The distinctive idea generation process – more questions than answers

The campaign creation process seems to be getting forever tighter with less time available to produce distinctive ideas. At the same time the industry sees and is calling for technologically driven ideas that can overcome peoples basic indifference to normal advertising and not just engage but enchant as mega Tweeter Guy Kawasaki puts it. But there is a major disconnect here right? It’s a false economy to suggest we can create distinctive campaign executions with little time. The pre-thought that goes into distinctive executions like Virgin’s recent Echo Temple as well as its execution must be vast. Ok that may be a bad example, Mini’s iPhone [ARG] game that involved users holding or stealing a virtual Mini to get an actual one is also a bad example because they were obviously tied to campaigns and massively ticked the distinctive box. But how can the industry consistently come up with ideas that are this distinctive with reduced timeframes?

What process can we follow so that distinctive ideas are common place for brands in a country like Australia? Do we employ a parallel process that explores ideas against no tactical strategic objective but instead against the brand idea itself and the aim of creating enchantment with the brand via a highly distinctive idea. Of course this route will not always yield a positive outcome, but maybe it shouldn’t be pressured to. Maybe it should be a work in progress route that if it yields something great but if it doesn’t it doesn’t jeopardize a brands broader marketing plans because normal campaign idea generation is in progress as well.

This is probably what W+K are doing with the launch of Dam Armada blogged about today in Campaign brief see ref: http://bit.ly/pyvq2H

It is also interestingly a process we are seeing more of in regards to Facebook community engagement. Ideas that are campaign agnostic and are designed in line with the brand essence but are there to engage this one audience. Like this then we may be able to invent another channel, the uber engagement channel, a channel that is like Facebook independent of campaign executions but can only be populated by ideas that are uber engaging or as Guy Kawasaki puts it enchanting.

Original campaign refs: http://www.digitalbuzzblog.com/virgin-mobile-freefest-the-echo-temple-installation/

http://www.digitalbuzzblog.com/mini-getaway-arg-game-in-stockholm-2010/


Facebook’s changes are absolutely necessary

Its fair to say that brands and content providers of all descriptions are continuing to develop greater presences on Facebook which unabated would just lead to cluttering and spamming of the all valuable newsfeed. So Facebook have to make it harder for brands to access a user’s newsfeed or the user experience will decrease and so too the users demand for Facebook. It was always inevitable.

The changes make it harder for brands to connect with fans but to me that highlights two things: firstly that brands have under delivered on the level of engagement that should be delivered to a brands fans, and second that the fans of a brand, i.e. the ones that actually have a conversation with the brand in Facebook will end up being the true fans of the brand, adorers not just passing interestees.

Its a tangible reminder that people are largely indifferent to bland messaging and that brands have to now, and should have always anyway, over delivered on the engagement front.


Beyond the ‘like’

Several years ago now the industry of digital marketers spoke of engagement beyond the click and it soon became the catch cry of deepening engagement with users via digital. Then the industries attention was turned to ‘likes’ and now it has become a metric of focus. This metric of course focused on the size of a branded community the brand had mustered which was worn like a crest of honour around organisations by their marketing teams. This metric is still very important and a ‘like’ is quite reasonably but still arguably much more valuable than a click. But the industry is now moving past this metric as the main focal point. Engagement again is becoming the focus with response or feedback being the goal. This is in part a mandate now from Facebook with it’s Edgerank algorithm but it is also best practice if a brand is to properly leverage it community.

There is a further extension of this idea of beyond the like though and that is leveraging the other major dimension of social media which is advocacy. A recent comScore research report stated that:

“…typical approaches that focus on raw fan counts, or the total number of engagements on a given piece of content, fail to depict the potential and realized scope of social media brand impressions.”

Stating that the friends of fans should be a crucial part of the social media strategy and went as far as to say that it is the friends of fans that should be the real target of social media activity. It makes sense, another study by Opinionway showed that 84% of Facebook fans are existing consumers, which is hardly surprising but it is a reminder that we need to focus on this important dimension of social media as well being advocacy and not just that of the two way dialogue between the brand and the people that already consume it. It depends on the category of course. For something like a chocolate bar it pays to stay top of mind and maintain affinity with a community given people routinely eat chocolate, but why stop there? If a friend of a fan of the chocolate bar sees their friend engaged with good content and posts it will have a positive effect on that friends propensity to consume the same brand of chocolate bar.

So its time we raised the bar on engagement through social media and it’s not just to make sure our fans are seeing our posts instead of a more engaging competitors but mainly because advocacy is the most powerful form of advertising.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.