YOU can be a Trend Setter in 2013

source: http://socialmediatoday.com/rohitbhargava/1038626/how-spot-trend-7-social-media-trends-matter-2013

For those of us who don't have the time to stay in touch with changes in the Social space every waking minute of every day (because we have day jobs, because we are doing stuff related to life/school/work ALL the time, because the darn thing moves too fast and is too complicated, etc.) below is a cheat sheet courtesy of the article sourced above, on what we can expect in 2013. Here's your shot at being IN with the IT crowd!

7 Social Media Trends That Matter In 2013 (Sneak Peek)

1. Shoptimization – The growing suite of technology, apps and business practices designed to make shopping quicker, easier and more convenient. (Examples - Slice, Dashlane, GoodRx,ShopSavvy, Wish Want Wear, Key Ring, Rent the Runway, Macy’s in-store GPS)
2. Partnership Publishing – Sitting between traditional publishing and self publishing is this “DIT – Do-it-together” model that pairs aspiring authors with publishing experts on an independent or boutique basis. (Examples - Paper Lantern Lit, Net Minds, The Domino Project,  andLayerGloss).
3. Human Banking – In the works for some time, this trend of financial institutions finally using more human language and simplifying their offerings is set to take off in 2013. (Examples - Ally Bank, Mint, and FoundersCard)
4. MeFunding – Crowdfunding gets personal as individuals turn to this model to raise money for everything from life changing trips to paying for health costs after tragic accidents. (Examples - GoFundMe, indiegogo and GiveForward)
5. Hyper-Local Commerce – The money follows this hyper-local trend as tools emerge to instantly create ecommerce sites and apps help you keep money in your community. (Examples - Goodzer, Sears Local, Popularise, Fundrise, and Shopify).
6. FriendSourced Travel – Your friends are your greatest source of inspiration for planning travel, and a suite of apps and new travel services are making it easier to make your travel more personal than ever. (Examples - airbnb, Vayable, trippy,  Dine with the Dutch, and Tripbirds).
7. Degree-Free Learning – The eLearning trend starts to take shape as more than a way to learn about hobbies – and begins to finally present itself as a viable alternative to a college education for some. (Examples - creativeLIVE, Inc. Advisor, Jack Welch eMBA, UnCollege, E[nstitute]and Soundslice

I for one am very much looking forward to #1, #6, & #7--starting September 2013, post MBA program commencement of course.

For those who are more socially inclined, can you think of any trends this list is missing?

The Anti-Social CMO

source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markfidelman/2012/11/29/the-top-20-social-cmos-of-the-fortune-100-visuals/

This article brings to the fore the issue of the growing gap between technological progress/global connectedness and CMO (Chief Marketing Officers) participation. The article shows pretty astoundingly that MOST Fortune 100 CMOs do NOT have active facebook/twitter/linked-in accounts/friends/followers, even though the rest of the world (aka normal people) seems to be moving full force into the realm of social media. 

This is problematic for numerous reasons, but I'll just state the big one: How will CMOs manage what they don't understand? WIth the majority of CMOs having never interfaced in the social space, how will they understand & approve/make decisions on the digital marketing strategies & tactics being employed by the digital marketers who sit on their own teams?

To be fair, this problem might not be so much about the willingness of CMOs to accept social media, as it is about the generational gap between Boomers (current c-suite) and Gen X/Y/Z'ers (more so Y and Z then X). Whereas Boomers grew up under the norms of achieving work-life balance and separating their personal lives from the world, Millenials today are living with an uber-connected-always-on-integrated-work-life-social mindset.

What does this all mean? That likely, as the current C-Suite steps down over time, the issue of social media/digital adoption will correct itself. In the meantime, if you're a CMO and not getting down with social, at least start taking some classes/reading articles about this stuff so that you don't lose touch with reality (or more importantly reality doesn't loses touch with you) over time...

the end of the smartphone era?

source: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-end-of-the-smartphone-era-is-coming-2012-11?goback=.nmp_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1

The article sourced above talks about the potential for digital glasses to take over the current wingman position enjoyed by smartphones. Not that I 100% agree with the author's take on what the future will look like (I much prefer The Jetsons and flying cars that fold into briefcases myself), but it is definitely worth stepping back and reflecting on the rate of technological progress that we have witnessed in recent years. I mean seriously, who could have known that smartphones would take over as the dominant means of communication and information exchange just a couple of years ago?

