5 things agencies want from their clients (besides more money)

Now that "digital has arrived" it's important that agencies and clients reconsider the ways that we interact with one another. Just a few years ago, digital didn't get much respect from either the full service agency world or most client companies. It was akin to cheap champagne -- something you served up when you cared, but not very much.

But now things are different, and clients and agencies are becoming increasingly dependent on the results that are achievable through digital platforms. And yet, in my "grandmother" research of about two dozen folks in full service and digital agencies, it appears that the ways in which agencies and clients interact haven't changed to reflect the increased importance of digital media. For far too many companies, digital platforms have become primary media delivered with also-ran development and communications processes.

The issues are not at all insurmountable. In fact, in many ways, they are dead simple. The focus of this piece is on things that digital agency teams want from clients. But they aren't intended to sound like sanctimonious demands; rather they are intended as five ways that we can quickly improve the impact of digital marketing efforts just by making small changes in the way that we work together. While the focus here is on what agencies want from their clients in order to forge these new ways of interacting, it'll be just as important to hear from brand marketers what they need from their digital agency teams.

Here, then, are five things agencies want from their clients to help improve digital marketing effectiveness.

1) A seat (and a voice) at the table

In its early years, digital was a tack-on, something you thought about after the campaign was developed and virtually all the media money was spent. Then you'd call in the digital folks -- whether on the client or the agency side -- and give them five days to slap together some banners and a schedule. In today's environment, in which many target audiences are spending a heckuvalot more time on Facebook than they are with Fox or Family Circle, it's clear that this approach needs to be revised.

Digital can play such a pivotal role for brands that its experts need to be sitting at the big people's table from the outset of planning. Why? Because we really should be involved in campaign development. Different campaign ideas can have very different relevance in an interactive environment. Digital can now be the starting point for a campaign, or the ending point, or the thread linking it all together. But truly taking advantage of the medium requires time to think and execute along with a concurrent development process.

2) A strategic mindset

Both agencies and clients often have highly strategic analog efforts, and then they assemble a potpourri of digital platforms and executions without considering what is best – strategically -- to reach and connect with a target. The fault here is absolutely on both sides. I'll be the first to note that we digital agency people have a habit of going straight to execution, in part because that is usually what has been demanded of us, and because time demands make people sloppy over time.

But when a client insists that there be as strategic an approach to digital efforts as for all other marketing efforts, we will all get far more out of our efforts and our careers. Clients need to demand a real examination of what target audiences are doing online, the likely times and places consumers will be open to brand messages, and whether deeper interaction with those banners might take a week longer to execute but deliver far stronger results.

I'm sure I will hear from both agencies and clients about this: "How dare you say we aren't strategic?" To which I can only respond: "Perhaps the point isn't about you." But just take one look at the blinky-blinky-click-now detritus that passes for creative online and you'll realize how many brand plans are fad-platform driven. See the point?

3) More open mindedness about quality and efficiency

Years ago, marketers typically fell into the quality bucket or the tonnage bucket. You and your company either believed in the power of high-rated, expensive programming to drive brand results, or you believed in barges full of the cheapest GRPs obtainable.

I make no comment on which is the correct way of thinking about broadcast, (other than I am certain that tonnage is the way to go ;-).

But in digital, both high-quality edit- and efficiency-oriented inventory have a critical role to play. This is because in digital, it's challenging to have both broad reach AND depth of interaction from a single set of executions. Brands need to be open to a mix of tools that collectively offer both, rather than simply demanding billions of the cheapest possible 728s, or approving only big, splashy deep integrations on elite publications.

Such a mix drives brand reach while also allowing deep brand experiences aimed at our best customers because the internet can be an incredibly powerful way to capitalize on the 20/80 rule insight. You can cover the waterfront to reach ordinary consumers while pinpointing the heavy users for deeper marketing efforts.

Many media companies offer solutions in both buckets -- portals, leading publications, and the best ad networks, just to name a few examples. All we need to do is capitalize on these dual opportunities more often.

