"The meek shall inherit squat."

Sermon From the Mount

August 19, 2009

I’m Lovin’ It. Carl’s Jr. Consistently Brings Automatic Weapons To A Knife Fight.

Ladies and gentlemen, The Big Carl. 1,400+ calories and $0.50 less than a wimpy, 700 calorie Big Mac.

Ladies and gentlemen, The Big Carl. 1,400+ calories and $0.50 less than a wimpy, 700 calorie Big Mac.

McDonald’s is McHuge. McGlobal. McMonolithic. So if it’s your job to try to nibble away little chunks of business from Micky D’s, (like, for instance, if you’re the marketing team for Carl’s Jr.), you don’t wake up every morning looking for new ways to play fair.

And, to be fair, they haven’t. Carl’s has probably done the best job of any marketer lately at scoring tons of free eyeball time and brain space by deliberately cultivating outrage through the overt sexualization of sandwiches. It doesn’t matter what I think of their efforts. All that matters is what what burger-loving males between the ages of, say, 14 and 24 with three bucks in their pocket think of them.

OK. I'll admit that I didn't even know who Audrina Patridge is until I reaad that a bunch of mommy bloggers had complained about this Carl's Jr. viral video.

OK. I'll admit that I didn't even know who Audrina Patridge is until I read that a bunch of people were complaining in blogs about this Carl's Jr. "Bikini Burger" viral video. Well, say what you will about Audrina's gold lame swimsuit. Carl's closeup food footage blows the pickles off most of what you see on the air these days. That is a tasty-looking burger.

So, I’m not even going to comment on “Soapy Paris Hilton on a Bentley” or “I Like Flat Buns” (by the way, Carl’s used Sir Mix-a-Lot’s “Baby Got Back” years before Burger King forced mommies to cover the eyes of their Sponge Bob loving kiddos), because their latest street fightin’ tactic is something that just about everybody in marketing has always dreamed of doing (come on, admit it) but never got to because it was “too risky”, “too hard”, or “we’ll get letters.” And, whatever you think of Audrina Partridge and her “Bikini Burger”, the Carl’s team deserves some serious props for this one.

According to today’s Wall Street Journal, Carl’s has taken to parking a flashy, heavily branded mobile kitchen in front of select McDonald’s restaurants, waylaying customers as they’re walking out and offering to swap Big Macs (Beef content = 3.2oz) for Big Carls (Beef content = 7oz).

And, since Carl’s has learned to use YouTube the way Procter & Gamble uses “One Life To Live”, we can expect to see some juicy footage emerge from this. If they’re really lucky, maybe they’ll catch a McDonald’s manager going all Christian Bale on some innocent kid in a paper hat in the Carl’s Mobile Diner. Good for you, Carl’s team. Fight on. If you had restaurants in Massachusetts, I’d go scarf a couple of Big Angus Burgers (I think those are Paris’ faves) just to say thank you for reminding us all not to be such big, cluckin’ chickens.

July 15, 2009

“Facts are the enemy of truth.” So said Miguel de Cervantes, 16th Century Spanish novelist and, apparently, savvy marketing guy.

I think Seth Godin is a heck of a bright fellow and I especially admire him when he expresses (beautifully) ideas that align with Drumcircle’s worldview.

For example, in his blog today, entitled Facts always win, right?, he writes about how marketers, especially B2B marketers, are far too prone to rely on facts as reasons people should buy their products.

Young man, your presentation on 3/8-inch, high-capacity chisel point staples interested me. But it didn't move me.

Young man, your presentation on 3/8-inch, high-capacity chisel point staples interested me. But it didn't move me.

Says Seth:

“If you’re selling a business to business service and you can prove that it’s better, that it delivers more value, that it’s cheaper or more durable or more efficient, shouldn’t that mean you will close every sale?”

Of course, we all know it doesn’t work that way. Nobody closes every sale. And there are dozens of fat books and scholarly papers on neuroscience, decision-making and marketing that explain why: they’ll never admit it, they’ll probably never even know it, but even the most spreadsheet-obsessed, abacus-wielding, thy-Likert-scale-guideth-and comforteth-me businessperson will still always buy what feels right rather than what - at least according to the manufacturer - is right (a more neuroscientifically accurate way to say it is that we buy what feels right, then convince ourselves that it is right by looking to all those facts).

