Her latest post provides a profound insight of what can happen when blogging and life collide and the perils of second guessing yourself–or in Charlene’s own words, “analysis paralysis”:

"I realized this past week that I’m suffering from analysis paralysis — I’ve been holding myself to a level of analysis and writing that is simply unreasonable given what I want this blog to be. My last substantial post was on the YouTube acquisition by Google, which was quite the event. But those kind of blog post opportunities come roughly about once a year, and for some reason, I’ve been trying to write similar posts for the past month with no success.

So I’ve vowed to follow Nike’s mantra and "just do it", or in this case, to "just blog it". Damn the idea of quality and depth of analysis — I’m better off getting something out there and getting your reactions to it. So here I am, writing a stream of consciousness and finding my voice again."

Charlene’s post provides a deep insight into the nature of social media (and maybe life).  It’s less about perfection and more about being an individual–strengths, flaws and all.  Charlene’s blog  provides an opportunity to understand how she sees things and expresses her opinions in voice that is uniquely hers.  She says it best:

"I’m often told by readers that my blog has an interesting voice which
always I find so curious — because it’s not something that I
consciously do"

So maybe that’s part of the appeal to personal publishing.  The opportunity to be personal.  Having access to someone’s  subconscious in addition to their conscious–and the freedom to be creative without being "perfect".  Go check out the rest of the post.  And welcome back Charlene.  Both to you, and your voice.

Photo originally featured on Waiting For Dorothy

The next time you work on a major marketing or interactive initiative–ask yourself this question: “Is what I’m doing hitting at least some of the consumer values on this list”?  The 12 Consumer Values to Drive Technology-related Product and Service Innovations was created by the Washington, DC-based research and consulting firm Social Technologies.  My rationale for putting this into wall-friendly visual is simple: I think agencies run the risk of infatuation with YouTube and the temptation to put all their eggs in one viral video basket.  And we have to be careful about not neglecting other areas of marketing innovation.

Take this recent story from AdAge:

“With not a penny of paid media and in less than a month, "Dove Evolution," a 75-second viral film created by Ogilvy & Mather, Toronto, for the Unilever brand has reaped more than 1.7 million views on YouTube and has gotten significant play on TV talk shows "Ellen" and "The View" as well as on "Entertainment Tonight." It’s also brought the biggest-ever traffic spike to CampaignForRealBeauty.com, three times more than Dove’s Super Bowl ad and resulting publicity last year, according to Alexa.com.”

Now in my opinion, that video was simply amazing.  A powerful, compelling story that draws you in and inspires you to share it with others.  But what about the experience it links you to?  Complete with E-cards and a message board, CampaignForRealBeauty.com is a respectable site–but could it be doing more when you apply the 12 values to it?

My point here is that the gi-normous success of YouTube may tempt the Ad industry to hyper-focus on viral videos as an inexpensive way to generate buzz (and ROI).  Nothing wrong with this at all–but we cannot forget that at the end of the day, a video is a passive experience.  It can make us laugh, cry and want to share it with others–we just can’t interact with or actively engage with a video.  In contrast, you CAN interact with YouTube itself.  Imagine if an agency had come up with that idea?

So on that note, here is the full list as conceived by Social Technologies.  It’s worth chewing on.

User creativity
Consumers increasingly want to create, augment, or influence design and
content, and share these creations with their peers. Supporting user
creativity will be increasingly important to consumer technology, and
will become more mainstream in coming decades.

Personalization
Consumers will increasingly look for products and services that align
with their specific personal needs and preferences–whether in the
aesthetics of a product or in its functional design. More goods will be
created to match individuals’ unique specifications.

Simplicity
Simplicity will have growing value for consumers confronted with
information overload, time stress, and technological complexity.
Simplicity’s influence is already evident in new, stripped-down devices
that offer just a few functions, as well as in minimalist interfaces
that conceal breathtaking complexity. The common denominator of all
these efforts is that they are human-centered–and thus easy to learn
and integrate into busy lives.

Assistance
As consumers are bombarded with more tasks, choices, and information,
and as demographic changes such as aging reshape consumer markets, they
are looking to assistive technologies for help. Consumers will seek to
bolster and extend their natural abilities–with technologies ranging
from pharmaceuticals that enhance mental performance to robot aides for
the elderly.

Appropriateness
Products and services will need to embrace the principle of
appropriateness to ensure that they are suitably designed for users
with varying physical needs, resources, cultural characteristics,
literacy levels, etc. Appropriateness will aid in the spread of
technology products and services to new markets and to diverse user
segments.

Convenience
Already well-established in mature markets, demand for convenience will
rise as a technology value for consumers all over the world. Consumers
will look for technological products and services that give them what
they want and need on demand and that reduce effort and relieve time
pressure.

Connectedness
Connectedness gives consumers what they want, when they want it, and
will grow exponentially with the expanding global information
infrastructure. Consumers will look for products and services that
seamlessly integrate with this global network.

Efficiency
Efficiency is the ratio of output to input–or, put simply, the ability
to do more with less. It will become more important to technology as
consumers search for products and services that let them manage
emerging resource uncertainties, rising costs, and other pressures.

