what he was, I wonder what one of his REAL internal presentations at Apple must have been like...

Scene: A large auditorium at Apple headquarters. Lights dim. Spotlight picks Jobs as he strides across the stage to thunderous applause.

Jobs raises his hand, asking for quiet: "Shut up, you worthless slugs and pay attention!" (Note: This is a superb technique with which to make an immediate audience connection.)

Jobs:  "Before I begin, there are a few ground rules even you simpletons will grasp. No talking. No arms folded or legs crossed. You in the first row, you're fired! That'll teach you to keep your legs crossed. Idiot! Now, the rest of you, listen up: you inhale and exhale on my commands only, got it? Now, slide one."

Slide One shows a classic portrayal of god in heaven with Steve's head superimposed on the body.

Jobs: "Excellent. This is just in case you had any doubts about my ultimate authority." (Note: Here's another tried and true presentation technique since Jobs establishes his credentials right up front.)

Slide Two shows an oh-so-clever, uber-cool, new type of communications device.
Jobs: "What you incredibly fortunate rabble are now viewing is the new iJobs. Quite simply, it is the greatest product ever invented. It will end war, world hunger and poverty. And it has some pretty neat apps too." (Note: A superb presentation technique. Rather than waste his precious time on features Jobs, instead, focuses on the new product's benefits.)

Slide Three shows the mushroom cloud that rose above Hiroshima in the moments after the first atomic bomb was dropped.

Jobs: "This is our competition. This is what you will do to our competition. And, if you don't, this is what your career will look like. Now, go out and sell, you morons!" (Note: What a superb way to quickly wrap up his remarks, motivate the audience and also suggest possible outcomes if they don't succeed.)

So, in just three slides and two minutes, we can see how masterful Steve Jobs was at presentation techniques. Like Makovsky's Marbach, I've sure learned something from Steve Jobs. Fear and retribution are powerful motivators and can make any presentation a total home run.

And, now, as Mr. Jobs might say if he were addressing you, go back to leading your lives of quiet desperation.

Do You Truly Want to Be a Leader? Listen to What’s Happening in Pop Culture

Today's guest post is by Peppercommer Sam Ford

For marketers and communicators, especially those working at agencies, staying on top of what's truly shaping communication is vital. But, as an industry, we've never really been all that good at it. Sure, we can see trends happening once they are prevalent and react to them. But it's been tough for agencies to truly innovate and drive our clients toward where they should be headed.

 
Even if you prioritize constantly challenging the way you think, it's hard to figure out how to do that. At Peppercom, we put a great deal of emphasis behind challenging our own status quo: from our internal Innovation Mill launched by Peppercommer Lauren Begley--which highlights the latest innovations and experiments in the marketing space that we might learn from as an agency--to collaborating with new partners and making hires from outside the public relations space. (After all, that's what brought me--now an "in-house" media studies academic--to the firm.)
 
But beyond that, I wanted to share a bit of advice I've learned over the years as to the best way to stay on top of what's happening in the world: keep up with what's happening in culture. That's the gist of Grant McCracken's Chief Culture Officer: that marketers who pay little attention to the world around them will both miss out on business opportunities and find themselves at risk.
 
I'll take that one step further and say that PR, advertising, corporate communication and marketing pros who want to truly stay abreast of what's happening and what's coming need to watch the entertainment space.
 
For the past several years, I've been fortunate to help organize an annual conference called the Futures of Entertainment. The event brings together media industries practitioners, marketers, and media scholars to talk about what's happening in the entertainment world. And, through my years of research, I've often found that new modes of engagement, developments and challenges that eventually affect companies and governments have, in some ways, often been "previewed," in a way, among media audiences over the years.
 
After all, many of the ways citizens today talk about the news, rally the government, or petition companies--particularly through online communication--was once considered the strange and marginalized space of "the fan" or "fanatic," people who had nothing better to do with their time than to become obsessed with what they watch, create media that responds to it, share media amongst each other, etc.
 
Each year, I look at the issues that end up getting planned for the conference as a barometer of the things I should be keeping in mind and the issues I should be thinking about how to bring to bear on our agency and our clients. And I'm especially proud this year that Peppercom's events division, Peppercommotions, is helping plan the conference.
 
To Repman readers, whether you work for an agency or "in-house," I highly recommend you come up and join us at MIT Nov. 11-12 to talk about pressing issues like "spreadable media," crowdsourcing, location-based technologies, audience/producer collaboration, and privacy issues. In particular, we'll look at the innovations taking place in journalism & documentary filmmaking, music, serialized storytelling, and children's media. And I promise there will be many implications to come from these issues in the marketing world. Rather than waiting for them to happen and playing catch-up, I hope you'll consider joining us.
 
More information on the conference is available here: http://convergenceculture.org/futuresofentertainment/2011/
 
Grant McCracken's book referenced is here: http://www.amazon.com/Chief-Culture-Officer-Breathing-Corporation/dp/0465018327

The Sixth Question

Silverpop, which says it provides 'e-mail and marketing automation that's complete, not complex,' just sent me an unsolicited, 15-page report entitled, '5 Questions Keeping Marketers Up at Night -- and 5 Experts with All the Answers'.

