Published: October 18, 2009 in articles » management by Thomas Baekdal
There is a whole generation of people who need to change how they communicate with the world. Just this week, Michelin hired TBWA to create a Facebook campaign around their slogan "The right rite changes everything," in an attempt to rebrand the Michelin Man.
Companies like Michelin just don't get it. That kind of thinking will get you nowhere on the social web. The world doesn't work that way anymore. We don't want to connect with a slogan. We don't follow a logo. We don't care about your message.
Traditional marketing is not compatible with the social world. The social web is not just a different format; it is a completely different form of communication.
To illustrate just how drastically the world has changed; I created this short story (which you can also download as a PowerPoint or Keynote presentation below).
Twenty years ago, marketing was a one way street. A company created something that they thought they could sell, and then spent an enormous amount of money on ads in newspapers, magazine, billboards, and on TV.
Because this was the only way to get mass information, it kind of worked. We were impressed by fancy full page ads with cute images, or huge billboards.
But, the problem was that there was no communication. You could see the ads, but you could not respond to them. You couldn't provide feedback. It was like watching a (often) really boring art show.
Then came the internet. And it brought with it the ability to interact with people. You could create a campaign that people could respond to. Create surveys or interactive experiences.
It was every marketers dream. To be able to fully immerse people in your campaign were like having a virtual amusement park at your finger tips. Can we all say interactive bonanza? Weeeeeee!
Except, the advertising industry completely missed what the internet was really about. If people could interact with your ad, Then maybe they could also interact with other parts of the company? Maybe they could complain about a product? Maybe they could demand that you solved their problems? Maybe people could ask the bad questions?
Companies suddenly faced the power of the crowd. In the past, all the difficult questions could be handled without anyone knowing it. And the marketers could focus on what people should see and how they should see it.
Now they had to handle it in public, and that was incredibly scary. So they created moderated forums, where people could ask questions, and you could delete the bad press. They added comments to their website, but only showed the ones that they approved of.
Of course, this wasn't what the crowd was thinking, so they decided to take it to the next step. There was no point in interacting with a company, who made it hard to have a real conversation, when you could interact with other people instead.
Instead of asking a company what their products was like, they would ask their friends. They would read blogs made by other people, write comments on other blogs.
This was the first of two major turning points. In the past companies could decide what to tell, and when to tell it. And when people had a question, the marketers were the one who answered it.
Life was easy. Life was safe!
The internet changed that. Because when people realized that they could use it to connect with other people, then the companies suddenly had to be just as good as their ads. If your product weren't as fast, or as solid, or as impressive as you made it out to be, then everyone would know about it.
Mediocrity wrapped in a shiny package, was no longer an impressive product. It was simply a boring thing, that you tried to look better than it really was.
On the internet, your biggest competitor is not other companies. But, the quality of your own products, and the authenticity of your message. Ads are no longer the way to sell more products. Making better products, and changing who you are as a person, is!
It's not about how you market your products; it's about why you created it.
The shift in marketing, caused by the internet, is only the very first step of the social revolution. The second step is happening right now all around us.
Shortly after people realized that they could use the internet to discuss topics with other people, they also realize that they didn't really need the companies at all.
Here, we have the most impressive communication tool of all time, the internet. So why not use it to do things that really matters to us? Like being with friends, connecting with people that we admire, sharing what we like, being part of something, use it to tell the world who I am, what I can do, what I think, and get instant feedback.
Maybe even do something together, no matter where or when.
The internet changed how people experienced communication. In the past it was one way, or controlled via external points (like a company websites). The social web is about multi-faceted communication. Where you follow people, and people follow you. And you sit in the middle of this incredible network of people and ideas that matters to you.
The reason people went online in the past was so that they could see things, experience things, and search for things. The reason people go online today is to be a part of other people's communication. To be connected, to be there, to be available, and to be in it.
This is an incredibly shift in mass communication. In the past it was about the message, the format, and the product. Now it's not about that at all. Who cares?
Marketing is no longer about things. It's about people, and how it brings people together. People have taken over completely. Companies, and their products, don't have a place in it. We went from companies being in control of the message, to not even be a part of the message itself.