4) A genuine interest in digital CAMPAIGN ideas

For me, one of the toughest adjustments I had to make as I moved from the analog world to digital was succumbing to the disparity in the meaning of the word "campaign." In offline, a campaign was built around a selling idea and was designed to live for years. Choosy mothers choosing Jif; Rolls Royce owners sharing Grey Poupon through driver-side windows; a lot riding on your Michelins; baking someone happy. That sort of thing.

In digital, "campaign" means some common element in a couple of pieces of creative that will be replaced in three weeks with another set of banners that have something different in common. A campaign in digital is essentially akin to what offliners call a flight, only it's even less than that.

Blue is not a campaign. Ditto Helvetica. Nor is a snake made of tiles labeled with state names. I am not saying that the snake doesn't get clicks, but for most of the readers of iMedia, there are goals other than immediate conversions to consider.

Identifying real campaign ideas is even more important today than back when Mr. Whipple was squeezing toilet rolls. As consumers are barraged with more and more marketing messages, the need for more integrated and enduring messages and imagery is even more pronounced.

I wish more brands were interested in identifying what works and sticking with it. Many of the same people who develop TV campaigns to last two years want entirely different banner looks every month. This is nothing short of marketing insanity.

Ideas and executional elements are just as much a part of building a brand online as they are in building one through 30-second spots. We all need to be more open to enduring digital advertising ideas.

5) Passion for data

Why are so few clients (and agencies) capitalizing on the tremendous resources and information available through digital reporting and analytics? Yes, yes, some are, especially giant brands and agencies. But many, many brands and agencies aren't.

Let's start with the basics. There is more to life than the CTR. Not every campaign objective can or should be measured by clicks. CTR is, of course, an easy metric to understand, and it's an easy one to measure, but a click does not adequately reflect the results of an awareness campaign, or a program designed to drive genuine brand interaction.

More to the point: It's time that all of us demonstrate real respect for data experts. So often, these information and analytical professionals have deep insights that could make a huge difference to businesses -- if only they were heard.

I want to emphasize that often clients have more respect for data than some agency people. But by demanding better reporting and analytics from us -- and by valuing it in both contract negotiations and with your time and attention -- you'll help unlock tremendous brand value and improve the actionable insights available from your agencies. Because ultimately, we care about what you care about.

Closing thoughts

Many of us are weary of quibbling with our client or agency side counterparts over process. And let's not even get started on the squabbling over fees -- that's a far bigger fish than I can fry here.

As I write this piece, it is apparent to me that we need to get past this he said/she said -- "You guys over there need to do…" -- thinking and figure out how to address all of these issues, and the myriad others we face, together.

There is a flip side to every issue, and while clients may need to give agencies a seat at the table, the agencies must provide value and insights that make their presence at the table valuable. And we must have the courage of our convictions, rather than be quick to acquiesce. Agencies need to demand strategic ideas from all of their teams, so that clients get strategic ideas to buy. And so on.

But clients do have a role in addressing all of these issues, because ultimately, agencies morph and recalibrate to reflect client priorities. We need to push you, and in turn, you need to push us.

My fear is that in a world of tightening budgets and limited people resources, we are all pushing each other the wrong way -- toward the illusion of an easier softer way, and that somehow we can standardize what we do to reduce time and effort.

Don't get me wrong, standardization has value -- just ask any buyer who used to have to buy "standard banners" in 92 sizes for a modest campaign. Just ask the designers that had to wrist all those versions of the same execution a couple of years back.

But standardization can only deliver so much benefit in our dynamic media environment. We need more and bigger ideas so that we can focus limited time and money on something better. Let's start coming up with them…together.

It's Time To Buy Newspaper

Last Friday, ANOTHER American newspaper died, Scripp's Rocky Mountain News. Yes, yes, you can certainly take the free market POV and say bah humbug these dinosaur newspapers deserve to die I spit on your graves.

Or, we can pause for a moment and lament the challenging times for America's only professional journalism form that is not (as) obsessed by Anna Nicole, Jon Benet, or whether [[insert name of emaciated, hungry starlet]] has strofoam boobs.

Newspapers uncovered Watergate. And My Lai. Newspapers fed the statistical appetite of every baseball fan my age. Newspapers make an effort to go a scosh deeper than offering headlines in between rightwing zealot versus left wing zealot food fights. While a certain cable news channel regaled us with an hour of [[this is 100% true]] what breakfast cereal was Saddam Hussein's favorite in American captivity (note: I believe it was Fruity Pebbles) newspapers were reporting about literally tons of money simply disappearing in Iraq.

