Stop pursuing your goals. In his book, »Obliquity«, by John Kay presents an idea that flies in the face of corporate practice and process thinking. Kay claims that goals are best achieved not directly, but indirectly. And this is relevant not only in business, but in all areas of life.

The most profitable companies are not the most aggressive profit-chasers. The wealthiest men and women are not the most materialistic. And the happiest people do not pursue happiness in itself. The goals are mostly reached as a spin off from something else: meaning.

Kay leans toward six creative attitudes towards problem solving and life in general.

”Muddling through”. By this he stresses the importance of approaching a dilemma in a non-rational, intuitive way but at the same time according to some kind of plan. Hm… this sound familiar… Ah, yes! In my book, »Let’s get gorgeous«, I wrote something like this: Fix your eyes to the top (a higher purpose) and follow your instincts like a curious fool. In a zig-zag way. Like a child wandering about, devoted and wide-eyed, disrespectful, foolhardy and reinvestigative.

Pluralism. In the business world people tend to think that there is only one solution to a problem. This is wrong, there are more than one answer to a problem.

Interaction. The outcome has more to do with the question ?Why?” than ”What?”. Problem is, in a process-obsessed world the former is much harder to find an answer to than the latter. You can read my more about it here.

Incompleteness. We like to think that we know enough about the nature of our problem. But we rarely do.

Abstraction. Models are always imperfect descriptions of reality. And should therefore be handled with suspicion.

Complexity. The world is far too complex to understand and manage.

Well, what can I say? Kay is one of the few economist who understand the creative mind.

Anmäl dig till min nya distanskurs i copywriting så får du veta mer.

Professionell Copywriter är en distanskurs över tio veckor i Batteris regi. Vill du vässa ditt skrivande och tänkande tycker jag du ska hänga på. Efter drygt tjugofem års daglig träning av att skriva kort, långt, roligt, spännande, lättsamt eller seriöst om allt från köttbullar till finansiella tjänster känner jag att det är dags att dela med mig av mina erfarenheter.

Kursens syftar till att utveckla din förmåga att föra ut ett budskap genom flera olika medieplattformar, som tv, radio, print, digitala medier, direktreklam, butiker, pr, säljbrev, kund- och medlemstidningar, samt att forma dynamiska varumärkesmanifest.

Kursen innehåller fyra moment. (Med reservation för smärre ändringar.)

1. Att tänka på innan du skriver (4 brev)

2. Lär dig konsten att förföra (4 brev)

3. Konsten att fängsla dina läsare (19 brev)

4. Bli mer kreativ (3 brev)

Vi startar med ett halvdagsseminarium 18 februari (första kursbrevet 21 februari). I kursen ingår också fem större uppgifter som vi diskuterar både gemensamt och individuellt i vårt virtuella klassrum. Anmäler du dig innan den sista januari får du min senaste bok Den mentala orgasmen utan extra kostnad.

Jesus, I had no idea. I’ve been heavily manipulated during the last weeks.
I guess you have too.
All my actions have been forecasted and meticulously planned out by a red, powerful force.
And it’ suddenly dawned on me that I haven’t been celebrating christmas at all.
I’ve had a brand experience.
It’s called *Santa*.
Have a look at these brand guidelines and be inspired.
(Thanks Tore, for the tip. Originally from Quiteroom.)

I‘m tired of hearing people proclaiming the death of advertising.
My guess is I’m not the only one.
Truth to be told, the grim reapers of this industry have been around since
Don Draper wore diapers, predicting the future with the finesse of an elephant
in ballet slippers.
First, what is advertising?
It’s the art of persuasion, making people buy your subjective view on reality.
And why does advertising work again?
Simply because the reality is more complex than the human senses can grasp.
People will always buy the interpretation that best fits their perception of truth.
Be it new. Or exciting. Or funny. But it always has to be authentic.

Once upon a time, radio was going to kill print advertising.
Well, it didn’t.
Then television entered the scene as the ruthless slayer of radio ads.
It didn’t happen either.
When I started in this business I heard lot of of jinx about video killing tv.
Guess what? Tv is more popular than ever.
Then came the banner ads, the final nail in the advertising coffin.
The result? People hardly noticed the banners.
Because the banners were even more intrusive than the traditional advertising.

A few years later we were hit by a new technological revolution.
Social media was expected to forever change the rules of advertising.
It was regarded as the consumer’s final weapon against intrusive advertising.
Suddenly people had the power to block out all advertising, except the kind they really wanted to embrace.
We will soon remember this era as the weird days of interactive advertising.
In which the main idea was that everybody would love to talk to their peers about
the brands they like, interact with them, and gather in huge fan groups.
And yes, the consumers did interact – but not with brands. Only with each other.
(Except the one-in-a-million brand that were already of cult status.)
Fact one, these conversations are almost never about brands.
Fact two, people have always been able to block out bad advertising.
It’s called the RAS. I.e. the reticular activating system.
This is a part of the mammalian brain located in the brain stem, which uncounsiously lets you block out irrelevant ads.

Then came YouTube and put a new buzzword on the agency agenda.
All of a sudden everybody was buzy making a viral success.
But it wasn’t long before people got their head around the fact that a viral video
has a death rate that would make Pol Pot look like mother Theresa.
Speaking about crap, when the ad-space is free it gets crowded fast.
And ninety-nine percent of that space is filled with… you guessed it right:
Crap.
Crap costs money.
Which is usually the case with the overrated Anderson idea of ”the long tail” and
the concept of ”free”.
These might work perfectly for a few companies.
But for the average business owner it’s just fancy words for a crappy model.

