It Came From The Water

26 09 2012

There’s probably no better way to start an argument in America than to bring up evolution. Regardless of where you stand on this topic, one thing’s certain: the resulting display of emotions and rhetoric will take on the appearance of de-evolution.

But if we start talking about the evolution of marketing, and specifically in the digital era, then everyone will step to the same side. There’s just no debating that the field has come a long way in a short period of time.

The crazy part is that many of the things we use today actually had their start…well, a relatively long time ago. The first SMS message was sent 18 years ago; the first QR code came that same year. And Friendster? Who remembers that? Well, it was a precursor to everything we now know in the Facebook and Twitter era. Think of it as the Neanderthal social media site.

Another way for me to look at the Infographic is that I have been married precisely one year longer than the earliest innovation pictured. I’m not sure if this is a good or bad thing, but I do know that both my wife and I, and all of this high-tech marketing, have evolved significantly. Some memorable things, some not so memorable.

Yeah, but still part of the story we (and marketers) will tell grandkids one day.

Since I toil in this field on a daily basis, I am frequently asked where I think it is all going. Of course, if I had the answer to that question, I probably would not be sitting here in an office ensconced in the ivory tower of academe. I’d be in California hustling up venture capital funds. But I am still willing to give it my best shot. Heck, it might make for a good comedy sketch someday.

So here goes.

I see a day coming very soon in which we will all have televisions connected to the internet, whether it be by Roky, Apple TV, Google TV or whatever. The device won’t matter as much as that they are integrated.

We will also watch these TVs with one or two other screens (phones and/or tablets) in our hands or only inches away. We will interact with network- or show-specific apps while we are watching the shows, tweeting and Facebooking all the while, and engaging with programming in ways never before imagined possible.

And we will then be able to shop during the show. Smart remotes or mobile apps will allow us to point and click at anything we see in a scene. In fact, each and every scene will double as a showroom, which means that paid product placement will be the norm. Nothing will be left to chance. And while paid placements like these date all the way back to the 50s, at least now we will be able to connect the dots and buy it. Right here. Right now. On impulse.

Virtually everything we do will have the possibility of it being broadcast to our legions of fans and friends on the social graph, whichever part(s) we use. I am already seeing this in small bits and pieces today. As part of my track record at GetGlue.com, I now get push notifications at the beginning of Survivor and How I Met Your Mother, telling me how many people have checked into those shows.

And the message is, “Hey Nick! Don’t be left behind!”

Which is, I suppose, an important part of evolution. No one wants to be left behind, while everyone else is evolving. Shedding the vestigial dorsal fins of the analog era. Reaching farther. Growing the long legs needed to leap farther into the future.

Yeah, count me in. I kind of like this stuff. I like where we’re headed. And I like to think I fit in. Swimmingly, of course.

Dr “(d)Evo” Gerlich





Conversion Factor

26 09 2012

Just when you think you have all this futurecasting under control, social media presence cemented, and mobile devices charged and ready to go, along comes a report that says that less than 1% of online sales are influenced by social media.

Gulp. How can that be?

It is admittedly very difficult to track such influence, regardless of the source. While the study examined 77,000 online transactions during early April 2012, it had to rely on sophisticated tracking the grabs click-throughs like where the shopper came from immediately prior to the purchase. The study concludes by recomending “traditional online marketing tactics” be relied upon more than social media.

First of all, allow me a brief chuckle while I process the words “traditional” and “online” in the same sentence. That’s another way of saying organic and paid search, as well as email. Email? Who does email anymore?

My, we have come a long way, baby. How many years has it been since Amazon opened? (It was 17 years ago, in case you didn’t know.)

But what the study does not begin to include is the cumulative effect of consumers having been exposed to ads, wherever they may be. Older “traditional” media are likewise not included (how could one begin to tabulate whether the shopper just put down his Sunday newspaper?), nor have we included the soon-to-be-introduced concept of live television shopping (see it, click it, buy it). And, of course, nor does it include seeing all those pesky ads down the right-hand pane in Facebook, the images on the corporate Instagram account, the cool pics and information available on the company Pinterest page, or the last month’s worth of branded tweets.

In other words, it was a noble effort to understand online buyer behavior, but there’s just too much else going on that we cannot begin to think in isolation. Search (both organic and paid) may still reflect a high degree of consumer purposiveness (after all, you were Googling it, right?). Website traffic may still be driven by shoppers seeing your URL plastered somewhere. But so, too, are consumers driven to your social media sites.

