Sure, we occasionally read original content based on an original thought or study results that cast a new light on previous perceptions or a new technology in town. But, realistically, how much content can marketing writers and publishers contribute to social media and publishing without sounding redundant? Is there anything new under the sun anymore?

Now, before you jump down my throat and tell me I’m nuts, let’s do an experiment. Enter the following in your browser search bar:
“Does your website build trust?”

What do you get? In Google, I got about 12,200,000 results that include the following organic listings on the first page alone:

• 47 Simple Ways to Build Trust in Your Website or Blog
  Some major points: Make it personal; website design is first impression; use appropriate language (i.e. to your segments); use good grammar; never lie to make money …
  
• Build trust: the most important online value
  Some major points: Write in simple language; be personal; update content often; professional-looking graphics …
• 40 Ways to Build Trust in Your Brand on Social Media
  Some major points: Create meaningful and thought-provoking content; no hard selling
• 11 Reasons Customers Don’t Trust Your Web Site
  Some major points: Each typo a user finds puts another ding into your credibility; keep your website as fresh and up to date as possible; don’t use buzz words …
• 15 Ways To Build Trust In Your Website
  Some major points: An attractive website displays professionalism; adding personal flare; add new content whenever you have the chance,…

Are you bored yet?

I suppose if you’re new to a topic, then reading the same points in each article is comforting. At least, that way, you can assume the information is credible. But, what if you’re looking for something NEW—something refreshing on the same topic? Then, this can become a frustrating experience.

So, here are my questions for the content creators:

• How do you write fresh marketing content?
• Do you think fresh content matters?
• Where do you get fresh ideas that haven’t been rehashed a million times?

Oh, and one more thing … I did a search on Google: “Rehashing: The New Boring Marketing Concept,” and guess what? Nothing came up —yet.

Seth Godin reminds us that marketers tell stories to best sell products and services. “No one buys facts,” he says. “They buy a story—they’re here for the story and the way believing it makes us feel.” Anyone who has seen a marketing brochure or advertisement for Volvo can see how the use of storytelling brings forth the “safety” value proposition much better than detailed specifications of its whiplash protection system or roll stability control.

However, a carefully crafted story that works well for one market may fall flat in another. Godin says that’s because “different people have different worldviews. People can see the same data and come to different conclusions.”

Author Peter Hessler highlights this idea in a New Yorker article titled “Go West.” Born and raised in the United States, Hessler has spent the past 10 years traveling from farm to factory in greater China, so he knows a thing or two about Chinese and American culture. It was no surprise to Hessler how the two cultures uniquely use narrative in daily communication.

For example, Hessler writes that one night he decided to visit a local bar somewhere in Colorado. Hessler relates that within a few moments, a stranger had sat down next to him, ordered a drink, and proceeded to tell Hessler his life story, including the fact that he had just been released from prison.

Hessler contrasts this openness with his experiences in China. “People in China never talked like that,” he writes. “They didn’t like to be the center of attention, and they took little pleasure in narrative. They rarely lingered on interesting details.” It wasn’t necessarily that Chinese citizens didn’t tell stories, just that they told stories about much different topics. “Most Chinese could talk your ear off about things like food, money and weather,” Hessler says. “But they avoided personal topics, and I learned that it could take months before an interview subject opened up.”

Hessler observed that Chinese seemed less willing to talk about themselves. Contrast this with the average U.S. citizen who is likely more than willing to tell you his or her life story and probably has it well-rehearsed.

One narrative technique that seems to work well in Western cultures is the personal testimonial. However, from Hessler’s observations on the uneasiness of Chinese to talk about personal issues, it’s easy to see why a marketing campaign of customer testimonials for a product or service might fall on deaf ears in China.

In addition to cultural nuance, a university professor friend of mine—who is Chinese—says there’s something deeper here on why personal testimonials might not work in China. The larger issue is trust and believability.

In Communist China, billboards with propaganda are the norm, the Internet is tightly controlled, and the government does its very best to control both media and message.  The professor says, “Many believe that stories and testimonials are made up, especially because there isn’t an unbiased monitoring mechanism to convince consumers that testimonials are from real people.”

Storytelling works in marketing. But the most real and believable narrative may fall victim to cultural nuances that predispose your customers to not listen in the first place.

Questions:

• One person interviewed by Hessler says, “An individual with a story is on a higher ground than an individual with an argument.” Do you agree or disagree?
•  Hessler also observed, “Many Americans were great talkers, but they didn’t like to listen.” Is this consistent with your observations?

Businesses won’t hire us unless we appear credible and trustworthy. The questions come down to: 1) How do we project trust and credibility and 2) Why Do Businesses Choose One Consultant Over Another? The same questions apply to getting hired and being trusted as an employee.
Since 1983 I have either run a consulting business or served as a manager or executive within mid-sized or large business. Therefore, I have had to either prove the value of my consultancy or my own worth in the business world. Based on those experiences and having hired more than a few consultancies and employees and having had more than my fair share of both business successes and failures in terms of revenues and client relationships, here are the primary characteristics I think businesses look for in hiring consultants or employees.

