Challenging Paradigms – New Ways To Think About Marketing

You Can’t Judge a Book By Its Cover

Nor can you judge a person by a job title. Job titles were created as extensions of job descriptions. A one or two-word summary of the list of mostly general responsibilities someone could be held accountable to by the person paying them to do work in the Industrial Age.

News Flash: It’s no longer the Industrial Age.

Perhaps job titles are still necessary, but it’s time to knock off the stereotyping of the people the job titles are assigned to. Most didn’t create them—-they came from a common aligned database accumulated over the last two centuries. Unfortunately, they not only restrict the range of creativity and contribution of the person who wears the label, they restrict the perception of the creative value an individual could bring to the table in a different environment.

A Question of Motive

Why would a sales representative in one industry want to engage with people in another industry? If the people, groups, or organizations suffer from tunnel vision, they automatically assume the rep wants to permeate their walls to sell more products. Why else would they possibly choose to do this instead of smiling and dialing the names on their purchased lead lists? Could it be REMOTELY possible that they understand the LONG GAME and truly want to help other people?

It’s worth considering.

Collaborative Synergy

The days of customers accepting brands’ “my way or the highway” systems are nearing an end. No longer can self-proclaimed “customer-centered” or “customer-focused” organizations survive with lip-service and no actions to back it up. While customer segmentation and predictive analytics have increased the speed of compatibility assessment and worldview-matching, optimal results cannot be achieved without inclusion of the HUMAN ELEMENT.

My assertion is that we have reached a critical point in our futures as brands, representatives, AND customers. The actions we choose in the next two years will determine our success or failure for the next century across multiple industries. And yet, so many of these industries are choosing to hunker own in their storm shelters when they SHOULD be harnessing the storm’s energy. Doing so would fuel changes that would provide them a competitive advantage difficult, if not impossible, for an organization clinging to bureaucracy to overcome. Making this happen can be best demonstrated using the example of the most powerful force in nature: The tornado.

Harness The Power

Tornadoes aren’t a force because two opposing air masses necessarily COLLIDE. Instead, they are a force because two opposing air masses collaborate in a way that intensifies the rates of circulation and rotation. (Admittedly, this is a simplified way of describing how tornadoes develop, but being from the Midwest, let’s just say I’ve been up-close and personal with them more than a few times.) In fact, an EF-5 tornado is one of the greatest examples of synergy ever witnessed in nature, far more powerful than the individual winds and air masses that combine to generate its destructive capability.

Any area impacted by such a catastrophe is admittedly heartbreaking, yet one cannot help being awestruck by a force powerful enough to drive a 2” x 4” piece of lumber through a chimney. Then two blocks away removing an entire dining room wall while two glasses of red wine remained undisturbed on the table. My family and I witnessed both in our own community when a tornado struck in 2006, literally 100 yards from where we were huddled under the stairs in our basement. While thoughts and memories of such events evoke fear, I ask that we set them aside for the remainder of this post and, instead, focus on the potential to recreate the same degree of power, except for the attainment of a POSITIVE outcome—SUPERIOR CUSTOMER EXPERIENCES.

Synergistic Collaboration

I’ve brainstormed hundreds of ideas for acquiring and building momentum in my business model, but nothing ever connected the solution to the problem. Then I began focusing on what WASN’T being discussed—what was missing from a large percentage of the proposed solutions. That’s when I searched the term “Synergistic Collaboration”. Perhaps cultures don’t necessarily be changed, per se, but rather culture, brand representatives, and customers all need to work together to achieve synergy in ways that harness the power of the tornado. This all starts with a laser-focus on the customer experience: It’s at the center and everything else “rotates” around it. Unfortunately, momentum isn’t picking up because of breakdowns in trust and communication of responsibilities between all three components of the “storm”.

Like the tornado, the higher the speed of rotation the greater the potential strength. Air masses (in this case brands, reps and customers) should not collide, but collaborate synergistically for maximum outputs as deemed valuable by each component. This collaboration and rotational force is exhibited by the directional arrows.

Enterprise forces coming from one side apply the high-level influences by protecting brand image, keeping promises, developing and updating systems for operational and transactional efficiencies, etc. Representative forces from the other side provide grassroots influences by creating and promoting a differentiated and transparent personal brand, building network connections, sharing and engaging with customers in an educational manner, etc.

In the center of it all is the customer, which, in line with the tornado analogy, is also the CALMEST part of the storm. The customer should never feel the impacts of what is rotating around them. The more consistently “calm” their experience is, the more likely they are to advocate for the brand and provide direct introductions to the representative who serves them.