This second shift, is so disruptive to traditional marketing that the entire industry is in a panic. Every marketing departments and advertising agencies in a wild frenzy to come up with ideas of how to get the regain the power to impress people.
And almost all of them don't get it. It's not coming back. Going on Facebook isn't solving the problem. Creating a Twitter account isn't the way to make your products look prettier. Putting your ads on YouTube won't change things.
Just look at Michelin. They hired an exceptionally expensive advertising bureau, and uploaded this ad to YouTube. After 10 days it has an insignificant 6,780 views, which for a company this size is pathetic (they have 177,500 employees).
That is not all, because there is no way that people will go back to not being in control.
People will fight you if you interrupt them. People will fight you when you force them to see your product, try to control what they can do with it, try to tell them what to think, or try to hide those who dislike you.
...and that's not a good thing. Definitely not a good marketing strategy.
While traditional marketing is a disaster in the social world, the social web itself is actually the best thing that has ever happened. If you forget about traditional and do it right, then it becomes the most powerful and influential tool you ever had.
The social web is cheaper, faster, much bigger, more powerful, direct, up-close, and far quicker than anything in the past. The social web is filled with people talking about companies and products. 20% of all discussions are brand related.
The big question is then, how do you do it right? How do you become a part of people stream. How do you connect?
And the answer is very simple... You get invited!
That means...
You are not a company that sells a product, but a group of talented individuals. Who are creating something remarkable! Because the world need something better, more stylish, and more affordable.
Something that makes you happy, and gives you that really good feeling inside your stomach.
You do not market your products... You share them!
And you share what people are doing with them. You make your fans remarkable!
You help them do things better, provide tips and ideas. You tell them about what inspired you, and continues to inspire you!
You ask your fans what they need. So that you, with their help, can continue to be remarkable.
This way, people want to follow you, because you are worth following.
You get invited into people's life, because you give them something they need. You give them something to talk about, you make them feel better, make the quality of their connections more valuable.
If you do it really well, then people will return the favor and turn into fans. And instead of a guest, you become a friend. Someone that they will tell their other friends about.
Copyright: Share it, use it, copy it, shred it, jump on it, tweet it, print it, remake it, translate it, republish it - but don't sell it!
You might want to credit Clay Shirky for the first three slides. They look the same as his latest presentation at TED talks.
Writer, Social Media Advocate, Project Manager and Internet Manager
follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, or visit my website
Jonas,
I did see Clay Shirky's use of similar slides, but those illustrations have been used in different forms for the last 8 years (or more). I didn't get them from him, nor did he invent them.
I do not even know where I got them from. I have seen the so many times, from so many sources.
The real point of the article is not about the first three slides either, they merely form the back story to important change. Which is the point where a company is no longer in the center, and the conversation explodes into something beyond a single point :)
Emmanuel, Thanks. Please do visit Michelin's marketing team. They need you.
Very well written!
By blogging about that video you probably tripled their views. :D
The thing is, companies do need and will still need "old" marketing !
Marketing is way more than communicating, and if you shift all your efforts of social media, you might be tempted to forget all about marketing that isn't communicating.
Besides, there are millions of products (I'd dare say 95% of them) that will never be "followable". Just think iron, concrete, bricks, eggs, lettuces, nuts and bolts and so forth.
Because no one will hype a lettuce, no matter how tasteful, green or bio it might be. Because it's just not exciting. Noboby will talk about non-exciting products. The bad news is, the world is full of products that are not exciting, not social media worthy. However, their marketable, and they're a huge slice of what keeps the economy moving.
Writer, Social Media Advocate, Project Manager and Internet Manager
follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, or visit my website
Henrique, It matters little that companies think that they still need 'old' marketing. The world isn't about what companies want, it is about what people want, and people simply ignore old marketing.
Spending money on 'old' marketing is money out the window, because everybody simply ignores them. And if you try to force people to see them, people will fight back and actively try to stop you from selling your products.
Take lettuce. You are right when you say that you cannot create a campaign about lettuce, because it's all the same. But you can make a social movement about being healthy and creating inner balance.
