I’ve been thinking a lot about how to evolve traditional marketing as we transition to a social economy. In reading Rachel Happe’s post “The Big Secret to Social Media Marketing” this morning, I got to thinking about how a lot of marketers (and advertisers) depend on a magician’s smoke & mirrors to promote and sell their products.
In traditional marketing, it’s really a matter of promoting/highlighting the strengths of a product while minimizing/hiding the weaknesses. This deceptive nature is completely counter to the authentic/transparent nature of social media.
For example, soft drink manufacturers hawk the image of professional athletes drinking soda, yet most nutritionists decry soda as the biggest contributor to obesity in this country. Should this contradiction be of concern to those of us in social media?
It was interesting to see Pepsi engage social media influencers in a re-branding effort last year. Was this an attempt at authenticity or clever ploy to get their new logo/packaging exposure to potential customers in the land of social media?
In another post today, DJ Francis suggests “if your product sucks, reinvest the money you would have spent on blogging back into making the product better.” Do you agree? Should companies with poor products/services avoid engaging with social media until they fix their ills?
Cool photo in this post in from The Rocketeer’s stream on Flickr.
January 20, 2009
Jim Storer
Leave a reply
7 responses to “Smoke & Mirrors in a Social Economy”
heatherjstrout
January 20th, 2009 at 18:00
Jim, thanks for writing about such a thought provoking topic. I believe companies need take inventory of their skeletons before they execute any public feedback mechanism such as blogs and discussions. You and I both know that authenticity is critical to the success of business to customer interaction in such a public forum. Preparing for hearing about those skeletons and having a genuine response to them is key in breeding loyal customers.
Should companies forgo social media to reinvest in products when they know there are holes in their products? No. They may want to start with a blog, where they can talk to their customers about what they know to be true about the holes in their products. Not only do they own up to the issues but customers may help them focus on the right changes to the product. My clients were always happier when I owned up to issues and gave them a timeline for resolution, or even delivered the bad news that something was not on the horizon to be fixed, and offered the business case as to why. The alternative was skirting the issue and having them bring it up repeatedly, or lose faith in our relationship.
Blogs cost only the time it takes to implement, write and manage them. They can easily be implemented in tandem with investments in fixing the product.
The more important issue is whether the company is ready to own up to the problem, address their customers and actually respond to requests for change.
Rachel Happe
January 21st, 2009 at 07:19
Thanks for the riff Jim – this is something I struggle with (clearly) and don’t really understand the deceptive part of marketing either.
I agree with Heather on how to handle it. You can’t just stop marketing because there are issues or gaps with a product. Very few products are perfect for everyone so what you need to be able to clearly articulate is why the choices were made that got the product to where it was. As a product professional, there is constant prioritization of what to enhance – having a model for prioritization that is simple and clear is critical – and customers appreciate (even if they are not overjoyed) understanding how product decisions are being made.
Scott
January 21st, 2009 at 09:21
In principle I agree with the statement, “if your product sucks, reinvest the money you would have spent on blogging back into making the product better.”
But, if you enter the world of social media in an attempt to share and discover honest feedback (as you should) – you will have an ideal and cost-effective means of discovering how to make your product better.
Social media isn’t about marketing. It’s about genuine participation, communication and tapping into the knowledge of many in order to learn about yourself and/or your products.
derekshowerman
January 21st, 2009 at 09:25
Jim- The American Auto Companies are a prime example of promoting a lesser product instead of investing in their product. I have no doubt that if GM, Chrysler and Ford has spent as much cash innovating their product to be competitive with Toyota & Honda, instead of pumping cash into Football commercials, they would not be in the place they are in. Before engaging social media, companies need to have a great product. Social Networking has made the world consumer too smart to be fooled by “lipstick on a pig” advertising. Word can spread like wild fires now-only the strong products will thrive.
Gary Lombardo
January 21st, 2009 at 10:09
Nice post Jim. If we wait to market a product until it reaches an “acceptable” or perfect state, then no product would ever be marketed, so the use of either traditional marketing or social media is fine even if your product “sucks”. The key is having an authentic, honest conversation with your customers around the perceived gaps in your product and what you are doing to improve them. As a product person, this is the type of conversation I try to have all the time. What better way to do so than to utilize social media?
jstorerj
January 21st, 2009 at 11:05
Awesome comments all. You’ve taken the topic further (a lot further) than I had with the post. I love when that happens.
I totally agree that engaging customers in the product improvement process is only going to help companies, IF they’re going to act on the information collected. Including customers in the process and then ignoring their advice is probably worse than not engaging them at all.
What if their product can’t be improved… it just is “bad” as it is? I used the example of soft drinks, which have very few redeeming qualities (imho), but we could also look at cigarettes. The companies that make cigarettes aren’t looking to change the product, but should they be utilizing social media? Deception is an essential component of their sales process – can that be overcome?
Francine McKenna
January 30th, 2009 at 17:47
Blogging about a crappy product or service is like focusing on SEO for a blog with bad content. Cart before the horse.
1 Trackbacks / Pingbacks
Who’s on first? « Jim Storer :: Return on Community January 21st, 2009 at 13:28
[...] About Jim Storer ← Smoke & Mirrors in a Social Economy [...]