The curse that newspapers must face is partly us and what we have done to consumer expectations. We have spent years feeding the tiger, giving users pretty much any info they want, for free. "We'll worry about the making money part later." And make no mistake, the pain they now feel is something many of us will be feeling in the not too distant future, when an ecosystem built on free begins to show its flaws. Free is not a business model. As we are discovering.

Newspapers have certainly made mistakes in the way they first ignored the web, and then rushed in without considering how to really make money in it. It takes a lot of 728s to replace a $74,000 P4CB in section one, from a revenue perspective.

Happily, all of the newspaper news isn't bleak.

Not by a longshot.

The digital offerings of some newspapers are getting superb. Some are experimenting with larger and more noticeable ads. Others with subscription models. And it's never been easier to buy local papers' online presences.

One cool development is the New York Times article skimmer, which you can check out here:

http://prototype.nytimes.com/gst/articleSkimmer/?scp=1&sq=article%20skimmer&st=cse

It's a way to scan pretty much every scrap of content in the NYT in a single, easy to use page.

Many newspapers are also creating extremely lively interest communities, juxtaposing chatty onliners with juicy local news.

There's lots of energy in this sector, lots of experimentation. And despite the closing of another paper, I am bullish that the papers will figure out a way to earn more revenue online. I really hope so.

And so should you, as the affluent, educated, involved lean forward eyes that newspapers attract -- both online and offline -- are probably what you and your brand are looking for.

So pick up that phone and RFP newspapers. The right audience within the context of truly unique and valuable content.

HELP! My Client Watches Online PORN!

OK, I sort of tricked you into a visit. And rest assured no CSF client watches online porn because they are all universally good looking and are living very active and wholesome sex lives.

But there is actually a reason for the headline. And it comes in just one paragraph.

Years ago I worked with a partner of LifetimeTV.com and the Lifetime folks said that one of their biggest traffic drivers was the ongoing discussion/board called “Help, my husband watches online porn!”(Of course, this viewing circumstance is both common and troubling, especially for the viewers of Valerie Bertinelli movies.) I kid. Let me give a personal shout out to Lifetime TV as being the only consistent provider of Golden Girls reruns. I love my Sophia and Rose.

Anyway, the reason I used this headline is to point out how hard it is to drive traffic growth online today. I have a number of friends who work on editorial at leading sites, and when they complain about traffic issues I always suggest the “Help! My fill in the blank watches online porn.” They all poo-poo it, saying they are all about quality n stuff, and then sooner or later some actually do it. And it always works. For a day.

I salute Lifetime for making this idea endure -- after all, such a discussion is very Lifetime. But for most pubs porn talk won’t be a good driver of ongoing traffic.

But while even a day's traffic boost may be welcome to some pubs, what is more remarkable is when an edit driven site can drive sustained traffic growth – it is surely a sign of consumer engagement and passion – two traits that we definitely need more of. I love it when site partners demonstrate a long term growth trend.

Naturally we need to recognize that a large site will likely show a less steep growth curve than a smaller one, but showing growth is a great indicator of consumer passion and editorial vitality. For some site uniques will be a good measure, for others, pages. And for still others, time spent or some combination of the above. But growth is a really good indicator of quality edit. And we should reward quality edit because it will reward our brands.

So the next time you get one of those canned decks from a pub showing how they are number one in something, I suggest you ask how their traffic is doing lately. What is the trend? It’s not a perfect indicator of consumer engagement, but it probably is a very good one. After all, we can’t expect to have our ads engage if the pages they are on are largely forgettable.

Below is the space reserved for all the pubs who are growing to shout out to you. They deserve the soapbox. ;-)

When Will The Microsoft Brand Police Wake Up?

Despit ethe fact that there is something Microsft on...like...95% of computers, and despite the fact that it is unlikely that Apple PC share will be in double digits in my lifetime, the brand continues to languish as a laughingstock. Now there are those who might say that it doesn't matter because they are on like 95% of computers but I think it's rather important. Microsoft always had FUD going for it. The idea that if you went Microsoft you wouldn't be getting the best, but it was a safe choice.