Make An Impact

Or as Chris Brogan and Julien Smith say in their book, “Impact Equation”: CREATE an impact:

Impact = C(Contrast) x (R(Reach) + E(Exposure) + A(Articulation) + T(Trust) + E(Echo))

To fully understand how to apply the Impact Equation requires effort and reflection. The important thing is that the CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE must always be the focus. Referring to the diagram above, note that two elements of the IMPACT equation have been assigned to each of the three parties involved. Doing so makes it easier to identify activities that can be combined in a manner that creates synergy. Like a tornado, circulation of ideas (versus air masses) is what generates the greatest amount of energy.

Combining the Theories

This is what my personal branding impact graph looks like today. All metrics are based on the only thing that truly matters: CUSTOMER PERCEPTION (preferably acquired from direct feedback.) For example, contrast asks if an idea stands out. You and your organization may think it does, but to a customer your idea may be nothing more than a commodity. On the other end of the spectrum, you and your organization may think your idea connects to the intended audience, but marketing reports say otherwise.

Here’s a breakdown of the 6 factors of the Impact equation and the primary drivers of each:

Contrast—Primary metric driver: Customer feedback
Reach—Primary metric driver: Office systems
Exposure—Primary metric driver: Parent brand
Articulation—Primary metric driver: Enterprise systems (Namely precision and efficiency of systems
Trust—Primary metric driver: Personally-branded representatives
Echo—Primary metric driver: Customer feedback

In summary, the graph reflects weakness in two areas: Reach and Echo. In my situation, the two are directly correlated and have been kept low intentionally until the next phase of a larger vision is initiated. At that time, an increased focus on community engagement and education should improve potential personal AND parent brand advocacy if done correctly—with the best interests of the customer in mind. One more reason reach was kept low intentionally? To monitor disruptive trends and industry responses to them in order to create effective, agile personal branding strategies.

Perhaps a similar analysis would benefit you as well.

Thank you for your time and attention. Also, many thanks to Chris Brogan and Mark Schaefer for being the inspirations behind this post. If anyone cares to discuss Synergistic Collaboration in more detail, Google me (Gary, Iowa City).

A Dog and a Doorbell

What do a fire alarm, tornado siren, telephone and doorbell have in common? They’re all designed to make people take unanticipated and immediate action. When school children hear a fire alarm, they are to begin executing emergency evacuation procedures. When a tornado siren sounds, families are to seek shelter in the lowest level of their homes.

While fires and weather-related events are literally matters of life or death, what’s the rationale for lumping telephones and doorbells into the same category? Twenty years ago, there wasn’t one. Like everything else, however, times have changed. Allow me to explain using one of Pavlov’s theories, a time management course, and a couple of real-life examples.

Sit, Ubu, Sit…Good Dog. “Woof”

Pavlov has been credited with the discovery of classical conditioning: The relationship or association between the occurrence of one action in anticipation of another unrelated action. If you’ve studied psychology at any level, you probably remember Pavlov’s experiment where he rang a bell and immediately fed a dog. After repeating the same action multiple times (ringing the bell) and consistently rewarding it with food, the dog eventually began anticipating being fed, as noted by salivation each time the bell was rung. Although stimulus and response are relevant, this post is about the EMOTIONAL STATE EXHIBITED when responding to a stimulus, which leads to the next point…

Who the Phone Serves

One segment of a time management course taken several years ago made a rather startling assertion: The telephone was primarily designed for the benefit of the person DIALING IT, not for the person ANSWERING IT. Since its invention, the phone has been used to ask a neighbor for a favor or a place of business a question about a product or service. It made perfect sense to call instead of driving a car or sending snail-mail, then waiting for a reply two weeks later. The exception to the “benefit to the user” assertion was when a call from another person was ANTICIPATED AND EXPECTED—usually someone important in their lives.

When I was a kid, I remember sitting by the phone in our upstairs hallway WAITING for the phone to ring. My school friends would tell me that they were going to call, but not always when. Needless to say, I was looking forward to it. In that sense, the phone brought me, the person receiving the call, pleasure. To complete this puzzle, let’s combine the two examples of Pavlovian dogs and phone calls into one final example: The doorbell.

This Had Better Be Important

Our family dog loves HIS people (our family). He knows when we’re all home and somehow anticipates when someone who’s not home WILL BE. And unless we’re playing, he rarely makes a sound, even when a family member comes home late at night.

HOWEVER….