You can make create a community of people who use lettuce for more than just the standard salad. You can use lettuce as the basis for advocating an eco friendly style. Or a movement about the hip city café lifestyle that is about more then junk food (something that every women, in every big city seeks).
Gary Vaynerchuk could have turned to old marketing to create regular magazine ads for his wine retail shop in Springfield, New Jersey. Ads that would have cost him a lot of money, with little result. But instead he created http://tv.winelibrary.com/ - with 60,000 daily viewers.
Yousef, Thanks... and yes, I might be giving them a few extra page views. But hey, they need it! :)
That's a really good point Henrique.
Favourited this post because of the article and Henriques comment.
Writer, Social Media Advocate, Project Manager and Internet Manager
follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, or visit my website
Tomasj, That depends on your B2B market.But essentially it works with everything.
Thomas,
I do admire your commitment to social media, and that's why I follow your articles ! ;)
But I beg to differ on this matter. While, on the one hand, it's undeniable the "social media power", and I think you've explained quite well why, on the other I still think that companies still have a lot to earn with the offline marketing.
For me, true channel integration is the key to marketing success. However I still think that there are many products that need to be marketed but that won't get people to be engaged with them.
But hey, we agree on one thing, companies do need to listen more to their consumers ! ;)
PS: Thanks for the complement Damir !
Writer, Social Media Advocate, Project Manager and Internet Manager
follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, or visit my website
Wow... time out! :)
When I talk about social, I don't mean only something that goes on via Facebook or Twitter (or in the digital world).
Social media is all about how people feel in relation to other people. Either as an expression of their ego (or usually lack thereof), or feeling good about helping other people. And the mechanism, and end result, is a 'bond,' or a connection similar to friendship.
That isn't limited to what we do on the internet.
The problem with traditional marketing is that it, by default, threats people as just another subject. The message is all wrong.
Or as FutureLab wrote in their presentation Change Marketing (http://bit.ly/2fQnBs):
-
BRAND-CENTRIC COMMUNICATION PLANNING:
Starts from what the brand wants to say and how to efficiently get it to pre-defined homogeneous audiences.
HUMAN-CENTRIC COMMUNICATION PLANNING
Starts from what the customers want to "hear" and and being relevant to their situation, environment, interests and needs.
-
Social means being human centric. To reorient your message to be about what people want, not what companies want. And this shift from company centric marketing (traditional), to people-centric marketing (social) is fundamentally changing how companies can promote their products.
...the time where companies could decide what people should think, or look at, is over. Every company needs to change how they talk about their products and why they make them. Regardless of they are promoting them on Facebook, or placing it on billboards at the bus stop.
...or to use another slide from FutureLabs presentation: Don't look at the box, look at the person: http://twitpic.com/m43xh
I guess I misinterpreted you then ! ;) Guess we are more on tune than I apparently thought initially!
I was focusing on social media solely "online".
Thanks for this interesting "discussion". !
Best !
Henrique
Writer, Social Media Advocate, Project Manager and Internet Manager
follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, or visit my website
Henrique, Well, I did write "social web" in the article, so sorry for the being confusing :)
And thanks to you also for an interesting discussion.
Hi, I'm new here as my friend just forward this blog to me.
I do like your article and feel sorry for Michelen at the same time. However, I do admire the company for its attempt to move away from traditional advertising. Personally, I think the problem isn't to do much with the strategy of trying to create buzz via social web;as you know it's just another old form of "Word of Mouth", but rather lies upon the bad excecution of the agency. Nowadays, all ads agencies try very hard to sell on-line direct mkt service to the clients as their traditional media sales has been declining. However, not many big agencies have done a great job so far. I prefer to use both small agency with expertise on specific channel (for fresher and more creative ideas) and big agency (for brand strategic level)
Thus, I do strongly agree with you that their viewers' reponse is so minimal compared to the effort they've put in although the budget used here is much less than what you usually invest in TVC. Not sure whether this campaign also utilizes other media mix as well, if not, it's going to be a the flop for sure if the concept and the execution aren't that great.
Well, I love your article but still wonder do you have suggestion on what might be the next trend from "Social Web" or "People - Centric- Marketing"
JS
The basic key to excellent advertising is to get people talking about the ad, the product, or your company. It doesn't really matter which medium you choose as long as you accomplish this.