If anything, the high road is one paved with a durable macadam of old and new, and everything in between.

Which, of course, is another way of saying “everything in moderation.” Don’t put all of your advertising eggs in one electronic basket, or you might miss the sale. Because at the end of the day, it’s all about converting people, getting them to become your customer, and keeping them coming back for more. Studies like this one need to be viewed through the proper lens. And when you do, you will see that the futurecast may be complicated, but with proper planning you really can dress for this weather.

Dr “View Cart” Gerlich





Right Here, Right Now

26 09 2012

For the last several years, I have shared futurecast videos with my students. Yeah, sometimes they are a little farfetched, but then again, so were The Jetsons. Still, they give us a snapshot of where we are right now, and hint at where things appear to be headed. These futurecasts are a lot like the 6-10 day weather outlook: the closer you are to today, the more likely you are to make a good prediction. But once you get out a week and a half, your guess is as good as mine.

For what it’s worth, then, share this video (which my student Julia Greif shared with me this morning…so appropriately, I might add…via Facebook:

While this one is not perfect, it does make some very valid claims…claims that no business can afford to ignore. Like I told my students 15 years ago, the question was whether your business would have a website. No, the question was when. And now, the questions is not whether your business will have a presence on social media. Instead, it is when and how much. Or, as the video queries, how well you do it.

Which is another way of saying that the train has left the station, but if you run fast enough, you might be able to hop on.

I recall futurists saying similar such things some 20 years ago when email was just starting to take off, that the world would begin to look like it currently does. I also embed a rather somber video (with schmaltzy late-60s jazz soundbed) in my Evo Marketing class in which future shopping is foretold from the view of 1969. One look at the gigantic computers and clunky connections is good for a quick laugh, but they actually hit the nail kind of on the head. OK, maybe a glancing blow, but they got most of it right. We are buying more and more of our stuff online without having to venture out to stores.

The moral to the story? Pay attention to folks in the middle of the fray, for they have the best view of the crystal ball. They may not own the crystal ball, but who else is more qualified to predict what is coming down the pike? Who else would you trust to draw out the implications of all that is happening today?

But what do I know. I’m just the guy who teaches the class.

Dr “Let’s Get Sociable” Gerlich





Turn The Page

20 09 2012

There is a sneaky side to me that often only becomes apparent once I have played my cards. For example, I will often play devil&3039;s advocate in my classes, and argue something around the block, even if I do not believe it is the right route. It’s a good way of stimulating conversation.

Kind of like what I did yesterday when I presented the news about Kodak’s partnership with On Demand Books. On paper, it looks like a very good deal for both parties. It should enhance Kodak’s abilities to sell of its kiosks, it will add nicely to CVS’ product array by offering books, it eases inventory requirements in the channel, and it gives consumers broader access to tangible copies should they desire them.

Except for one thing: E-Reading is going through the roof.

The study linked above shows what many of us already know to be true: that while tangible books are still king, the incidence of reading on tablet devices is quickly gaining in popularity. Furthermore, those who read on tablets are heavy reader, consuming nearly twice as many books in a year as those who prefer paper.

The study shows that 29% of US adults own a tablet device. The only problem is that the study did not include devices like the iPad, which is a tablet by any description. A recent study that my colleagues and I did at WTAMU showed that 33% of our students own some kind of tablet. Either way, these devices are becoming increasingly popular, and they are changing the way that we read.

I have also read recent reports that tablet usage on airplanes now exceeds that of laptops. They are far more convenient to tote, and in many instances, can perform the same tasks as those of a laptop. On a recent flight from Chicago to Dallas on Southwest Airlines, I availed myself of the $5 wifi service in flight. It worked marvelously on my iPad. Oh, and for grins, I did a Facebook Check-In from 36,000 feet. I’m waiting to see if anyone else has found my “spot.”

But as tablets become ever more ubiquitous (just wait until this Christmas–they will be the hot gift item), we will consume ever more of our books in this format. It just makes sense. E-books are normally cheaper than their tangible counterparts, they are more portable, and, as your collection grows, never exceeds the size of the tablet itself.

You can start planning what you will do with all that extra space in your home.

Sure, the entire reading experience is transformed. No matter how authentic the software developers try to create a metaphor of turning pages, booking etc., it will never be quite the same as the real deal. While I love to lie down to read, and then slowly drift off into a nap with a book on my chest, I sure as heck know that I don’t want to awaken only to find my iPad had crashed to the floor. That’s an impact only a tangible book can withstand.

