Does the following describe your PR plan? Send out a press release, hope someone runs it. If it runs, hope someone reads it.
If so, you’re missing out on numerous opportunities to expand the impact of your good news. In today’s communications arena, a broadening mix of new technology, traditional and non-traditional media and social networking is opening new avenues to reach and engage your target audiences.
One of our manufacturing clients has taken the lead in getting more productivity out of their PR. As part of a strategic initiative to integrate PR coverage into other marketing activities, they’re making their PR coverage multitask as content in a customer e-newsletter campaign, and with great results.
And our client doesn’t stop there. One win begets many more, in a chain reaction of PR productivity. It starts with the initial press coverage—an interview, byline article or news announcement (that’s one communications method). That gets turned around and used in an e-newsletter (that’s two). That e-newsletter is then aligned with the sales force through an e-mail sent out from the VP of sales explaining how to leverage this coverage in their sales efforts (we’re at three now). The newsletter may be posted on the company’s web site (do I hear four?). With a focus on informative, helpful content, the e-newsletter potentially becomes a pass- along, or viral, communications vehicle (that’s five). If done right, the content can even lead to word-of-mouth discussion around the customer’s office (six) and may open the door to future marketing communication uses down the road.
The point is, a PR campaign has great potential beyond the published, aired or posted initial coverage. Technology opens the doors to get more out of your budget dollars, increase brand awareness and further position your company as an expert in your industry.
Next time you see your company’s name in print, online or on the airwaves, don’t just clip it and forget it. Make it multitask for you. Get it out there any way you can for your customers and prospects to absorb.
Friday, August 17, 2007
Thursday, August 9, 2007
4 Key Trends in Lead Generation: How Will You Adapt?
Marketing Sherpa is a storehouse of always valuable, sometimes surprising business marketing knowledge. For example, I recently sat in on a Sherpa webinar showcasing some fascinating new research findings on “B2B Marketing Lead Generation, Nurturing & Conversion Stats & Tactics.”
The presentation was loaded with interesting tidbits:
“Marketing to a growing number of people involved in the buying process” is today’s biggest marketing challenge. More and more, we’re all marketing and selling to a “committee.” We’re struggling to appeal to and gain consensus among all the members at once.
Target audiences demand instant satisfaction. If you don’t make it available with a mouse click, they’re not interested. They don’t want to fill out your form and wait for you to mail them a whitepaper. This suggests that, in lead generation at the very least, whitepapers are outdated.
From a tactical perspective, the old meets the new. Telemarketing is still effective if done properly. At the same time, webinar traffic is increasing daily (case study: the Marketing Sherpa presentation discussed here).
Perhaps the most interesting finding:
80% of decision makers said THEY FOUND their key vendor(s), not the other way around.
As a marketing communications professional, I at first winced at this last revelation. Despite our best marketing communications, public relations and sales efforts, our customers are taking the credit for finding us—instead of us finding them!
But maybe it’s better that customers think that way, because then it means we’re doing our jobs without intruding. What’s important is that we get through to customers, one way or another.
The underlying lesson? It’s more important than ever that you know where your targets look for information. Industry publications, the Internet, trade shows ... You need to be there, where and when they’re searching. Just as important, you need to seize every contact opportunity by sharing a compelling, memorable message about why your target audiences should choose you over the competition.
If you’re not there in front of customer and prospects, sharing your powerful message, your competitors are likely to be.
The presentation was loaded with interesting tidbits:
“Marketing to a growing number of people involved in the buying process” is today’s biggest marketing challenge. More and more, we’re all marketing and selling to a “committee.” We’re struggling to appeal to and gain consensus among all the members at once.
Target audiences demand instant satisfaction. If you don’t make it available with a mouse click, they’re not interested. They don’t want to fill out your form and wait for you to mail them a whitepaper. This suggests that, in lead generation at the very least, whitepapers are outdated.
From a tactical perspective, the old meets the new. Telemarketing is still effective if done properly. At the same time, webinar traffic is increasing daily (case study: the Marketing Sherpa presentation discussed here).
Perhaps the most interesting finding:
80% of decision makers said THEY FOUND their key vendor(s), not the other way around.
As a marketing communications professional, I at first winced at this last revelation. Despite our best marketing communications, public relations and sales efforts, our customers are taking the credit for finding us—instead of us finding them!
But maybe it’s better that customers think that way, because then it means we’re doing our jobs without intruding. What’s important is that we get through to customers, one way or another.