Intelligence
Intelligence will be enabled by innovations that increasingly shift
information and decision-making burdens from the user to the device or
service. The demand for greater intelligence will come in response to
factors including complexity, aging, and the desire for personalized
experiences.

Protection
Protection will be sought by consumers in a world that feels
increasingly insecure. Consumers will look for technology-enabled
products and services that strengthen their sense of personal security
and protect their families, homes, wealth, and privacy.

Health
Consumers will look to technological products and services to maintain
and, increasingly, improve their health and wellness. The search for
health-enabling solutions will extend beyond traditional health and
medical products and services to include more of the things consumers
use in their everyday lives, whether at home, work, or play.

Sustainability
Consumers will increasingly look for products and services that embrace
sustainability–reducing the “human footprint” on the environment while
maintaining quality of life. A variety of technologies offer ways to
minimize resource use, waste, and pollution while improving human
welfare.

It was matching and coloring shapes.  Typical stuff, I thought as my five-year-old skipped away.  But I looked at the paper a little longer.  I couldn’t help but notice the teacher’s comment.

"Try staying in the lines."

Now, I understand that kids need to learn how to color in the lines.  It teaches them basic coordination and concentration.  But what does it teach them about themselves?  What does it teach them about skills that might serve them well one day in the real world?

Couldn’t there be an assignment in addition to coloring shapes that maybe included handing them blank sheets of paper and asking them to invent and name a shape that no one has ever heard of before?  Maybe some kid would come up with a Sqoval, or a Tri-square, or even an Octocircle.  Who knows?  The point is that we do need to be taught to do things like coloring shapes at a young age, but shouldn’t we also be taught how to invent, create and look at problems from a totally different perspective?

The Picasso Tree

One morning on my way to work, I hurried to my car while balancing the usual assortment of my laptop bag, coffee and a granola bar.  Just as I was about to pull out, I noticed the tree in our side yard.  Max and I had put one of these "tree faces" on it–a set of eyes, nose and mouth that makes your tree look like something out of Lord of the Rings.

But what caught my eye, was that all the features were mixed up.  The tree looked like Picasso had come by during the night and did some of his best work on it.  I knew immediately what had happened.  So I went back in to ask Max what the story was and he simply replied:

"It looks better that way".

And of course he was right.  It does look better this way.  So needless to say, we kept it as is and are the only house on the block to have a "Picasso Tree"–and an original one no less.  In fact, I think the company who makes these should consider marketing a special line like this.  You can "create your own Picasso Tree", with it’s own unique placement of facial features.  YOU can be the artist.

That’s what coloring outside the lines will do.  It can take a good idea, and build upon it.  Make into something better, unique, or as someone once said–a “purple cow”  .  Of course this is something that school can’t always teach us.  But look at the world around us.  What if someone told Steve Jobs to “stay in the lines”, or what if Thomas Edison never tried coloring outside of a line, just to see what would happen?  What about that person at Motorola who thought the world was ready for a unusually thin and stylish phone?  What if that individual just “stayed in the lines”?

Coloring outside of your own personal lines doesn’t mean taking a trip on the bohemian express–but it does mean looking at something differently.  I can imagine little Max taking a step back and looking at his creation.  Sure, the Tree face was cool before, in that Lord of the Rings kind of way.  But now, it’s both cool AND different.  And how many brands can say that about themselves?

…I recall the pleasant smile of our receptionist, Marti and her warm and genuine greeting as if she had extended it to me hundreds of times before.  I can remember how I looked at the lobby area differently as if I were inspecting the entryway of my new home.  I absorbed every detail of the design and each nuance that my senses could detect.  I took it all in, and of course this happened in micro seconds.

Nearly a year later and that initial impression is just as significant to me now as it was on my first day on the job.  How?  Consider this.  Every morning, I return to the office after a previous day’s work ready to begin the new work day.  I may have worked late into the evening the previous night, or not–but in either case, walking into the lobby and being greeted by the receptionist helps set the tone for the day.  And the design of the lobby makes a difference too.  Sometimes I find myself thinking “I’m really lucky to work in such a cool looking office (with great people)”.  I especially feel like this after traveling–and being exposed to a variety of other corporate environments.  These experiences are no longer first impressions. 

They are everyday impressions. 

And they matter.  Walking into a positive office environment offers me reassurance that I’ve made the right career choice.  Now, let’s bring this home.  What kinds of everyday impressions is your brand offering up your customers?  Think about the first time your customer interacted with the homepage of your site.  How did it greet them?  How did it welcome them?  How did it help orient them so that they could move on to the rest of your site with confidence?  Now fast-forward a year later.  Your customers have seen your homepage many times before.  It’s nothing new.  What are you doing to reassure them, that they have made the right choice to business with you?  Are you doing things that make them feel “lucky” to be in a relationship with you?  Do they feel appreciative of you–especially when they have had experiences with other brands?  Has their positive first impression evolved into an equally everyday impression?

T-Mobile does this for me.  A while back, I reviewed their homepage and discussed why I thought it was so successful–especially to the first time visitor.  But as a seven-year customer of T-Mobile, I still enjoy the everyday impression I have with this design.  There isn’t actually a lot for me to do on the homepage (except log-in), but for some reason I feel good about seeing starting here.  I like knowing about their latest phones and plans.  I just like that it’s “there”–even if I don’t use it.  For some reason, I find it reassuring that I’m giving my time and money to a brand that I feel good about.

