Nov 29

We have met the enemy and he is us

It goes without saying that almost every single marketing communications crisis rule no longer applies in our Post-Trump/Fake News era.

CCOs and CMOS everywhere are scrambling to figure out if, and when, to respond to an angry @POTUS Tweet, a barrage of fake news damaging the brand, the cascade of sexual harassment suits that not only destroy the careers of Kevin Spacey, Charlie Rose and countless others, but have a HUGE negative impact on the organizations for whom they work (and on and on and on).

As it turns out, we have no one to blame for the 24×7 tumult but ourselves. To put it bluntly: We’re a nation of dullards.

Timothy Egan penned an amazing opinion piece in The New York Times that said, among other things:

  • Nearly one in three Americans cannot name a SINGLE branch of government
  • 97 percent of immigrants who take the U.S. citizenship test pass it. But, one in three American citizens FAIL the test.

And, make no mistake, the dullards are not attempting to join MENSA. Instead, they’re unable to answer such rudimentary questions as:

  • What major event happened on 9/11?
  • What ocean is on the West Coast of the United States?

Even worse, by a 48 to 38 percentage, Americans think states’ rights and not slavery caused the Civil War. Holy utter ignorance, Batman!

In his essay, Egan places the blame squarely on our public school system which, as most would agree, is in shambles. I agree, but I’d also blame the lackadaisical adults who have raised so many citizens who know so little about their country.

This is beyond scary because it not only fans the flames of the uniformed believing fake news, it augers very, very poorly for the future global competitiveness of our nation.

Egan’s optimistic since a dozen states now require high school students to pass the immigrant citizenship test. But, hey, that still leaves 38 others that are graduating students who have not read and don’t understand our Constitution, Declaration of Independence and basic historical facts about the past.

I wish I had an answer, but I think the long-ago cartoon character Pogo said it best when he opined, “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

Nov 16

The Data Science Behind the Dating Scene

Today’s guest blog was authored by Jason Baik, Senior Manager on the Analytics team at Peppercomm…

Most people associate “analytics” with simple tables and graphs without really understanding the true power of data. I’m here to break that stereotype.

Before I get into the details, a bit of background is required. My name is Jason, a professional analyst and a true data advocate; I analyze everything from conducting non-hierarchical clustering for my fantasy football drafting to predictive price modeling for my bitcoin gambling. You name it and I probably have a personal spreadsheet of it.

When I was freshly single in the summer of 2016, I decided to follow in the footsteps of journalist Amy Webb and put my love of analytics behind my pursuit of love: data behind my dating life. I started by crafting profiles across various dating apps and meticulously tracked everything, from opening lines and response times to respondent ethnicities and hobbies. I was ready to prove that love was a quantifiable game…

By the twelfth day, I was frustrated by my lack of progress. My response rates were improving but my problem lied in the candidates themselves… the first few dates had been entertaining but no one stood out enough for a second meet. Even worse, there was no apparent correlation between any of my variables and my enjoyment of an experience. As day fifteen rolled around, I decided to add a qualitative layer to the mix. I calculated personality scores based on profile keywords and developed an attraction index. My daily response rate stayed about the same but my enjoyment of the dates soared!

I wanted more. During month two, I decided to increase the stakes by adding what I’ll coin as my radical honesty test. I would ask a series of ‘controversial’ questions throughout the course of conversation and gauge response lag, initial eye movements, and facial reactions. Some of my questions included: 1) number of ex-boyfriends, 2) reasons for termination of latest relationship, 3) current salary level, 4) political views, and 5) criminal history. I hardly cared about the answers as I only met the women who passed my screening process – I already knew they were decent human beings. I was more intrigued by how each would respond in an unorthodox situation.

On the one hand, I got to meet some genuinely amazing women. I soon discovered, though, that regardless of most people’s claims to appreciate ‘honesty’ not many people truly did… or at least not in the way I defined it. Even these highly curated individuals became awkward or disinterested as I asked my questions and some of them blatantly lied. To my dismay, my radical honesty test remained pass-proof…

Lucky for me, my story doesn’t end there. Six months into my amorous adventure, as I was on the cusp of giving up on ‘happily ever after’, I met the most wonderful woman… ironically, outside of online dating. I was at a board game night with high school buddies when a friend of a friend appeared on a whim based on a last-minute invite. To disillusion the romantics, this woman and I barely spoke during game night… but coincidental parking led to the exchanging of numbers and an eventual first date.

During my first meeting with – from here on out, I’ll call her Grace… and I say that facetiously because that’s her actual name – I decided to enact my honesty test but with a twist. Instead of asking my typical questions, I decided to up the ante and start with my own confessions. Unfortunately for me, what started as an attempt to spice up my experiment ended with me telling Grace literally every secret that I housed: every library book I had failed to return on time, every plastic can I had failed to recycle… it was all laid out for her on our (I will stress again) first date.

She, in turn, laughed at most of what I said… and calmly elaborated on her own shameful history. That was ten blissful months ago.

I understand, first hand, that in a world where the client deadlines get cut as often as the budgets, analytics will forever be seen as a mere dashboard or an Excel template. With that said, my best contribution to this wonderful field comes in the form of a friendly reminder: some of life’s greatest answers are derived using analyses. The next time you’re going about your daily routine, even if you aren’t an “analyst”, try putting some data behind a situation. While I can’t promise you a Nobel Prize-winning revelation every time… once in a while you may, like me, make a life-changing discovery.

***

More about Jason:

Jason is a Senior Manager on the Analytics team where he leverages data to solve client problems. Prior to joining Peppercomm, Jason worked at several digital advertising agencies and crafted measurement strategies spanning social, programmatic, search, email, and mobile campaigns. Jason is originally from Princeton, New Jersey and earned a Bachelor’s Degree in Economics from Northwestern University.