If nothing else, as a culture we are definitely becoming more comfortable with the idea of artificial intelligence & fluid hands-free access to information--a la Apple's Siri & Android's Iris. Now, if we could all look this fashionable (see below), maybe the author is right and glasses will be IN at some season in the future.

 


Now for the tough question: IF digital glasses do become mainstream, what does that mean for the traditional digital marketing strategies & tactics that are currently being studied/employed/refined by marketers (which for the most part rely heavily on viewable screen space)? 

companies don't know how to network (socially anyway...)

source: http://mashable.com/2012/11/20/business-facebook-engagement/

This article points out the obvious to those who understand the power of networks and networking. As MBAs, we all understand the value of networking. Networks help us accomplish two distinct goals: 
1) strengthening existing ties with those who are already within our network, and 
2) exploiting loose ties to further grow our presence and influence

It is interesting just how few companies (even multinationals who recruit MBAs), actually know how to do the latter through social networks. Most companies spend the vast majority of their time, resources, and effort on point #1 versus harnessing the power and potential of point #2.

Companies mine social channels to see what their fans/followers are saying or doing with regards to a particular advertisement or promotion (versus looking to see what those individuals who are connected to their fans, but not actually fans themselves, are saying or doing). If companies spent some time honing in on the power of loosely connected potential fans, through tools such as facebook's social graph, they could greatly increase the value of social networking as an asset within their overall marketing toolkit.

In other news, Turkey Day is tomorrow--just think about all of the loose potential networking opportunities!

Happy 8th Birthday Firefox! (You Geezer)

source: http://mashable.com/2012/11/09/happy-8th-birthday-firefox/

Did you know that it was Mozilla Firefox's 8th birthday? For most of us, I am guessing no... unless of course you happen to be a tech buff or digital enthusiast (or at some point in your life decided to 'like' or 'follow' Mozilla Firefox). 

The fact that Firefox is only 8 years old is almost hard to believe. That's because in many senses Firefox feels like a dinosaur--something that we have all used or tried at some point in the past and then moved away from (probably towards Chrome, Safari, or even back to Internet Explorer). Reflecting on Mozilla Firefox's 8 year old birthday brings up a critical point about the truly rapidly changing pace of the digital landscape.

As an individual who works his day job at The Coca-Cola Company, where 1 year yields little to no progress in the grand scheme of the brand's 125 year old history, it is just absolutely fascinating how quickly the digital landscape is changing, ranging from the players who are in it and the tools there are to understand it, to very rules of the game itself (ala YouTube, Facebook, Netflix, Hulu, Groupon, Instagram, iPhone/iPad, Surface, etc). 

The digital world of today may very quickly become the digital world of yesteryear--Scary right? I guess the rapid pace of change gives us all the more reason to keep up with all this digital stuff. What will the next 8 years bring?

Pinterest for Dudes?

source: http://business.time.com/2012/10/26/pinterest-for-dudes/

This article makes an interesting point about the digital marketing arena and how it is evolving to include marketing to men. That's right, men. 

It turns out that guys like shopping too--they just want to be able to do it from the comfort and convenience of their homes (or via laptops and mobile devices on the go). The articles sums up the difference between genders perfectly: "women make shopping an event... men just want to find what they're looking for and be done". One fact that struck me was just how much guys like to shop: during last year's Black Friday, men outspent women online 2 to 1!

The main thing that keeps me skeptical however, is the relevance of Pinterest or any other social scrap-booking platform to men. As the article itself states, men just like to find what they're looking for and be done with it. So if a man finds what he wants and buys it, will he then go out to "Pin" that item so that his bros can go buy that item as well? I am guessing no, but the jury is still out there...

The Couch Potato is Extinct

source: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/the-couch-potato-is-extinct/50736/

The article sourced above talks about Mobile devices bringing the notion of "the couch potato" to extinction. The concept of people just sitting on the couch watching TV and not interacting with anything or anyone else is old and outdated. The article has plenty of stats to back this up, but the basic idea is that these days, smartphones & tablets make watching TV in isolation almost impossible. For example, when you are watching sports, don't you find yourself tweeting/facebooking/texting with your friends (or enemies) every time something major happens? Also, when you're watching a TV show, don't you find yourself surfing the web/texting/facebooking during commercial breaks? Also, have you ever watched a TV show or YouTube clip on your tablet or mobile phone, while you were away from home?

