MarketingInsideOut.com

An AdAge story this week about the sales success of HeadOn states: “Those rapid-fire “HeadOn, apply directly to the forehead” spots are arguably among the worst commercials ever from a creative standpoint. They’re annoying, repetitive, obnoxious — and effective. ”

Creatives everywhere probably gagged when they first saw the campaign. But when I posted this story about HeadOn back in November, I thought it was a smart strategy. And still do.

Regardless of how un-creative the spots are, look at the facts…sales are up 234% even though they annoy viewers. Millions talked about them. Thousands upon thousands blogged about the spots (there are 19,562 on Google blog search alone…a few thousand more show up on Technorati.)

The last time I remember such a high level of buzz about an ad campaign was for Deadenbacher, the ill fated Orville Redenbacher campaign. The Deadenbacher spots cost a fortune to make and were done by one of the most creative shops around. That “creative” approach didn’t work and Crispin lost the business.

On the other hand, Dan Charron, VP-sales and marketing at Miralus Healthcare, the marketer of HeadOn fully admits they weren’t out to be creative or win awards. Charron’s very pragmatic approach of testing for recall against ad clutter helped him hone in to find just what achieved his objective: just getting people to remember the product. And that they did…extremely successfully.

I found myself nodding my head when I read the following comment on the AdAge story. Since he/she says it so well, I’ll just quote it in its entirety:

In this article about the +200% growth of the product Head On, the author used the phrase “arguably among the worst commercials ever from a creative standpoint” to describe the infamous TV commercials for the headache product. And in using that phrase it shows that most advertising types have lost their way. It validates what I say here and on many sites on the web, a creative ad is not necessarily an effective ad. But I also think AdAge (mirroring most of the industry), doesn’t understand the term ‘creative’. This IS a creative ad. Yes it only says the same six word phrase over and over. Yes it is one single camera shot with a chromakey and two-dimensional graphics. So? It is creative, unique, and effective. Those six words do more for sales than those million dollar campaigns with big football stars. Just because it doesn’t have a cinematic look, some sort of cool special effect, or humor driving it does not mean it’s not creative. What it does have is a call to action, and highlights a products purpose, without having to show some esoteric shot of the cliffs of Ireland from a helicopter while offering a tongue twisting voice over from a smooth voice such as Peter Coyote that has the viewer wondering what it was they just tried to advertise. No not every ad should mimic this ad but the fact that it stands out amongst the field of much more expensive ads, yet does so much more for the product, rather than the ad agencies award wall should once again be a wakeup call to most big agency advertising, that advertising is broke and only sees ‘creative’ as what makes an ad good. As for annoying, try the Sprint ad with Peyton Manning that has a budget 100 times this, yet no one can make heads or tails of what it’s supposed to do, let alone what it’s trying to sell. Yet the agency for this Sprint spot made a behind the scenes video and posted it on YouTube so the world could see how a creative, high priced, award winning ad that does little for the product is done. Now that’s annoying. –New York, NY

What’s your opinion?

Most of us have had some not-so-great experiences trying to get an answer or resolve a problem through a customer call center. Whether dealing with your bank to clear up a problem, a cell phone company to change a plan or any number of places that are supposed to troubleshoot, being put in the queue is a fact of life. Sometimes even getting a human is a challenge (I’ve posted on that subject before).

There are about 50,000 call centers in the US alone. And many more thousands offshore. Competition is fierce, and a single bad experience with a company in any channel can lead to defection from a company. And rarely do defectors leave quietly. They tend to tell friends. They blog. They make themselves heard. Which is easier today than ever.

The fact is that a customer call center is a critical point of engagement for customers. It can make or break a relationship. Most companies know intuitively how important their call center interactions are, but they aren’t sure what the satisfaction drivers are.

Today an article regarding a new study by CFI Group on call center performance indices caught my eye because it gets at some of the key drivers that cause either pleasure or pain and ultimately determine satisfaction levels. CFI studied six industries: Banking, Cable and Satellite TV, Catalog Retail, Cellular Phone Service, Insurance, Personal Computer and reported on how they did and what factors drive satisfaction.

Here’s a few points I found interesting in the study:

• The most crucial factor contributing to satisfaction, loyalty, retention, and positive word-of mouth is not about how well you were treated during the call, but whether or not the CSR is able to resolve the caller’s issue. Unfortunately, 18% of customers do not have their issue resolved. The importance of this one factor is astounding. Customers who resolve their issue have satisfaction scores 46 points higher than those who do not. Furthermore, those who do not have their issue resolved are eight times more likely to defect.
• On average, about two-fifths (38%) of the respondents say they tried to reach the company first through a means other than the call center. Eighty-five percent of callers who try another method first try the company’s website, which fails to meet their needs, forcing them to try another channel to resolve their issue.
• Call center executives need to take a hard look at their training and monitoring programs to make sure that CSRs have the tools they need to answer the questions they are getting. And the bar is only getting higher as customers migrate to the web. If the “easy” questions are answered on the web, it leaves the more difficult issues for the CSRs to tackle.
• Not every issue can be addressed via the web, and one of the clear takeaways from this research is that improving the quality of the online channel could defer hundreds of thousands of unnecessary calls from the costly contact center channel. Contact centers help with resolving issues that can’t be resolved on the web. They should serve as a continuous feedback loop to the web operation. There can an should be processes in place to make enhancements to the website based on what the CSRs in the call center hear.