For the record, the five questions are:
- Are you as social as your prospects?
- Are you as strategic as you want to be?
- Can you automate the tactical?
- Do you wish you could do more with less?
- Can you prove your value?

In quickly scanning the document, it became readily apparent that Silverpop's experts forgot to add a sixth, more fundamentally important question that pre-empts the others:

- Have you placed yourself in your customers' shoes and experienced your brand as they do?

A marketer really shouldn't bother addressing Silverpop's other questions until she's experienced her own brand.

But, far be it from me to wax poetic on the importance of what we call Audience Experience. The IBM Institute of Business just published a highly readable, in-depth study of the wants and needs of 1,700 CMOs in 16 countries.

In it, the IBM experts said, “…look at the organization through your customers' eyes, as they progress through the full relationship lifecycle. While you may believe you already capture this information (take note Silverpop types), all the data in the world cannot replace the personal experience of walking in your customers' shoes.” To which I say, amen.

This outside-in way of thinking now pervades Peppercom's go-to market strategy (as well as the way in which we now think about client relationships and business development).

Yet, far too many marketers remain content to stay sequestered in their corner offices and have a Silverpop tell them what the data means. Considering most CMOs have the lifespan of a May fly, one would think they'd take The Sixth Question more seriously.

Does genius trump abuse?

I must admit to being taken aback by the universal outpouring of grief, passion and adulation at the recent passing of Apple founder and CEO Steve Jobs. It reminded me of the reaction that followed the passing of Michael Jackson and George Steinbrenner, respectively. I've added 'Jacko' and 'The Boss' to a list that includes Jobs because, frankly, all three were very, very bad guys.

Articles about Jobs and his abusive behavior were plentiful before he contracted pancreatic cancer (but curiously scarce since then). In fact, here are links to just five pieces from such reputable media outlets as Forbes, CNN.com and The London Daily Mail (insert links).

I'll let you read the full texts, but consider the following excerpts:

- Despite an estimated net worth of $7 billion, Jobs had NO public record of giving to charity.
- He and his board covered up his initial pancreatic cancer diagnosis for nine months, a totally unethical, if not illegal, stunt by the CEO of a huge, publicly-traded company.
- His factories regularly employed young teenagers and people below the legal working age of 16, made them work grueling hours and tried desperately to cover it all up.
- Jobs had two Apple security guards search the home of a San Francisco man and threatened him and his family with immigration trouble if he didn't return blueprints for a missing iPhone prototype.

But, that's just scratching the surface of a man who was clearly one of the all-time nasty leaders in the history of business. Consider these tidbits:

- Forbes named Jobs to their 'Bully Bosses Hall of Fame'.
- Jobs routinely parked his Mercedes in the handicapped parking space.
- He consistently reduced employees to tears and fired long-time subordinates in front of their peers, often after ridiculing them as “bozos”.
- He claimed personal credit for scores of ideas and patents that other Apple employees had invented.
- Stanford professor Robert Sutton said he was “...besieged with Steve Jobs stories” when he announced he was writing a book entitled, 'The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn't'.
- Jobs always considered himself the smartest guy in the room, and Apple's employees and products were either “insanely great” or “shit”.
- Unhappy with a product called MobileMe, Jobs told the product development team, “You've tarnished Apple's reputation. You should hate each other for having let each other down.”

Two final tales:
- A former employee said of Jobs, ”No one greets him or says hi to him. Low-ranking employees are afraid of him. I remember him walking around the campus one time and groups of people in his way would just split and let him walk through.”
- Former Apple PR chief Laurence Clavere once told a colleague that before heading into a meeting with Jobs, she embraced the mindset of a bullfighter entering the ring. “I pretend I'm already dead.”

So, there you have it. Multiple examples from impeccable sources that Jobs was arguably one of the worst human beings to ever lead a global organization. And, yet, the fawning, hagiographic profiles completely dominate the media and paint Jobs as some sort of Thomas Edison/Mother Theresa hybrid.  Is that because:

- The media really is a pale imitation of its former self, and balanced, objective reporting simply no longer exists?

- Or does genius totally trump abusive and unethical behavior? Are we willing to turn a blind eye to one man's endless record to inhumanity to his fellow man and paint him as a god because of his genius?

I'd like to hear your thoughts.

In the meantime, you won't catch me dropping off a bouquet of flowers at the nearest Apple store or lighting a candle in his memory. I'm more likely to quote the classic line from 'The Wizard of Oz' and sing: “Ding dong the Witch is dead. Which old Witch? The Wicked Witch!”

Pope Victim XVI

Pope Benedict XVI finally admitted that the Roman Catholic Church has a “questionable” reputation.

A questionable reputation, eh? Well, if that's the descriptor the pontiff thinks best applies to his misguided organization, then I'd say it works equally well for everyone and everything from Jack the Ripper and Enron to Bernie Madoff and The New York Mets.

