I think everyone knows that a lot of data is collected as we conduct our daily digital activities. Google and the other search engines know what we’re looking for, Amazon and other commerce sites know what we’re shopping for, Facebook knows what we like, LinkedIn knows who we know, etc., etc., etc. These data footprints are collected and in many cases sold to marketers and their agents to allow them to serve ads to you. If any of that comes as a shock to you, I’m not sure where you’ve been for the last decade or more.
What you might not have thought about, however, is that the ads themselves collect data. How many times has someone seen it? What kind of person (that pesky data that the aforementioned guys have) has responded to an ad, and how well do the ads translate to sales (lovingly called the conversion rate as if someone is changing religions…). As it turns out, there is a bit of a controversy about who actually owns that data: the advertiser or the agency. The marketers believe that they are the rightful owners while the agency folks believe just as strongly that they are. Neither side feels that the publishers who serve the ads and, therefore make data collection possible, have much of a claim to it. Of course, even publishers came out ahead of one other group as the rightful owners in the survey: consumers.
As you can see in the chart, only 10% of advertisers and 15% of agency respondents believed that consumers had a claim to their own information. That’s tragic. Why? Because it represents a mindset that is ultimately self-defeating. It can lead to legal problems at worst and consumers opting out (if they can figure out how) at best. What have the advertiser or the agency done to give the consumer value for the data? Nothing, in my mind. One could argue that the ads they serve make possible the content the consumer enjoys, but those very ads make that enjoyment nearly impossible given the state of ad-serving today, particular in mobile.
Unless and until we on the marketing side see the consumer as at least an equal partner in our business and not as a bunch of rubes or just as “data”, the problems with ad blocking, anti-spam rules, and other protective measures aren’t going to go away. What will go away are the people represented by the very data over which the agencies and marketers are fighting. You agree?
Here we are, the last week of the Summer, and I think I need to take a writing break. For you loyalists in the audience, you know that I try to post 300-400 fresh words each weekday. That’s on top of trying to keep up with the income-generating portion of my life meaning doing consulting work. As I’m sitting here this morning, I’ve realized a few things:
- Not a lot of folks are working or reading stuff this week so my brilliant take on the world will mostly go unheard;
- There isn’t a lot of “stuff” going on in the media, marketing, or tech worlds this week so there won’t be a lot of news to write about;
- I’m kind of tired and maybe even burnt out on this blogging stuff.
It’s the last point that is most relevant. I don’t want to short-change your investment of time in the screed by delivering meh material. It’s what I’m always writing about: understand your customers and surpass their expectations. It’s not that I didn’t have a few topics hit me as I read the paper this morning but they’ll keep.
With the above in mind, I’m taking the rest of the week and the long Labor Day Weekend off from the blog. I hope to come back next Tuesday with some new perspectives and insights that are worth your time. In the interim, you can find all the older posts archived if you miss me. You can always email me too, especially if you’re in need of someone to work with your business (shameless plug!). Have a good week!
This Foodie Friday comes in the midst of various companies announcing their financial results. One of those companies is Wendy’s, which reported weaker than expected sales growth. That’s not particularly unusual for any company, but I think there’s a business lesson in the thinking behind their reasoning for the weak results. Let’s see what you think.
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
According to Wendy’s, people aren’t dining out as much because it has gotten even cheaper to eat at home. Bulletin to the financial folks at the company: it’s generally been cheaper to eat at home. I can’t ever recall anyone I know saying let’s go out to eat and save some money, even when our destination is a fast-food place. In my mind, that’s not why people choose to dine out. It may be more convenient or they might just not feel like cooking. Maybe there is a time crunch (although unless you’re already out and about, you can probably whip up a couple of burgers in the time it would take to get to Wendy’s and eat). Wendy’s isn’t alone in either the weak results or the unusual reasoning, at least according to this article:
The results from Wendy’s follow disappointing sales from other chains including McDonald’s, Burger King, Dunkin’ Donuts and Starbucks. The other chains have cited a variety of reasons, including the political uncertainty created by the presidential election, for their performance.
Let’s accept that their reasoning is sound (hmm). Any of us in business realize that there are always any number factors beyond our control. Commodity prices, which can be strongly influenced by the biggest thing out of our control – the weather – are certainly one factor in the food industry. What we can control is how we give our customers a reason to come patronize us, regardless of the cost. We ought to be selling value. Unfortunately, in the food business “value menu” has become synonymous with “cheap.” That can only work for so long, especially, as in this case, as the costs of making our product or providing our service rise.