All bets are off when the doorbell rings. Like most dogs, this one also LOSES HIS MIND. He goes into a fit of barking that neighbors can hear even with their WINDOWS CLOSED. Preventing this from happening has been relatively simple: We tell him in advance when we’re expecting visitors. It sounds weird, but he can sense what we’re telling him and he often greets our guests with a few small barks and whimpers. Strange how talking to a dog can reduce a human’s blood pressure.

Putting the Puzzle Together

Still questioning the inclusion of telephones and doorbells in the category of “things designed to make people take unanticipated action”? Take a few deep breaths and visualize the following scenarios:

You’re sitting at your desk working on a project with a strict deadline. The phone is on “do-not-disturb” and your assistant has been instructed to hold all calls. Suddenly your phone rings—someone has broken through the “gate” and IT’S NO ONE YOU KNOW!!!

What was your immediate response? (Was it at all associated with an employment ad?)

You and your family are seated at the dinner table after a long, hectic day. You’re ready for a nice glass of wine and a wonderful home-cooked meal. The family dog is under the table, poised to pounce on whatever falls his way. You take a sip of wine and just as you’re raising the fork loaded with succulent flavors, the doorbell rings. In a nanosecond, your dog goes from peaceful to BALLISTIC. He sprints toward the door to either greet a visitor or annihilate an intruder. (Determining which really isn’t clear although you’re secretly hoping for the latter.)

What’s going through your mind in that instant?

Psychology Behind the Statistics

Social media “gurus” have been throwing out statistics for years saying that cold-calling is “dead”. This post wasn’t written to disprove or argue their points. To the contrary, it was written to reinforce them. It lends insight as to “why” their observations are not only accurate, but also how consumer psychology may indicate their facts are understated. (Unless, of course, those consumers continue to embrace or instill compliance to the activities in the scenarios.) For everyone else, phones and doorbells have been negatively conditioned since the dawn of the Internet Age. In my case, the primary reasons those things should ring today is similar to a fire alarm or tornado siren: A life or death situation.

Otherwise, allow me to introduce you to my dog.

Bounce Rate Revisited: How It Applies To The New Buyer Journey

There are a lot of differing opinions about bounce rate: The factor assigned to the duration of an individual’s visit to a particular website. The general consensus is that VERY low or VERY high bounce rates are bad and that optimally, bounce rate targets should be set, based on industry, between 40%-60%. I’m not disputing whether organizations like 21Handshake are right or wrong. I’m simply asking if it’s not time to revisit bounce rate guidelines now that so many functions of business and industry can be segmented into molecule-sized units.

BOUNCE RATE ASSESSMENT IN A RETAIL SALES ENVIRONMENT

I’m not a fan of shopping. In fact, I prefer to spend as little time doing it as possible. When I need something, the first place I look is online—either at branded websites or on Amazon. If I MUST go to a store to touch or try on something, I know EXACTLY what I’m looking for and make a beeline to that department. I’ve gone through the selection process before ever leaving home. All that’s left is FINDING AND PURCHASING THE ITEM THAT’S IN MY HEAD.

If a bounce rate could be assigned to that shopping experience, what would it be? 70%? 80%? 90? Based on what you learned about me as a CONSUMER, where would the bounce rate fall on a scale from low to high? How many consumers do you think likely share the same attitude?

A good friend, Nick Westergaard, wrote a BRILLIANT post a few years ago called “The Age of Interruption Is Over“. It describes the opposite scenario—where a high bounce rate is bad. More importantly: What causes it to be bad. How convenient, as holiday shopping season is right around the corner! In Nick’s post, the only bounce rate is the one in which those mall doors are BOUNCING OFF THE HINGES!

BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS VERSUS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

If money were not a concern, how many people prefer to spend time engaging with community members instead of transacting business? In other words, would most people prefer the recreational weekend activities or working in their offices?

The answer is obvious unless you have a career that allows you to work like you’re on vacation. Here’s the quandary: The purpose of marketing has always been to distract consumers and keep them in the buying environment/mindset. Why are so many displays set up in retail environments? Why are people staffed at mall kiosks handing out “free samples” to anyone who passes by, whether they want them or not? To DISRUPT consumers. This contradicts the objective of people like me who know what they need and want before they even leave the house—to get in and out as quickly as possible. Why? So I can spend MORE time engaging with members of my community that I want to be around. For many people, this community is our family.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to set bounce rate targets for transactions as high as possible (85% or above) and bounce rates for community engagement targets as LOW as possible (15% or below), with anything in the middle considered NOISE?