This shift in media consumption behavior towards multitasking across screens and consuming on the go, has big implications for the marketing ecosystem. The big challenge that this poses for traditional advertising agencies, is how to ensure that TV ads are disruptive and breakthrough enough to ensure that consumers who are watching at home will pay attention to them, instead of spending commercial breaks on their tablets or smartphones. The challenge that multi-device usage poses for media planning agencies, is how to ensure that enough resources are being allocated across devices to ensure that they are reaching as many viewers as possible. The opportunity that this poses for digital marketing firms, is to ensure that they have the right SEO/SEM, display ads, social presence, etc. in place to make a meaningful connection with the consumer who is searching for something on his mobile phone or passing the time watching a YouTube clip on his tablet. 

From a strategic perspective, one thing is clear about this trend towards multi-screen on-the-go usage: there will continue to be a misattribution problem when it comes to determining the effectiveness or utility of one marketing medium over the other. This means that marketers will have to accept not knowing whether their consumers responded to a TV commercial, internet banner ad, company website, social conversation, etc., because ultimately each of those channels ought to serve as complimentary touchpoints to one another. The most successful marketers of the future will not ask which of the various media channels is more effective than the other, but rather spend their time ensuring that all channels are being utilized in a way that maximizes the relevance of each touchpoint to the consumer at each point in the consumer's media consumption journey.

Consumers Shifting Time to Mobile

source: http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?R=1009431&ecid=a6506033675d47f881651943c21c5ed4

Mobile provides the "next frontier" for growth in the digital marketing space, driven by the explosive penetration of smartphones & tablets, particularly within the United States. Today, the US consumer spends 82 minutes of their day on mobile devices (up from 34 minutes in 2010). That's more than double the time spent on traditional Print mediums, and roughly equal to the amount of time consumers spend listening to the Radio.

Despite this explosive growth in mobile usage, there is an ongoing dilemma for companies & individuals looking to profit from this major shift in consumer behavior--marketers are hesitant to spend a significant sum of money behind mobile advertising. Based on consumer usage, mobile advertising should command ~12% of a marketer's media budget, but in reality mobile represents less than 2% of total ad spending. 



There are many reasons behind this mismatch between share of usage and share of ad spend, but I will share the big two. The first and most likely is simply the fact that no large company likes to be the first to move into uncharted, unproven, risky territory. And because large companies tend to control the vast majority of Ad spending, it is no surprise that the vast majority of spending is still very much locked in tried-and-true advertising mediums such as TV, Print, Radio (and increasingly Online--but even Online suffers from the mismatch between share of usage and share of ad spend). The second reason behind the mismatch is the (im)practicality of using traditional advertising tactics--i.e. display ads/homepage takeovers/etc. on a mobile device. The prospect of having an intrusive oversized banner ad cover up a good portion of an already limited viewing screen, is likely to result in upset consumers and is likely not what marketers want.

Until marketers begin to see documented case studies of wins made by mobile marketing, and until mobile marketing methods begin to tailor themselves to the realities of a mobile device (and not just take a bite out of traditional advertising playbooks), we will continue to see this great discrepancy between time spent by consumers and dollars spent by marketers.

Nielsen Launches Online Campaign Ratings in the UK

source: http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/news/nielsen-introduces-most-accurate-online-analytics-tool/4004299.article

If you or someone you know works in CPG (consumer packaged goods), you probably know or at least have heard of the power and ubiquity of Nielsen as THE syndicated data provider of in-market sales, shopper behavior, and media viewership data in the CPG industry. 

On the Media viewership front, Nielsen has expanded its footprint from Traditional Television Ratings to the Online Space, previously in the United States but now for the first time in the UK. Unilever (makers of Dove) and Reckitt Benckiser (maker of Lysol) are among the first European companies to try Nielsen's Online Advertising Measurement System, which Nielsen claims will give advertisers a "never-seen-before degree of accuracy" in judging the effectiveness of online campaigns to reach consumers.