Yes, there is a pattern here.
The advertising apocalypses is always sparked by technical developments.
The lesson here is that tech is not the solution.
We have to learn that technological advances are only means to and end.
And the end is always persuasion. The art of making people believe you.
Because you can’t trick yourself inside a persons mind.
There are no shortcuts. No free lunches.
You have to charm your way in.
If you’re dishonest, out of sync, irrelevant, boring, greedy, or plain stupid,
you’re not going anywhere, except spending the clients money.

Contrary to popular social media-opinion, making people to like ads isn’t
exactly new. It isn’t forced into existence by the digital technology.
It’s the timeless, immutable rule of all advertising.
Bernbach used to talk about this. So did Hopkins, and so are we.
It’s just that competition stiffens day by day and makes this increasingly
harder to accomplish. Regardless of media.

Have a look at the ancient, traditional ad above, made by DDB New York.
It was made more than fifty years ago.
Then ask yourself if this ad could work today.
I think it could.
The noble art of persuasion isn’t dead. Not in a million years.
It’s vibrant, constantly adapting, and as tenacious as mankind itself.
And the reason for this is very simple.
We see ourselves in it.

Apple’s famous 1984 TV spot reached around 38,000,000 eyeballs watching the Superbowl the only day it ran.

YouTube has added  5,879,629 viewers since, (as of November 1, 2010).

Nike “write the future” has to date 21,350,482 views .

That’s almost 4 times more than Apple’s 16 year old TV spot. On YouTube.

But also way below Apple’s original Super Bowl viewership.

The soccer world cup was watched by close to 100 million Americans, so worldwide I reckon the Nike spot must be among the most watched TV spots ever.

Even though Nike and its agency probably hoped that viral would be huge with Rooney playing a fat old loser, it was first and foremost a TV spot, aimed at an enormous TV audience worldwide. Nobody would spend so much money on speculation of possible viral spread.

However. Arguing that viral is for free is a faulty argument. Aside from crappy and crazy home videos that for strange and largely unpredictable reasons go viral big time, the cost of producing anything worthwhile isn’t exactly gratis.

And predicting anything to go viral is not a media strategy any professional would even dream of recommending.

YouTube is basically a total guess. Nobody might see your ad. While a big TV event with a huge audience guarantees your ad will have  a certain predicted reach in the millions.

Reach is of course not the same as effectiveness. It’s just a possibility.

Of Apple’s Super Bowl ads, 1984 is the only one anyone seems to remember. The follow up ad the year after,  “Lemmings”,  reached just as many people. But it’s not at all as well or fondly remembered. YouTube views are a dismal 32,000 plus.

Today all the rage is , as nobody could have missed, all about social, web and interactive. Although, as an advertising channel the web is still rather small. And the efficacy is still largely debated. No major brand has yet been built on the web alone, aside from web brands such as Google, Amazon and Zappos.

To get anywhere near so called traditional media in effective reach is not likely with web based media channels, including social media sites and (not so possible) viral effects. But it certainly sounds as if the web is by far the biggest and most effective channel out there listening to all the noise it’s created in the advertising industry and among clients hoping for wonders.

The record number of YouTube views is probably Justin Bieber with 3.7 million views a day in September this year, adding up to over a billion views. Did he sell a billion records?

Lady Gaga is another artist with monthly views in the millions per month.

Those may be businesses but are not advertising brands.

Ikea gets a couple of hundred thousand YouTube views at best for their real ads.

While views are in the millions  for spoofs and parodies done outside the control of the company. “Ads” they’d never approve if they had a chance to.

Volvo three years ago had a viral success of sorts with a video called “Volvo S60 TS 5 kills Ferrari”. It’s a shaky home made video, so far getting almost 390, 000 views. Not made by any of Volvo’s agencies.

Normally Volvo gets views counted in the low thousands. Yes, thousands. Not hundred thousands. You don’t produce costly spots for that sort of viewership. Only if it’s something like a crazy road race, illegal driving, vomiting and cursing, will the numbers go up to 6 digits.

Pepsi’s Michael Jackson is up to 15,776,603 views as of Ocober 28, 2.48 PM, New York time. It was put up a year ago, so it obviously has more to do with MJ’s rebirth, than it has to do with Pepsi the brand.

As mentioned in the beginning, the closest to TV numbers online for a brand may be Nike with its “Write the future”. Which when I write this has more than 21,000,000 views.

That’s impressive.

However. Super Bowl 2010 had more than 106,000,000 TV viewers, and the final episode of M.A.S.H. 1983 had over 105,000,000 TV viewers.

Which leads me to events.

Events create more interest than anything else. Whether it’s in sports, movie events like the Oscars, or royal weddings.

It seems as if one of the few ways to reach a huge audience in one go today is to piggyback on a well watched event. Or create one.

The media landscape is so extremely fragmented and complex. With hundreds and hundreds of TV channels, outdoor advertising spaces everywhere from garbage bins to wildpostings on empty walls to taxis to hoardings, banners and posters and what not, including the clothes you wear.  Wherever you look there are ads, ads, ads and more ads. Web banners on a trillion sites, facebook pages, etc. etc. How much can you take in?

Consequently a clever headline, beautifully crafted type, a nice photo, a neat and well balanced lay-out don’t cut it anymore.

Neither does the formulaic 30 second spot. If it ever did?

And talking about new media, web banners on the whole long ago stopped working.

