Get it off your chest

Our Own Worst Enemies

My wife recently had an interesting customer experience that, although she categorized as positive, I am sure the service provider would categorize as negative. My wife was trying to redeem points from a loyalty program toward an airfare. Her first stop was online where her options would have required eight times the number of points she had anticipated. Dissuaded by what she saw, she called the loyalty contact centre. By talking to an agent she was able to obtain an upgraded ticket at one-fifth the number of points as was required by the sel-serve option presented on the internet.

My wife was delighted with the service and results that she received from the contact centre, but as a contact centre guy myself, I was haunted by the unnecessary call that was driven into the contact centre. At the core of the issue for me was the inability for two customer-touching channels to harmonize their servicing strategy. The internet, a channel used to improve customer experiences and reduce costly calls to the contact centre, had in fact driven an additional call into the contact centre.

This experience is not unique to loyalty programs or an online contact centre strategy. We see this type of unintended end result frequently caused by organizations with multiple customer touch points. When you consider all the potential ways in which you touch a customer (inbound calls, outbound calls, marketing solicitations, statements and invoices, applications, letters and so on), its easy to understand how difficult it becomes to maintain consistency within a customer touch point communication strategy.

I have seen organizations where customers question that company’s price competitiveness not because of the outside competitive market, but rather because different channels are offering different rates for the same product suite. I have seen organizations where statement inserts have not been communicated to the contact centre and thus resulted in frustrating customer experiences and lower than anticipated take-up rates. All of theses types of issues, and many more similar ones, drive both customer dissatisfaction and increased cost.

The overriding issue seems to be that the larger an organization grows, the more touch points and channels it has to communicate with customers. As the number of customer touch points grow, the control over the consistency and sharing of information internally seems to weaken.

What is missing is a customer contact guru: an individual or a team who does not own a specific customer contact channel, but rather is empowered to ensure that all information sent or accessible to a customer is appropriately disseminated within the corporate organization. A group that is tasked for identifying and eliminating conflicting information between channels. Effectively, a group that makes sure that the right hand knows what the left hand is doing. Until such time that we recognize that all of our touch points with our customers need to be zealously guarded, we will continue to be our own worst enemies.

Richard Litvack, Vice President, Operations, Citi Cards Canada Inc.
& member of CMA’s Contact Centre Council

Who Won the Superbowl?

Okay, I admit it. While you're reading this during the week at some point after the SuperBowl aired and know who won, I'm sitting here writing this blog entry on SuperBowl Sunday instead of watching the big game. And while I'll be interested to hear who won (Go Saints?), I, like you, will go online tomorrow to find out who advertised and which spot was the funniest or most outlandish. And then I'll go on with my day and probably never think about those spots ever again.

However, the Superbowl is the most watched televised event of the year with some 100 Million people expected to watch. According to a recently televised report, a 30 second spot on American TV during the Superbowl will go for between $2.5 and $2.8 Million. That's about $80,000 a second!

But the larger question being asked these days, especially by a lot of young people I know, is whether that money could be better spent. Especially with everything that's going on in the world right now.

Now after years of producing some of the most memorable Superbowl ads in history, PEPSI is asking the same question and has decided not to run an ad. Instead, they're going online with "The Pepsi Refresh Project". http://www.refresheverything.com/

According to their "refresh everything" site, they're looking for people, businesses, and non-profits with ideas that will have a positive impact. "Look around your community and think about how you want to change it." Submit your ideas and vote on your favourites. Those chosen will be awarded up to $250,000 in grants in categories ranging from Health, Arts & Culture, and Food & Shelter to the Planet, Neighbourhoods and Education.

And the so-called Pepsi Generation is eating it up. This is just one example of what's going on right now. We saw the impact the internet and social media had and is having post-Haiti. This is more of the same great trend. The NetGeneration is getting involved and looking for something more fulfilling than a gratuitous 30-second spot where the money spent to buy the media could eradicate so many issues affecting Haiti, Cambodia and the Congo to name a few -- and those affecting us right here at home. Pepsi is on to something and other brands ignore the trend at their peril.