Rather than stepping up, admitting fault, announcing widespread systemic changes and asking for forgiveness though, the pope instead blamed everyone else for the institution's tarnished image. In fact, he said the church's questionable reputation is a direct result of what he called 'uncommitted Christians'. Does that mean he's pointing the finger at Baptists, Protestants, Methodists and every other Christian sect as well as Catholics? Well, why the heck not? Misery loves company.

The Pope's bought into what I'd call the victim defense strategy. To wit:

- If a woman burns her hand as a result of spilling hot coffee on herself, it's not her fault, it's the restaurant's for not warning her that yes, indeed, coffee can be served hot and, if spilled on an exposed body part, it can cause pain. As a result, she's entitled to collect millions of dollars in damages.

- It's society's fault if a person chooses to pursue a life of crime, drugs and debauchery. Why? Because he wasn't given the same advantages his peers in more upscale neighborhoods. So don't blame him for last night's drive-by shooting. He should be given a suspended sentence at most.

- And, of course, it's not the Democrats fault that Obama hasn't really accomplished anything in three-plus years. And, it's not Sarah Palin's fault she completely rewrote the history of Paul Revere's ride (that was just 'gotcha' journalism at work).

We live in a world in which we buy into the notion that it's no one's fault for anything that goes wrong. We're all victims. And, it's always someone else's fault.

As a recovering Catholic and erstwhile altar boy, I'm ashamed of the way in which the Church has embraced victimization as its modus operandi. As the attached article notes, the Church blames 'societal changes during the 1960s and '70s' as the reason why so many priests went off the rails and gorged themselves on a bacchanalian feast of pedophilia. It wasn't the Church's fault. It wasn't the misguided concept of celibacy that attracted misfits and put them in direct, unsupervised contact with young boys. And, it wasn't the Church that shuffled these predators around from one parish to another and covered up their horrific deeds. It's really never been the Church's fault. It's always been someone else's.

And, so playing the victim card remains the Vatican's sole strategy. I guess it works with true believers. But, we uncommitted Christians don't buy it for a minute. The Church, and the Church alone, is responsible for the path of destruction its priests have sown.

I, for one, suggest a name change for the pontiff. He should call himself Pope Victim XVI. If he did, it would be the first truly honest and transparent thing he, and his Church, has done to date.

It's the customer, stupid

Two separate opinion pieces in two separate industry trades agree on one basic principle:  agencies and marketers alike are overlooking the customer in their rush to do the right thing.

Let's begin with Rose Gordon's superb editorial in PR Week. Fresh from a year-long stint as editor of Direct Marketing News, Gordon's POV on PR's role in marketing has expanded faster than a Burger King patron's waistline. She's spot on in admonishing the PR industry for not having “…a firm grasp on the customer.” We really never have. Instead, we're content to rely on market research, feedback from sales forces and other second-hand sources of what the customer REALLY wants and needs. And, when it comes to results, we get high on such warm and fuzzy things as image, transparency, reputation and total media impressions. That may have worked in the past, but it's not enough in today's 24x7 customer-driven, bottom-line focused marketplace.

All of which leads me to the Ad Age opinion piece. Authored by Jonathan Salem Baskin, a global brand strategist, it analyzes the various reasons why CMOs “…are fired TWICE as often as every other C-suiter.”

Baskin (or, is it Salem Baskin?) explains why the average CMO's professional life “...is going to be short and not so sweet” and sums it up by saying the bottom line MUST be the bottom line. Pressured by analysts, institutional investors and the board, CEOs need sales results. And they need them yesterday.

CMOs, says, Baskin, are too caught up in soft results and one step removed from the customer. (Indeed, we surveyed 75 CMOs a year ago and found a shocking 75 percent had never personally experienced their brand. Imagine trying to market a Lexus without ever having entered a dealership to see what the sales experience is like?)

Gordon's and Baskin's articles are warning shots across the bow of every marketer's ship. We MUST start going directly to client's customers and experiencing the brand the way they do (or obtaining their permission to accompany them on their journey).

It's no longer enough to sit back and wait for a client or a market research firm to tell you who the customer is and what she wants. The smart CMOs, ad agencies and PR firms will INSIST on experiencing a brand, a product or a service first-hand before formulating a communications plan. That way, we'll be assured the brand promise is in line with the customer experience.

Too many ad agencies, PR firms and their clients are caught up in winning awards, believing such accolades equal success. They don't. At least not in the CEO's mind.

In fact, the winning formula in the future will have NOTHING to do with website traffic, media impressions or brand favorability. Instead, it'll be all about “…sell(ing) stuff” as Baskin writes.
So, here's a note to friend and foe alike. Do yourself a favor and experience your brand as your customer does. See where they go and to whom they speak to make buying decisions. Find out where and when it makes sense for your brand to enter the conversation. Then, and only then, begin building your marketing plan.

As Gordon says in her piece, “In the end, there is one stakeholder and that's the customer.” The marketers and agencies willing to do the heavy lifting now and follow the advice of Gordon and Baskin will be the ones still around to read AdAge and PRWeek in five years.