But if you compare the growth of my bookshelves items to the gigabytes on my iPad, you would know where I and how I am spending my money. I am reading more than ever before. I just make sure to put my iPad on the nightstand before drifting off.

Dr “Cover To Cover” Gerlich





Paperback Writer

20 09 2012

The last 20 years have not been kind to dinosaurs. While there’s still a market for vinyl records, photographic prints and books (among other things), the fact remains that we have gone digital and unless you can find your niche with the old school alternative, life support is only a choke and gasp away. Kind of like at Kodak, the company that invented the digital camera a few decades ago, and then politely sat on it. Once others reinvented that wheel, Kodak went into denial and thought that film photography would last forever.

Sure thing there, Ansel.

But every once in awhile Kodak hatches a good idea…like their partnership with On Demand Books to wrap Kodak’s photo kiosks around ODB’s Espresso Book printers. The married products will debut in CVS stores soon.

And it really is a great idea, because in this digital age, inventory of tangible goods becomes a huge risk. And never mind the competition from Amazon who sells both digital and print versions. Being a BAM retailer these days is simply not an enviable position.

But being able to sell paperback books on-demand in a BAM store is a great idea. No muss, no fuss. No inventory. Customer wants The Grapes Of Wrath? No problem. Insert credit card and watch it print, collate and bind your own audience-of-one book.

For that matter, the Espresso Book works great for limited edition books, which is a fancy way of saying “the book of our vacation pics.”

The only kink in the story is that Kodak has also put up for sale its kiosk division. Of course, one might quickly ask why Kodak would forge this relationship with ODB, but the answer is simple: this could easily make it easier for Kodak to unload yet another of its properties as it seeks to get its head back above water.

Whether Kodak will survive in the long-run is another story with great speculation. But as for being able to buy books…yea, thousands of possible titles…down at the corner drug store is appealing on many levels. OK, maybe not so appealing if you happen to be Barnes & Noble, but from the custoemr perspective, it is golden.

By the book? Yep. Buy the book.

Dr “Binding Agreement” Gerlich





Screen Saver

20 09 2012

It’s fun watching my 14 year-old watch TV. Well, actually, she’s not watching that much TV, if you sit down and watch her. What she’s really doing is juggling…TV, iPhone and iPad. She is busy interacting with three different screens.

And she is not alone. Digital natives can handle this task with ease. Then there are folks my age who have trouble figuring out the remote control.

Marketers and broadcasters, though, are very much aware of this multitasking. They are onto the fact that for many viewers, there are second and sometimes third screens involved. It is completely divided attention, but if this can be turned to the marketers’ advantage, there is much to be gained. And retained.

Which explains why NBC is going bonkers with its NBC Live initiative. A full slate of new Fall shows have companion sites on Pinterest, Instagram and Tumblr. And NBC is doing everything it can to steer multitasking minds to those landing pages. It can work both during and after the show, but especially during.

Imagine getting real-time viewer comment while the show is airing. That kind of stuff is priceless. It’s called engagement. The more you can engage your viewers, customers, etc., the more likely you will be to retain them.

In the TV business, jobs are won and lost by number of eyeballs. Do whatever it takes to keep them glued.

More than anything, all of this activity by NBC in response to changing user habits shows that not only can and should a company be resilient, but that these viewing habits are for real. This is no aberration; if anything, it is only going to intensify. Even for oldtimers like yours truly, I know that watching TV is seldom a singular activity. I already have a problem sitting still long enough to watch a show (unless it’s Breaking Bad). My mind starts to wander, and pretty soon I find myself playing with my phone and iPad. Of course, I sleep with these two only a few inches away anyway, so it is pretty much now second nature to reach for them whenever my mind drifts.

Maybe I was born 40 years too early.

Within the context of today’s teens and young adults, NBC’s moves make perfect sense. In fact, it’s do or die. There are so choices available today, so many voices in the media landscape. That efforts to engage have escalated so dramatically is really no surprise. In fact, the real surprise will be seeing who doesn’t reach out. Anyone who digs in their heels and refuses to budge is bound to be left behind.

Now if I could figure out a way to put my talking head on one of my daughter’s gadgets. Maybe then I’ll be able to engage her in conversation.

Dr “The Big Screen” Gerlich





Creator Or Curator?