Back to the lobby example.  When I was working during the the dot-com days, we traded in standard titles for namesakes such as “Director of First Impressions”.  Makes me wonder…  Is it really about being a “Director of Everyday Impressions”?

…I stopped for a minute, because the person looked really familiar.  After a few seconds it hit me as to who that person was (a copywriter I work with).  The whole thing was a nice little deviation from my morning routine.

The next day I strolled into the kitchen and there was another High School photo.  This was one from a prom no less.  Again I studied the picture as I knew it had to be someone in our office.  But I couldn’t figure out who.  Another co-worker came up to me and was like “what are you looking at?”.  When I said I was trying to figure out who the person in the photo was, they joined me.  Before I knew it we had three people studying the photo.  Eventually, one of my co-workers figured it out.

A week passes and now the wall is peppered with photos of people from childhood and high school (and pets too).  I get my morning coffee and if someone is there in the kitchen with me, chances are we start talking (and laughing about the photos).  There is a richness to the discussion–texture you could say.  We talk about the hairstyles.  The clothes.  It immediately bonds me with whomever I am conversing with at the moment.  I’ve actually found out more about the people I work with in these informal discussions then I do on a daily project basis.  And more importantly, we deviate from our routines and engage eachother as people.  Not co-workers. 

Several more weeks pass and the wall is full with personal photos.  And the informal conversations go on.  “Who’s that?” “Oh I know who that is!”, “Look at that tie”, “Oh, you look like a different person!”.  And I couldn’t help but notice that what’s going on in my office is what needs to be happening more in marketing.  People having genuine conversations and taking interest in each other.  In what we do.  In who we are and who we used to be (I participataed as well–can you find my photo?). 

A spontaneous action, being rewarded by participation.

An action that causes people to not only have conversations–but also take action themselves by tracking down their own photos and pinning them up on the wall.  One act sparked a contagious response from others who wanted to be more than mere spectators. They wanted to be a part of it.  They didn’t want to be left out of all the fun. Each contribution sparked more contributions and so on. 

I track down my co-worker who pinned up that first photo.  “What made you do that?” I asked.  She replies, “I was curious to see what would happen”.

…A Navigator. An Explorer. And an Engaged Participant. Before I get into how I define these along with examples, allow me to make a few analogies:

Getting to the destination: Have you ever hopped in your car for your weekend getaway and all you cared about was getting there? You couldn’t care less about the scenery you passed on the way to the destination. All you want to do is get to that beach house, cabin, or whatever so your weekend can begin. Once you get behind the wheel–it’s all about navigating the path of least resistance.

Taking in the journey: Now suppose that you are on a different kind of trip where you’ve decided to take the side roads and make a few stops along the way. You’re curious about the area you are traveling in and want to explore what it has to offer. You still want to get to your destination, but the direct path doesn’t appeal to you as much as the more interesting nooks and crannies that you take in on the “scenic route.”

Stopping by for a spell: So let’s say that time isn’t an issue at all, and you really don’t have a pre-determined destination. Let’s say you buy a train ticket to a location you’ve never visited and you spend the day there, You visit with the local people, get to know a few of them by the end of the day, and even take some pictures back with you to share with a few friends.

So back to my three distinct interactive experiences that I had over the weekend. While doing my online banking, I realized I was being a Navigator. I knew exactly where I wanted to go and what I wanted to do and I quickly plotted my course to arrive at my destination (getting my bills paid).

But then, I turned into an Explorer while going through the RPA site. The site has this really interesting way of “navigating” through it that allows you to move through 3 dimensional space. There was also a more straight forward navigation bar at the top–but I choose to use my arrow keys to explore the space. I didn’t care as much about getting to point B as much as I did they way I got there.

And lastly, I acted like an Engaged Participant while playing Verizon’s Beatbox Mixer which I came across on 3 Minds. Since it was Saturday night and I had all the free time in the world–I killed some of that time by playing with the very cool mixer. I was delighted by the sounds and how I could manipulate and mix the vocals from each artist. And when I was done, I shared what I had done with some people that I knew would appreciate it.

So that’s my story. Sometimes we are Navigators. Sometimes we are Explorers. And other times, Engaged Participants. And sometimes we’re all three of these and more. Food for thought as we think about how we incorporate digital and non-digital experiences in our everyday lives.

Technorati tags: online banking 3 Minds interactive

Well, it had to happen sometime. Typepad has left me stranded. It’s only day one but it feels like weeks. I don’t know who’s coming to my blog. I can’t see what referrals I’m getting, I can’t approve track backs. Life simply isn’t worth living!
Or maybe I just need to live it a little differently? I know, maybe it’s time for a new Top 10 list!
Top 10 Things You Can Do During A “Blogout”
10. Catch up on e-mail–it’s the next best thing to getting that “blog fix.”
9. Visit some news sites. Oh my gosh, there are current events that don’t involve Scoble, Amanda, and Rubel?? Who knew?
8. Read a book, magazine, or something else that won’t give you an error message, stop working and leave you to face your addiction alone.
7. Go home early–what’s the point of being in the office?
6. Actually leave your desk and talk to people–they’ll think you really want to talk to them but won’t realize it’s only because you can’t blog.
5. Take your kid to a movie, but forget about blogging about it afterward because you can’t.
4. Draft future posts about how you spent your “downtime.” (Top 10 lists are usually popular.)
3. Use the experience to quit “stat checking” cold turkey. Who am I kidding?? I’ll start the minute it’s up again.
2. Think about what you’re going to write in your complaint note to your bloggy service provider “Dear Typepad–I hate you. But I love you. I’m so confused…please come back.”
1. Actually get work done. Scratch that. Find a blog platform that’s working (like this one) and blog about the whole crummy experience.
I feel so much better. So how about you? What do you do to survive a “blog outage”?