Find Jason on LinkedIn here.

Nov 14

Why Corporate Leaders Must Join the National Conversation

Today’s guest blog was authored by Lauren Parker of Peppercomm…

“Where is the corporate Kapernick?”

Ariel Investments CEO Melody Hobson posed this question to a room full of CEOs during her presentation about diversity and inclusion in the board room. It’s one example reflective of our evolving cultural landscape and the impact it’s having on corporate America.

Politics divide Americans on issues from gun control to tax reform. Women are standing up against systemic misogyny. The topic of racial inequality has moved out of the shadows and onto our national football fields. Every morning, we awake to new headlines that amplify these important national conversations.

Technology has changed the way we consume and amplify news and opinion. It’s given people the opportunity to shout their points of view and it’s led to the expectation that everyone should have an opinion to share – including corporate leaders. Social media has provided a direct line of access to those executives.

People want to know where corporate leadership stands on issues most important to them because people want to buy from, work for, and invest in companies that align with their values. In fact, 47% of millennials believe corporate CEOs have a responsibility to speak up about important social issues, and 51% are more likely to buy from a company led by an activist CEO (KRC Research). Moreover, 62% of employees of all ages expect their employer to take a stand on major issues of the day (Glassdoor).

CEOs can no longer hide in their corner office. They are expected to be the face of their corporate values. For some, this is a natural role to play. Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks, is one of the few corporate executives standing up to President Trump and the GOP tax plan. At the recent New York Times DealBook Conference, Schultz said, “I don’t believe that corporate America needs a 20% tax cut. The tax cut is not going to create a level playing field and more compassionate society.” Schultz took a dissenting position compared to many of his peers, but successfully connected his stance to the company’s core values, which resonates with many coffee-loving consumers.

Other executives have struggled in the spotlight. Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank has taken heat after sending conflicting messages about his support for Trump and subsequent decision to leave the president’s manufacturing council. The brand took another hit when it initially came out in full support of the NFL players, then deleted the tweet and replaced it with a more generic statement. Brand spokespeople including Misty Copeland and Steph Curry publically denounced the brand claiming it “stands for nothing.”

Companies have had to respond to fake news about their business; backlash over ad buys on controversial programs; and even direct confrontation from our president. Brands can no longer attempt to be all things to all people. At the same time, they can’t afford to simply stay silent. So how can companies navigate this new set of challenges and keep its reputation intact?

  • Define Your Mission and Values: Have a clear definition of your company’s mission and values and communicate them clearly and regularly across its communication channels (not just in times of crisis). Use these as your North Star when determining when and how to speak out a challenging issue.
  • Check the Company You Keep: Recognize the importance of building a supply chain with partners who have similar corporate values. If their reputation slips, you’ll want to avoid being dragged down with them.
  • Know Who You Serve: Deeply understand your target audiences and what motivates them. Use that knowledge to connect on issues of shared importance.
  • Dust off Your Crisis Playbook: A basic crisis communications plan will no longer cut it. You need a sophisticated protocol for assessing potential reputational threats and getting the right message to the right people at the right time.
  • Speak to Your Values: You don’t have to take a formal stand any time a new issue hits the national zeitgeist. Speak authentically on the issues that directly connect to your core values and allow you to reinforce your company’s purpose.

In today’s polarized environment, it’s impossible to appease everyone but it’s even riskier to stay on the sidelines. Are you prepared to stand for something?

***

Find Lauren on Twitter at @ImLaurenParker.

Nov 07

The clock is ticking

Check out this fascinating Advertising Age interview of Facebook marketing guru Andrew Keller. While Keller expounds on any number of topics in the piece, he hones in specifically on the rise of the term “six seconds” in advertising.

While the Facebook executive, and his fellow advertisers, are fixated on six seconds, research shows the average human actually has an attention span of eight whole seconds. That’s one second less than a goldfish.

But, the six (or eight) second discussion should extend far beyond Keller’s focus on digital advertising and videos.

Split second responses are table stakes in ALL forms of communications today.

In the new normal of Trump Tweets, fake news and Kevin Spacey/Harvey Weinstein-type transgressions, individuals and organizations have about eight seconds to gather their thoughts and determine:

  • What will they say?
  • Will they say anything at all?
  • What criteria determine whether a response is warranted?
  • Who should make the statement?
  • What channel would make the most sense?

Here are two very quick cases in point. One is a worst practice; the other a best:

  • UnderArmour completely blew the NFL player-kneeling controversy by first Tweeting the firm’s commitment to diversity & inclusiveness. Then, when right-wing customers expressed their disapproval, UnderArmour Tweeted a revised comment that included “..and show respect for our flag.” In doing so, UnderArmour created a whole new news cycle that, ironically, unified outraged right and left-wing followers who agreed on one thing: the brand was speaking out of both sides of its mouth.
  • @POTUS recently attacked General Motors in one of his 3am Tweets. Rather than respond with a Tweet correcting the president’s erroneous charges, Ray Dey, GM’s CCO decided, instead, to share the facts with trusted beat reporters who routinely covered the car company. Once their articles were published, Trump didn’t have a leg to stand on and quickly moved on to attack someone else.

The point is this: While no brand should be expected to respond in eight seconds or less, every organization should prepare now for what cannot be anticipated, and create new protocols for the new normal.

Getting back to digital advertising and marketing content of all types and forms, I completely agree with Keller. Organizations have six (or eight, depending upon the target audience’s attention span) seconds to engage, connect and begin the process of consideration. The day of long-form storytelling is dead.

Split second communications is the currency of the realm, now and for the future.