| The Hauser/Burns Report As the world of advertising changes, questions existing organizational frameworks and embraces Web 2.0, we are moving toward strategies based on meaningful and relevant brand experiences designed to viscerally connect with customers. Erik has coined the phrase "Acquisition Through Experience". Designing a holistic, experiential purchasing influencer is key to marketing success in the current climate. Neal, on the other hand (being wiser and yes, a bit older) continues to believe in the importance of brand, telling stories and utilizing the interactive character of Web 2.0. The Hauser/Burns Report addresses all forms of advertising, marketing, selling - experiential in particular, and dissects issues currently facing those of us who are passionate about the field. We are keeping our eyes and thoughts firmly focused on the future so we can help anticipate the winds of change and bring them to your attention for discussion. We encourage your comments and look forward to hearing from you often! Don¹t make us ask twice. Erik Hauser and Neal Burns
|
|
Thursday, 03 May 2007 |
Aspirational This and Inspirational That
A quick funny thought before I head to bed……….
I was kicking around the office today with Neal and Aaron. We began to discuss various things about branding – shop talk. We touched on the various types of brands and the positions that brands take. The conversation quickly drifted to aspirational brands – my favorite! They are the ones that make you work harder.:)
According to the collective community that we all know as WIkipedia, an aspirational brand is defined as the following:
In consumer marketing, an aspirational brand (or product) is one that a large segment of its exposure audience wishes to own, but for economical reasons cannot. An aspirational product implies certain positive characteristics to the user, but the supply appears limited due to limited production quantities.
Then, we had some visitors in from Japan and drank some tea - refreshing.
When they left we quickly picked up where we had left off. However, this time we started discussing inspirational brands. In a moment that can only be defined as hilarious I did a quick search and found this from the Hampstead Villager:
“Alec Baldwin Endorses Liv’n Out Loud! Clothing
An Inspirational Brand of Sun-Washed “Comfort-Stuffs”
Doesn’t really make a strong case for wanting to be an inspirational brand.
Do a quick search on Alec Baldwin if you need to clarify:)
Neal, having worked years on building the Harley Davidson business with CL said, “ It’s really not an inspirational brand until someone wants to tattoo it on their body”. I can’t really disagree with that.
Score: Neal 1 Erik 0
I ask one simple question. How many brands have created such a unique experience, such a cult following that people want to tattoo it on their body?
I have to know…………..
|
|
|
Wednesday, 02 May 2007 |
There will be a lot of folks checking out the forum today since we "officially" released the CPT survey data. I thought it would be a fantastic time to revisit a piece from October. It was well into the time frame when exploring brand managers started jumping into second life for their "ultimate" experiential campaigns. Experiential? I wish I had a chance to speak to the brand managers at Nissan, Pontiac, Toyota or any of the other forward-thinking strategists that jumped into the new world because there are so many questions to ask before making the choice to do so.
- Do you understand that setting up a corporate presence in second life is very different than buying outdoor in Los Angeles?
- How many people inside of second life want you there?
- Did you take any time to understand that Second Life is essentially a real world with real people that might really wish that you'd simply disappear?
- Do you know that running a marketing campaign in Second Life is like trying to run a field marketing campaign in Iraq?
- That the odds that you'll get "virtually nuked" are about 50/50?
- If your campaign is meant to connect me with your vehicle in a meaningful and relevant way - to compel purchase - then why does it take 8 seconds for the car to take a left hand turn when I've been pounding my mouse forever?
Those questions are all in good fun, but very real questions that I have been dying to ask. The real deal is that we are months away from web 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0...not to mention TV 2.0, 3.0 etc..etc... When Linden Labs opens up the source code it will be the web equivalent of girls gone wild. The 2-D web will shift to 3-D, and virtual travel agencies will thrive!
Moving right along with my typical A.D.D flow……..
As expected the social networking and virtual world craze has led everybody to go "all in". What's next? Companies that were there first will be bought for silly amounts of money, and then the buyers will realize that the got screwed. Screwed you say? Yes. Mark Cuban style. There is a reason why people bail when they do - It's called the smart money.