…Retaining your talent.

Jason Calacanis serves up some compelling food for thought here:

“Amanda has printed her back and forth with her former partner Andrew Baron–it’s really sad. This is a text-book example of how not to treat your talent (and frankly, how not to respond when you’re treated bad). The whole thing is a mess and everyone winds up losing.

Regardless, there are some great lessons here for business folks. When you’re on the business side your job is to:

   1. Keep talented folks focused on making great product.
   2. Get talented people paid (so they can focus on making great product)
   3. Let talented people grow and support the hell out of them (so they can focus on making great product)
   4. Make talented people feel comfortable that they are not going to get screwed (so they can focus on making great product)
   5. Make a bunch of money (so talented folks can get more money and get more focused on making great product)” 

As Jason eludes, I think this development goes beyond the blogoshphere to a basic truth that we see in a competitive marketplace.  Finding talent is tough.  Keeping it can be even  tougher.  Is it any surprise that Amanda is moving her career forward despite that she’s been “fired”?  A co-worker and I were chatting about this scenario last week before it even happened.  We mused about how long it would take for Amanda to go primetime–I mentioned how I could easily envision her hosting something like a Daily Show.  Amanda just has “it”.  It is that thing–that separates her from everyone else.  The talent which is hard to describe, but you know it when you see it.  It was difficult not to want to watch Amanda–she has that kind of screen presence.

But it’s not all about the glamour here–and I’m not talking about prima donnas.  Think about the teams that you manage who create, write, develop and build engaging interactive experiences.  Think about skills like the ability to tell engaging stories.  A talent for finding out what really motivates customers.  A sheer gift for visual or multimedia design.  Maybe even an instinct for fresh ideas and thinking.  Think about the talent that surrounds you on a daily basis–and what motivates these kinds of individuals.  Think about the challenges they crave and the rewards they seek.  Think about how good (or maybe not so good) you have it with a talented team at your disposal. 

Think about how you can serve your team.

If you are surrounded by talent, you are in a rare position you should value–if not cherish.  If you manage talent, it’s your responsibility to nourish that talent on a daily basis.  There was one portion on Amanda’s blog that really stood out for me:

“In fact, it saddens me that you have not had the time and/or willingness to significantly participate creatively in Rocketboom for some months now. We’ve sent you things during the production process, and what we’ve received back is criticism after the show has already been produced or after it is too late to make changes. Statements like "I’ll continue to check my blackberry but please don’t wait on me if it starts to slow you down" and "I will have my phone so I can still chime in but don’t feel ever wait on me for any answers if I cant respond in time" really don’t cut it.”

Read between the lines.  What Amanda wanted was acknowledgement of her creativity.  Her performance.  Maybe even some suggestions to make her "product" better while was being produced.  What she got instead was acute aloofness and an “I’m too busy for this” attitude.  Also–it sounds like she got “unconstructive criticism” too late in the game.  Nothing kills the creative spirit faster than this combination.

So, here’s what you need to know.  It’s a flat world.  If you have talent in your organization–it’s not difficult for others to see their talent in today’s uber-connected landscape.  And whether you fire your talent–or they leave you on their own, truly talented individuals have a way of rising to the top.

Tip of the hat to Jaffe for the Calcanis link and "Rocketbust" reference.

…here’s a little experiment. Search for the word “Innovation” on BusinessWeek. You’ll get 4,708 results. Now Search for the word “Creativity.” You’ll get back 1,173 results. Innovation has had a good run in the past few years. But it’s looking like creativity is becoming a hot topic in both creative and non-creative forums.
If you have 20 minutes to spare, I highly recommend watching this video of Sir Ken Robinson:

