In the ever-evolving world of search engine marketing, organic search still prevails as the great equalizer.  With thoughtful keyword management, search-centric content creation and tagging; a search friendly infrastructure and an ongoing strategy to adapt and evolve to manage rankings, David can seem like Goliath in the page rankings.  Knowing that the majority of click-throughs and conversions come from organic search listings versus paid truly enable you to outsmart instead of outspend the competition.  A gap does currently exist, however, during the time it takes for search engine crawlers to discover something new that you’ve posted and optimized.  Sometimes it’s not a big deal.  In the case of a major event such as a product launch, it’s a very big deal.  If the product launch isn’t accompanied by a major promotional investment, it can be a very, very big deal.  A strategic investment in paid search can be a great bridge to accompany a product launch to establish online presence and credibility until the algorithms of the search engines take over.  And, the keywords associated with a new product can sometimes be exceptionally affordable.  So, build that bridge.   

Very challenging economic times have resulted in an interesting bifurcation of marketing strategies.  As to be expected, many companies have looked to the bottom-line, reducing marketing spend to help manage near-term profitability as an alternative to head-count or R&D reductions.  Reductions in marketing spend and headcount leads to re-organization and oftentimes chaos that can easily translate into a defensive marketing stance; a reactionary approach dictated by market forces.  Some companies have taken a seemingly contrarian view, not necessarily investing in additional marketing spend, but taking an opportunity to “sharpen the saw” so that when the economic conditions improve, they will be the firms best suited to take advantage of the inevitable upturn.  One major opportunity is a transformation of talent.  Whereas many marketers will stay put in time of downturn until security is assured, these are not necessarily the marketers needed to drive transformation.  Those that can embrace risk and bring optimism and enthusiasm in this market environment can be a tonic to an organization on the verge of greatness.  Another major opportunity is a fine-tuning of marketing strategy, which can pay rich dividends as customer, and prospects, begin to plan their way into growth cycles.  As competition waits to react and economic pressures redefine markets, a reassessment of the unique value a company can deliver articulated through a uniquely relevant and credible brand strategy can be of significant advantage. And can represent significant share gain or new market growth opportunities.  George Bailey (a great fictional niche marketer with the Bailey Building and Loan in the classic “It’s a Wonderful Life”) recognized the savvy of his nemesis old man Potter when he observed during a financial panic, “Everyone-else is selling, but Potter’s buying!”  Leave the malicious intent of Potter aside, but as marketers, now is the “time to buy” or your market just might become Potterville!

In B2B communication, Power Point has become synonymous with high-touch customer engagement.  But, has the servant become the master?  Power Point is the internal corporate currency.  The opportunities to easily churn out rich media presentations is evident; entire off-shore agencies have emerged to quickly and cost-efficiently produce power point.  And, Power Point has become the presentation vehicle of choice in academia.  Not just university, but primary and secondary schools in the U.S. now include power point as part of the curriculum.  Power Point is indeed a high-impact presentation tool with increasing capability to use rich multimedia assets in storytelling.  A picture is truly worth a thousand words in a B2B high-touch engagement and showing solutions at work, showing a rich 3D rendering of a product still on the drawing board, or showing a customer reference singing your praises is certainly effective.  I do see a couple of risks.  One is the vehicle becomes too much of a crutch for the content and the delivery.  If the prospect is staring at imagery flying around a screen, she may not be paying attention to the root message specific to her situation which is the core objective of the engagement.  Will the presenter become lazy knowing that the story will tell itself?  I recently had a hardware malfunction and had to present an hour strategy session on a white board from memory.  It turned out to be pretty invigorating and raised my level of engagement significantly.  Some of the best sales presentations I have seen have been forty minute conversations based on 1 or 2 key ideas (albeit reinforced on 1 power point slide on a screen in the background).  I’ve also detected a subtle shift in the high-touch environments where basic Power Point is perceived as indistinguishable from the competition.  One observed answer to this dilemma, flashier and fancier power point with embedded video, thunderous sounds and high-flying animation.  An unfortunate side-effect is computer crashing file sizes and the potential need to cart around external speakers and other paraphernalia.  Another observed approach,  a retro movement towards customer-tailored physical boards just like the ad agencies use on t.v.  High-touch engagement across the sphere of decision-making and influence is exceptionally important in the later stages of the B2B sales cycle.  But,  vigilance is required to ensure the differentiated “what” that needs to be communicated doesn't’t get lost in a rich media clutter of “how” it’s presented.  And, sometimes the competition can be outflanked by redefining the media supporting the message instead of seeking to win the power point arms race.   