Doing something with a chance to go viral is easier said than done. To complicate things is that what’s going viral on a big scale is all too often something that most brands don’t want to be associated with. Dirty jokes, juvenile pranks, sexual innuendo etc. Or it’s a well viewed TV spot that gets extended life online.

Viral is not a strategy. It’s a lottery.

Although you can buy ads on Youtube obviously. And end up in front of successful clips.

But that isn’t exactly for free either. And personally, I can’t wait until the disruption is over, and with the new function where you can click out of the ad, well, many of us will. Because unlike sitting laidback in the sofa watching TV, we’re quite active and impatient when online.

Even so, advertising is not dead. It’s just become so ubiquitous that we’re basically immune. It’s no longer enough to advertise. It may not even be enough to come up with a brilliant ad.

No matter how big or small the logo is, people today are so ad-literate they can smell an ad even when it tries hard not to look or feel like one. Product placement is often so clumsily done that it may backfire rather than having a positive impact. The cheese factor reaching Himalaya heights.

So what can an advertiser do?

Create an event.

Build something bigger than the ad. Make something to talk about. And weave the advertising around it.

What is an event?

I don’t mean a circus tent or a fair. I mean something that is more than an ad campaign, be it expressed in a print campaign, TV, online, mobile, instore, etc. or all media combined. Nike+ is what I’d like to call an event.

It isn’t just an ad for a runner shoe. It isn’t just a web site with pictures of shoes and tips for runners. It is engagement. An ongoing event. And event the audience can partake in. Not just view. For serious and semi serious runners it’s “Just Do It” on a whole other scale. Which resonates beyond the core target group. It also raises the positive perception of the brand among people who may only buy a pair of shoes to promenade to the car or the subway in.

It engages. Doing, not just talking.

Honda’s diesel engine work “Hate Something, Change Something” was more than a couple of ads and some web stuff. It was not just a clever ad campaign, it came out of some real thinking and engineering. It gained fame in our industry for its sweet TV spot, but it was way more than that.

It’s an ongoing event, taking place not just in the marketing department but in the factories and the R&D department. The agency did a brilliant job of bringing it to the masses.

The big idea was in the product development.

The big advertising idea was in taking the words of the inventor and making it pretty and charming and engaging. Doing, and talking about the doing. In a creative and brilliant way.

Thus it won every conceivable award and was talked about not just among ad folks. It sold diesel engines. It made diesel engines look very different from the perception they had in peoples minds. Especially Honda’s engines. It was not an ad campaign, but an event that changed things.

Ogilvy’s Conquer China for the North Face was an event. Inviting the audience to participate by putting flags like explorers do, all over China. So it become something to follow and talk about. It was not just a stunt. It was an idea that emerged from the core of the brand. It was way more effective than any traditional ad. The ads became more than ads. Check out ogilvyaction and look for the Red Flag Movement.

What is an event? Well, an event is often what evening papers sell copies based on. A major train robbery becomes an event for weeks, maybe for months, even years. It transfixes the man in the street for a period of time and often remains as a life long memory.

The recent drama in Chile, with 33 miners trapped for many weeks, and thankfully saved, was on every news channel in every part of the world. It became a media event, a PR event, and it will be turned into books and movies.

So the first job is not to create an ad. It’s to come up with something to talk about. And then figure out a way to dramatize it in such a convincing and engaging way that it breaks trough the clutter.

Of course, coming up with events that compete with the real world’s drama might not be an easy task. But it sure does have a better chance than a couple of ads where the idea is an ad idea rather than an idea based on something somewhat bigger.

The big idea is no longer a tag line or an ad. It’s “what can make us talked about?” In a good way.

Ads seem a little unimportant in today’s world. That is why creating an event is important than creating an ad. Using every possible creative solution and media channel to tell the story.

We like to say that modern advertising is not a one way monologue but a two way conversation. Personally I don’t think it’s so simple. People don’t want to have a conversation with their brand. But they might want to have a conversation about something. That “something” is rarely an ad. But it can be related to a brand. About a brand.

In other words. Don’t try to come up with an ad. Come up with something that’s bigger than an ad.

By Tore Claesson. He has been an Art Director and Creative Director at agencies around the world over the past 25 years or so. Still alive and kicking.

Mattias är en av få, förutom mig själv, som utgår från Ken Wilbers integrerade teorier.
Fast vi förklarar på lite olika vis.
Det här är Mattias version, del 1.
Om hur man gör budskap intressanta och hur man når framgång i sociala medier.

Yesterday I decided to watch an old favourite. ”Bagdad Café”. A Percy Adlon film. Starring Marianne Sägebrächt, CCH Pounder and Jack Palance. If you missed it, this is a cult movie from 1987, about ”the little café just around the bend”, set in the desert not far from Las Vegas.

I wanted to relive this beautiful story. I couldn’t wait to meet the characters again, and enjoy ”Calling you” by Jevetta Steele. Since I loved the film, I took for granted that I remember the film scene by scene, like they were forever etched into my mind. But I were in for a surprise.

Although the film is a classic, many scenes had somehow escaped my memory. It seems like I only took away the emotional parts from the film, but not the factual. Many scenes were erased from my memory and I were stunned by all the details I had missed out.

I know the brain doesn’t work like a video recorder. I’m fully aware that it doesn’t recall the facts, only what is meaningful. I have known this for quite some time, but I hadn’t really experienced it.

And now when I have, I can finally come to a conclusion.

Time distorts facts. But not feelings.

Facts doesn’t last as long as the impressions they make.