Hyper-saturation is here only to be followed by hyper-fragmentation. AHHHHHHHHHHH.. The paradox of choice. Soulless properties like MySpace that have been homogenized down to the lowest common denominator will realize that they can’t be everything to everyone like they thought they could be. New sites will fold.
The media will declare the death of Web 2.0, and then the smart and innovative people will emerge with the right formula. The perfect corner coffee shop formula. Give them what they want.;) They'll select an audience that they want to cater to, and they’ll empower that audience by providing them tools to pursue their passions. Sure, people will maintain their MySpace accounts. But.......let's be real. It's now FOX’sSpace, and the folks that made it what it was have drifted to these smaller passionate communities. It's the difference between Del Taco and the taqueria with your favorite salsa - where ya' gonna go?
And now to our regularly scheduled programming........................
|
|
|
Saturday, 14 April 2007 |
As Erik and I wonder what we can bring to your attention that is worthy and perhaps a bit different from the blog-fare that’s so readily available, the issue of the recent re-do of the famous Apple “1984” commercial was again discussed and its recent pirated adaptation that overlays Senator Hillary Clinton in the big screen. A brief re-visit seems to be in order. If it’s been a while since you’ve seen the spot check out this url: (http://www.uiowa.edu/~commstud/adclass/1984_mac_ad.html ) and its recent pirated adaptation that overlays Senator Hillary Clinton in the big screen. During the process of re-examination I was reminded of the original philosophy – the position really – that Apple adopted. While the rallying cry for the Apple brand in the market place was “Be Different”, one can look at it as a political statement even then. It was a creative metaphor encouraging the marketplace to bravely fight the totalitarian excess of the major computer giant of that era [“No One Ever Got Fired For Buying IBM”]. And so before blogs and message boards there was an invitation to be inventive and expressive in your own idiosyncratic fashion – as a consumer! Hooray.
But whoops. Implicit in that message was also an encouragement to be the same – find an option that others like you are adopting. The Macintosh commercial used as its platform the big brother representation of the Orwellian state – and invoked images of every dictatorship or mass following. And, if we were to do a full content analysis consideration must be given to the portrayal of the woman as heroine -- representing empowerment and liberation. At that time when many were still to purchase their first computer the woman was perhaps selected as being more approachable. Think new voters – and the need for a non-IBM candidate – one that could bring a brand equity of difference that surpasses the female candidacy and suggests empowerment and joining a new community. Hmmmm ?
"Think different!" as a slogan for both democratically disposed voters and computer shoppers suggests that a “non traditional” choice is a way to achieve individuality, rationality, liberty, and empowerment. This is of extreme importance because in 1984 – as we all understand now - advertising was not anymore about the product, but about how consumption and possession defines us as individuals. The candidate of choice – for each of us – represents a distinguishing “club” and we articulate both our difference from ‘them’ and our similarity to ‘us’ in the choice we declare. And, the development of experiential advertising and its intersection with the idea of brand makes this distinction of community and belonging clear and – more importantly – something we can work with, develop tactical executions for and attract adherents, believers – in short – a bigger share. At the end of the day, your client has to like that.
(Burns wishes to acknowledge his colleague Dr. Vanessa Vonseca for introducing him to this line of thought – how prescient our ideas were then.)
|
|
|
Saturday, 14 April 2007 |
As if the marketing landscape wasn’t changing quickly enough we’ve now added endless miles of virtual terrain with which we have to be familiar if we want to be where our customers are congregating. However, on the upside,it gives us new canvases on which to create brand interactions that engage audiences through meaningful, relevant and positive experiences. Today’s youth have grown up with new technologies at every turn, and they are the ones that are early adopters and the first to embrace new mediums.