Or, just a very clever viral marketing gimmick?  Skittles (www.skittles.com) has launched a new website that may be a harbinger of things to come as the web evolves from destination to distribution.  The Skittles brand is now represented in the digital world by an amalgamation of all things social networked and crowd sourced.  The home page itself is the Wikipedia listing for Skittles.  A chatter tab takes you to the twitter page for Skittles. Another tab takes you to the Skittle Facebook page.  Even video is supported off-page via a You Tube channel.  And pictures?  Flickr, of course.  (Interestingly enough, there seem to be quite a few people who name their pets Skittles.)  All of these off-page resources are managed fairly cleverly by a branded navigation bar to keep a visitor grounded.  What’s a marketer to make of this integration of relevant and credible content sources that are shaping the Skittles brand through grass-roots discussion, debate and consensus?  More importantly, what’s a consumer to think?  Is it credible, or are we going to find out later all the passionate posters of Skittles pictures on flickr are actually employees of a PR firm working incognito a la Lonely Girl?  The Wikipedia entries seem to be coming from trusted sources exclusively within the Skittles organization and its digital marketing firm.  Plus, the opt-in content disclaimer up front is a little creepy for a candy brand. Regardless, it’s a shot across the bow on how marketers think about the interaction of customers and brands in the digital space.  Most marketers have already been thinking about how best to leverage the power of viral content and crowd sourcing to improve customer engagement and keep brands timely and credible.  Skittles has launched an aggressive approach, which has basically handed the brand over.  It may be a well-executed gimmick, but a thought provoking one in the integrated marketing space. (Photo credit: PiccoloNamek)

There’s a very poignant story circulating right now, “The Last Lecture” by Randy Pausch.  The video of the lecture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji5_MqicxSo is inspiring and I also recommend the book which has some additional material and perspective.  If you’re not familiar, it’s literally the last lecture of a Carnegie Mellon professor afflicted with terminal cancer (who has since passed away) where he reflects back on lessons learned.  One particular anecdote I’ll paraphrase is his experiences with a youth football coach he describes as “old school”.  The first day of practice, the players quickly notice that the coach has arrived without any footballs.  When asked, the coach retorts, “How many players touch the football at any given time on the field?”  When someone answers “one”, the coach continues “We’re going to focus on what the other 21 players are doing…. the basics”.  As I continuously monitor topics related to integrated marketing through the digital toolkit, I am struck by the same lesson…focus on the basics.  There are a lot of new digital tactics emerging in both B2C and B2B some will win and proliferate others will fade, but it’s important not to lose focus on the basics.  For most marketers, their web site is the media channel garnering more customer interactions and engagement that any other media channel.  Ensuring the right information awaits the right person in the right place on a website is an exercise in content management which isn’t the hottest of topics, but critical to the credibility of a brand.  And, the movement of customers from one stage to the next in the purchase cycle is intrinsically tied to not only the right information, but also the basic taxonomy of the website and effective calls to action.  It’s an exercise in basics that takes internal fortitude and discipline.  Similarly, the most efficient means by which many companies can bring people to their interactive experiences, their most prolific media channel, is search engine optimization.  Again, an exercise in ongoing discipline and institutional focus as SEO is a journey not a destination.  The ongoing evaluation of keywords, copywriting, tagging, taxonomy, urls and other algorithm affecting variables is roll-up-your-sleeves, basic marketing.  Just as in sports, a strong foundation in the basics of digital marketing will make the rest of the mix more effective.

The emergence of computer generated imagery (CGI) as a viable production alternative for very flexible creative platforms has been proven to me as I’ve used it as an alternative for traditional photography in both on-line and off-line marketing components.  I know most photographers no longer use film as the flexibility and cost-effectiveness of digital photography have taken hold.  I wonder if someday the photo shoot will become obsolete and creative production will occur only on high-performance workstations.  After seeing this article   http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/retailing/article5404384.ece  another dimension emerges.  Will a computer generated shopping world be a viable alternative channel now that it’s moving from a gimmick in Second Life to a stand-alone replication of a world-class shopping different.  My retail marketing experience has taught me the importance of the “last 3 feet”, the moment of truth when final purchase decision re made.  The retail sales representative continues to have significant influence on this moment of truth.  I wonder if Artificial Intelligence-based sales avatars are in development to help close the sale in the virtual world?   