Social Media Pollution

Consider the following scenario: Your plumber approaches you after completing a repair in your home. He seems like a nice enough guy, so you give him a chance when he begins speaking to you. He asks if you’d be interested in receiving his weekly newsletter. You are confused and a little bit uncomfortable. You decide to play along, though, and ask him what the aforementioned newsletter would touch on. He responds, “Oh, various items on plumbing and how you can get the best out of it. I have different tips on how to maximize the effectiveness of your toilet-water… I also review new fixtures and pipes that are hitting the market.”

At this point, you awkwardly decline, allow him to leave, and lock the door. Why did this happen? It’s simple; there is no need for an exterior relationship between the service (our weird, hypothetical plumber) and the consumer (you). When my water pipes are busted, I require the service. Beyond that, it’s not really part of my world – and I’m okay with that. So why do so many marketers try to force the same kind of irrelevant content down the public’s throat on social media sites like Twitter and Facebook? As these sites continue to grow in popularity and international reach, uninformed marketers are latching onto their coattails and, consequently, making a fool of themselves.

When done right, many brands have been quite successful utilizing this young medium. Clothing company H&M posts photos of their new seasonal collections and other interesting materials that their close to1.5 million fans on Facebook legitimately care about. As marketers, we are obligated to understand and properly take advantage of the trends that affect our consumers. There is no doubt that social media provides an opportunity for branding. However, that opportunity isn’t open to every business out there. You must have something unique to offer the consumer - beyond a price listing or link to your website. If there is no demand for additional material, don’t provide it. You’ll just be polluting an emerging media that consumers are still interested in.

So before you hop on the social media bandwagon, please take a minute to consider if anyone wants you going along for the ride. After all, it’s already pretty crowded out there.

Brook Johnston @marketingman.ca

Surprise

Not many things surprise me after so many years in this business, but I have to admit, this did:

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/09/google-does-not-use-keywords-meta-tag.html

Since starting my own creative consultancy two years ago, I've written many websites for clients who think that key words actually matter. So you can imagine my surprise when I learned that Google doesn't use the "keywords" meta tag in their web search ranking. Obviously this isn't as earth-shattering as learning that cigarettes are bad for you or that Balloon Boy was a hoax, but it does raise an eyebrow given that Google hasn't exactly advertised this news. Thoughts?

The Fallacy of Return on Investment in Marketing

Return on investment in marketing cannot be measured accurately. We are fooling ourselves if we think it can. The main reason ROI in marketing is virtually impossible to measure is that most actions from marketing are not instant and many actions from marketing are caused by a cummulation of impact over a period of time.

Do you buy a Nike shoes because it is on the billboard; because you saw the ad on television; because you saw the billboard; because you like the Just Do It slogan; or because the store clerk suggested them? Was it the ad this month or last? Or was it the ad you saw when you were 12? Or is it the recommendation of a friend who had been impacted by Nike marketing?

The answer is - you probably don't know exactly why you buy the shoes at the particular time that you do. It is a combination of all these factors that make up marketing that cause the consumer to take action.Most likely the purchase was made due to a combination of factors. That is why all marketers preach multiple medias and multiple frequencies. Marketing effect happens over time.

Marketing is the battle for perception. Good marketing can create the perception needed to cause purchasers to buy. It can also create the warm feeling towards the company or product that prompts the purchase.

The only type of product that can have an instant return on investment in marketing is something that is truly commoditized.

If you are selling water and there is no perception that your water is any different than anyone else's water, then if you do a marketing campaign or a promotion or a price reduction, you can shift share from a competitor. Most manufacturers should actually be spending their marketing dollars differentiating their product. It is much easier to sell "Clean Glacier" water over "bottled city" water if Clean Glacier can sell the refreshment and health benefits of their brand. Even water is not a commodity.

The only companies that should want to commoditize their markets are ones that are truly the lowest cost to produce (not to be confused with lowest price). To sell at the lowest price without the lowest cost is a recipe for failure.

Because of the difficulty in measuring ROI, some companies will just stop marketing. This is great news for those that keep marketing. In time share will shift to those that continue to invest.

Just because ROI in marketing is impossible to measure accurately does not mean marketing has no value. Just because we desperately want to know how to measure ROI in marketing does not mean it can be done. And just because the measurement is not accurate does not mean we should not try to measure it.