LIVING ON THE EDGE

We’re experiencing great change across a multitude of industries. Consumers are making purchase decisions before they ever leave the house, if they ever need to. Most people say that others they know, like and trust influence their decisions more than branded store personnel. Yet businesses continue to try to influence purchase decisions using distractions to entice and convince consumers to consume. I get it…that’s how a consumption-driven economy survives and thrives. On the other hand, streamlining transaction processes (especially automated ones) would accomplish the same outcome. HIGH bounce rates will reflect the efficiency of those processes. Conversely, LOW bounce rates would reflect the effectiveness of relevant content stimulating deeper community engagement. Wouldn’t the integration of these two strategies benefit all parties involved?

A great mentor once said to me: “If you’re not living on the edge, you’re taking up too much space.” His wisdom is quite relevant to this post. Many activities in the middle are generating a lot of noise. Breaking through has become extremely challenging, yet many insist on staying the course.

Perhaps it’s time to check the date on that map…

Artificial Intelligence and Its Impact on Jobs

Before we start yelling “the sky is falling!”, let’s ask ourselves what functions artificial intelligence will realistically be performing: Repetitive, mathematical, formatted jobs. Jobs that make an 8-hour workday feel like a decade. Instead of worrying about that robot taking your job, how about focusing on what technology CAN’T DO (yet)? Things like showing emotion or displaying empathy and sympathy are great places to start. In fact, I’d make this your PERMANENT job description, no matter where you end up:

TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONAL HUMAN VALUE TO EVERY PAST, CURRENT, OR FUTURE CUSTOMER THAT COMES IN CONTACT WITH ANY BRAND I REPRESENT.

If you don’t like your brand or the role you play within that brand’s organizational structure, AI is irrelevant. It’s probably time to find a new place to land.

Selective Integration

Nobody ever said change was easy, and it’s certainly not slowing down. What many fail to see is the forest through the trees. In the paranoia surrounding AI, IoT, VR, AR, and robots, one very important fact remains: People NEED each other. People CRAVE human contact. There are some interactions when machines could effectively replace humans, but a solid argument can be made that most people would still prefer a living, breathing soul to interact with, especially in times of stress or crisis.

Something AI and IoT bring to the table that actually empowers human interaction is intuitive segmentation. This process, executed in milliseconds, will give people more time to build deeper human-to-human relationships. While individual reps may be serving fewer people, their compatibility with them will be much higher. It’s the perfect breeding ground for both employee AND customer advocacy. Think about classroom size in schools: Smaller classes usually mean more personal attention for each student. In a marketing scenario, smaller brand tribes will equate to greater retention and ultimately increased revenue. As trust expands, more permission is granted. A tangent to this trust is stress level related to work: When smaller, more tight-knit communities form, stress levels diminish because more open communication is taking place.

Where integration needs to be selective is dependent upon CUSTOMER, not ORGANIZATIONAL, perception. Integrating technology where the CUSTOMER’S PERCEPTION of value is the least volatile frees humans to engage in situations where emotional connection is non-negotiable.

Jobs in the NEW WORLD of Work

A few months ago, I wrote this blog post about organic SEO growth that mirrors the advocacy model. It introduces the idea of individuals having very specific communities across networks rather than trying to be “all things to all people”. No one advocates for anything or anyone they dislike or distrust. They only advocate for people, groups, organizations, or brands they are passionate about. The key to organic growth and reach is the intensity exhibited by both the community organizer (seller) and each community member (potential buyers and/or customers). Committed advocates then channel their passion into building deeper relationships that encourage individual community growth through INTRODUCTIONS from other passionate members, netting a far greater level of loyalty than the referral process. As community membership grows, the advocates’ value to the organization increases.

Introductions are Referrals That Don’t Need To Be Requested

The key to the advocacy concept working is pride in the association with brand communities and other members. Pride drives engagement activity and results in a higher propensity for personal introductions than the traditional referral process. How do most referral processes begin again?

“Hey, Fred, may I ask you a question? Did you find value in our conversation today? If so, I strive to bring value to others in the same way, so would you be willing to give me the names of 3 people you feel could benefit as well?”

That script is in every referral textbook. The problem with it is determining if pride in the relationship is actually DEEP enough for the customer to put their friends’ names on the sheet of paper. That’s a risk in this day and age that most people are simply not willing to take. The alternative solution is to be EASILY ACCESSIBLE. When people recognize the value in what you do, they tell others about you ON THEIR OWN. This admittedly changes the focus of your marketing strategy, but it results in deeper levels of trust when the long-term focus is on retention.