Having had the opportunity to market in both B2C and B2B (and B2B2C) environments, it’s been interesting to take a step back and evaluate the similarities and differences between the approaches necessary in both to achieve success.  At the core, both share certain basic similarities founded in classical marketing convention.  Customer-needs based brand positioning which is relevant and credible, and creates distance from the competition (through uniqueness within a category or creation of a new category) is the structure upon which I’ve been able to build successful marketing programs in both B2C and B2B environments.  From this commonality; however, diverge two very different marketing lifecycles.  B2C customers are typically much less brand loyal and often make buying decisions emotionally.  My B2C experience has substantiated that a consumer will quickly change brands should another meet a relevant need better with more credibility and differentiation.  My B2B marketing experiences have dealt with customers who consider brand quite important in the purchase cycle (“no one ever got fired for buying IBM”) and engage in a very rational purchase process.  The purchase process itself is exceptionally different.  Whereas B2C marketing can encourage the “impulse buy”, B2B is a much longer and complex sales cycle with typically a large sphere of influencers impacting the ultimate purchase decision.  This difference in purchase cycle leads to much different channel marketing strategies, with the complexity of B2B solutions often requiring multi-step distribution across a number of partners who bundle together a solution of parts for the ultimate end-customer.  These differences impact the integrated marketing approach as target audiences (buyers and influencers) respond to different marketing vehicles.  One thing I have noticed is a convergence of both B2C and B2B in the digital space, as digital marketing proves effective across the audiences to nurture a dialogue with the end-customer regardless of speed and complexity of the sales cycle.  Many of the digital tools once focused on the B2C space to help the consumer easily research a product and hopefully convert them are now being successfully utilized in the B2B space.  B2B customers now the ability to holistically research solutions (and marketers now have the ability to accelerate the sales cycle) through the digital toolkit.  Search any major B2B company on YouTube and it’s likely you will find a channel focused on the B2B customer.  This convergence in the digital space is turning what used to be two different types of marketing skill sets into different points along the same spectrum.

I am a passionate proponent and frequent champion of avoiding what in my view is a common marketing mishap, the "ready, fire aim" method of running with a marketing tactic prior to clearly understanding a couple of things:  the business objectives which drive the marketing objectives and corresponding integrated marketing mix, but also, and more important to the overall effectiveness of a marketing program, the unique positioning of a product or a brand as the genesis for all marketing.  I define "brand" as a promise to customers, employees, channel partners, employees and even competitors.  I define positioning as how a company (or a product as representative of a brand) uniquely delivers on that promise.  Typically, my most effective work developing positioning has been done through the lens of relevance, credibility and distance.  Relevance related to how the attribute of a brand are translated into the terms that are aligned with customers in a particular segment of the market.  How does a brand or a product deliver against their specific needs, help them achieve their goals and aspirations?  How can they relate to a brand in their own context, in their own language and vernacular?  Credibility builds upon that relevance to articulate the reasons to believe that a particular brand can deliver against those customer-specific aspirations and goals.  Why should anyone believe your promise?  Any brand has that information at the ready.  Some are challenged bringing that to the forefront.  It's often corporate nature to focus inside-out.  To want to talk about what makes your product cool, to focus on a technology instead of benefit, to list features etc. etc.  And conversely, against corporate nature to think about positioning, what makes you unique in a way which is relevant and credible to your customers?   Continued discipline is needed not only to establish this type of philosophy, but also adjust and evolve it as the market, customers and competitors, evolve.  The third element, distance, speaks to how different and differentiated you are from the competition.  How do you deliver your brand promise with relevance and credibility that's unique to other choices in your category?

With all that said, as I reflect upon this blog to-date, I've started with tactics loosely affiliated under the confederacy of the integrated marketing mix. In hindsight, this topic should have been the genesis of any integrated marketing discussion.

Visual clutter has unfortunately extended from the digital world into the physical resulting in an interesting evolution of out of home advertising space.  The leader with whom I’ve had good experience is JC Decaux (http://www.jcdecauxna.com/  )  an agency consistently pushing the envelope in the intersection of new technology and out of home advertising.  What used to be static is now dynamic as lighting and movement is integrated into what used to be static small form out of home such as bus shelter advertising.  JC has also put a green spin on out of home with advertising kiosks in Paris which catch and store rain water via roof basins that’s stored in the body of the kiosk and then used to clean and post material on the kiosks with out requiring a water tanker truck to drive around and service the kiosks.  Interactive store windows that sense and interact with the movements of passers-by are exceptionally engaging; check out the weird soundtrack for Diesel in Milan http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/diesel-interactive-store-window-sculpture .  I am intrigued by  the whispering window http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxd_CeQPAbY  and the potential it represents for personalized interaction when combined with other technologies, but a high cost may never move it out of a promotional state.  Bluetooth enabled out of home which passes content to passersby as seen at http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-9755102-1.html has the potential to target but also annoy.  Mini did interesting work with RFID enabled billboads that utilize RFID keyfobs and user contributed personalized messages to flash targeted messages as the MINI drives nearby http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/13/mini-usa-rolls-out-rfid-activated-billboards/ .  Really cool, but doesn’t change and gives rise to big brother conspiracy theories.