Solve consumers’ problems and provide excellent value at a reasonable (but profitable) cost. Give them a reason to turn off the stove and get in the car. Let’s see where that gets us.
We’ve all been through a job interview at one time or another. Even those of us who work for ourselves meet with potential clients or vendors and an interview of sorts takes place. I always judged the success of those sessions by the quality of the questions asked and I’d like us to take just a minute to think about that topic. I’ve written before about the specific questions I ask a job candidate. Today is more abot the quality of questions that the candidate or prospective partner asks you.
First, who is doing the talking? Is the candidate or the interviewer guiding the discussion? My feeling is that the candidate should do more of the guiding of the meeting by asking phenomenal questions. Obviously, there are specific things the interviewer or potential client must elicit, but the truth is that a hiring candidate needs just as much information to be divulged in that discussion.
For example, for every discussion point made about the current business, can the speaker provide a concrete example? If not, maybe they’re speaking about that they want and not about what they have. When they talk about metrics, are they actionable and insightful such as cost per acquisition and the average customer value, or are they vanity metrics like web traffic or social “likes”?
Candidates or potential suppliers/partners who ask the right questions and challenge assumptions are way more valuable than those who don’t. Which are you?
One of the really special things about the holiday season in my town is the concert put on each year by the high school music department. They held the 75th annual one over the weekend and it was great. It also offered us an instructive business point as well.
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The school’s band, orchestra, chorale, and choir all perform. While I never played in the orchestra, I did play in my school’s band (saxophone, thanks for asking) and I sang in the choir. When I go to concerts of this sort, I always listen for the one thing my conductors used to emphasize: the blend. If you’ve ever gone to a school concert, inevitably you hear the voice or playing of a really talented kid above all the others. That’s exactly what you don’t want to hear, because it has the effect of distorting the overall sound. Really wonderful musical groups sing and play as one instrument. Every component of that instrument is in sync – on exactly the same beat with exactly the same dynamics. It’s the conductor‘s responsibility to make that happen. I recall how when our musical groups were doing extremely well in rehearsal, the conductor would often walk to the back of the auditorium and listen. We were all working together so well that we really didn’t need to be lead.
Like that conductor, a great manager needs to be able to make the blend happen. We need to let individuals sing their parts loudly, but we have to blend all of those parts together in a single, overarching product that’s our brand presented as one. Without the blend, it’s just a cacophony. It’s not just within your own unit either. The blending across departments is critical today more than ever. As an example, think about how marketing and tech have become so totally intertwined. The Chief Marketing Officer must blend with the Chief Technical Officer in a seamless duet or the organization is absolutely not going to sound right.
The next time you hear some live music, listen for the blend and think of your company. Are you putting out a unified sound that’s greater than the sum of its parts, or does the world hear a lot of strong pieces that are disjointed and not pleasing to the ear?
Even though the snow is melting, with over a foot still on the ground I suspect it will be quite some time before I’m back on the golf course. That won’t stop me from thinking about it, however. If you’ve read the screed with any regularity you know that I often find business lessons in the game and today I want to point out another one which came to mind.
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
On the golf course I have a nasty habit of beating myself up mentally. I might hit a few good shots in a row but the subsequent bad shot (I’m not very good so there are quite a few of those) tends to stay with me. Rather than considering the offline shot an anomaly I take it to be an indicator that I truly stink at the game and will never be any good and I should not be out here and…well, you get the idea. The worst part of it is that those thoughts continue as I stand over the only shot that matters on a golf course – the next one. A sports psychologist would tell you that I’m not staying in the present – my mind is focused on something that’s done and over which I no longer have any control. This is bad on a physical level since anger creates tension and tension is not your friend while trying to swing a golf club. Obviously it’s not great for your blood pressure either. But it’s also bad on a mental level because I’m focused on the wrong thing – the last shot, not the next one.
We do this in business too. We all make mistakes – it’s part of learning and growing. The key to being really successful is to learn from those mistakes and to forgive yourself. We can’t change the shots we’ve already hit so we need to move on mentally and emotionally. We can’t hit “undo” on many of our business choices but we can continue to write them anew each day. This applies to dealing with others – subordinates, partners, etc. – as well as to ourselves. Forgive and remember, maybe?
My golf game is a constant work in progress. So is my business life. I’ve vowed not to get angry on the course for more than a few seconds after a bad hit and then to let it go. I’ll forgive myself for my mistake. I’ll try to figure out what happened and fix it but attempt to do so without anger or fear. Golf is hard. So is business. Every shot is a new chance. So is every day in business.
You ready to try that with me?