Ease of Accessibility

The idea of being easily accessible was more labor intensive just 6 months ago. It required diligent effort around SEO, organic and paid reach, consistent keyword activities, editorial calendars, etc. It ultimately paid off for those who stuck to it, as I can attest. Here’s a personal example you may have seen before: When you enter “Gary, Iowa” into your Google search bar and enter, the first result anywhere in the world will be mine. No gimmicks, no paid or manipulated SEO, no ads, no nothing. A decade of persistence made that possible.

Although execution of those things is still very important, there’s something you must know: If you haven’t been doing ANYTHING even remotely systematic on the Internet, YOU DO NOT EXIST. Search will soon incorporate AI in ways unimaginable to most people. Check out these links:

This post from Sam Hurley actually has a little surprise inside…He was kind enough to link to one of my pieces last month.

In this one, Diana Adams of Adams Consulting in Atlanta offers similar insights.

Getting Found

In the future, AI devices like Apple’s Siri or Amazon’s Alexa will fulfill requests such as this:

Customer: “Alexa, find me a professional services provider that aligns with my personal values and beliefs.”

Alexa’s AI scans the Internet for all inputs and insights created, shared, or commented on by anyone in the desired market area with a comparable professional services tag. Two years ago this assessment took 3 hours. Alexa’s highly-intuitive search algorithm will take less than a minute. And the technology will be here within 6 months.

Alexa: “I have three professional services providers for you. They are _____, ______ and ________.”

Customer: “Thank you, Alexa. Please connect me to ____________.”

Alexa dials the phone via VoIP and connects the customer to the provider.

Question 1: How does Alexa find a provider that hasn’t set up even ONE social profile?

Answer: IT CAN’T.

Question 2: How long will it take Alexa to find someone like me?

Answer: Because of the activities and content created over the last decade, it’s done before you finished reading this.

No Time Like the Present

There is no better time to be in marketing, sales, advertising…business, PERIOD, than right now. When speaking with students in the local high school and college classrooms, I can’t help but be incredibly enthusiastic about their opportunities. The best piece of advice, therefore, is:

“Go forth and MAKE IT HAPPEN!”

Consumer Goods Vs. Professional Services

Many marketers and business managers insist on lumping professional services into the same category as consumer goods when it comes to “selling”. Maybe simplifying it in that way makes it easier for the next “GURU” to sell their magic bullets. Ever heard this: “If you do this (their idea) in ANY industry, you will be successful!”? Sorry to deflate anyone’s balloon, but it’s simply not true. There’s a HUGE difference between marketing and sales of consumer goods (often categorized as wants) and professional services (often recognized as needs). Here are couple of scenarios that may help explain the difference:

Scenario #1: Consumer Goods—The Auto Dealership

Would you agree that most people need a car to get back and forth to work? Is that the only criteria people consider when buying a car? If it were, everyone would be driving the same kind of car—one with an engine, 4 wheels, seat belts and airbags, etc…Just the basics and no more. We know that’s not how it really works, right? People usually have their heart set on a SPECIFIC car: A car that differentiates them from everyone else. And they tend to buy from whatever dealer will give them the best price on that car they want. A close friend may even be a sales rep, but if the dealership insists on a price that is perceived to be out of line, the customer has no problem going elsewhere to get the car they WANT. Even if it means their friend doesn’t get the sale.

Scenario #2: Professional Services—The Dentist’s Office

A patient visits their dentist’s office for a cleaning, but this isn’t a routine appointment: The X-ray identified an infected root that would soon reach a nerve ending. They are going to NEED a root canal. Does this patient WANT a root canal? Absolutely not, but NOT having one results in more pain than the procedure itself. Two key items of note: They aren’t likely to price-shop the procedure. They aren’t likely to seek help on their own. Instead, they’ll most likely get it done by the professional their dentist trusts enough to refer them (and they know is quite liberal with the use of anesthesia!)

Wants Versus Needs and Incentive Plans

Most sales representatives work on commission. This is certainly true for the auto industry. It’s no secret that the goal of every business is to make money. Where the chasm seems to be widening is in the actual FUNCTION of every business: The acquisition and maintenance of customers. Where the problem lies is in the priority of these two facets of business. In some cases, they seem to be reversed. It’s certainly why some professional service providers are getting so much attention these days. Let’s revisit the two stories again to explain why this is significant.