The truth is, building a sales pitch solely on facts and product attributes is risky. After all, a competitor can drop prices, introduce a more durable product, incorporate a secret ingredient or win some important industry award. Suddenly you’re in a facts arms race. Suddenly, you’re working hard to “out-fact” your competitors instead of outsell them.

Without even knowing it, Seth Godin captures in four paragraphs the potency of what Drumcircle calls Message Architecture™. It’s an important part of how we help clients move from feature/function/fact-driven, transactional marketing to connection-driven, Emotivational™ marketing.

Stick to the facts. Just stick them on the bottom.

Message Architecture isn't advertising copy, but it has been known to inspire more emotionally engaging advertising copy.

Message Architecture isn't advertising copy, but it has been known to inspire more emotionally engaging advertising copy (click the picture for a larger view)

In almost every Drumcircle engagement there’s a session called an Emotivation Workshop. In these half-day sessions, we work together with our clients (and anyone else they’d like to include) to craft a new, more effective Message Architecture for their products or brands.

These new messages are always constructed from the bottom up, in three linguistic “stories”, like the illustration on the left (click it for a version you can actually read).

As with any good structure, Message Architecture has to be built on a firm foundation. In this case, it’s all the facts and features that make what we’re selling great: we’ve got the biggest, fastest, oldest, newest, freshest, lightest, heaviest, you get the picture.

Continuing the architectural analogy, the middle story is where the work gets done. It’s where we elaborate on the benefits customers derive from all those great features and facts in the first layer.

The top layer is derived from a unique, emotional insight discovered during the course of the project. This insight is the answer to the question “what, exactly, does right feel like?”

Whether our client is selling baby shoes, copier paper or auto service, there’s always an emotional need within the potential purchaser that goes much deeper than shoes, paper or an oil change. The closer we can come to acknowledging and filling that need, the more right our offering will feel.

This is how we’ll out-connect, out motivate and outsell competitors.

This is where we’ll demonstrate that We Understand the deep, emotional need.

This is where we’ll make our offering feel right (if our assignment is to help develop a new product concept, we’ll work together to design the new product so that every aspect of it, from components to packaging to promotion, not only feels right, but is right).

We don’t have feelings about facts. We accept the facts that fit our feelings.

It’s important to keep in mind that, while Message Architecture is built from the bottom up, people perceive and react to it from the top down. We Understand makes people look (“Why, they’re speaking directly to me…), We Can Do Great Things For You makes them pay attention (…and they’re telling me things that benefit me, personally) and, finally, We’re Great gives them reason to believe (I knew I was right to look and listen, after all, look how great these people are!).

Facts, features and functions are important parts of marketing communication. But in Message Architecture and in human psychology, they come dead last in the process of making a sale. And that’s good. Because, if some competitor comes in and cuts your facts out from under you, but you’ve done a good job convincing people that you understand and are doing great things for them, that powerful, emotional connection can buy you some time to build yourself some new facts (if you find you even still need them).

June 8, 2009

Recommending Best Practices to Positively Impact the Verbiage-Based Communication Space

Filed under: Marketing Language, People — Tags: , , , — admin @ 5:27 pm
small-hmmm-woman

I'm imagining inserting a pushpin into this guy "at every possible touchpoint."

About three weeks ago, I launched a thoroughly unscientific survey on Facebook to identify the 25 most clichéd, credibility-wrecking examples of Biz-Buzzpeak that people are coming across in conference rooms and the Barnes & Noble “Business and Money” section these days.

I’m talking about words and phrases that, when they come out of a person’s mouth, immediately make you subtract about 40 points from that person’s estimated IQ.  You know, terms that make you think, “If that man says ‘optimize’, ‘empower’ or ‘go-to-market’ one more time, I’m going to force-feed him that PowerPoint clicker.”