This morning I came close to being run over by a crazy woman, running like a Kenyan on speed, with her eyes glued to her iPhone.
She was soon followed by a bunch of other maniacs, including a bloke in a wheel-chair, all running and stumbling, with their eyes wide open.
What’s this all about?, I asked myself.
I discovered that there are a lot of buzz about it in the papers and social media.
And that a couple of friends of mine were the brains behind the event.
So I called their agency, Jung von Matt in Stockholm, and asked what the hell they were up to.
”Oh, that’s our new campaign for the MINI Countryman.”

Here’s the deal.
The MINI is all about engagement. Let’s motor. Let’s have fun!
To succesfully launch the MINI Countryman the company wanted the agency to present it to the swedish public in a truly engaging way, as a part of the international Getaway concept.
People has to get involved in the brand’s core message.
All marketing has to mirror the bond between the driver and the brand.
So they created a live, social gps-game, ”Getaway Stockholm 2010”.
Probably the world’s first of its kind.
Neither Playstation or Sega, have even come close before.

The game is set within the Stockholm city limits, where the virtual MINI Countryman is released.
You’re supposed to find the MINI.
To play you need to download the new iPhone app.
If you get within 50 meters of the car, you’re able to catch it with your iPhone.
Just press the ”take the car-button”, and it’s your’s.

Now you need to escape.
And now’s the time when the real stress begins, when another player comes in your proximity of 5o meters, the bastard can steal the car from you.
If this happens, you’ll have to wait a minute before you can start chasing the son-of-a-bitch that stole what you rightfully have earned.
If you can recapture the car and keep the distance from all the others until the gaming week is ended, you win a real MINI Countryman.

Wow.

This is a brilliant idea.
The goal was to have 5000 people downloading the app.
Over 80 percent did this before the campaign even started!
Not only does the campaign cover many different media platforms,
like pr, social media, live gps-gaming, mobile, it’s also not an ad.
It’s a real event.
Which you can participate in.
The best part: it’s fun!
It lets you be a kid again.
And, come to think of it, isn’t it what we are all longing for?

Steve Jobs, you’d have to say, is the greatest marketer of the last thirty or so years and early this morning I just got another example of his prowess.

My Mac’s hard drive died. So I went, more than a little agitated, to the Apple Store near me for help. I got more pissed when, at 6:30 in the morning they said I needed an appointment. Fuck heads, I said to myself, this is a mechanical problem–your problem–that you’re making me pay for. I was getting angrier.

Finally, about 30 minutes later, I got to see both a genius and Job’s genius. When I turned my machine over for them to keep and repair, the Apple technician said to me, “I’ll take care of your baby.”

Wow.

He understands, he gets it, what my computer means to me. All my anger, agitation and animus disappeared with that one simpatico sentence.

The ability to have your workforce speak the language of your brand not just mouth the words is an amazing feat.

The kind of feat that keeps customers coming back.

I brought my “baby” to the Apple store on a Friday. And Monday was Columbus Day, so the genius at the Apple store said my machine would likely not be ready until Tuesday. Then they called Sunday, three days early, to say it was repaired and ready to pick up.

Like I said. They get it right.

I like writing manifestos. I do this for a couple of reasons. First, it depicts the brand core as something you can relate to, preferably a drama of some sort. Second, a manifesto is the backbone of the brand, a plot that gives people a clear sense of meaning and direction. Third, it’s an arcehtypal ad. A mother-ad. An ad which all future ads will emanate from. An ad that is made to inspire people to create new ideas and executions, externally as well as internally.

About a year ago I wrote a manifesto together with the guys at Whitelines, a paper company specialised in writing paper, which is built around the promise of supporting your ideas. It immediately inspired the company to launch a limited edition, wonderfully illustrated by Anton Grandert (see above).

Here it goes:

Don’t just do it.
You entered this world as a creative genius.
Curious. Playful. Somewhat obstinate.
But over the years society shaped you into an obedient, well-mannered citizen.
Your questions became nicer, the decisions safer, and the answers more certain.
We’re here to reverse the trip.
We want to uncage your imagination. And dare we say, make every single person on this planet one percent more creative.
Does this sound a bit naive? If not a little overambitious?
We agree. Our vision is easy to criticise, ridicule and whisk off.
But we feel it’s a small price to pay in order to encourage your independency and nurture your brainchildren.
It’s not an easy task. It’s a never-ending battle.
Because the world is full to the brim of faceless bureaucrats and greedy bullyboys, waiting to kill your ideas with just a flick of the wrist.
So whatever you do, don’t just do it.
Put your heart and soul into it.
Love it.
Hate it.
Turn it up-side-down.
Turn it inside-out.
Bend it.
Brake it.
Shake it.
Torture it.
Blow it up.
Whatever you do, don’t just do it.
Push it forward.

Det finns två sätt att få folk att ta aktiv ställning till dig och ditt varumärke. Antingen genom att de blivit besvikna och fly förbannade på din vara eller tjänst. Eller genom att bli överraskade av att du överlevererar. Klippet ovan är från Southwest Airlines, ett flygbolag som ofta överleverar och får folk att prata positivt om bolaget, hämtad från boken WOW! Så får du dina kunder att rekommendera dig, som Tomas Lydahl har skrivit.

Tomas kan det här med kundvård. Jag träffade honom i samband med en föreläsning jag höll i Kristianstad. Vi delade taxi in till Hässleholm och under färden gav han mig grunderna i hur man skapar lojala kunder. Sedan sa han: allt det här skriver jag om i min nya bok. Och då sa jag: Oj, den måste jag läsa.