I am not sure people believe that anymore.

All giants fall. Swift meats was once the largest company in America. Now its a piece of a piece of a company. Toys R Us once threatened to have a 100% lock on the toy biz. Now it limps along as big but not terribly successful. Is Microsoft the next giant that will end up relatively unimportant in a handful of years?

I am not saying they will die. They'll be big for some time. But are they actually going to be essential to our lives? I'm guessing NO unless they figure out what they stand for and stop making the same mistakes. Over. And Over. And Over Again.

Figure out what you are. Be a brand instead of a trademark. Get it together guys! You have some of the smartest people on earth in your walls. Let them do what they can do!

Thanks for reading, and don't froget to write.

The Bright Side of a Recession: The Success of Real Brands And Real Businesses

Although I have been active in digital marketing for years, I have always had an issue with the way Internet "businesses" are developed and valued. Silly me, I always thought that a business was a company that sold things -- products or services -- for money, and then subtracted the cost of providing those goods or services from revenue to calculate profit.

Ultimately, business, as I understood it, was about that last bit, profit. That the success or failure of a business related to how much or indeed IF a profit materialized when costs were subtracted from revenue.

Not so in Internet "business." Witness AOL paying $850 Million for Bebo a year ago, despite the fact that the company had little if any revenue and enormous expenses. And despite the fact that the major soc nets haven't cracked the nut of profitability -- at least to the extent necessary to justify paying $850 million for the number three network.

The thing is, when revenue is smaller than costs, the result of subtracting costs from revenues is what we call a LOSS. Which, perhaps I need to remind the digitheads, is NOT as good as profit. In fact, I will go out on a limb here and say...whereas profits are good, losses are BAD.

Naturally, there are those in Internet business who would poo-poo my pedestrian notions, pointing out that platforms like Facebook have attracted 160 Million users and that that is impressive, even if money isn't being earned in prodigious quantities YET.

OK, I will accept that to a point. But let's look at it as if a real company, like say Kraft, were evaluating Facebook as a business opportunity. Let's pretend Facebook is actually the name for a block of cheese. Imagine it's got a blue wrapper and comes in a long package like Cracker Barrel.

Imagine this pitch to the division head.

"So how it works is, we give the cheese away to 160 Million people. As many times as they want it. And every quarter we make the cheese taste a little better, or make the piece a little bigger. And keep giving it away. And hopefully someone will come along and help pay for the cheese we give away. But no guarantees."

I grow weary of listening to Internet "wunderkinds" that have never generated a dime of revenue. One of the great things about being at the iMedia Brand Summit this week is that one gets to talk to people who earn revenue and profit instead of just score hype. I am sure that there are some people on Sand Hill Road who wish we had a little more old school business thinking in digital.

And while this rec(depr)ession is not at all a good thing, it may produce the side effect of having people remember that the marketers that sell things and earn profits are more worthy of big pay and recognition than folks who give away value indefinitely.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

An Exciting Week Ahead

One of the exciting things about going to iMedia's Brand Summit is that you get reconnected to what our business is all about -- pleasing the consumer. We live in positively bizarre times, and I am not just talking about the economy. Rather, the constant forming and reforming of the media landscape is cause for both excitement and trepidation.

What I love about programs like this is that these marketers are more than just the survivors, they are the succeeders, pleased with the opportunity to build and experiment and find new ways to connect and drive results -- while also driving the intangibles that are the lifeblood of what we are here to do and how we will drive stronger results in the future.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

The UnAgency

We are creeping up precariously close to my 22 year anniversary in the ad biz, and one thing I am struck by is how the basic agency model appears to be so ill suited thtoe times. Hey, now don't get me wrong, I am not ragging on big agencies as they are currently configured, as agencies have long been on the road to figuring out how to evolve to the new times that we face.

But what's interesting to me is that what constitutes an idea has evolved from an execution-centric piece of film -- either moving or in print -- to more of a genuine concept. When I started in the biz, and especially because I started in packaged goods, an idea really meant a demo or an executional pattern that could be burned into the head of Moms through endless repetition. Getting the consumer to PROCESS a message was largely unnecessary because we could use the sledgehammer of 10+ frequency to embed the message permanently in the consumer's brain.