Making a product that sells itself also doesn't hurt.
i appreciate your passion. but good advertising agencies have been advocating human-centric marketing over brand-centric marketing for twenty five years. i'm kind of amused by the new breed of social marketing evangelists who believe they're the first to stumble upon this idea.
just because social channels offer a more complete two-way communications model doesn't mean they automatically generate results in a way that one-way channels can't. they'll still require strategic and creative thought leadership.
and yes, mediocre agencies are slow to accept social marketing as a way to deepen the bond between brands and their tribes. but there will always be marketers who sacrifice substantive connections and authentic advocacy for short-term results.
Great post! and I love that quote: "FutureLabs presentation: Don't look at the box, look at the person: http://twitpic.com/m43xh" Thanks for sharing it!
Writer, Social Media Advocate, Project Manager and Internet Manager
follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, or visit my website
Thanks Elise :)
BTW: Strange why you show up as anonymous... something odd must have happened when it was locating your twitter info.
J, What would the next trend be? well. targeted interaction (and thus targeted marketing) is a big trend for the future :)
As for Michelin, then I do not know how they see things internally. You might be right, but if so, then they need to hire a new people.
Mark, Of course, but the in the past people didn't have a way to fight back in any organized way. Of course if you did something really wrong, people would start protest, but this is for more direct and case specific. What we see now is a change in culture, now companies no longer have a choice.
The need for people-centric marketing has been around for as long as the human race, but in the past, companies could force people, because choice and media were limited.
"What we see now is a change in culture, now companies no longer have a choice."
yes, that's an excellent point. and one that we traditional advertising people who've been trying to ween marketers off of brand-centric thinking can really appreciate about crowd sourcing.
Hi Thom,
Thank you for the interesting analysis. This article makes me wonder about the future of the industrial marketing. What I mean is that there are goods that are not widely consumed (e.g. concrete, steel, trains, ships, etc.). In this case social marketing is not applicable since the industrial manufacturer does not depend on thousands of buyers but a handful.
So what is the future of the marketing of such goods in regards to the communication progress? What is your oppinion?
Business development manager with technical acumen and a history of result-focused out-of-the-box thinking
follow me on Twitter, or visit my website
Great presentation! I particularly agree with;
"On the internet, your biggest competitor is not other companies. But, the quality of your own products, and the authenticity of your message. Ads are no longer the way to sell more products. Making better products, and changing who you are as a person, is!'
In this new environment companies without a real passion for what they do will die. Slick marketing and messaging could delay the inevitable but why would I purchase a product from a company that does not care about their product or their customers.
Was the Michelin ad only an online ad, or was it on T.V. also? If it was on T.V. then I can guarantee it got a lot more than 6,780 views. Not all marketing has to exist in the social realm of Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, and not all marketing can be or should be judge by its online influence.
I'm really tired of social marketers overemphasizing views, fans, and site traffic in relation to profits. Profits are where it counts ; in the end - from a business perspective - nothing else matters. If I have two targeted site visitors and I make one sale from it, this is infinitely better than having 500 random visitors because of a Facebook/Twitter post that doesn't generate any revenue. Social marketers don't seem to understand this concept.
Social marketing needs to be kept in perspective because done right it can accomplish great things for your company including branding. But video views, Facebook fans, Twitter followers, and even site traffic mean absolutely nothing unless they ultimately generate sales.
In 2008 the Michelin company made 357 million Euros, and over the past 12 months their stock has gone up more than 25%. These two facts put in to place any criticism people have regarding Michelin's marketing techniques. Now whether they could have made more money by better utilizing social marketing is another issue. I personally don't think they would have, but, to be fair, we can only speculate on that. Profits, on the other hand, are definite. And at the end of the day a profit of 357 millions Euros says it all.