Nu har jag den i min hand. Och jag är överraskad över hur smarta och enkla råd han ger. Inget hokus pokus, bara sunt förnuft som alla kan börja praktisera direkt. Han skriver övertygande om skillnaden mellan att ha en WOW-kund, en enbart nöjd kund och en riktigt förbannad kund. Vad det handlar om är att till varje pris undvika att underleverera och i alla lägen förvandla nöjda kunder till ivriga fans. Skillnaden är stor.

En kund som enbart är nöjd har fått sina förväntningar uppfyllda, varken mer eller mindre. Kommer personen att prata om dig? Rekommendera dig? Köpa igen? Kanske, om vederbörande blir tillfrågad. En kund som är förbannad agerar på ett annorlunda sätt. Då missar hon inte tillfället att berätta för varje person hon möter hur dåligt hon blivit bemött. Hon rekommenderar dig naturligtvis inte och återvänder aldrig. Kan du däremot överträffa kundens förväntningar på dig skapar du en WOW-kund. En sådan berättar om din vara för så många som möjligt, rekommenderar dig till alla hon känner och återvänder med en enveten lojalitet. Tomas beskriver en sådan kund i boken.

En man hade förlorat sitt American Express-kort och ringde upp företaget för att beställa ett nytt. Representanten frågade hur fort han behövde sitt nya kort.

– Jag ska ut och resa imorgon bitti, men det finns väl ingen möjlighet att få ett nytt kort tills dess? sa mannen.
– Hur dags ska du åka? frågade representanten.
– Jag åker till Kastrup klockan 4:30

Det blev tyst i telefonen och sedan sa representanten:

– Vilken väg åker du till flygplatsen?

Förbryllad berättade han vilken väg han skulle köra. Varpå representanten sa:

– Jag möter dig vid korsningen klockan 4:40 med ett nytt kort.

Wow!

Tomas lär oss också att räkna fram den lojala kundens verkliga värde. Säg att du driver en matbutik. Din årsomsättning är 10 miljoner och du har en kundbas på 5.000 kunder som handlar i genomsnitt för 2.000 kronor i månaden. Då blir varje kund värd 24.000 kronor. Om den är hyfsat nöjd, vill säga. Den besvikna kunden söker sig till din konkurrent och har du otur försvinner 24.000 kronor. Per år! Men vad händer om du skapar en förbannad kund? Naturligtvis förlorar du 24.000 kronor årligen. Men du har också skapat en kränkt kund som sprider sitt budskap om dig till hela sin bekantskapskrets. För varje person hon övertygar förlorar du 24.000 kr. Varje år.

I det ljuset framstår kundvård som ett oerhört dynamiskt instrument för att förbättra affärerna.

Tomas berättar hur han en gång förvandlade en förbannad kund till lojal WOW-kund. Händelsen inträffade när han jobbade på Marriot Suites i Newport Beach. Han befann sig i lobbyn då han upptäcke en gäst som slängde sin väska i golvet och svor. Tomas gick då fram till mannen och frågade vad som hade hänt. Det visade sig att hans möte hade slutat tidigt och han ville till flygplatsen för att kunna ta ett tidigare plan hem. Men personalen hade glömt att meddela föraren av hotellets van, som redan givit sig av till flygplatsen.

– Om jag inte är på flygplatsen om tio minuter kommer jag att missa planet och måste vänta i tre timmar innan nästa plan lyfter.
–Detta är usel service och jag kommer aldrig att bo på det här skithotellet igen, fortsatte han.

Det fanns bara en sak att göra för Tomas. Han sa:

– Problem är till för att lösas. Ställ dig utanför ingången så kör jag dig med min bil.

Gästen så väldigt överraskad ut och sa:

– Menar du allvar?
–Klart jag gör, svarade Tomas med ett leende.

Sju minuter senare lämnade han av gästen vid flygplatsen.

– Det här kommer jag aldrig att glömma! Jag ska alltid bo på ditt hotell när jag är Orange County, sa den överraskade gästen.

Det finns mycket mer att läsa om i Tomas bok WOW! Så får du dina kunder att rekommendera dig. Nu rekommenderar jag den varmt. Det är en bok som jag tror att alla har nytta av att läsa.

Tänk om du arbetade med en produkt som de flesta människor ogillar. En produkt som de inte tror på och som de kan tänka sig att vara utan – om det inte vore för konsekvenserna, vilka de så klart inte har några som helst skäl att fundera över. Hur inspirerande skulle det vara att gå till jobbet på morgnarna? Det är precis vad som hänt med reklambranschen.

Jag minns när jag var yngre och skulle gå på bio. Att missa reklamfilmerna var att går miste om halva kvällsnöjet. Jag minns att jag som tonåring, alltså långt före jag ens funderade på att arbeta med reklam, hade känslomässiga diskussioner med kompisarna om den senaste, coola Coca Cola-filmen. Jag minns också att en serie annonser som jag skrev i början av min reklambana, för en bar i Göteborg, väckte så stort engagemang att helt vanliga människor hörde av sig till byrån för att få veta vad nästa annons skulle handla om.

Idag gör jag allt för att undvika tevereklam. Ibland genom att helt enkelt zappa till en annan (gärna reklamfri) kanal så snart det blir reklamavbrott, eller – vilket blir allt vanligare – genom att trycka på ”time shift” och pausa favoritserien när den börjar, för att en kvart, tjugo minuter senare se den, och då snabbspola förbi reklamen. För att inte nämna mina allt mer frekventa besök på tevekanalernas play-sajter (där f.ö. SVT Play är överlägsen konkurrenterna).