Now that is of course nigh on impossible. We created Catalyst:SF because we understood that getting the consumer to process a message is now the critical challenge. We may get only one exposure to her -- or indeed we may need to get her to seek out her one exposure. Engagement, process...tomato, tomahto...what' we're really tlaking baout is elective attention.

Driving elective attention was a new skill to learn for many agencies, especially the sort of strategicy/accounty agency where I cut my teeth. We didn't generally produce awe inspiring ideas, but we were adept at sinking the anvil of a `demo into the skull.

That's not what it's about at all anymore. Isn't that awesome?

Thousands Apply For Part Time Receptionist Job

From Consumerist:

Unquestionably Horrible Taste

A doll inspired by Caylee, the homicide victim. Thankfully, the project has been shelved. Good intentions, but a bad idea.



Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

RNC Chair Candidate Saltsman The Magic Idiot

From Talking Points Memo.

Thanks for reading, and don;t forget to write.

It's Time To Render and Waterboard John Thain

Link to story

Surely the SEC can imprison this MF for such outrageous behavior. I suggest Barack hold off on outlawing extraordinary rendition until this f-er is on a nice Afghan waterboarding table.

Seriously, what kind of screwed up values must a person have who begs for money from people who are struggling to buy groceries and gas so that corrupt failures can get bigger houses in The Hamptons.

And the GOP wanted to stop bailing out GM because auto makers make on average $28 an hour.

Soylent Green - No, Wait, Diesel Fuel - Made of People!

http://consumerist.com/5120330/beverly-hills-plastic-surgeon-uses-liposuctioned-fat-as-fuel-for-car

We Can't All Just Get Along

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Bloggers Going to Prison: Film at 11

The Committee to Protect Jounalists has reported that 45% of the journalists imprisoned are Internet based, meaning that you are more likely to be jailed if you are a digital journalist than a Print or TV one.

See Ars Technica graphic below:



Now I can see a lot of resons for this -- one being that Internet journalism is largely citizen journalism -- without legal departments to censor the skank comments.

But whether explainable or not, it is a troubling trend in that Internet journalism is the only category not dominated in the US by five media giants. Silencing this channel would strike a terrible blow to having a truly informed society.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

Joe The Unlicensed Plumber, Reporting From Gaza

Unlicensed for plumbing, but apparently has the right stuff for reporting (!)



14.997 minutes and counting...

Who Should Be More Insulted?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/30/powell-aide-calls-bush-sa_n_154325.html

Nine Moronic Comments I've Heard In The Past 30 Days

9. Yes, we're transparent. But our network doesn't offer site lists. We offer opaque transparency.
8. Well, you know, we find the sample data preferable to the directly measured in terms of accurate site traffic counts.
7. What we want is something totally innovative that's guaranteed to work.
6. We want to pay the same next year as this, but we also expect 20% bonus weight.
5. Will you accept publicity in lieu of payment? After all, publicity is the currency of the web.
4. I'd much rather not pay you and just have you guys mentor us with free advice.
3. In a down economy chatchkes becomes absolutely vital to your business.
2. Comment on my personal blog: "I found this post fascining and direct you to our ofice supply compny in Sri Lanka."
1. Are Moms the same as Women 18-49?
What have you heard in the past thirty days that made you either laugh or wince???

Coming Soon! More Amateurish Local News!

From the NYT.

Yeah, But Christmas Isn't Actually About...Christ...Is It?

White House Happy Hanukah cards bear a Christmas tree.

A fitting end to a confused Presidency.

When reached for comment, Laura Bush's spokeswoman, Sally McDonough, said the White House usually prints separate cards, but in the waning days of the presidency, there had been an oversight.

"Mrs. Bush is apologetic," she said. "It is something that just slipped through the cracks."

Mess-A-yah Mess-I-yah, potato potahto, same diff...

What the heck do you Jews want, respect for your beliefs?

Not from dis Prezdent.

Sad: No Facebook/Twitter Deal. I Wanted To Title My Post TwitBook

;-(