There is something that J said about her last line that really annoys me. I see this everywhere. Marketers and advertisers in general are so lost that they are seeking for "Jesus Christs" of new trends to guide them. They seem like some addicted people coming from rehab seeking for some fervorous religion to settle their lives. I don't know if I'm being too extreme in this, but I think people should start Thinking a little bit instead of searching for magical formulas to solve their selling issues. I mean it, It doesn't cost a cent on trying to understand what's happening to the world. And don't get me wrong, information, pre settled formulas, "new cool super freaking alternative media" and fake gurus won't help. I see Baekdal as an Agora of consumer trends, Social media discussion and exchanging of ideas, not a place of brightness where you can follow some undeniable dogma about market reality. I don't know if Thomas think that way, If he does(which I believe so), props to him, that's the future, if he doesn't, well, I can only be sorry, being a "Guru" is an old way to profit over ignorance.
...and following one as a guide of your own business is a proof of professional incompetence.
Writer, Social Media Advocate, Project Manager and Internet Manager
follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, or visit my website
Luiz, I am definitely not a guru! ...and thanks for your comment :)
themadpeacock wrote "why would I purchase a product from a company that does not care about their product or their customers."
Spot on!
Adam, sorry, but I do not agree. The effectiveness of TV ads is a myth, and only focusing on profit is not the way to actually get profitable. Just look at Apple.
Hi Thomas,
It is indeed an excellent presentation, very clear and outstanding point of view.
I was wondering how this change in our collective attitude will affect and changes the shape of companies. Perhaps there will be no huge companies as we see today. Maybe technology will make viable small factories attending smaller groups requirements.
Sorry for my English.
Regards.
Diego
Very interesting article indeed.
A lot of my clients, even today while so much has changed, prefer to remain closed for communication out of fear of exposing too much. No one wants to portray their weaknesses in order to seem or appear as market leaders.
I really don't get it. The idea to be open isn't about spilling out everything. Everyone, including brands, have their personal corners they don't wish to share with anyone at all and that is very understandable.
Sharing information and listening to what the people are talking about is important to you as a marketer if you intend to take that information and use it for the good of the people, shape up your act and be profitable alongside. After all being profitable is important for the long term survival of a business but paying attention to the source of that profit and making your products and services better can only lead to happier customers (fans, if you prefer) and better profits.
@Diego Rodrigue: There is one problem with this approach. Looking at the principle behind economy of scale, the only way to keep your products affordable is to produce something in abundance and keep your margin low to remain profitable enough to survive or grow. With customization, there is a limit to what can be done and it usually comes at a cost if you try to push it too hard or as for something totally out of the blue. So I guess I don't see the big companies going anywhere, maybe shrink a little. They do have the resources and infrastructure to keep producing in large quantities and still keep the costs down.
There are so many variables involved that it is really hard to pin everything on one and base all our assumptions on that alone for a conclusion.
One last point. Social media is good for creating awareness, getting feedback, to some extent influencing perceptions and generating recommendations in real-time. Generating sales is only an outcome not the process itself.
Thomas, super stuff. Goes a long way to explain to the stuck ones. Combined with Seth's stuff, this is grand.
The thing that nags me; what should Michelin have done? They still need to find their disciples & sneezers. And the tire market is tough! Who cares about which brand of tires they buy? What is their motivation? Isn't Michelin's target buyers the manufacturers of cars, bikes etc? The retail shops? Tire shops? Michelins are expensive, how do they combat this? Wouldn't they be wise putting all their dosh into sponsoring bike & racing heroes, drifters and what not?
Now that would be an interesting client!
Better, measurable results... internet marketing, social media... follow me
follow me on Twitter, or visit my website
Thomas, thank you for the great presentation!
I have one question: where is the sourece of the "20% of all discussions are brand related" data. I have heard 16% but I haven't been able to locate the facts behind these numbers. Could anyone point me to the right direction?
Writer, Social Media Advocate, Project Manager and Internet Manager
follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, or visit my website
Priit, Thanks!
The 20% is from a research done by PennState (The Pennsylvania State University)
http://live.psu.edu/story/41446
http://www.brandinfiltration.com/dailygrind/2009/10/16/social-media-can-destroy-your-brand/
Something interesting I read about the effect of Social Media on a brand.