So, here’s the list (alphabetized because, as I said, it’s an unscientific survey). Please keep in mind, I’m just reporting the data, not passing judgment, and, if anybody ever hears me use one of these terms, know in advance that I’m using it “ironically”.

  1. Anything “2.0”
  2. Best Practices
  3. Center of Excellence (personally, I’ll be happy to be part of a Center of Extreme Adequacy)
  4. Change Agent
  5. Circle Back
  6. Client/Customer Centric Strategy
  7. Continuous Conversation/Improvement
  8. Core Competency
  9. Dialogue (as a verb)
  10. Eco Anything
  11. Inclusion
  12. In The _________ Space (Example: “We’re having a game-changing impact in the emulsified, starchy-tuber-based, salty snacks space” instead of “we’re selling a lot more potato chips”)
  13. In today’s (Choose at least one from (1) and one from (2))
    1. globalized / challenging / recession-ravaged / interconnected / high-speed
    2. economy / society / workplace / world / corporation
  14. Let’s Take This Offline (translation: “I need some time to come up with a better response than “oh, yeah?!”)
  15. Low-Hanging Fruit
  16. Maximize
  17. Relative to _________ (as in “…how people feel relative to cufflinks” instead of “…how people feel about cufflinks”)
  18. Stakeholder
  19. The iPod of ________ (as in, “We believe we’ve created the iPod of galvanized roofing nails.”)
  20. Thought-Leader
  21. Touch Base
  22. Touchpoint
  23. Turnkey Solutions
  24. Traction (unless describing tires)
  25. Value Proposition

Here’s a thought: when a person uses a phrase like “optimizing throughput”, there’s a good chance that 50% of the people in the room will think he sounds smart and the other 50% will roll their eyes (most will do this in their imaginations, but it doesn’t matter, the damage is done). If that same person says “”becoming more efficient”, nobody will roll their eyes.

_________________

22210991NOTE: This entry was inspired by the excellent and tiny book Why Businesspeople Speak Like Idiots by Brian Fugere, Chelsea Hardaway, and Jon Warshawsky. The book has been around a few years and some of the jargon has changed, but based on the way we hear a lot of people talking, the subject matter is still relevant.

So, before you buy another book that purports to tell you how to create win-win scenarios by seizing the long tail of downstream, value-added, best-of-breed, seamlessly-integrated strategies, buy this book so you’ll be able to tell people what you’ve done, in a way that won’t have at least half of them rolling their eyes.

June 6, 2009

Hey. Check it out. The New York Times no longer has “readers”.

Filed under: Consumers, Marketing Language, Media — Tags: , , , , — admin @ 8:36 pm
Photo of a man using a newspaper

Photo of a man using a newspaper

When we founded Drumcircle in 2008, my partner Anne and I set out on a quixotic mission to eliminate the term “consumer” from the lexicon of our industry (there’s a whole page on our website devoted to the subject, in fact).

Just substituting the word “people” for “consumers” will instantly make every one of us better at our jobs. It just makes sense. Thinking about people instead of consumers will give us all one less chance to forget that it’s breathing, brains, blood and bone individuals, just like you and me, but nothing like you and me, that we’re dealing with here.

We have to get a person’s attention. We have to connect with that person at a level he may not even have direct access to himself. Then we have to change, reinforce or create something new within that person.

So, today, I came across this in Creativity Online:

“Why The New York Times Doesn’t Call Its Readers ‘Readers’

“In a world of near-ubiquitous computing, where an ever-expanding collection of devices turns readers into…co-creators and distributors, The New York Times…(needs to turn)…its readers into, well, something more.

Speaking at the CaT: Creativity and Technology conference today, Derek Gottfrid, senior software architect and product technologist at The New York Times, said the company has quit calling online readers “readers,” instead referring to them as users.”

Until now, only software developers and drug dealers have referred to the people they sell their merchandise to as “users”. So this is a big step forward. Congratulations to the folks at the venerable Gray Lady who were in the meeting where this decision was made. This is exactly the kind of thinking that’s keeping newspapers in their current state of relevance in today’s dynamic media climate.

Come on, people.

Powered by WordPress