I never had a word for it before. Now I do. My teen daughter is into communitainment-ing. And she’s not alone. If you’re a parent of a teen or spend much time around them, you can probably relate.

The symptoms: they are always on…online…on MySpace…on IM…on a photo sharing service…on an online game with friends…on I-tunes…on their cell phone texting…on the spot in sharing some crazy video with their friends (sometimes all at the same time).

They don’t watch much TV. But nonetheless, when you start to worry that they are becoming desk-potatoes and anti-social and you force them to disconnect and go outside to get fresh air or exercise or go to the mall or a ball game, it’s not uncommon to find them in groups on their cell phones texting others and even one another. As more of them convince their parents to buy them smart phones, they are taking and sharing video, mobile myspacing and so much more.

A report released last month by Piper Jaffray’s analyst Safa Rashtchy entitled ‘The User Revolution’ describes how users are going from simply exchanging information, to sharing information, ideas, content and entertainment, all within a social context, as part of a process dubbed ‘Communitainment’.

In a story in Adweek, Rashtchy pondered whether the younger viewers were cutting back on something else? It turns out they are cutting back on some of the more traditional entertainment avenues. But the communication on IM and MySpace is entertainment for them. To them, communication is not what it is to us. If we’re talking, we want to exchange some information, then we’ll get back to our work, or we’ll go watch a movie or some TV for entertainment. For younger people those [communication and entertainment] activities are intertwined. They send music and video files to each other, and that activity, by itself, is fun for them. It is not the same as what we call communication. He believes that increasingly, people on the Web, especially younger people, are going to gravitate toward content consumption in a way that is not direct content consumption but, combined with something else that is tied within the idea of social community.

The report suggests that “Communitainment” will at least partially replace other forms of content–i.e., TV, magazines, and even big Internet sites in favor of niche content sites. And the importance of the trend is not just in shifting traffic patterns but, more importantly, in the way users view content as a free-flowing part of the communication spectrum.

So where do marketers fit? When consumers watch TV, there is an understanding that they get commercials in exchange for free programming. With “Communitainment,” that ‘understanding’ doesn’t exist. Content is created and shared by users. It’s a closed system and advertisers have to find a way to get into it. And that point is critical if Rashtchy is correct in his prediction that “communitainment” will rise from 30% last year to 50% over the next decade. But once you get in, you’re actually part of the family. The content family. Part of the family, that is, if advertisers can indeed gain consumers’ trust.

From Emarketer.com

“Blogs, like podcasting and virtual worlds such as Second Life, offer a passionate niche audience. At the same time, they typically are not suited for repurposed content, and require special attention from marketers to work well as part of a campaign. This is partly why blogs are not considered very effective by most US advertising executives, according to the American Advertising Federation.”

Viral marketing and bomb scares - two concepts few people anticipate being in the same news headline. But, that’s exactly what happened this week as a result of a viral campaign for Turner Broadcasting’s animated television show “Aqua Teen Hunger Force” produced by its Adult Swim brand.

In nine cities across the country, the lighted, blinking electronic signs displaying a boxy-looking cartoon character caused barely a stir. But in Boston, the signs, some with protruding wires, sent a wave of panic across the city, bringing out bomb squads and prompting officials to shut down highways, bridges and part of the Charles River. Resulting in thousands of news stories within hours.

Two men, Peter Berdovsky, a freelance video artist, and Sean Stevens, both employed by Turner Broadcasting to place the magnetic devices for the stunt were arrested but released today on $2,500 bond.

It’s a mess. A very high profile mess. But does it spell disaster or mean viral/guerilla marketing will cease? Or even slow? Doubtful. Especially in light of how saturated the media marketplace is and how companies desperately look for ways to breakthrough the clutter. In fact one concern is whether, given the level of publicity and how quickly it was created, others will try to replicate a stunt like this. Turner, while perhaps a bit taken aback, has never had this high of profile. No typical guerilla campaign could have ever generated this. Even my Mother knew about the Aqua Teen Hunger Force (not that she would ever watch it). The impact may very well be determined by what happens legally.

The city of Boston is looking to file charges to recoup $500,000 of costs. Will the agency be fined or charged? Will Turner? Or both? Accoding to one blog post I read, it sounds like the agency that created the idea, Interference, may have some real problems on their hands relative to their conduct during the Boston panic.

Many feel this was an ill-thought and irresponsible campaign. Yet others think there has been massive overeaction to the whole thing. According to one report:

Young Bostonians familiar with the unconventional marketing tactics used by many companies tended to see the city’s reaction as unmitigated hysteria.

Tracy O’Connor, 34, a retail manager, called the police response “silly and insane,” contrasting it with that in other cities where no one reported concerns about the devices _ an advertising gimmick for the Cartoon Network show “Aqua Teen Hunger Force.”