Better, measurable results... internet marketing, social media... follow me
follow me on Twitter, or visit my website
Thanks for the link , Thomas. A while ago I read somewhere that in real life people talk about brands some 16% of the time. I can't find it again. If anyone knows where this number comes from, please post here...
I may be a little late, but with the Michelin example I agree with both Adam and Thomas.
Youtube views count may not be the best benchmark for this AD as I also think it was targeting TV. I don't imagine much Youtube users searching around for an AD they did not heard of nor that is not spreading around by itself: by the attraction of it's content itself.
But for the profits side, I don't know how a bad product with perfect advertising and branding could remain profitable. If a company make remarkable products, it's just the starting point from which creatives approaches on the web can be built. "If your product weren't as fast, or as solid, or as impressive as you made it out to be, then everyone would know about it."
Think about all the tire review websites out there, that is the social marketing reality of the tire industry and they are not in control of it, but as Thomas point out, they could benefit from better dialog. In another hand, I don't think products like tires could benefit from people trying them before enough security tests, but a lot of different products could benefit being closer to people.
I also think that everybody is not obsessed with talking about products but most importantly, people are not all on twitter or always plugged into the virtual world. Traditional marketing still have an important role today, in our reality. Having a good Image will still be important too, and that's why analytic people relying solely on facts and numbers should stay in touch with artists and visual designers that have another sensibility that may never be reproducible in an analytic fashion. Something that talk to people, to their human essence. Art is the raw material of advertising and have been essential to every culture. The web could eventually benefit from a better integration of art and information. As we cannot deny our human nature, still we get marked by well told stories.
Thanks for your great article!
That is absolutely incredible and needs to be seen by soooo many businesses.
The corporate Twitter account for SmartSymbols focused on interactive media and customer interaction in ecommerce
follow me on Twitter, or visit my website
Now aggregate or federate (what ever term you like) all the internal (traditional) and external (social) marketing material, organize it and place it at the product point of sale. Now you have the marketing power of both worlds where it counts, next to the "buy" button!
This is the official Twitter profile for Iconfinder. Get updates about new icons and news from the webdesign and development community.
follow me on Twitter, or visit my website
Spot on!
Very well written - all I need is more examples to back up the thesis.
This is astonishingly true. Thanks for such a wonderful article and I need to spread this word to all my team to get things done in THE RIGHT WAY. Once again, thank you so much.
Follower of rabbits down holes and attender of tea parties hosted by Mad Hatters
follow me on Twitter, or visit my website
"Because no one will hype a lettuce, no matter how tasteful, green or bio it might be. Because it's just not exciting. Noboby will talk about non-exciting products. The bad news is, the world is full of products that are not exciting, not social media worthy. However, their marketable, and they're a huge slice of what keeps the economy moving."
That's simply not true. Besides being a tried and true geek I am also very much into traditional domestic arts like knitting and belong to sites such as Ravelry and Bakespace. There is a large group of men and women that talk about stuff like nuts, lettuce, and other boring stuff. Hell, some even take pictures of their CSA boxes and homestead gardens.
I find a lot of Social Media/Web types to be so narrowly focused on well... social media and the web that they forget about the rest of us. Ravelry, for example is so huge and so intimate at the same time, that the businesses that sell yarn make a killing in sales by also being a part of the community. It would make most other companies envious. If you don't believe me, go see for yourself. Ravelry is almost an all-female social media site and as you know, women drive the consumer economy have have the most purchasing power.
marcomms with bite.... strategic communications with a creative edge...
follow me on Twitter
Loved this Thomas - have only just 'discovered' it and thought is was completely bang on. Whilst I think there'll always be a place for 'traditional' marketing it will have to stem from a transparent proposition that accounts for the immediacy of social media.
Hope you don't mind - I name-checked you as the inspiration for my blog post today:-
http://battleplan.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/caring-and-sharing/
Thanks! ;O)
Baekdal.com is (nearly) everywhere. Check out our social profiles:
FaceBook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
FriendFeed
Delicious
Oct 18
2009
Emmanuel
Great way to explain what I've been trying to tell to my 'expensive advertising bureau' boss for so long ... enough ! I will translate it and spread the word all over France ... to my own clients ! wonder if I should go and see Michelin's marketing team right now ?! ....