The Art of Achieving Break-Through: Part 2

My initial post on the subject of breakthrough was a bit abstract, presenting a contrarian ideal without much substance. My hope in part 2 is to start providing substance and texture around the idea that less may be more when it comes to advertising efforts with actionable direction also forthcoming for those that choose to subscribe to the position.

Again, the basic premise is that marketers are competing for a fixed allotment of brain capacity termed "share of mind" and with new technologies enabling more messages to reach consumers through more channels than ever before, that competition is increasing significantly. So by increasing marketing efforts, we (marketers) actually create more clutter through which we must breakthrough.

Consider the number of messages seen by generations in the 50's and 60's versus those in this day and age. TV viewership has grown, the interactive space has evolved and everything from pizza boxes to urinal pucks can be seen carrying a logo or message.

Further increasing the challenge for marketers is a growing sense of skepticism with regard to advertising common among mass audiences particularly younger, coastal types. Trust in the institution has taken a major beating in an era where gov't, church and corporate scandal riddle the headlines. Conspiracy theories are commonly woven into the fabric of culture serving as the basis for countless movies and TV shows. I can spend all day on this one, but we'll save that for another blog entry. Bottom line: Because you (brand) say so, doesn't make it true anymore.

So having laid out the challenges, the logical question is what are the solutions? Am I really suggesting marketers cut back their budgets? That a decrease in SOV or "presence" will actually help engage consumers and create trust in a greater and more effective manner...

...well, to a degree, yes. In fact, I think starting there is a good place. We throw the phrase around internally that good advertisers have the ability to "box above their weight." They compete for share of decision within a category despite a significantly inferior share of voice. T-Mobile is a great example. Mini, Target, Apple all come to mind as well. Without question there are operational efficiencies that likely play a role in the success of these brands, but who's to say the GM's of the world could not refine their marketing practices to enable their advertising to perform more efficiently?

In the boxing world, a heavyweight has to lose weight to fight at a lower weight class. In doing so they become more nimble, more agile and increase their stamina and durability. They may lose some of their power, but a flurry of jabs is often just as effective as an upper-cut. In the world of marketers, there is no knock-out punch. The truth is most of us are in a fight that requires the ability to throw jabs repeatedly and with precision. And those brands that remain nimble and agile in marketing practice while demonstrating stamina and durability are those that are positioned to succeed.

Step 1
Sports analogies aside, the first step I would suggest to enhancing breakthrough (if you are a heavyweight) is to cut your budgets in half (T-Mobile, Mini, Apple and Target are excused from this step). I know this defies all conventional wisdom, but I think it is the first step towards more efficient marketing practices (it'll drive immediate ROI figures up if nothing else.)

Step 2
Don't allocate dollars towards media such as TV because its what was done before. Its the fastest and easiest way to spend the largest amount of your marketing budget, but this practice is short-sighted. I'm not saying to stop using TV, it is still an extremely viable medium, just don't use past usage as a rationale. And not to pick on TV, this applies to all avenues of communication, even online. Why? For starters, its just lazy, but furthermore, the marketing world has changed more significantly in the last 3 years than it did in the previous 50. Its a different game, we all need to learn to play it differently. Don't rely on what was known or accepted as convention...conventions are changing and there's not a research company in the world that can predict where its going (only where its been, which is why I find "norms" such a nuisance).

Step 3
Stop talking at your target. So many advertisers behave like what they have to say is the answer for world peace. Let's be clear, its highly unlikely what we are saying is as important to our audience as it is to us. We live in the world of our products and services. Its easy fool ourselves into thinking our customers care as much as we do. No matter how compelling the offer might be, they don't (see Chrysler employee discount program year 2 performance). Recognize this and you'll be starting from a better place. Message to your audience like you are talking to a friend and you'll be in an even better one.

Step 4
Find ways to allow your target to engage on their own terms. This is the one thing (if anything) readers should take away from this blog entry. We are an increasingly independent society and as marketers this needs to be recognized. Tools such as the remote control, the mouse and Tivo and vehicles such as youtube and myspace have enabled audiences to take control of the content they absorb and to some degree given the ability to create content. Its no longer about waiting around for ABC or NBC to tell you what you will see. Consumers are more empowered then ever when it comes to choosing content, a trend that will only continue with greater veracity. Older audiences are being conditioned to this expectation and younger audiences demand it so marketers might as well embrace it. The online space appears to be the best medium to currently accommodate this need, but there may be alternatives. Interactive and online are not necessarily synonymous. It will be interesting to see where the convergence era takes us. Regardless, I firmly believe those marketers that engage their target in a non-threatening and empowering fashion will succeed long-term.

Step 5
Speaking of the long-term, keep it in mind, extend your elbows, and treat your marketing efforts accordingly. I've written in another entry that the days of the "1984" spot are long gone. With media fragmentation, its become increasingly difficult for marketers to reach (and favorably impact) a large audience segment in a short period of time. So don't expect a new spot or campaign to save the day...not right away. It takes time for campaigns to move the needle. Give them the time and investment they need to do so.