1. Values–What are your personal values and your business values and how do you apply them in your work?
2. Personality–Are you someone who is easy to work with and a team player?
3. Point of Reference–Do you understand what the business needs, where it is going, what solutions will work, and that your primary role is to produce results?
4. Strategist or Tactician–Are you able to think and execute on strategies or are you a tactical thinker? Strategists make good consultants and leaders; tacticians make good employees and workers.
5. Experience–What experiences do you bring to the business? Are they in line with what the business needs?
6. Client List–Do you have a list of clients that make the potential client comfortable that you can meet its needs?
7. References and Testimonials–What do they look like? Are they from executives, managers, and/or co-workers? Do they reference results and successes?
8. Presentation–How do you present yourself? Are your shoes shined and your attire suitable to the business culture? Are you confident and look people in the eye? Do you think quickly and answer strategically? Are you goal and results oriented? Do you ask questions about the business’s needs or only about yours?

There’s much more and please share your thoughts, as well. The point I want to make here is that at the end of the day a business hires a consultant or an employee because it trusts you will deliver the results it needs.

By now you’ve likely heard of Bernard L. Madoff. This hedge fund operator is accused of the largest corporate fraud in United States history, to the tune of $50 billion dollars lost. In a SEC complaint, Mr. Madoff–a former NASDAQ chairman–is accused of a “stunning fraud of epic proportions” by essentially running a Ponzi scheme where new investor money was used to cover losses and pay-out returns to previous investors.

While there were plenty of warning signs along the way such as steady returns during tumultuous times and allegations of manipulation from other brokers, investors continued to pour money into Madoff’s funds.

Madoff used interesting schemes to dupe high net worth investors, many of which preyed on basic human needs of social connection and esteem.

According to a Wall Street Journal article, Madoff cloaked his investments in a “mysterious allure and sense of exclusivity.” Simply getting into the club–if you will–gave investors bragging rights, a sense of belonging, and enabled them to feel they had access to something special.

In fact, according to the same WSJ article, once an investor was “in”, it would be considered an insult to ask deep questions about the fund for fear of being thrown out. “When you are in an exclusive private club,” the article notes, “you don’t go rummaging around the kitchen to make sure the health code is being followed.”

Adding insult to injury, many of Madoff’s customers came from good old “word of mouth” connections where new clients were referred by other wealthy families, political leaders, and charity organizers.

Mark Penn, writes in a recent Wall Street Journal article, that Madoff, “sold himself to people on the basis of brand, and he got access to more marks by using the smart, rich and famous to introduce him to more of the smart, rich and famous.”

Madoff’s fund wasn’t built on advertising. It wasn’t built on direct marketing tactics. It was built on leveraging customer trust, exclusivity, and word of mouth recommendations.

Many otherwise very intelligent people failed to ask questions of Mr. Madoff as they invested millions of hard earned dollars.
While red flags popped up on occasion, as long as “the returns” kept coming most investors operated from a “don’t ask, don’t tell” perspective. Investors, referred by other people they trusted, wanted to gain access to this exclusive hedge fund so badly that they in effect checked their brain at the door.

Don Peppers and Martha Rogers often talk the importance of building customer trust to improve revenues and profitability. In an article, “Trust Stakes Its Claim“, they say, “Although trust is the welcome consequence of any successful customer relationship, it is not something to take for granted. Building trust is an investment in the future of your customers. You have no more important asset; you have no more important strategy.”

While many companies have altruistic motives for building customer trust, Madoff did the opposite–using customer trust to defraud. He leveraged his political, social and faith (Judaism) network to ensure a steady flow of recommendations (and investors). And people blindly trusted him with their millions.

Surely, this is an egregious example of fraud, and hopefully an outlier. That said, as economic times get tougher and scam artists abound, it is probably fair to ask more questions, perform due diligence on personal and corporate investments, and check the assumptions that underpin our decision making.

Should we stop trusting altogether? That’s not a very practical strategy. We live in communities, we need to participate. That said when it comes to recommendations– whatever their source–we should at least pause and think about the motivations for those recommendations. Opaque is out, transparency is in.

Questions:
* Should recommendations–from companies, friends, relatives, etc be trusted? Under what circumstances?
* Many of Madoff’s investors were “swayed by the gut” and ignored the warning signs. What analytical techniques could have sniffed out this fraud?
* With cases of fraud and deception abounding, what practices can companies use to establish and maintain customer trust?
* Have you taken a break from thinking in a significant area of your personal life or business? Who is watching your hen house?