The challenge is how do you create experiential campaigns with these technologies that don’t just entertain, but connect with your young customers and drive purchase? Many brands are jumping head first into virtual worlds without investing the time to see if it even makes sense for them. They’re operating with the mentality that if others are doing it then we all have to be there. The result is empty pockets and the question: where did all of our money go?
The proliferation of emerging media and media platforms has caused a hyper-fragmentation that requires brands to be smarter and work harder to make sure they are creating experiences in the right places. I’ve always had a saying – it’s pretty simple. Deliver the right message, to the right audience via the right medium at the right time. What I am essentially saying is that, as a marketer, I have to put my head into the intended audience’s head to figure out when they will be most receptive to the experience that I am providing. It is tougher to do, but the rewards are ten fold.
|
|
|
Wednesday, 28 March 2007 |
A short ramble from the good doctor.
In an advertising agency there has been, in a sense, the celebrated focus – and the real power. The openly celebrated are the creatives – the copywriters, art directors, producers – taking the bows and bringing home the metal and glass memorabilia that fills the shelves in the agency hallway entrances. And then, without a smirk or a nod, there is the quiet secret – where the real money is spent and where the agency’s longevity with their clients is often determined. Media. And measurement. Did they watch – how many? Did they remember – can you convince me that they got it? Is it better than the last campaign? Better than last year? Let’s use Arbitron, Nielsen . . . OK, Starch -- and show that the metrics have had a positive effect on sales. “Look . . . we sold the advertising campaign as an investment – not an expense – now we gotta show the bean counters the RETURN. Right? Right!”
Well, perhaps that’s not a perfect description of the importance of media measurement but it is painfully close. The metrics of media have become well defined and established over the past forty years and helped satisfy a need for answering the famous John Wannamaker concern about which half of his store’s advertising was, in fact, effective. CPM has ruled – and in most circumstances still does. So, how does one answer questions about measuring the effectiveness of experiential advertising and promotion campaigns – and do so in a manner the client will accept and that reflects an understanding of research practices and what it is that advertising can really do? The issue is the stuff perhaps of its own blog – but starting a discourse about it here may be a good thing.
I think that the questions of measuring interactive efforts, mall interactions with consumers, guerilla campaigns and the rest and providing some answer that encompasses anticipated or realized return on investment is now – or will soon be de rigeur. The best answer will be a three-part approach. The three areas are briefly described below and with some additional work quantifying each class of measurement for communication and comparative purposes is very doable.
First, we can measure baseline brand position or likeability within the competitive set; doing so before and after the exposure to the event or process has occurred and looking for shifts in that ranking -- or perhaps even seeing the brand now a member of the competitive set whereas before hand the brand was excluded. Another expression of that condition can be derived from examining well-designed likelihood of purchase. Secondly, a series of measurements on a convenience sample drawn from those exposed to the event or process can deal with brand message comprehension, i.e., did those exposed draw from the experience those brand attributes that the work desired to introduce or enhance. Third, web-based metrics can be designed that track traffic to the site as a consequence of exposure to the experiential campaign and the viral spread can also be well estimated. Equally important is the dwell time, interaction and information exchange that takes place and quantifying that activity with comparison to web behavior observed with previous or conventional media approaches.
In short, a dynamic and meaningful metric set and terminology – one that goes beyond CPM of impressions is needed and attainable – for so-called alternative or experiential advertising techniques. Let’s go do it.
|
|
|
Monday, 26 March 2007 |
Dear EMFers,
I pose one simple question that I would love to get your feedback on.
If you don't think that the proliferation of technology has flipped things upside down - chew on this.
Remember the phrase that your parents drilled into your head when you were a kid?
Don't talk to strangers.
What should parents be saying to their kids these days? Most relationships are formed on-line with total strangers? Can't wait to hear your answers.
Erik Hauser
|
|
|
Wednesday, 21 March 2007 |
Lets begin with this from Neal.....................
