Tom Asacker on unlocking hearts and minds

Henry David Thoreau on change

"Things do not change; we change."

Yea . . . right.  I'm not sure, but I think this is how most kids view their parents' digital endeavors.

Ben Stein on ordinary people

"It's amazing what ordinary people can do if they set out without preconceived notions."

This one was sent to me from my friend Trevor from across the pond.  Paul Potts was a mobile phone salesman with no self confidence . . . and then once upon a time (last year), someone believed in him.  If it doesn't touch you, get yourself to an emergency room . . . stat!  You, my friend, are dead.

And to all of my friends in these great United States, have a happy and healthy Thanksgiving holiday!

Schopenhauer on impressions

"It is only at the first encounter that a face makes its full impression on us."

Voters often make sweeping judgments based on a split-second reaction to their appearance, a new study found.  Princeton psychologist Alexander Todorov has demonstrated that quick facial judgments can accurately predict real-world election returns. His tests show that a rapid appraisal of the relative competence of two candidates' faces was all it took to predict the winner in about 70 percent of the races for U.S. senator and state governor in the 2006 elections.

"This means that with a quick look at two photos, you have a great chance of predicting who will win," Todorov said. "Voters are not that rational, after all. So maybe we have to consider that when we elect our politicians."  Perhaps we should.  In the meantime, business leaders should certainly not assume that the people choosing their brands are rational.  They're the same people!

Rational man (and woman) is a myth.  Consider the word "rational."  It's from the Latin rationalis "of or belonging to reason, reasonable," and that from ratio "reckoning, calculation, reason."  Ratio  is the relation between two quantities when compared mathematically with one another. For example, the most frequently used ratio among business people is the cost-benefit ratio.  So then, here's the rub.  What one customer views as beneficial in a product or service, another may discount completely. And so that makes their "ratios" incomparable and irrelevant.

For example, my friend refers to Starbucks as "four bucks."  For him, the benefits clearly do not outweigh the costs. However, for many others they clearly do ($8.97 billion in annual revenues). Now, you may be thinking that all you have to do is narrow down the market and identify a group of people who have a similar view of your cost-benefit ratio, thus creating a rational niche or "position." Good luck.  Politicians can't even nichefy the masses into party lines today.  Instead, do what all great brands do: appeal to people's emotions in a masterful way, and then let the audience self-select.

Gregory Bateson on logic

"Logic is a poor model of cause and effect."

Inference and demonstration are poor models of cause and effect, yet they're precisely what the marketing community uses to explain the elusive - and precarious - connection between mass media advertising and sales.

A few months ago, BusinessWeek analyzed the results of the least forwarded ads on TV based on Tivo’s data on 20,000 households. They reported that the one lesson from the Tivo ratings is that "relevancy outweighs creativity in TV commercials - by a lot."  The least-fast-forwarded commercial on TV wasn't an emotionally compelling narrative for a major brand, rather it was an informational ad for a company called CORT Furniture Rentals.

In contrast, last month Brandweek reported on a new Advertising Research Foundation study that found that  "Telling a story about the brand is more engaging, memorable and compelling than telling a bunch of facts."  An ad that struck an emotional chord with respondents was one for Campbell's soup. "Ad research firm Gallup-Robinson, Pennington, N.J., found that the spot, which showed a little girl's sadness and anxiety melt away into a soft smile once she was given a bowl of soup, generated 80% purchase intent. Most viewers measured said it was believable."

Both conclusions are interesting and can be debated at length, but where precisely is the causal relationship to sales and profitability?  It's not there.  The problem is one of proximity.  The further away one gets from the effect (in place, time, occurrence, or relation), the more difficult it is to pinpoint the cause.  Instead of trying to get consumers to engage with passive TV ads perhaps marketers should become more active and real, get closer to their audiences and engage with them.

As John Russell, President of Harley-Davidson so aptly put it, "The more you engage with customers the clearer things become and the easier it is to determine what you should be doing."  And make no mistake, the key to a truly differentiated economic offering is what one does, not what ones says (no matter how engaging).

Gilmore and Pine on the subjective nature of authenticity in business

"The sole determinant of the authenticity of an economic offering is the individual perceiving the offering.  Because our experiences with offerings happen inside of us, we become the sole arbiter of what is authentic for us."

I just finished Gilmore and Pine's latest book, Authenticity: What Consumers Really Want, and was pleasantly surprised by the varied models, frameworks and exemplars on creating valuable customer experiences. In my opinion, that's what the book should have been titled: "Models, frameworks and exemplars on creating valuable customer experiences."  But that title certainly wouldn't have sold as many books.  Right?  In fact, the authors disclose in the book's acknowledgments that their agent steered them away from a sequel to the experience economy.  You see, authenticity sells!

So based on the authors' premise, "When consumers want what's real, the management of the customer perception of authenticity becomes the primary new source of competitive advantage," as well as their assertion that authenticity is purely subjective and is based on how well an economic offering is "rendered" to match the customer's desired self-image, I can rightfully say that their book is quite inauthentic.

If you've read this blog, you know how I feel about using the word "authentic" to describe most mainstream economic offerings (read this article for elucidation).  It's bullsh*t.  All Gilmore and Pine have done is provide a model for how to become a superb bullsh*tter in an age of abundance (note: there's nothing wrong with that in the context of marketing goods and services).  However, if you truly want to be authentic, then be authentic.  If you're not sure how, start by reading this post.