“Sir Ken Robinson is senior advisor to the J. Paul Getty Trust in Los Angeles, and an influential advocate for the importance of creativity in education. He makes an entertaining (and profoundly moving) case for overhauling our education system. (Recorded February, 2006 in Monterey, CA.)”
What I find most compelling about this little gem is how halfway into his monologue, he taps into some extremely profound thoughts that all of us can relate to–not just us creative types.
He describes us when we were children. Our vivid imaginations and curiosity. Our inclination to take risk and not fear mistakes. Then he makes the case for how education has the tendency to domesticate our creative urges (my interpretation here). He uses the example of the individual with “ADD” who can’t sit still. Maybe that person was designed to be a dancer? He makes some very colorful jokes about academics “living in their heads” while seeing their bodies as merely vehicles to “transport their heads”.
It’s a really interesting and thought-provoking talk. I think Sir Ken Robinson is asking a bigger question here:
Are we in danger of educating ourselves out of creativity?
Sure, places of academia are also places of great thought exchange and ideas–but what if everyone has the same thoughts and ideas? Or more importantly, do existing educational programs foster creative thinking?
I’ll make this personal. Growing up and going through the public school system–I was always a little different. Maybe not on the outside–but within. I had teachers who thought I was “lazy” and at age 5, I can even remember my Grandmother trying to make me use my right hand instead of my left. (I said my right hand was “broken.”) I’ve always had a vivid imagination and saw things a little differently. And I can remember feeling pressure to do what everyone else did.
Though I received a decent education, what most of my teachers prized was good behavior and following rules. What does this do for creativity?
It wasn’t until D-school that I “found myself.” An environment that encouraged and challenged creativity and the fruits of it. Pratt’s mantra still rings true in my soul: “Be True To Your Work and Your Work Will Be True To You”.
Back to Sir Ken. At the end of his monologue he leaves us with several key thoughts:
That we have an obligation to use the “gift of human imagination” wisely, and a responsibility to the “education of the whole being” for our children. Not just their heads.
In my estimation–creativity is being re-defined, re-evaluated and re-prioritized as a critical component of the human condition. And I think that’s a good thing for all of us.

The debate has flared up again. The professional world is discussing what we should and shouldn’t call our “peeps.”
Don Norman holds this perspective:
“Words matter. Psychologists depersonalize the people they study by calling them “subjects.” We depersonalize the people we study by calling them “users.” Both terms are derogatory. They take us away from our primary mission: to help people. Power to the people, I say, to repurpose an old phrase. People. Human Beings. That’s what our discipline is really about.”
Joseph Jaffe has this to say:
“User is the name given by technology geeks (oil) to the art (once upon a time) of marketing (water) and for some reason, those with “i” (interactive) before “e” (experience), are forgetting about the all important “c” (consumer)”
And Paul Mcenany of Hee Haw Marketing Has this to say:
“Ok, I’ve got it. I give you the new buzzword of 2006…Custconsumuser”
The irony of this all is that Paul’s moment of levity actually has a grain of truth to it. When we talk about people in the context of marketing, advertising and even designing for them–sometimes it helps to acknowledge that people can be customers, consumers, and users depending on the context and the individual’s state of mind.
Let’s put this in perspective. The context of calling someone either a “consumer” or “user” is usually in the setting of marketing professionals using the terms to convey specific information. I’m not talking about how marketers need to speak to people. That is an entirely different story.
What I am talking about here is how we speak to eachother as professionals. Not unlike several physicians getting together and referencing the people they treat as “patients.” Does using that term between professionals demean the actual people they treat? My personal perspective is that these “labels” can provide a certain level of clarity and context. This actually helps us prioritize what is really important in the context of meeting both rational and emotional needs. Sometimes people are more than just people:

An individual balancing their checkbook online is USING technology to complete a task–so they can do other things that are important (like put the kids to bed). Someone listening to a Podcast is part of an AUDIENCE consisting of like-minded individuals who share a common interest.
A person who decides to create their own online ad after seeing what others have done becomes an active PARTICIPANT. Someone who engages in the social media network is part of a larger COMMUNITY. People who spend their money online or in the real world are CUSTOMERS. And when we partake in an economy where goods and services are bought, sold and exchanged then we become CONSUMERS–in addition to PEOPLE.
Sometimes labels help. They help us remember what’s important in the context of meeting a specific NEED. Designing an interface that is useful and usable makes for a happy user. Happy users make happy people (or consumers). And happy people tell good stories about your brand to others.
Let’s not forget it IS about PEOPLE. In the same breath, let’s not get too carried away with limiting what we can and can’t call ourselves. After all, we’re people too.

… iMedia Connection has recently published “A Quick Guide to Integrated Marketing.” It’s another take on the all-too-familiar challenge of aligning multiple marketing initiatives across multiple channels with the goal of “integrating” these efforts to achieve marketing nirvana. Only one problem with this piece: What about the TOUCHPOINTS?
Before I go on–here is how I would differentiate a channel from a touchpoint:
CHANNEL:
A method of communication or interactivity that attracts, engages, or raises awareness among consumers. Channels may also involve participation and community especially among emerging media. Examples: TV, Radio, Direct Mail, Web, Blogs, Social Media, etc.
TOUCHPOINT:
How customers interact with a business or brand. Touchpoints usually involve some type of transaction or facilitation of a service. Touchpoints are experience-driven with the quality of the experience determining the effectiveness of a touchpoint. Example: catalogue, online catalogue, ATM, retail, online shopping, customer service, banking, online banking, travel etc.
Now back to the article:
“Integrated marketing means that your brand messages resonate in complementary — rather than contradictory — ways across marketing channels.”
Brand Messages. That’s the key theme of the entire piece. Messaging the brand across multiple CHANNELS. There is nothing wrong with this–but here is the point. If marketing firms and agencies are serious about providing a comprehensive “brand message” across the media landscape–then they need to at least CONSIDER touch points too.
I’ll use Citibank–my favorite example. Great online banking. Great offline banking. Great ATM Experience. And great marketing initiatives across all those wonderful “channels”. I know there are many agencies behind this (in addition to Citibank)–but I would like to think that somewhere, someone is thinking about how all of the marketing initiatives and customer experiences come together.