The Auto Dealership Revisited

When a customer WANTS a vehicle of a specific year, make, model, color, feature/accessory list, etc, they don’t care who they buy it from as long as that car makes it to their garage. The car they want may be very unique, but in most cases it’s still categorized as a commodity. They don’t necessarily need to trust the person or organization they are working with to buy that car…all that matters is that they get what they WANT. They also don’t care how much the person that completes the purchase agreement with them earns in commission. Again, they WANT that car. Anything else is irrelevant.

Back to the Dentist’s Office

Similar to the auto dealership experience, it’s likely that a patient isn’t going to care how much the root canal costs, especially if they have dental coverage. However, let’s say the dentist and the oral surgeon are part of a larger organization, and at the head is a CEO. One day, the CEO says: “We’re not doing enough root canals…You need to do more or else we’re going to have to cut out that part of the business.” One way to solve the problem is for the dentist and the oral surgeon to get together and come up with a way to diagnose and refer more root canals. Another way is for the oral surgeon to just do an additional one while the customer is under anesthesia, then bill them for it.

Question: IS EITHER SOLUTION ETHICAL?

(You really don’t NEED an answer to that, right?)

The difference between wants and needs is huge, but the one constant across ALL industries is the same:

FUNCTION PRECEDES GOALS EVERY TIME. THE ACQUISITION, MAINTENANCE, AND RETENTION OF CUSTOMERS IS WHAT ENABLES BUSINESS GOALS TO BE ACHIEVED.

What drives YOUR decisions?

Tribe Defined: An American Songwriter

Unless you’re a member of his tribe, I’m not sure how many people even know who Todd Snider is. I certainly didn’t until getting introduced to his music about 10 years ago. I was a captive audience: My friend was playing HIS music, in HIS car, on a 7-hour road trip to Memphis where HE was running a benefit marathon for St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital. Let’s say there wasn’t a lot of room for negotiation.

My friend literally had every one of Snider’s albums on his i-Pod. Initially I was skeptical, but after about the third song, I was thoroughly entertained. Why? Because between many of his songs, Todd Snider told a story that transitioned into the next track. Not random, pointless stories, either. These stories were HILARIOUS. By the end of the weekend, I was a BIG fan.

A few months later, my friend called to say that Todd Snider was doing a concert in the area and asked if I’d like to go along. Of course, I said: “Heck yeah!” The concert was in Cedar Rapids, at a small venue in a place called Czech Village. (Czech Village is the place that was severely damaged a couple of years later by the flood of 2008.) The venue seated about 250. When we walked in, we were instructed to “grab a chair”—a metal folding chair—and take it into the auditorium. Unique, right? Audience members could sit wherever they wanted in front of the stage, but it wasn’t disorganized…all chairs ended up in straight rows, just like a normal theater.

When Todd Snider came onstage, the crowd roared. The crazy thing was: They began engaging in conversation with him like he was in each of their living rooms. I’d never experienced anything quite like it in my life. He asked them: “What do you want to hear tonight?” The crowd responded with a variety of requests, but when he heard the one that correlated with his agenda, he started his performance. After each song, he again engaged his audience with another story or random conversation. When he was singing, the audience sang along, oftentimes as loud or louder (and in tune) with him. $65 a ticket for a community concert, and it was one of the most memorable experiences I’ve ever had in my life. Which is why I’ve seen Todd Snider two more times since then.

Many of you are likely thinking: “What does this story about an obscure folk musician have to do with marketing?” It has EVERYTHING to do with marketing, particularly the challenges CONTENT marketing is facing today. Here are four big ways:

1. Of the concerts I’ve attended, most of the venues seated LESS THAN 500 people. This means he prefers to play in more intimate settings. This enables him to know his community as well as they know him.

2. People travel for MILES to see him in concert. By miles, I mean from MULTIPLE STATES AWAY, sometimes as many as 8-10 hour drives. This is a tribe of LOYAL followers.

3. People relate to him intimately through his music, which is totally transparent. When the audience participates in the experience, it becomes far more memorable for everyone.

4. Community members INTRODUCE outsiders to join the party. Since his music isn’t played on the radio, XM, or Sirius satellite, the only means of discovery is personal introduction. Serving/entertaining the TRIBE is more important, more rewarding, and less costly than trying to serve the masses.

How has all of this worked out for Mr. Snider? Not being on the radio, not playing to sold-out 30,000+-seat venues, and not landing a “mainstream” record deal CAN’T be lucrative, right?