The underlying lesson? It’s more important than ever that you know where your targets look for information. Industry publications, the Internet, trade shows ... You need to be there, where and when they’re searching. Just as important, you need to seize every contact opportunity by sharing a compelling, memorable message about why your target audiences should choose you over the competition.
If you’re not there in front of customer and prospects, sharing your powerful message, your competitors are likely to be.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Stay Silent or Take a Stand?
The leaders of the NFL and the NBA recently came upon two public relations minefields. Unless you never watch any TV news and have no access to, say, SI.com, you’re aware of the Michael Vick/Dog Fighting issue in the NFL and the Referee-in-the-Back-Pocket-of-the-Mob issue in the NBA.
These negative issues cut to the core of some fundamental social and professional ethics. How did NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and NBA Commissioner David Stern respond? Both commissioners, as the leaders of their respective organizations, had a small window of opportunity to demonstrate exactly where their organizations draw the line between right and wrong. But days went by before either leader made any semblance of a leadership move.
In today’s 24/7 news cycle, a leader of any organization – much less one as public as the NFL or the NBA – doesn’t have the luxury of days to formulate a response to scandal. Customers and employees are looking to the leader to “tell” them just what the organization stands for. To do this quickly, the organization and its leadership must have already-at-hand declarations of their core values. Any delay in publicly responding to these situations means one of two things: either the organization doesn’t really know what it stands for, or the organization is afraid to take this stand.
My father believed that you never get a true measure of a human being (or an organization, for purposes of this post) until you see how he or she (or it) performs during stressful situations. It’s easy to say you’re for or against something when nothing’s on the line. But how you speak and act in times of crisis is the real test that determines what customers, employees and the public think about your values.
It’s a pass/fail test, one that Goodell and Stern have failed. You can, and should, do better.
These negative issues cut to the core of some fundamental social and professional ethics. How did NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and NBA Commissioner David Stern respond? Both commissioners, as the leaders of their respective organizations, had a small window of opportunity to demonstrate exactly where their organizations draw the line between right and wrong. But days went by before either leader made any semblance of a leadership move.
In today’s 24/7 news cycle, a leader of any organization – much less one as public as the NFL or the NBA – doesn’t have the luxury of days to formulate a response to scandal. Customers and employees are looking to the leader to “tell” them just what the organization stands for. To do this quickly, the organization and its leadership must have already-at-hand declarations of their core values. Any delay in publicly responding to these situations means one of two things: either the organization doesn’t really know what it stands for, or the organization is afraid to take this stand.
My father believed that you never get a true measure of a human being (or an organization, for purposes of this post) until you see how he or she (or it) performs during stressful situations. It’s easy to say you’re for or against something when nothing’s on the line. But how you speak and act in times of crisis is the real test that determines what customers, employees and the public think about your values.
It’s a pass/fail test, one that Goodell and Stern have failed. You can, and should, do better.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Truth in Advertising: A Refreshing Approach
With an enduring perception of consumer advertising as rife with exaggeration and half-truths, the American public has over time been desensitized. We’ve tolerated a certain degree of “dishonesty” because it has become commonplace in TV, radio, print and even electronic ads.
But what has contributed to this situation? Tobacco advertising has certainly had an impact. In the annals of advertising history, smoking was typically depicted as fun or seductive. Cigarette manufacturers continued their glamorous portrayal of smoking even as evidence mounted that it caused numerous ill effects—until, of course, they were forced to change their behavior.
The cosmetic industry has been even more blatant with their claims. Even with constant exposés on ineffective products and less than remarkable results, purchasers continue to view these products as the equivalent to the fountain of youth. So, while we know we are being tricked, we continue to buy and use these products thinking we’ll find the one that does work.
The pharmaceutical industry is another case and point. We continue to look for a magic pill, a panacea for what ails us. Many over-the-counter and prescription drug ads have come under fire for false or misleading claims. But the nearly $3 billion spent each year on prescription drug campaigns says that people are being influenced by this advertising. Truth in Advertising: Rx Drug Ads Come of Age
Earlier this month, we witnessed a new approach to product advertising. With the release of the much heralded, first FDA-approved, over the counter diet pill, Alli™ , consumers were given a harsh dose of reality instead of smoke and mirrors. They were told that this pill could prevent the body from absorbing fat in some foods if, and only if, they became active participants in the diet process.