Don’t marketers need to think about Brand Experience in addition to Brand Message?
Another quote:
“Every medium, channel, format and vehicle from online marketing, direct mail, television, print, billboards, guerilla marketing and so forth has its distinctive strengths and weaknesses.”
Again–no mention of the customer experience anywhere in this “Integration.” So here’s how I’ll end this. If marketers really want to “integrate”–then we will talk about experiences as well. Until then it’s partial integration at best.

I’m going to answer the question I just posed. Yes. Design and usability matter.
Why am I so confident about this answer? Because in addition to common sense, communications design has been my world for close to 14 years. Blog design these days reminds me of where Web design was five years ago. Some bloggers put a great deal of effort into what kind of user experience their blog will offer, while unfortunately many others don’t even give it a second thought. And aside from things like usability–some people succeed at making their blog a unique fingerprint through how they write combined with the way the blog looks and feels. Is one better than the other? Hard to say–but chances are, you will remember a “customized” blog vs. generic template that you’ve seen a hundred times before.
So back to the user experience of your blog. Isn’t good content enough? Yes and no. People who want your content will most likely suffer through bad design–but you have to ask yourself this question. If you respect your readers, why would you want to make anything unpleasant for them?
So what are the hallmarks of a “blog experience” that is less than ideal? Here’s a short list of what you might want to avoid.
Blog Roadblocks: Try to avoid advertising, promotions, or other distractions in the main body content area of your blog. It’s the equivalent of turning your back to your readers in the middle of a conversation.
Bling Binging: Blog Bling such as search, swiki’s etc. can be useful as long as it’s not overwhelming. Carefully decide how much bling you really need and what purpose it serves. And also try to keep these away from main content. Too much bling and you risk coming off as a “Gansta”–or even worse, Liberace.
Blinking Spinning Rotating: It was bad in 1996 and it’s still bad now.
Noise: Try to avoid background images–especially behind copy.
Multi-colored Madness: Stick with 2-4 colors maximum and try to be consistent.
Legible Lunacy: Don’t sacrifice legibility for a cool design effect. People are coming to your blog to read it–not to admire your “black” concept.
Convention Tension: Stick with basic web conventions like clickable logos etc.–unless you have a really good reason to mix things up.
So that covers basic usability. But what can a blog say about your personal brand? Design and how you write can differentiate your blog from others and help you define your own personal brand. Take Diva Marketing, for example. Now there’s a great first impression. It’s unique, fun, consistent, easy to use and the theme is simply delightful as is the writing style. They go hand and hand. Diva Marketing definitely has “blog brand”.
Now let’s take a look at a commercial example. Nuts About Southwest also blends a wonderful visual design style that is on brand and consistant with the casual writing style that feels totally Southwest. But again, it’s also usable–uncluttered and easy to peruse (a professional design firm was behind this). Both are solid blog experiences. But both examples are also not the norm. Many blogs suffer from some of the ailments mentioned in the previous list. Or if they are usable–they may simply come across as bland, generic or not in alignment with the writing style that gives it personality.
First impressions count. It’s why design, marketing and PR firms stay in business. Companies realize that their sites are often times a primary touch point with consumers who often go to the website first. So wouldn’t these principles also be true for blogs?

…Seth Godin’s last post includes the option to post comments! I’m heartned by this gesture. In Seth’s most recent post, he cites that bloggers should “Include comments so your blog becomes a virtual water cooler that feeds” as way to drive traffic, and community.”
But the irony is that Seth’s own blog does not support comments. Until recently that is. I don’t know if Seth will continue this moving forward–but I encourage and applaud the gesture. As a young and impressionable blogger myself–when I see something like this, it’s, encouraging–there is a certain authenticity to the move.
Seth’s been getting some flack recently on not supporting comments or “joining the discussion”. Our own Mack Collier recently had this to say on the Viral Garden:
“Seth Godin is really hard for me to get a fix on. He will sound like a genius for a handful of posts, then leave a stinker like his infamous ‘we’re talking too much’ post about how bloggers need to post less (interesting viewpoint for a guy that leaves multiple posts a day). And don’t even get me started on him not allowing comments…”
And I recently had a brief e-mail discussion with Ann Handley asking if Seth’s Blog was actually a blog since it didn’t allow for comments. The whole thing made me question what a blog is supposed to be. As a result, I opened up a suggestion box on Logic + Emotion and removed my approval function on comments.
So, Seth is “walking the walk”–at least with this latest post. I hope that the blogging community is supportive of this. It’s one of the things that makes blogging so fantastic–we can call people out–but we can also give “Atta boys”. Atta boy Seth–we are all watching you.