20 09 2012

The beauty of the social media explosion is that it has given academics an entirely new sandbox in which to play as well as research. Like being kidnapped, blindfolded, and released in a jungle without a machete, we are trying to find our way through the thick growth.

Sometimes we get lost for hours, but every once in a while we figure out something new. Like who likes what. And that are categories of users.

I’m sure you have already noticed this to some degree or another, but probably never really connected the dots. Turns out there are Creators and Curators, and that hybrid who does both.

Creators are those who post lots of pics and videos, as well as post original glib remarks and tasty blogs. Curators are those who post other people’s content. The Cureator does both with reckless abandon.

Naturally, there are degrees of each. Some Creators only post one thing a day, or take the weekends off, or otherwise ration their contributions, while some appear to be endless founts of wisdom and pith. As for Curators, some people share news and political commentary, while others focus on being the 5078th person to share a lame e-card or Willy Wonka graphic.

I hope you aren’t that person.

Not to be left out of the mix are the individual sites catering to these user types. While Facebook and Twitter, for better or worse, manage to oblige every user, Pinterest appeals to women, and Instagram skews younger. Of course, this probably comes as no surprise to those of you who are actively engaged in social media. I stumbled into my 14 year-old daughter on Instagram earlier this year. “I didn’t know you were on Instagram!”

“Yeah, Dad, all of my friends are there.”

And as for Pinterest, the Y-chromosome in me has absolutely no idea what to do with the site. Pinning room decor, clothes, and recipes? That’s OK if it’t your thing, but I just don’t think that way. It just seems like a digital hope chest to me, and if I were to return to all of my unmet hopes and aspirations, I would become depressed. Grrr.

Yeah, that’s it. But maybe that’s just me more than the guy in me (beats chest). If I see it, want it, and can afford it, I get it. I can always beg my wife’s forgiveness later.

All I know is that it’s a jungle out there, and my phone’s flashlight app isn’t up for the task. It’s almost worth writing a blog about. Or perhaps reposting the article linked above.

Or both. Because I am a Cureator.

Dr “Post This” Gerlich





As Seen On TV

10 09 2012

Back in the 1960s we thought we had it made. As in died and gone to heaven. Television. In the living room.

Never mind that for most of us, it was black-and-white. With a little imagination, we could superimpose a little color on all that grayscale.

If anything, family television viewing back then was just the same as listening to the radio…but with a screen. Everyone gathered close. Everyone, dammit. No splinter groups. This was a family activity. Sit down, shut up, and pretend like you’re enjoying yourself.

I have to laugh (maybe “cry” is a better response) when I think of my own family when it comes to TV. We have no fewer than seven TVs in the house. Just try to get all of us together to watch something. Between multiple screens and DVRs, no one ever watches anything with anyone…or when it originally aired.

Then add in Big Sis and her 2nd and 3rd screens (aka, iPhone and iPad), and you have the 21C viewing family. Yep, we put the fun in dysfunctional.

I was reminded of all this the last couple of days when a few colleagues and I started the process of responding to an RFP (that’s Request For Proposals) to a major media company seeking to award a major research grant to qualified applicants. The RFP mentions media, technology, family, and all that stuff that just complicates things. Why? Because whoever can put the puzzle together first is bound to make a big pile of money selling ads through it.

I feel like we are on the verge of yet another media revolution (as if we haven’t already gone through the fire already). Internet TV will finally stick (after repeated failures by Google). We will engage with this TV via our mobile devices (the 2nd and 3rd screens). We will shop while we watch (pointing our smartphones at the screen to scan that dress that Penny is wearing on BBT, or the way-cool t-shirt Sheldon has donned). Tap-tap-tap. Two days later, it lands on our doorstep.

But it will all likely be time-shifted. Mom in the bedroom. Dad in the den. Kids in bedrooms or the living room. All cross-posting to Facebook and Twitter, Klout scores growing by the minute with every person who Likes your discriminating choice in televised drama. Or the fact that you Liked Sheldon’t latest shirt.

It’s all a far cry from what my family did back in the 60s, and some would say it reflects the demise of the American family. Perhaps there’s a glimmer of truth there, but I also know that some of my more memorable intra-family exchanges of late have occurred while two or more of us were sitting under the same roof, “talking” to each other on FB and Instagram.

I know. Why don’t we just turn around and speak to each other? I dunno. But maybe, just maybe, our electronic communication was complimentary, not a substitute. The fact that I found my 14 y/o on Instagram was a fun encounter, for I had no idea. And my wife and I have had some really fun exchanges while sitting a foot apart…albeit back-to-back.