Like others I was briefly amused and then annoyed at the Barack Obama/Hillary/Mac 1984 revisited YouTube spot. In the world of Blogdom it calls for a comment and I know others have already vented. First, from a creative point of view I found the idea derivative (Duh!). Why not have Hillary the wild beast chased by the Mountain Dew gang and pull the can out of her mouth? Or, show her dancing with I-pod wires dangling a tripping. In my book those are weak and hardly worth a viral play. Politically I think those approaches do little to help or harm either candidate. Culture jammers have been studied and their effect on a brand is essentially modest -- those unaffiliated stay that way and those who are positively disposed to the brand remain so disposed.
Politically, I am so uninformed about the political issues facing the country I could never comment on the adequacy of either candidate - should they in fact become viable candidates. Yet, the spot does not make me any smarter about the stuff that needs to be addressed and solved so that we may live and work in relative peace and prosperity. But, I laughed when I saw Charlie Chaplin slip on a banana peel -- and I may have smiled at this bit as well.
Secondly, this is the dark side of consumer generated content - it can harm what's good and puts nothing of value in its place. Any of us, armed with a computer, or cell phone can suddenly become a commentator, photographer, correspondent - or TV commercial editor. And, with the Hillary Mac piece getting more than a quarter of a million visits since being posted perhaps Barack's campaign can use Obama as the kid in the tunnel giving Mean Joe Green a drink of Kool Aid just to show he's black enough -- or Hillary supporters bounce back and make Mean Joe into Obama and have him whack the kid and walk away muttering.
The compromise of the potential of television as a worthwhile investment medium for advertisers as well as being worth the time of an audience where politics is concerned is clearly up for grabs. As is the value of consumer generated content.
|
|
|
Tuesday, 13 March 2007 |
Hi :) … and welcome to the inaugural posting of The Burns/Hauser Report, a blog about every aspect of marketing we can think of, and some we have not even imagined as yet, hosted by The Experiential Marketing Forum.
In conjunction with the information and threads in the forum, we hope The Burns/Hauser Report will help address and dissect issues currently facing those of us who are passionate about the field of Advertising, and to firmly keep our eyes on the future so we can anticipate the winds of change. We hope you'll add us to your RSS feeds and Favorite Places, and let others know where to find us. Your comments are enthusiastically encouraged and we look forward to hearing what you have to say about the thoughts expressed here.
You already know me - your humble founder/moderator, Erik Hauser - and it gives me great pleasure to introduce you to an amazing colleague, Professor Neal M. Burns, the Director for the Center For Brand Research at The University of Texas in Austin. Neal's background as a successful advertising professional and educator makes him uniquely suited to be blogging about our industry. He and I will be collaborating on The Burns/Hauser Report, and you can find his bio on the EMF site under Advisory Bd. Members if you'd like to know more about him. I am truly psyched to have him on board!
Neal and I come at things from very different levels of experience and background, and our opinionated discussions are intense and sometimes incendiary - but the mix of traditional and non-traditional thought promises to offer great opportunity to anyone interested in marketing in general, and experiential marketing in particular.
We're on our way - and we hope you join the journey. Fasten your seat belts, at times it may be a bumpy ride!
Erik Hauser, moderator
"The issues facing those of us who are passionate" . . . [can you tell that Erik really is a wannabe copywriter]. The issues those of us in advertising must deal with today are the story, representing our clients to their current users and those ready for trial in ways they see as relevant and meaningful and getting paid appropriately for our services. Nothing really new in those issues.
So, what are we doing - I mean really. Why does advertising seem to be so fractured with contentious advocates essentially trumpeting "The King is dead . . . long live the King." Personally, I feel a sense of loss when I think about the claims that great print is no longer going to have impact - does it really have to be on a mobile 2 inch screen for anyone to do it - let alone buy it. Hell, I guess those Absolute ads really were trivial and did nothing to create the brand. And clearly, thirty second spots are dead and You Tube rocks - so much better than the stuff you might see on network TV. Does anyone reading this - including you, Erik my friend, really believe this rant of the sky is falling down?
Neal "Awaiting Erik's Response" Burns
|
|
|