In an advertising campaign that is expected to cost more than $150 million in the first year alone, GlaxoSmithKline’s ad agency says, “The campaign is aimed at a jaded consumer.” It doesn’t offer a magic bullet, or in this case, a magic pill. It encourages lifestyle changes. In order for the pill to be effective, people need to eat right and exercise more. A unique solution? No. But certainly an honest, refreshing approach to promoting the product!
On the mini-site created in conjunction with the product launch http://www.myalli.com/, GlaxoSmithKline boldly states, “It’s time for an honest voice. A promise kept.” Is this the beginning of a new era in advertising? We hope so.
Obviously, the best advertising advice is to tell the truth. Honesty is indeed the best policy. It creates a trust relationship with your target audience that outlives any immediate gain realized by quick-hit ads relying on half-truths and exaggeration. And while it may take some time for this approach to catch on, if you follow this bit of advice, you’ll at least enjoy the peace of mind that comes with a clear conscience.
But what has contributed to this situation? Tobacco advertising has certainly had an impact. In the annals of advertising history, smoking was typically depicted as fun or seductive. Cigarette manufacturers continued their glamorous portrayal of smoking even as evidence mounted that it caused numerous ill effects—until, of course, they were forced to change their behavior.
The cosmetic industry has been even more blatant with their claims. Even with constant exposés on ineffective products and less than remarkable results, purchasers continue to view these products as the equivalent to the fountain of youth. So, while we know we are being tricked, we continue to buy and use these products thinking we’ll find the one that does work.
The pharmaceutical industry is another case and point. We continue to look for a magic pill, a panacea for what ails us. Many over-the-counter and prescription drug ads have come under fire for false or misleading claims. But the nearly $3 billion spent each year on prescription drug campaigns says that people are being influenced by this advertising. Truth in Advertising: Rx Drug Ads Come of Age
Earlier this month, we witnessed a new approach to product advertising. With the release of the much heralded, first FDA-approved, over the counter diet pill, Alli™ , consumers were given a harsh dose of reality instead of smoke and mirrors. They were told that this pill could prevent the body from absorbing fat in some foods if, and only if, they became active participants in the diet process.
In an advertising campaign that is expected to cost more than $150 million in the first year alone, GlaxoSmithKline’s ad agency says, “The campaign is aimed at a jaded consumer.” It doesn’t offer a magic bullet, or in this case, a magic pill. It encourages lifestyle changes. In order for the pill to be effective, people need to eat right and exercise more. A unique solution? No. But certainly an honest, refreshing approach to promoting the product!
On the mini-site created in conjunction with the product launch http://www.myalli.com/, GlaxoSmithKline boldly states, “It’s time for an honest voice. A promise kept.” Is this the beginning of a new era in advertising? We hope so.
Obviously, the best advertising advice is to tell the truth. Honesty is indeed the best policy. It creates a trust relationship with your target audience that outlives any immediate gain realized by quick-hit ads relying on half-truths and exaggeration. And while it may take some time for this approach to catch on, if you follow this bit of advice, you’ll at least enjoy the peace of mind that comes with a clear conscience.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Don’t Waste Visitors’ Time with Unrefined Web Copy
If you’re lucky, someone who visits your website has at least a vague interest in your company. Don’t take that interest for granted by overwhelming them with words.
Of course, you probably have plenty to say. B to B companies’ complex products and services often need explanation. But website visitors typically are seeking clear, specific information—answers they can find quickly and easily. A disorganized “information dump” won’t do. And yet, at many B to B corporate sites, that’s exactly what visitors get.
I’m not advocating a slash-and-burn approach to copy. But we do counsel our clients to leave as many of the technical details as possible to in-person meetings, where the vast majority of sales still get closed. As this recent ClickZ post points out, online copy should be relevant, credible and short.
In other words, show your website visitors everything they need to know—nothing more and nothing less. Click here to see an example of a new website we developed driven by that philosophy, for Poblocki Sign Company.
A clear, concise and compelling website requires difficult choices about content, strategic thinking about how to organize information and repeated refinement of copy until all that’s left is the brand and key details in an easy-to-scan format. Also, don’t forget to tell people to continue the conversation on the phone or in person.
All that takes time, but it’s time you’ll save your website visitors. They’ll find the initial information they want to know quickly … and they'll be more likely to pick up the phone to learn more.
Of course, you probably have plenty to say. B to B companies’ complex products and services often need explanation. But website visitors typically are seeking clear, specific information—answers they can find quickly and easily. A disorganized “information dump” won’t do. And yet, at many B to B corporate sites, that’s exactly what visitors get.