En dagstidning har jag inte prenumererat på de senaste 10 åren. Och de gånger jag läser en tidning, t.ex. på flyget, har jag märkt att jag utvecklat en sorts blindhet för annonser. Det krävs helt enkelt extraordinära reklamidéer för att fånga min uppmärksamhet. Och jag tror inte att jag är ensam.

Det lustiga är att de flesta av oss som jobbar i branschen är medvetna om att det är så här. Ändå kryddar vi den redan oaptitliga grytan med ett antal banala och, i mitt tycke, pinsamma lösningar. Ett konkret exempel är reklamsnuttarna i början av vissa kanalers play-program som inte går att spola förbi. Allt för att i mesta möjliga mån tvinga människor att utsättas för våra reklambudskap.

Varför blev det så här?

Jag tror att svaret är enkelt. Och det har ytterst lite att göra med Internet, sociala medier och all annan, ny teknologi.

Vi har glömt bort vem som är kunden.

Vi har helt enkelt gjort samma misstag som bl.a. musik- och bokindustrin. Ett misstag som Apples CEO, Steve Jobs lika enkelt som träffsäkert satte fingret på i ett tal rätt så nyligen, som svar på frågan varför musikindustrin saknade förmågan att uppfinna något i stil med iTunes:

Musikindustrin trodde att deras kunder var Tower Records och Virgin MegaStore – men det var de aldrig. De var musikindustrins distributionskanal. Den faktiska kunden är personen som konsumerar musiken. Och det är slutkunden, inte mellanhänderna, som Apple fokuserar på i allt vi gör.«

I vår bransch tror vi att vår uppdragsgivare är vår kund. Vi ser inte längre slutanvändaren som kunden. Vilket är en smula ironiskt med tanke på hur ofta och ivrigt vi talar om för våra uppdragsgivare att de måste lära känna sin kund, vilka kundsvordomarna är och vad som får dem att föredra ett varumärke framför ett annat.

Resultatet är att vi producerar reklam som gör våra uppdragsgivare glada. Och mest glada blir uppdragsgivarna när de känner att ingen kan tycka illa om reklamen, av reklam som alla kan acceptera (inte minst höjdarna på översta våningen).

Resultatet blir menlös reklam. Reklam som människor inte bryr sig om eller som, i värsta fall, irriterar dem.

Eller som kreatören Mattias Sjöstrand uttryckte det när vi samtalade på Stockholm Social Media Club för några veckor sedan:

Dagens storföretag är så in i märgen livrädda för att uppfattas som oseriösa att de närmast skiter på sig. Med tusentals anställda och miljarder i omsättning är det väl inte en jäkel som skulle ta dem för annat än seriösa? Resultatet är som väntat kommunikation som ingen ser och än mindre kommer ihåg.«

Jag tror att det var den finlandssvenske kulturpersonligheten Jörn Donner som sa det kortare; han sa något i stil med:

»Är du inte hatad av någon är du heller inte gillad av någon.«

När kunderna inte bryr sig om vår produkt finns bara ett framgångsrecept.

Gör den bättre.

II vårt fall handlar det om att börja göra reklam som människor gillar, som de gärna offrar några sekunder av sitt liv på att konsumera, utan att bli tvingade till det. Och att vi inte tillåter oss att göra något annat.

Tro nu inte att jag menar att det är lönlöst med traditionell reklam, alltså t.ex. annonser, direktreklam, utomhusreklam och tevereklam. Jag gillar mångfalden av kommunikations- och konversationskanaler och jag är fascinerad av möjligheterna med den tekniska utvecklingen. Men jag tror helt och fullt att de sociala medierna under överskådlig tid är beroende av att samexistera med de industriella medierna (s.k. traditionella). Och allra mest tror jag på den sköna, nytänkande och relevanta reklamen – oavsett mediekanal. En riktigt bra annons i Sydsvenskan kommer alltid att vara bättre reklam än en mediokert genomförd webbkampanj.

Det görs en del riktigt bra reklam redan idag. Till exempel de filmer som visas under Super Bowl.

Marknadsförings- och ledarskapstänkaren Simon Sinek – tillika mannen bakom den lika enkla som geniala idén om varför vissa företag och ledare lyckas inspirera oss, »The Golden Circle Model« – har ett konkret förslag som jag gillar:

Varför ser vi inte samma kvalitetsreklam under årets resterande 364 dagar som under Super Bowl? Enkelt. Under Super Bowl mäts olika företags reklam mot varandra i samma situation. Men framför allt är det enda gången på året som reklam mäts seriöst baserat på dess underhållningsvärde. Så borde reklam alltid mätas. Alltså hur underhållande och engagerande är reklamen? Vi måste sluta mäta hur många människor som tvingats se, läsa eller höra (räckvidd och frekvens) och i stället börja mäta hur många som valt att se, läsa eller höra. Räkna hur många som zappar bort respektive stannar kvar när reklamen visas på teve. Ju fler som väljer att ta del av din reklam, desto bättre är den.«

Simons förslag ligger helt i linje med Michael F. Cramphorns forskningsresultat, vilka Dan Landin så vackert och välskrivet redogjorde för i sitt inlägg ”Om du fortfarande undrar hur reklam fungerar kan du sluta med det nu”. (Om du inte läst inlägget, gör det. Det är mycket välinvesterade minuter.)