I suppose that’s the new living color. Why live in shades of gray?

Dr “Now Watching Breaking Amish–on DVR” Gerlich





Biden Time

10 09 2012

Once upon a time, an audible faux pas left one vulnerable for a long time, to be mocked and mimicked relentlessly by late-night TV and stand-up comedians until everyone grew sick of the pun.

Not anymore. Today if you screw up, you just buy the word. Literally. Actually, “literally.”

Like how the Obama campaign just bought the word at Twitter. VP Joe Biden’s speech at the DNC the other night left people literally laughing out loud because of the Veep’s over-use of the word “literally.” The Twitterverse lit up with snide remarks, and #literally became a trending topic.

What else could Obama do but buy the word? Now if anyone searches on that word, they will be greeted with a promoted tweet in support of President Obama.

Smooth move there, Mr. President. Someone on your team was on their toes, and understands social media.

This is the kind of thinking it takes to survive in the oft-cutthroat world of Facebook and Twitter. You have to roll with the punches, and beat people at their own game. Had Lowe’s, Susan G. Komen and Chick-Fil-A used their noggins, they would have been busy buying up words…words that had turned against them.

Forget fighting fire with fire. Nope. Today we fight words with words. Sure, there is always the risk that someone can launch a new hashtag on Twitter, or craft another pithy graphic of Gene “Willy Wonka” Wilder (Oh, puh-leeeze!).

Today’s marketers who think like traditional marketers are in for a bruising. I recently intoned that brands are now conversations, not one-way communications. It makes no different whether you are selling candy or candidates, all are “products” in the broad sense. More importantly, those who choose to not engage in the conversation will have the story written for them by the audience.

Literally.

Dr “And This Is Why We Hire Speech Writers” Gerlich





Leave Me A Message, Maybe I’ll Call

10 09 2012

Remember when answering machines were in vogue? I do. You had to be someone pretty important to have an answering machine (which is what those machines were called long before someone thought of the word “voicemail”). Before answering machines, people just let calls ring and ring, in hopes of someone either walking in the door, or giving up to your tenacity.

Answering machines changed everything, because suddenly you could tag someone, and then there was an implicit social contract to return the call. Unless the power went out and deleted everything (or, as in the really old days, your tape filled up), there was simply no excuse for not calling back.

But things are different now. Where as we once anxiously looked forward to hearing whom we had missed while out and about, today checking voicemail is an ugly task.

Taking my cues from my 14-year-old daughter, I have observed that talking in general is loathsome. If you cannot text or Facebook someone, then forget it.

And businesses need to step up to the plate to figure out how to respond to this new development.

Three years ago I started inviting students to reach me via text or FB (having shared my cell number with them a couple years prior). Lucky for me, I am surrounded by young people, so I already had a sense that talking was going south. Maybe not as much as it is for teens, but still not the preferred means of communication.

In spite of what critics say about social media destroying our social skills, my take on it is that people really do not want to interact with one another, or at least the way we once did it. The preferred methods of communication are now short blurbs, often filled with emoticons and text-speak. At the risk of opening another can of worms, let me also say that we are graduating entire classes of students without the ability to write to, much less speak with, other people in a meaningful, grammatically-correct way.

But that’s another problem for another day. Right now, businesses need to embrace the notion that we consumers do not want to navigate through a voice menu from Hell, or speak to someone who really should be asleep in their time zone.

If anything, this presents opportunities for businesses, because we live on our phones. We are logged into FB 24/7. And the apps on our phones are like screwdrivers and wrenches in our toolbox. Companies that can redirect their communication…two-way communication…through these avenues are poised to gain customers, not turn them off.

While social analysts wring their hands over our inability (nor desire) to actually deal with spoken conversation, folks on the leading edge are figuring out ways to cope. And survive. For example, if I really need to give a detailed voice message (or am driving and can’t text), I will record a voice memo and then text it to the recipient as an attachment (just like an image). Others are using voice recognition software to capture messages and then embed them in emails.

But the really savvy ones are figuring out how to do it with just basic keystrokes on a mobile device.

Just as the primitive answering machine once separated the crowd, the ability to communicate in new ways will do likewise today. Now if I could just figure out how to embed my blogs into a mobile message, and allow you to respond from that device. Yeah, we’ll have it made then.

Type your response at the tone.

Dr “TTYL” Gerlich