Wrong.
In Cedar Rapids, he pulled up in a customized Prevost tour bus. According to Wikipedia, he has an estimated net worth of over $2.5 million. Perhaps that doesn’t SOUND impressive, but there’s a hidden benefit to how he has gotten there and what he does every day: Todd Snider serves a very SPECIFIC TRIBE OF FOLLOWERS. He’s not focused on people that don’t like him or who have never been introduced to him through the tribe.

Like it or not, HE is WHO he is, and few performers I’ve ever seen have done it better.

Scaling IoT, AI, and CX

There’s a huge degree of inconsistency in the marketing world. Traditional leadership is beginning to see trouble on the horizon. Instead of opening the windows, they are battening down the hatches. Check out most corporate leadership profiles on LinkedIn and you will see either nothing at all or 500+ connections, very few of which are OUTSIDE their own organization. This is a statement, is it not? Unfortunately, the message is: “We don’t know what to do or how to do it.”

Several recent Twitter chats and LinkedIn conversations have turned focus on the Internet of Things, Artificial Intelligence, Customer Experience, and Value Propositions. At the same time, posts about new, up-and-coming social media platforms are diminishing in frequency. The other day I took a step back (while taking a few steps forward on the treadmill.) “What is the impetus for this transition?” Why have the conversations about social platforms evolved to IoT and AI?

People are settling into micro-communities (tribes) of other individuals who share complementary worldviews. In other words, they are at parties with the people they get along with. As a result, the content shock Mark W. Schaefer refers to in his book “The Content Code” is a condition that is intensifying daily, causing random marketing messages designed to get the attention of potential buyers to fade, even get tuned out, because members of those communities are fitting themselves with earbuds. They are only listening for the messages THEY wish to hear. It’s happening, folks, but where is all of this headed?

A few months back, I consulted a local programming team about designing a Tinder-like professional services matching app. (No, no , NO…not THAT KIND of professional services!) The idea was to provide a way for consumers to identify and connect with providers who were more compatible to their worldviews than those who have historically been randomly assigned by lead distribution systems utilized by most organizations. I’m glad I didn’t waste the four grand…. I think search is going to do this automatically in the near future. If you’ve got a second, I’ll be happy to explain how what we already have available is possibly going to evolve in a manner that will fulfill this vision, and change marketing forever in the process.

Three months ago, I listened to a “Nobody Likes It Cold” podcast which featured Drew D’Agostino, creator of CrystalKnows.com. You can catch it here. Two days later, I subscribed to the platform. If you are unfamiliar with what Crystal does, you really need to log on and see for yourself. Allow me to use it as an analogy for how the next few months may very well be a defining period in marketing history.

Crystal has integrated DISC to assess compatibility between individuals, then provides e-mail/communication templates through LI, FB, Twitter, GMail, and Outlook to boost the effectiveness of the exchanges. It also provides the degree of compatibility between two people. For example, it told me last week that a person I was considering interacting with shared only a 16% compatibility rating with me, going on to state that we would “have difficulty getting along.” I didn’t pursue communications with that person.

Now let’s take this Crystal example one step further: Have you ever used LinkedIn search? If so, you know that when you search an organization, you also get a list of people, sometimes 1st, 2nd and 3rd-degree connections, inside that organization, right? (When you look at the screen, the main search page features the company, but there is also a box to the right side of the screen that lists the number of connections you have on the inside.) Until Crystal arrived on the scene, there was no way of determining the compatibility between the people in those results and the individual searching for information. But wait: It gets better…

Monitoring IBM and others in recent Tweet chats indicates an uptick in the development and integration of AI and IoT on the immediate horizon. I asked a few good influencer friends this week if it was possible for search to utilize AI to assess the overwhelming amount of consumer data in a way that segments individuals into infinite categories (rather than just the 6 or 8 most organizations seem to believe exist). If so, was it then possible to add in an element of IoT, such as wearables, to acquire physiological responses to situations before, during and after the buying process. Finally, if this could actually happen, would the search THEN be able to match that consumer to not only a brand but a rep based on compatibility of worldviews, emotional and physiological support factors in a way that maximizes the customer experience through this matching process? Let’s just say I wasn’t told “no”.

Let’s recap, shall we?

First start with LinkedIn search.

Next add Crystal.

Finally, integrate AI and IoT.

Voila! Customers are matched by search to relevant brands and reps based on ORGANIC content (as Google has been leaning toward for a few years).

Here’s the kicker: Reps and brands who have been inactive or who are doing it wrong are deemed irrelevant… Or worse…

Invisible.