How companies plan, source, make, deliver and return products and services is more than just the purview of procurement managers and supply chain analysts. And while the CEO and Board bear ultimate responsibility for the quality and safety of a company’s products and services, marketers have a significant stake in supply chain management.

Many companies have tried to save money by sourcing from other countries like China, Mexico, or other emerging economies, but unfortunately some companies don’t often track and monitor the quality of items sourced.

Case in point, in the past six months online and offline media have buzzed with reports regarding tainted chili peppers, tomatoes (whoops: false alarm), toothpaste, dog food, and pharmaceuticals imported from other countries.

Fellow MPDailyFix blogger, Ted Mininni wrote a post in May 2008 on the need for product traceability “from field to fork” to establish transparency and maintain public trust.

I’ll agree with Ted and submit the following: With brands and reputations on the line, companies need to know exactly what’s in their supply chain, down to the very unit and supplier whenever possible.

That’s fine you say, but what does this have to do with marketing?
For marketers, this is a risk management exercise–not to mention one centered on marketing ROI.

Marketers often spend gobs of money on optimizing marketing processes, building brands, and designing programs to increase customer loyalty. However, it is quite absurd to spend millions of dollars on marketing and have it all wasted as customers or animals get sick–or worse–from the products on our shelves.

Most companies are engaging in a purposeful effort to build effective policies, technologies (supply chain analytics and infrastructure) and processes to track and monitor the extended supply chain. Marketers must be able to access and query these analytical systems so as to understand the interdependencies, assumptions and events that occur or could occur within the supply chain.

However, accessing analytical applications is just one part of the equation–the ability to influence change and provide accepted input to supply chain stakeholders is another large part.

Marketers need to make a purposeful effort to reach out to CIOs, Supply Chain VPs, Operations, Finance, risk managers and others. Intradepartmental meetings with the above functions, in addition to analytical systems access will help give marketers the insight and visibility needed to make the best decisions in protecting our brands and managing risk.

Traditionally, marketers have been more concerned with the demand chain rather than the supply chain. However, line of sight into the entire value chain and the ability to influence decisioning with all stakeholders–will help us better manage risk and ultimately engender higher levels of customer trust.

Questions:
* Should marketers–in all roles–care about supply chain management? Or are these concerns “out of scope” for marketing?
* How much of a marketer’s time should be spent on collaborating with other departments on supply chain management?
* Have you identified the one or two big events that could cause massive disruption to your value chain? How are you mitigating those risks?

My initial response was to post a comment that wondered what we mean by friend. Because Valeria’s post made me question what I believe to be the most critical strategy in developing business growth–relationship building.
In brief, most of my marketing energies go into building relationships, which I believe is the most important step in building trust. Furthermore, I propose that without trust, we will not be hired to perform work nor will we sell products and services to consumers. I also propose that most of those with whom company marketers build relationships, hence trust, never become friends. In fact, most of the customers will neither know those marketers (beyond the brand image) or ever put a face to the persons behind the marketing of the products or services, except for those employee touchpoints who personally deliver thode products and services.
But as marketers in the b2b world, and especially as consultants and/or entrepreneurs, relationship building often blends into personal relationships. So if we accept that our first job as marketers, consultants and entrepreneurs is to build relationships with our best customers and a level of trust that is strong, how do we avoid destroying the business protocols necessary to produce a great customer experience?
In my world, building relationships with decision makers who will hire my firm means we learn each other’s first names; we get to know each other’s habits, good and bad; we often discover our likes and dislikes; and sometimes we share personal stories over lunch, dinner or a few beers. I don’t believe that makes us friends but it does create a level of personalization within what began as a business relationship. That can’t be bad, can it?
Valeria makes me think it can be bad, if we disrespect that client by treating them as anyone other than a business person for whom we work. That means distancing ourselves from the personal and relating mostly to their business wants, needs and desires. Is that possible? I am certain it is. But how we do it is as important as knowing we need to do it.
Therefore, what are the strategies, tactics and attitudes necessary to build strong business relationships that don’t cross the line into friendships, which Valeria convinced me can disrupt productivity and the quality of the work? Or if you disagree with this thesis, where am I going wrong?

It starts with our presence and with the marketing tools we use to share that presence with the right audience, at the right time and in the right place. That presence usually includes such things as a web site, perhaps a blog or a podcast, marketing collaterals, advertising, PR and so on.
For me, networking (i.e., face-to-face relationship building) is where I invest most of my energy. Asking clients to offer third-person testimonials that we then place on my marketing collaterals are important as well.
But do those things alone result in trust and credibility? Most of us apply those same strategies and tactics, so how do our customers and clients determine that we are trustworthy and credible based on those kinds of marketing efforts? Where is the innovation? The creativity? At the end of the day, how do we ensure that we build trust and credibility with our customers, clients and our audiences?