As someone who has worked in Marketing Analytics in the CPG space for several years now, I have a problem with blanket statements like the above, which promise far too much with far too little substance behind the actual claim. Nielsen states that "advertisers will be able to use the system to either save an average 11% of their marketing budget or improve campaign efficiency by an average of 14%, following a study of 30 campaigns using the format." 

If you have taken statistics (and I assume most if not all of us have taken stats and paid at least a wink of attention), a sample size of 30 does not hold up to any measure of significance in an industry where hundreds of thousands if not millions of Ad campaigns are constantly being run. 

Now, that is not to say that there isn't potential for Nielsen's new service to be successful. In fact, as a CPG Marketing Professional, I hope Nielsen's new Online Campaign Ratings (OCR) actually do prove to be accurate and useful, so that the CPG industry can finally fill the huge void that has existed in the Digital Measurement space, for the better part of the last decade.

YouTube adds Time Watched to Ranking Factor

source: http://searchengineland.com/youtube-search-adds-time-watched-as-ranking-factor-136412

YouTube has adjusted their ranking algorithm to include the actual amount of time consumers spend watching a video. Google's YouTube is stating that it is more important how much of a video was actually consumed vs the number of times people have clicked on a video. Simply put, quality trumps quantity.

I wonder if & how this algorithmic change would actually impact the YouTube clips that have gone viral over the past few years? Certainly, people have a tendency to click on videos that are shared by their friends/family, but only those who are truly interested in the video would then watch the video in its entirety and then decide to re-share the video with his or her friends/family (and the same would go for a re-share recipient's decision to watch/re-share, etc). 

To me, it appears that there already is a self-policing quality control in place by the sheer nature of how virality works (as just described). If you look at the example in the source article, it obviously looks like a way for Google to promote itself over Apple. I wonder to what extent this algorithmic change could then simply be a way to for Google to get itself to pop to the top on YouTube search results (i.e. a self-serving marketing strategy), more than anything else? 

Could the "Next Big Thing" have been EVEN BIGGER?

Can a company spend or manage its way to virality? And can a competing firm spend or manage against that virality? That question came to my mind when I found myself watching the galaxy vs iPhone ad that has gone viral rather quickly over the past week.

Samsung launched a competitive ad to thwart the recent launch of the iPhone5. The ad, which touts galaxy's features over the much anticipated iPhone5 (amongst apple loyalists anyway), was posted to YouTube on September 19th and quickly climbed to 14 million+ views. The ad ran across multiple media channels from traditional TV, to Out of Home Posters/Billboards, to YouTube and also Hulu and other streaming mechanisms. If you haven't seen the ad, check it out here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nf5-Prx19ZM

In the ad, the Galaxy takes a blatant knock on the iPhone, which theoretically could have organically sparked the virality behind the YouTube video--after all, a flurry of die hard iPhone and Droid users would have been keen on providing a point of view on the ad either out of sheer joy or extreme anger. 

While I don't doubt that organic virality occurred, having taken a few classes on Digital Marketing, it has become obvious that even companies with limited resources can take steps to increase the likelihood of having an ad 'go viral'. I know it all starts with great content and no doubt Samsung managed to deliver on content with this ad. But let's dissect the other pieces that likely came together to cause virality and see if there was potentially any opportunity for improvement.

Samsung launched the ad over multiple media channels, giving consumers multiple opportunities to see the ad and make an in-your-face comparison of the Galaxy and the iPhone. This more than likely led to instant consumer buzz (both real world and social/digital) around the Ad, but also importantly led to coverage by PR firms, major news sources, and blogs (exhibit A), which linked directly back to the ad or embedded the youtube video within the site. 

Despite the organic growth, Samsung seems to have managed SEO rather poorly (or maybe Apple managed SEO extremely well?), given that most google searches related to 'Samsung', 'Apple', 'iPhone', 'Galaxy' or even 'Samsung vs Apple', did not take you to the YouTube video in question. In fact, the only search term that I could manage to find which took me to the ad was to literally type 'Galaxy vs iPhone youtube', which was probably a much lower searched term given the relatively low awareness behind Galaxy in the United States. 

My take, for what its worth, is that the competitive Ad could possibly have gone even MORE viral had Samsung spent and managed SEO more effectively.