Time To Re-Run Your Lists

But first you must change the categories. The old way was to sort by name, address, city/state/zip and phone number, not necessarily in that order. Sales representatives used those criteria because they were expected to provide products and services to customers within a reasonable driving distance of their office location. They were expected to qualify people for products and services very early in the prospecting process. They, of course, needed to know prospects’ names, addresses, and phone numbers to ensure their after-hours marketing efforts weren’t going to be fruitless.

What percentage of today’s books of business are set up on those sort criteria? 50%? 70%? 90%? How territorial are the salespeople that serve those books of business? Over the top, right? They base their depth of relationships on the number of products and services they have sold their customers over the years. Now for the question that’s going to raise a lot of eyebrows: What percentage of customers bought before either party to the sale knew each other personally? How many of them would stay with their representative even if their best friend worked for a competitor with a competitive price point? No one reading this can honestly say that this has never happened to them. It happens all the time.

It’s always been said that selling multiple products to your customers insulates your book of business and establishes a consistent revenue stream by increasing retention. There is no disagreement that more product lines increase retention FOR THE BRAND. Where the disagreement arises is in the argument that customers who own a broad array of products and services distributed by one brand will remain with the representative that initially sold them even when someone enters the picture with whom they share a deeper personal connection. Herein lies the quandary: Does the brand care more about retaining their customer or which representative is serving them?

The old way of ensuring retention is no longer enough. Products and services are now automated. Customers no longer have to “sign here, now here, now here, now here”…on each page of a ream of paper the applications were printed on. They sign ONCE, ELECTRONICALLY, if even then. The myth that more product lines makes it harder for people to leave, and thus, increases retention, is BUSTED. Increasing retention today means sorting on an entirely different set of criteria that most companies don’t even have sortable categories for. They don’t even know what data they need.

Whoever figures that out first WINS BIG.

Marketing and Gambling: Synonyms?

Have you ever been to a casino? Flashing lights, poker tables, slot machines, craps, keno, blackjack, you name it…Most people go in with hopes of winning it big and come out with empty pockets. It’s just how the system works.

I worked for a man about 20 years ago that loved to gamble. He maintained a “fund” of about $4000 in the glovebox of his car and frequented the local casinos every weekend. For him, feeding the $100 slots was a recreational activity. To me, it seemed ludicrous that he was “burning Benjamins” on an activity in which the odds were NEVER in his favor. Perhaps it’s the way I was raised or the way I chose the activities to place my own bets on that formed my opinions about his behavior. It may have even formed a few professional opinions like this one: Most marketing is like gambling with house money.

If gambling is defined as “playing games of chance for money”, isn’t that what direct mail is? A business owner purchases a list of leads and downloads them into a prospecting platform. Not necessarily a CRM platform, as “CR” stands for “Customer Relationship”: In the initial stage of this game, there is no relationship. Following the definition, the names and addresses on the lists are acquired to have a CHANCE at generating enough revenue to RETURN the money to the house. For example, let’s say a list of 50 names and addresses is purchased for $100. That’s $2 per name, all of which are random. The GAMBLE is whether any prospect on the list will result in a sale. This is equivalent to pulling the arm of the $100 slot machine. Keep in mind that the average success rate for a direct mail program is LESS THAN TWO PERCENT. That means you get to pull the arm of the slot ONE TIME to even have a CHANCE to hit the jackpot. Let’s just say the odds are not in your favor. So why not choose a game with less chance and more control?

I’ve been to Vegas a few times, but gambling isn’t a rush like it is for other people. I don’t mind betting, but only on things that I have some element of control over: Like pool. The only true element of chance in a game of pool occurs on the break. After that, the skill of each player determines the outcome, not the random “lie” of the balls. The moment a great pool player gets their turn, the game is essentially over. Have you ever seen a tournament on TV where one of the players shoots one time…in FIVE GAMES? That’s what I’m talking about. Great players visualize the sequence in which they are going to pocket the balls before they even take their first shot. They know how to strike the cue ball in order to make it sit exactly where they want it to make the next shot. Great players OWN the table in a way that reduces or eliminates randomness. I was never close to “professional”, but had no problem throwing a $5 bill on the table before the break. If I lost, it was either MY fault or my opponent happened to be better in one game.

Online debates about the future or marketing are taking place daily. How-to posts about creating the best content for acquiring attention, building prospect lists, executing follow-up systems, and expanding networks are bombarding newsfeeds every 3 seconds. The question to ask is this: Who’s REALLY in control of the game, you or the HOUSE, with the house being the customer? That’s who you’re rolling the dice in hopes of attracting, right?

How many times can you afford to crap out?