Och visst låter det självklart att en produkt är mest attraktiv, och därmed mest affärsmässig, om kunderna faktiskt vill konsumera den. Dessutom, vilket Simon Sinek också påpekar, innebär reklam som kunderna vill konsumera att uppdragsgivaren behöver spendera mindre på mediekostnader. Plus, om människor väljer att se, läsa eller lyssna på något, är sannolikheten större att de gillar avsändaren – alltså varumärket.

Vilket, som sagt, Michael F. Cramphorn har bevisat:

Helt avgörande för en människas köpintention är att hon upplever närhet och samhörighet med varumärket. Och den absolut viktigaste drivkraften bakom en förstärkning av en människas varumärkesrelation är reklamens sevärdhet – dess underhållningsvärde (samt, då det är aktuellt, människorna och musiken i den).

Det är lätt att hålla med, att tänka ”javisst, men allt det här vet jag ju redan”.

Men handen på hjärtat och dina senaste reklamskapelser på konferensbordet, lever dina jobb upp till din insikt?

Reklam som inspirerar, berör, underhåller och engagerar är effektiv reklam. Lyckas du samtidigt också berätta vad som gör ditt varumärke annorlunda än konkurrenternas är framgången så gott som kassaskåpssäker. Det tycker jag UbyKotex lyckats förträffligt med.

Se filmerna ovan och nedan, inspireras av dem och lova dig själv att från och med nu bara göra reklam för kunden, inte för uppdragsgivaren.

Det tjänar uppdragsgivaren mest på.

The Brand-Man heter egentligen Micco Grönholm och är varumärkesutvecklare på den helsingborgsbaserade byrån Pyramid Communication, där han är delägare och arbetar som Director, Brand Development.

Now that the book is in the printing press, I can point out that the story has marched on in the same erratic style that it had begun. New problems have occurred. New improvements have been made, and new members have joined the team. There is a long way to go and new chapters will, surely, have to be written, but one thing is for certain. It is going steadily forward.

Maybe the crazy idea about the sparkling vodka, isn’t so crazy after all?

Interested in following their quest, go to the blog What’s sparkling? Want to read the book? Order here.

Let’s imagine that you are at a cocktail party. A new guest walks into the room. Heads turn. The conversation twists in a new direction. Everybody talks about the new guest and suddenly nothing is as it was a moment ago. Now there are new conditions. The new guest has taken the initiative from someone else. On the surface nothing much has happened, but below the surface everything had been affected in some way, and things have started to adapt to the new premises.

It is an entrance that many would like to make but few carry it off. How do you make an entrance into a market that is worth hundreds of billions of dollars? Without actually having a hundred billion in your pocket?

According to the theory you should have visible characteristic that breaks the pattern and is easily recognisable. You should also be sufficiently exciting and provide some meaning, so people can be bothered to change their thoughts and the topic of conversation. Besides you must give more than you take (the fundamental law of life) and be generally quite pleasant. For as we all know, there are very few people that find it pleasurable to hang out with a boor. [...]

The fact is, a revolutionary concept means that the vodka industry gains a new category, where the Camitz brand can benefit from its first-mover-advantage and automatically become the market leader. The news value is also the brands most important marketing strategy. It signifies the rough direction for the first years work, which suggests agreat deal of PR and word of mouth communication. Ultimately the idea is that the attention of the sparkling vodka will spread to the still vodka variant. And thanks to its sparkling sibling the still variant has grown into vodka of the finest quality. The vodka is only launched in specifically chosen, exclusive restaurants and bars. That is the thought and that is what presumably will happen. But this kind of loses the point of the whole story.

The point – that runs like a concurrent theme through this story – is that all this has been created through intuitive power, not through structured thinking. And so, when it is time for the summary, everything appears to have been extremely well-planned and thought out.

The explanation after the event generally tends to be carried out by the over-rational Spock-people, not by the honest Gump-people. Everyone seems to have acted so wisely and controlled with common sense in a know-all way.Reality is rarely so simple. The question is how often are successful stories so well-planned as they appear? At the same time nobody wants to say that everything that has happened in this story has been controlled by feelings alone. The strategic thinking has actually been close at hand for a huge part of the process, in collaboration with the creative work.

Everything was set in motion, of course, through pure coincidental circumstances. Peter got the idea into his head to pour vodka into his soda stream. Then came the problems one after another. The first impression of the vodka was that it tasted just fine, probably due to the charm of novelty. Then came the realisation that it didn’t taste good at all as the carbonation exposed the quality of the vodka. After that there was gradual improvement, until one day they had a palatable vodka to rank among the best in the world. And the reason was quite simple.

They had to.

Otherwise the vodka would not have taken to the carbonisation, and they wouldn’t have been able to bottle and distribute it in an acceptable way. And regarding the still variant, it wasn’t even on the cards from the off, it only became reality when they had found their vodka of quality. The plan is still on, but as we are searching for some kind of moral, one question remains. Must thought always come before action? Or can the heart leads us in the right direction? Do you dismiss an excellent strategy just because the idea came first?

No, of course you don’t.

How is it then that so many persist in allowing the strategic to precede the creative? Why not let them switch back and forth, stimulating each other? It is, of course, how life works in general. The first ones that hinted in this direction were the gentlemen who have just been given a load of shit: Al Ries and Jack Trout. Sixteen years ago they wrote the excellent book Bottom-Up Marketing. The book’s message was both audacious and clear.

Turn the process around! Let the tactics dictate the strategy. Find a competitive idea and build a strategy around it. Mattias and Peter almost did just that. Their method still feels wrong if you compare it with the methods of the majority. And how one acts and how one thinks is something that finally brings us to the fundamental values of Camitz & Lindberger.

