Category Archives: Thinking Aloud

Hitting The Line

If you’ve ever played  or watched tennis, one thing you know is that the players seem to approach each point with a plan.

tennis

(Photo credit: Marc Di Luzio)

To a certain extent they play the points backward – what shot do I want to set up, which positioning and speed of the serve will let me do that, and where do I want to hit it?  Part of the equation involves moving the opponent around, far away from your intended target.  Ideally, you can hit it just next to a sideline or the baseline depending on your plan.  The nearer to the line the shot lands, the more likely it is to be a winner.  There’s also an increased chance you lose the point by hitting it out.

Often when one watches high-speed Motorsports, the “high line” is the one that many drivers choose on an oval course.  Generally, the racing groove nearest the wall allows the cars to go faster even if they’re travelling a slightly longer distance (think of concentric circles – low vs. high).  It’s better to go faster and generally the high line is way to do that.  It’s also the line closest to the wall.  Hit the wall – go over the line – and you’re done.

There are similar analogies in golf (aiming for a target along a preferred line with a hazard line along the same flight path) and baseball (bunting very near a base line almost always works better for a hit than closer to the pitcher but it’s just as likely to be a strike for a foul ball).  What each of the athletes involved needs to do is to develop a plan that revolves around their tolerance for risk and the availability of a reward.  You might get spectacular results and you just might cross the line, crash, and burn.

Think of those athletes as you approach your business.  What’s your tolerance for risk?  Is the value of the reward worth going over the line?  I think most great athletes hit those lines – the places where very few can put themselves consistently and win.  To me, that sounds like a pretty good business plan if you can tolerate the risk.  You?

Enhanced by Zemanta

1 Comment

Filed under Thinking Aloud

Ratings Are Back-Assward

I saw something this morning with which I agree totally. It’s a statement, reported in MediaPost, by Starcom MediaVest Group CEO Laura Desmond about how media is measured and how consumers’ multi-screen consumption makes the traditional methods far less useful. As she said: “We need to invest in new measurement techniques for brands.”  That’s right, except that for the most part what we hear about has nothing to do with brands.  In fact, what we do now, and what I expect the industry will do in the future is completely backward.  Let me explain.

When you read about the most-viewed content of the week, have you ever seen a mention of a commercial?  Nope.  It’s all about programs – The Voice or Idol or Duck Dynasty.  The measurements, as Ms. Desmond said, tend to be channel-specific and, therefore, might not reflect all of the consumption that’s occurring.  The point that’s missed from a marketing perspective is that brands use these ratings to estimate how many times their ad was seen and what value they derived from their investment.  My question is this:

Why are we measuring for one thing and reporting for another?

If what we’re after is how many people are seeing a message, why do we care about the vehicle in which that message is delivered?  The industry makes the programming entities measure themselves (fair, since that’s who’s getting paid to deliver the message) but then assumes everyone watching sees the message (OK, I know some folks adjust the numbers slightly but humor my rant here, please).  Why aren’t we working on a system where a brand message carries some sort of tag across all channels that would allow all the impressions to aggregate?  Further, those tags could be used much like cookies to track conversions.  Since it’s the brands that pay for the impressions, should it be their own results that are tracked?

If the industry follows Ms. Desmond’s thinking and does invest in new techniques to measure cross-channel results, they’ll have a hard time if what they’re measuring are programs.  Many programs aren’t in all the places brands want to go.  Some are sold by different sales entities across channels.  It’s backward to measure an inconsistent series of channels instead of the consistent brand who is paying the bills.

What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Thinking Aloud

Remoulade

Foodie Friday Fun time! Today our topic is a sauce many of you have had with crab cakes, french fries, cold beef filet, or many other dishes called remoulade. Other than spelling, and the fact that it’s good, that’s about where the agreement ends.

Français : Sauce rémoulade faite sans mayonnaise

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I was chatting with a dear friend and fellow cook on the topic (we had dined at a place with excellent remoulade years ago and were trying to figure it out) and realized that we didn’t even know where to start.  Unlike many dishes, remoulade is a bit of a chameleon, changing itself based on its enviroment.

Cajun remoulade is different from French, which varies from Belgian.  Is it mayonnaise-based or more of an aioli (I know – splitting hairs bit still…)? Is there ketchup in it or not? Anchovies? Do we use French cornichons or a dill pickle? Capers – in or out (is that a master’s thesis topic or what)?  In fact, maybe it’s more of a condiment than a sauce?  Tell a cook to make a remoulade and you’ll get one of several things, each of which is “right” based on the cook’s background.  It’s unlike one of the “mother sauces” which are very specific. Which is the business point.

Most business issues are like remoulade – there is more than one right answer.  As my friend said, “there are so many different ways and you don’t know which one is right for the job, maybe you should just give them a list of options and let them pick the one that suits their needs the best.”  Good advice for consultants like me and other business folks like you.  What can hamper our business success is thinking that there is just ONE way to accomplish the goal.  We need to focus on “a” right answer, not “the.”

We haven’t quite deduced how this restaurant made their remoulade – they’re out of business now so we can’t go back and ask – but we’ll keep trying.  What we do know is that their answer to the remoulade question was unique and worked for them with their food.  That’s just like the answers to most of your business questions are.  You with me?

Enhanced by Zemanta

1 Comment

Filed under food, Thinking Aloud