It’s a sign that the battle for Agency 2.0 is in full swing. There are a lot of definitions floating around about what Agency 2.0 is.
For what it’s worth–I’ll offer up my unofficial version. Agency 2.0 is the next-generation model that many Advertising/Marketing agencies are actively seeking. It promises to heavily influence how a brand is “marketed” and experienced across a variety of customer touchpoints and channels. (Think Citibank “Thank You” and Citibank online, ATM experience etc.–then imagine one agency leading the charge across these multi-faceted initiatives.)
So what about DeCourcy did JWT take fancy to?
JWT’s chief creative officer Ty Montague described DeCourcy as a “big thinker who has one of those four-dimensional minds.” At JWT, she’s expected to work with all clients and contribute to new business development efforts. “I want to be able to deploy her in situations where she is most needed,” Montague said.
From interactive, to word of mouth–agencies across the globe want to position themselves as the driving force behind the strategies which help connect people with brands/business. So who will emerge as Agency 2.0?
Some feel that the large traditional agencies are best positioned to do this. Others, see the nimble interactive shops having the most relevant experience. Still others see the media agencies or marketing firms paving the way. No one really knows how this will turn out–but one thing for sure is that the agency world is taking action before our very eyes and it’s pretty amazing to see. It’s going to be an interesting ride–stay tuned…

I recently attended IIT’s Strategy ‘06 conference. Big deal right? We all go to conferences. What’s different is that it’s not really a conference about marketing. The audience of Strategy ‘06 is mainly composed of product designers, creative problem solvers, design strategists, research experts, experience architects, interaction designers and business people of all walks. (This year even attracted a representative from the city of Chicago Mayor’s office).
So what does this have to do with marketing?
It doesn’t if you think about marketing in the traditional sense of the word. But Marketing 2.0? That’s another story. The IIT cranks out scores of talented creative problem solvers every year.These are the people who dream of working for companies like Google, Yahoo, and Apple. I had a brief conversation with the Dean, Patrick Whitney about why his students don’t typically consider marketing as a profession and his answer was simple, “They don’t trust marketers.”
So back to my original point. Why would I go to a conference year after year only to be surrounded by people who perceive marketing as “purveyors of snake oil”? For this reason: Marketing and design thinking are merging. There. I’ve said it.
What many of the IIT type individuals may not realize is that they are marketers in a sense. The digital products/experiences they help design are enabling people to connect with both brands as well as each other. You Tube, Flickr, Technorati, Typepad, Facebook–these are the open source platforms that help us market directly to each other. And the design thinkers at IIT have the right skills to develop these platforms and make them work.
So why do I consider this environment “out of my sandbox”? Because the focus of the conference is still primarily between the balance of design thinking and business.
But this year was a little different. In his presentation, Clement
Mok–hero to thousands of graphic designers dared to use the “A-word” .
Advertising. In fact, his whole deck revolved around this. But his message was clear–he was talking about how advertising is evolving, vs. the traditional TV driven model.
I found this to be greatly encouraging. Finally, someone with tons of equity in the hearts and minds of designers was getting them to think about marketing. Good news for all of us.
So the morale of this story is that playing outside of you sandbox is good for everyone. I’m inspired by how design thinkers approach their work. The research, insights and user-centered practice that drives it. And this year, I think our design friends are looking at marketing a little differently. So maybe our sandboxes aren’t so far apart?
At the conference, I facilitated a break out session where we discussed how advertising agencies are doing things like designing retail experiences and product design firms are beginning to execute marketing campaigns. Some call this phenomenon cross-pollination. It was a good discussion and I think folks are coming to the realization that we need collaborative interdisciplinary teams to fuel innovation and cultural changes within our organizations if we want to evolve our offerings.
Who knows? Maybe next year I’ll mix it up and attend an entirely different conference. But one thing is for sure, it probably won’t be about marketing–I play in that sandbox on a daily basis.

It was in early February over six years ago when I truly began to feel the dizzying effects of the dot-com economy first-hand. I began working in the online space back in ‘97, but it was in 2000 that the internet industry seemed to hit critical mass. Everyone I knew was buzzing about their newfound stock options and career opportunities. The potential of the internet seemed bottomless.
I joined agency.com (see photos) at around the same time.
Back then, we were just another professional services firm positioned to help guide our clients through the interactive space. The company was founded by two “Silicon Alley” entrepreneurs before there even was a bubble.