Read the next chapter »The Camitz Manifesto« on The Brand-Man, september 17.

(Continued from »Hate me, but don’t ignore me.«)

We don’t want to look upon the consumer as a passive idiot. On the contrary, she is an intelligent and well-informed person who trusts the judgement of her friends more than commercials. The heyday of the adjective is over, and with it a huge part of positioning thinking died.

Positioning was a marketing philosophy that was founded by Al Ries and Jack Trout, which revolutionised the business world in the seventies. Nowadays, we look upon it with mixed feelings. On one hand, there is something that is timeless, namely, the approach to how people handle information and communication. In short, it deals with the fact that attention is a commodity in short supply and you have to create it by being original and meaningful.

On the other hand, it is clear that Ries and Trout were pioneers of their age. Their vision of brands today is hopelessly obsolete. Their thinking was formed during the time when you lived life by the principal that “the product was the hero.” The brand was essentially tantamount to the product, which in turn existed thanks to the umbilical cord to the category.

There was a time when one could tie an adjective – cheapest, best, fastest – to a product. And it worked a treat until the goods became altogether too similar and the adjectives ran out.

The positioning couldn’t keep pace with the development. Suddenly their image of the brand became rooted in the product and category, they became purely cosmetic in comparison with how we see the brands today. And those that insisted on sticking with the positioning were forced to work with an altogether more dubious message and unrealistic matrixes.

The market has developed and increased in complexity with more knowledgeable and sophisticated consumers. Nowadays the emphasis is not on adjectives, but more on questions of interpersonal and popular culture. The most attractive product on the market, therefore, becomes the one that is best in touch with the consumers’ needs and dreams, and the one that can meet them. Not by seeing her where she is now, but by anticipating where she is heading, and meeting her along the way.

Positioning faces two giant problems.

The first is the brand’s ability of extension. Currently, the brands should be defined so that they have the power to extend from the product categories and blossom into to so-called life brands. Or vice versa, categories lose their significance. In which category for example does Marlboro belong to? In the cigarette category, or the clothing category? In which category does Virgin belong to?

The second concerns position. How clever and up-to-date is it to lock an idea into an inflexible point on a graph paper, when the world is changing at an ever-increasing pace, and when most products and brands are deceptively similar to each other when it comes to presentation ?

Don’t think position. Think direction.

Aposition is a distinct and inflexible point. A direction is also distinct, while at the same time is alive and changeable. No spiralling essence should be reduced to a single point. A position is right, but it runs the risk of end up wrong. A direction is both true and easy to follow. A position leans towards an adjective, a direction towards a verb. It means that the statement is set against action. And what we see is the marketing strategy’s development from adjective to verb.

The difference is huge: saying that you are funny is not the same thing as actually being funny. Everyone can say it, but it is the one that proves the fact that wins in the end. When tactics are given a larger strategic role, the strategy has to be more intentional to its character, not so definite, but more pointing to a purpose and meaning.

Aposition is often based on an objectified reality, but is at the same time consciously incomplete. It conveys a host of benefits: it becomes mysterious, interesting and tempting. It’s intuitive and open. It is creative, interpretive, inquiring, constantly trying, and uninterruptedly curious. But it is still focused in a forward direction.

The position has lost its strategic significance and has become tactical. It requires an exposure that unfortunately soon becomes obsolete. A direction is equally as distinct but at the same time it is a more flexible strategy that can be constantly reconstructed and moulded in a new, original way. Positioning thinking reminds us of IQ. The direction for the thinking leans towards QI, which is Chinese for vitality.

Market dynamics currently demand more than what positioning can deliver. It is no longer about the ability to argue, as it is hopelessly out-of-date. It is now all about creating equally beneficial relations through interpreting and meeting the consumer’s needs. Take Coke for example. It may be a part of the beverage market and specifically in the cola category, but what does it say in the contract with the consumer?

The real thing.
It is neither a product, nor a category.
It is an idea.
A lifestyle. An American icon.

The tactic for Camitz communication is simple. It is not about boasting, it is about being. It does not involve being smart, it involves being genuine. Positioning Camitz Sparkling as per the classic model diminish the products vitality. The brand stands for much more than just a position; it is a story, a succession of destinies, a host of characteristics coupled with wild dreams, it is a flow of ideas and creations that hopefully will never cease.

It is a story of curiosity and craziness.

Read the next chapter »The curious fool« on The Brand-Man, september 13.

Subservient chicken is probably one of the most widespread viral videos ever. How can I top that?, I’ve asked myself over and over again. Now here’s an ad that easily outperforms the famous Burger King-ad and makes the rest of us look pretty stupid. It’s the new ad for Tipp-Ex made by the french agency Buzzman. The ad underscores the brand promise – to erase something and replace it with something better – in a mind-boggling way.

If you haven’t seen it yet, have a look. I bet you’ll be surprised. (Thanks to artist Mikael Pauli for the tip.) Here are the credits:

Agency: Buzzman, France, Client: Tipp-Ex. Creative Director: Georges Mohammed-Cherif. General Manager: Thomas Granger. Copywriter: Tristan Daltroff. Art Director: Louis Audard. Project Manager: Bastien Chanot. Project Manager: Antoine Ferrari. TV Producer: Elodie Jonquille. Digital Production Manager: Melanie Rohat-Meheust. Community Manager: Xavier Le Boullenger. Community Manager: Nicolas Mirguet. Film Production: Eleganz. Film Producer: Willy Morence. Director: Olivier Bennoun. Web Production: Grouek