“We’re the laughing stock,” she said.

And the story is far from winding down as Part II kicks in — the mockery of the Bostonian reaction. And this…and this…and this…and this…

Day 5…and it looks like the kidnapping is coming to an end.

This message is posted on the Diesel site today.

Official Diesel statement on Italian radio:

“WE WILL SHUT THE HEIDIES DOWN AT 23.00 CET”

“Today Diesel officially stated on the radio that they actually LIKE what we are doing but they ARE shutting us down. They want their collection back.”

I think this was an interesting stunt to watch in terms of the viral impact. Obviously it created a lot of attention. From the time the Heidies took over diesel.com last Monday (1/22) through Thursday (1/25), over 2400 blogs and news sites linked to it.

It makes a lot of sense –more eyes in more places = more possibilities to catch that great newsworthy moment.

Because cell phones are so ubiquitious and most now have cameras, they are increasingly used to catch public moments, like the recent racist rants of Michael Richards (aka Kramer), posted on TMZ.

Well…beginning tomorrow, Yahoo and Reuters, in the most ambitious effort to date in the citizen journalism arena, are introducing a new effort to showcase photographs and video of news events submitted by the public.

Big media has always used stringers and photos/video obtained from the public, but this project will create a systematic way to incorporate images covering a wider range of topics into news coverage.

According to a New York Times story:

Users will not be paid for images displayed on the Yahoo and Reuters sites. But people whose photos or videos are selected for distribution to Reuters clients will receive a payment.

However, it’s rife with possible problems. Just last summer, a Reuters freelance photographer digitally altered photos of the conflict in Lebanon. Reuters stopped using the photographer and withdrew his work but with today’s technology it’s way too easy to alter photos. It sounds like Rueters is trying to develop software that will help detect altered photographs.

Photos and video can be uploaded here>

If you’re a marketer and you still think social networking sites and blogs are the cloistered domain of computer geeks and something you can ignore…think again…or start polishing up your resume.

Fast-forward to today with consumers of all types flocking to social media sites to share brand experiences. Social Media such as blogs, wikis, forums and user-generated content sites like flickr, delicious, MySpace and YouTube have become both a source of information and entertainment. While this new age of digital word of mouth is dramatically shaping the way brands are perceived, many marketers and business managers are still amazingly unaware of the influence of social media on everything from brand reputation to purchase behaviors.

The influence traditional media and marketing have over consumer perception is waning as people use the plethora of digital technologies to circumvent traditional sources to obtain information and entertainment from each other. Simply look at the recent comScore and NetRatings traffic numbers for the likes of sites like YouTube and MySpace, and you quickly get a lesson in the power of user-generated content in endorsing or condemning a product or service.

According to Technorati CEO and founder, David Sifry’s most recent “State of the Blogsphere”; there are now 57 million blogs (about 55% of which are active), about 100,000 new blogs created each day, and 1.3 million posts a day (that’s double the volume of this time last year). At the current growth rate, the blogsphere is doubling every 236 days or so.

The interesting number that really caught my eye is the number of “authoritative” blogs (authority is a ranking assigned by Technorati based on tracking the number of distinct blogs that link to it over the past 6 months). The fact is there are more authoritative blogs than there are traditional outlets in any single medium.

There are 30,488 “high authority” and “very high authority” blogs. (This “authority” level means they each have more than 100 other blogs linking to them in the last 6 months.) For context there are about 13,000 radio stations, 9,000 TV stations, and 17,000 magazines in the US. (source: Forrester Research) That’s a lot of voices, a significant readership and a lot of influence.

Rueters reports that blogs are a more trusted source of information (24 percent) than television advertising (17 percent) and email marketing (14 percent). But blogs still lag behind newspapers (30 percent) in the credibility department. This according to a survey commissioned by Hotwire, a public relations consultancy working in the technology sector.

The evidence relative to the influence of blogs on everything from public opinion to purchase decisions is growing. In this article, on the impact of blogs in the b2b sector, a KnowledgeStorm/McCann survey of purchase behavior found that 53% of respondents said blogs influence their purchase decisions. That influence looms even larger over regular blog users. Of the respondents who said they read blogs daily, nearly 69% said blogs influenced their purchase behavior.

As a marketer, if you don’t have a program in place to monitor your brands in the social media, put one in place. Because detecting influence and understanding its role in how people perceive and adopt your product or service online can give you a powerful tool for marketing programs, advertising approaches and competitive business intelligence.

Great post by Andy Beal with tips on how to get started monitoring the blogoshpere to see what’s being said about you, your company, brand, products or service.  He recommends hourly…YIKES!

Although I’ve disagreed with some of his POVs over the years, like most people in the marketing field I’ve read his books and found some worthy insights.  But Jack Trout really dated himself in this interview in Forbes.

Word of mouth may not be anything new, but to think you can ignore it in our hyperconnected world and just focus on advertising is plain naive.

Steve Rubel said it well:

This is nostalgic thinking. It’s almost like saying that we should go back to using typewriters over computers since we don’t have to worry about getting a virus.