But when the bubble burst did hit us–it hit hard. Our high-flying stock was instantly reduced to a fraction of the initial price, we closed one office after another, and our numbers dwindled to less than a third of our peak size. It all happened in real time, and I had a front row seat. The only reason I survived was because we still had a handful of good clients–and we quickly re-focused our efforts on relentlessly demonstrating ROI to clients in tangible ways.
There is a point to this nostalgic tale.
As I look around at the business climate lately I’m reminded of those heady dot-com days. I’m not the only one. A recent article in Businessweek captured similar sentiments. So, to be clear–we’re in a different time now vs. back then, but what can be learned from this kind of experience? I’ll try to take a crack at it using a fitting metaphor for the “wild west” we once knew as the dot-com era:
The Good:
the bubble wasn’t all bad. In fact, there was a great deal of creativity and positive thinking that permeated the atmosphere. People weren’t afraid to take risks, if you had an idea, it was pretty easy to be heard. We were willing to try things, to experiment. As an employee, you felt an investment was being made to see you grow. And many of us worked our tails off, forging strong bonds in the process. There were some really positive side effects around all of this.
The Bad:
I’ve always been a creative–but what I noticed about the dot-com era was that I was working with a lot of people who had little former experience in what they were currently practicing. Folks seemed more motivated by stock options and perks than by the work itself. It wasn’t uncommon to find yourself working alongside someone who was doing something completely different at their past job, or they were fresh out of school with little to no real-world experience. Meetings easily got derailed and there was a lack of focus. And lets not forget the salaries. I knew some people who still aren’t close to the short lived salaries they had back then.
The Ugly:
In a word–arrogance. We thought we knew better than our clients, that somehow we were “enlightened”. How quickly that changed. Even the “poster boy” of dot-com arrogance, Jeff Dachis of the original Razorfish changed his tune by 2001. But all of us played a role. For my part–I’m sorry too. We should have all known better.
So back to present times–does anyone else feel just a hint of that “wild west” climate again?
Certainly much has changed since the late 90’s. The internet is a finally a respectable business model–and many brands understand this. Advertising is being turned on it’s head–the 30 second spot is slowly losing the unchallenged influence it once enjoyed. Product Design has experienced an all-out renaissance. Consumers control how they choose to interact with brands–they now have the power. Technology no longer drives–it enables. Design has gone mainstream–companies like Target and Apple have seen to this. I could go on…
Wow. It’s 2006 and I can’t believe I survived the downturn only to have continued working in the same field as I was back in 2000. And here’s what I’ve learned:
The creative spirit was good.
The arrogance was bad.
Let’s re-capture that creative spirit, mix it with the wisdom we’ve all gained since–and do some things for people that somehow makes life just a little bit better. Hmmmm… humility+innovation. That could be an interesting combination.

You’ve probably heard of the term “T-Shaped People.” Not sure who exactly coined the phrase, but the first time I heard it was from IDEO’s Tim Brown.
The notion is simple–cultivate people on your team that have a core competency, but can easily branch out (like the shape of a T). They ideally possess traits such as curiosity, empathy and aren’t afraid to ask why. And there is a distinction between this type of individual vs. a “jack-of-all trades.” The core competency and branches are complimentary, with the branches being secondary strengths. It represents breadth and depth of skills.
Here’s a brief but true story of where some T-shaped thinking could have been leveraged. Our creative team recently got together to review some of the work being done out there in the Interactive space. One of the examples we looked at was a Puma mini-site. Oooh’s and Ahhh’s could be heard as we made our way through the experience. Clearly there was a big idea here–it was clever, it was fun, had well-written copy, and was differentiated.
Only one problem. Halfway through the experience, no one could figure out how to get back to the starting point. So, we simply gave up and moved on to the next example. It was a Debbie Downer moment. You could almost hear the wah-wahhh.
Sad but true. How could such a compelling experience go wrong? It was missing a piece of the “T”–in this case, usability. What Interactive Marketing needs more of is “T-shaped creativity”.

T-shaped creativity means starting the creative process with some key insights to inform a creative/experience strategy, which in turn leads to a big idea and concept.
But it doesn’t end there. The interactive experience needs to be useful, usable and desirable in order for it to work on multiple levels. Take out one piece of the “T” and the experience is incomplete.
Notice anything about the “T-model”? Usability is dead smack in the center. It helps connect the other branches–yet when we set our creative teams off to create amazing experiences, we often under-emphasize usability.
As we look to Web 2.0 and beyond, T-shaped creativity is needed more than ever. The more interactivity, motion, and rich media embedded in the experience… the more critical it is to champion work that is on brand, on strategy, creative–and easy to use.

“Synergy” has been replaced by “Experience”–and having a differentiated brand seems more important than ever these days. Then of course there’s the customer. We want to do things that are “customer-centric”–which hopefully leads to delight, demand and ultimately loyalty. It all sounds great.
Now that I’ve established some “credibility” by throwing a few choice buzzwords around myself–allow me to get to the heart of the matter. Effective Interactive Marketing can hypothetically be boiled down to executing against three truths:
1. Draw the customer in–get their attention.
2. Reward them with meaningful interactions that somehow influence their lives positively.
3. Provide them with valuable experiences they want to use and are inclined to share with others.
…And of course all of this all needs to be measurable and results-oriented.
I’ve left some parts out intentionally to keep this really simple. But here’s the food for thought. Who are the kinds of people needed to do this type of work? And how can they work together?
Let’s see–it’s interactive, so you need people that live and breathe technology. Since technology is involved–it has lots of moving parts. This means you need people who know how to design experiences and understand things like usability. But it’s also marketing–so you need folks who understand insights, brands and the art of storytelling. The list goes on and on…
Point I’m making is that a great deal of true collaboration needs to go on behind the scenes in order to end up with the coveted “delighted customer.” And I have a hunch that marketing/advertising firms are grappling with getting the “brand-types,” “design-types” and “technology-types” to all work in sync as we try help our clients grow.
Sure, this sounds peachy–but in reality authentic collaboration is messy business. Have you ever been in a meeting with a creative, techie, and brand strategist mixing it up? It’s like the tower of Babel–everyone’s speaking a different language.
But when this all does come together–the end result is powerful and difficult to ignore. Point in case: nikewomen.com. Too early to tell how this will be measured–but the combination of brand engagement, commerce, design, entertainment, etc. enabled by technology all adds up to a delightful experience.

As agencies evolve and disciplines become increasingly blurred, something tells me that the quality of what we’re seeing in digital spaces is only the tip of the tower so to speak. Hope that last part didn’t get lost in translation.