I’m not advocating a slash-and-burn approach to copy. But we do counsel our clients to leave as many of the technical details as possible to in-person meetings, where the vast majority of sales still get closed. As this recent ClickZ post points out, online copy should be relevant, credible and short.
In other words, show your website visitors everything they need to know—nothing more and nothing less. Click here to see an example of a new website we developed driven by that philosophy, for Poblocki Sign Company.
A clear, concise and compelling website requires difficult choices about content, strategic thinking about how to organize information and repeated refinement of copy until all that’s left is the brand and key details in an easy-to-scan format. Also, don’t forget to tell people to continue the conversation on the phone or in person.
All that takes time, but it’s time you’ll save your website visitors. They’ll find the initial information they want to know quickly … and they'll be more likely to pick up the phone to learn more.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Transparency: If China Can Do It…
What can captains of capitalism learn from Maoist communists? Transparency is not impossible, and, in fact, it may have strategic value in advancing an agenda. As part of China being awarded the 2008 Olympics, reported National Public Radio, the communist government was required to lift bans on foreign journalists covering activity within the country. Academics speculate this is a strong signal China will loosen media regulations beyond the Olympics, creating a more open society.
Granted, media reforms are scheduled to end after the Olympics, and old habits of strong-arm tacticians are dying hard as media attempt to access more information. But if the communists see strategic value in opening a notoriously repressive society to media scrutiny—even for a short time—might there be value in private companies doing the same to advance their agendas?
Granted, media reforms are scheduled to end after the Olympics, and old habits of strong-arm tacticians are dying hard as media attempt to access more information. But if the communists see strategic value in opening a notoriously repressive society to media scrutiny—even for a short time—might there be value in private companies doing the same to advance their agendas?
Friday, June 1, 2007
A New Study Shows Many Are Beginning to Embrace Emerging Media Opportunities. Are You?
“Never before in history has innovation offered the promise of so much to so many in so short a time.” - Bill Gates
Although Mr. Microsoft’s words referred to today’s pace of technological innovation in general, they’re especially relevant in the specific context of new media opportunities. No other period in history has seen the emergence of as many distinctly new media options as the one we find ourselves in today.
But most major advertisers have been reluctant to leave the comfortable embrace of traditional media (TV, radio, newspaper, magazines, etc.). Sure… they’ve talked about and dabbled in new media, but their budgets have remained firmly entrenched in the old stand-bys. However, recent survey data shows that the major players may finally be ready to “put their money where their mouths are.”
According to the 2007 Media Investment Survey conducted by the American Advertising Federation (AAF)—on whose national board I serve—nearly three-quarters of respondents are reserving up to 20% of their media investment budgets for experimentation in the new media ecosystem. In fact, 52% say… “I am more likely to anticipate, prepare for, and get out in front of changes in the media landscape.”
Many recent developments in new media were long-anticipated (TV programs on the internet, text messaging, social media). However, the pace of innovation is such that there several also caught the industry by surprise, including:
- The rush to Second Life-type virtual community space
- The rise of YouTube
- The popularity of mash-ups or Web applications that have more than one source
"Without change there is no innovation, creativity, or incentive for improvement."
- William Pollard
All these new options are a boon for the creative output of the advertising industry. In fact, a full 87.4% of respondents believe that media innovations inspire creativity, and they’re willing to invest their budgets to harness that creativity.
When asked about approaches to media planning in the coming year, respondents ranked “I am always open to new ways to use traditional media” highest (at 78 percent), followed by “the right media mix almost always includes a balance of traditional and nontraditional media” (at 75.5 percent), and “the search for new media properties to grow my brand never stops” (at 57.7 percent).
The AAF survey makes it abundantly clear that there will never again be “business as usual” regarding media options available to the advertising and marketing industry. The pace of change is such that those that are not in a constant state of experimentation and will fast find themselves at a severe competitive disadvantage.
The AAF Media Investment Survey 2007 included nearly 1,000 advertising industry leaders, spread across agency (38 percent), media (26.9 percent), advertiser/client (13.6 percent) and other (21.4 percent, composed mostly of suppliers and academics) sectors, with the majority being at the director (19 percent), owner (18 percent) or manager (17.6 percent) level. Nearly 31 percent of participants are part of a team that makes the final media investment decision for their company. A full summary of the survey results can be found here (PowerPoint document, 891k).
***
The Small Business Times' BizBlog posted this entry on their daily blog. Check it out!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
SAVE TO DEL.ICIO.US