Enough! Please stop! No more! I can't stand it!

There are times when there is no possibility of being constructive when writing about the absurdities inflicted on an innocent world by others in our field. There are even times when, as honest proponents of our business, we have no choice but to call it like it is. And this, Ladies and Gentlemen, is one of those times. (By the way, stop me if you've heard this one!)

I am referring to the Province of Alberta rebranding project -- the one (I am not sure whether it is for tourism or just for the sake of doing it) which has as its tag line: "Alberta. Freedom to Create. Spirit to Achieve". Normally, as those who know me would expect, I would let a slogan as completely mysterious and meaningless and nonsensical as this pass with barely a snide comment. But this isn't normally.

Seems the marketers in Alberta (or whoever is responsible for this) took the "Freedom to Create" part literally, and "created" a beach and coastline for the province in order to make a point in an ad. Yes, I kid you not. They used a scene from a beach in Northumberland as the image in an advertisement. More than just the beach, they also used the image of two English girls romping on the beach.

Not surprisingly, they were caught out in the blogosphere, and this is where the fun really starts. It turns out that the image, over which the Alberta logo and the tag line appear written large, is not meant to depict Alberta -- it is meant to be a visual depiction of Albertans' concern for the future of the world (this according to Olga Guthrie of Alberta's public affairs bureau). It is likely that the intent of the campaign may be to counter the idea that Alberta's oil sands extraction process is an economic depiction of Albertans' lack of concern for the future of the world. If that is the case, then wouldn't the fact that they could not find a pristine example of concern-for-the-world in their own backyard, rather prove the critics right?

Apparently not. The Prime Minister's head of media relations (sorry, but what the hell is the Prime Minister involved in this for?), helpfully points out that, "There's no attempt to mislead here. The picture used just fitted the mood and tone of what we (we? we?) were trying to do." Obviously, whatever Alberta is trying to do, is something they can't do, if they can't find a picture to fit the mood and tone of whatever it is, in Alberta. Whatever happened to authenticity?

The little English girls, too, were not meant to deceive -- they are meant to be British girls because (implicitly) only English girls are suitable "symbols of the future." (Olga again).

If you don't believe me, here is a link to a PDF of the article in The Guardian Weekly.

Need I say more? Have we achieved absolutely nothing in the marketing world? Has everything we've been trying to do and say really been so tediously boring that it is totally ignored? I am desolate, disappointed and going to Mexico!

A Changed Vowel that is oh so Fowl….

Have you ever had one of those moments? You know, one of those brilliant moments where you come up with a campaign for a brand that is genius? You realize that perhaps your campaign idea may be fruitless because you don’t even work with the brand but because you love what you do, you can’t help yourself. Well this time I think I have done it, I really have. And this one should fly…

iTrade Canada, (formally E*Trade Canada) launched their rebranding campaign in early March with creative print executions, a new spot and host of other initiatives. All fine and dandy, but here is my big campaign idea: I propose that they re-launch the current campaign but instead of featuring a red Scotia power ball as seen here , the new executions should feature a common but highly underutilized animal, the chicken.

Beavers have been done (RIP Frank and Gordon) and thanks to TAXI’s long legged ingenuity, Telus has used just about every animal one can think of without it getting tired, BUT to my knowledge they haven’t used chickens yet. Come on Capital C, grab those chickens before TAXI does….

So where did this fowl campaign idea come from?

In July of 2008 Scotia Bank purchased E*Trade Canada for the tidy sum of $442 million U.S. dollars, immediately making them a legitimate player within the Canadian discount brokerage business, after years of trying. No offense to the anemic Scotia Direct or Trade Freedom brand, which are also owned by Scotia, intended here but E*Trade was the crown jewel.
The key for Scotia in this transaction was not the $4.7 billion in assets under management that came with E*Trade, but rather the undisclosed number of customer accounts that made up the $4.7 billion in AUM. Within the online brokerage business, the highest value customers are your heavy traders. Those select individuals who trade upwards of 50+ times a month are worth big bucks, and they are the hardest ones to get. Although it is not known just how many high volume trading accounts Scotia picked up from E*Trade, one can certainly guess that it was enough to justify the price tag. On an important side note, $442 million dollars presumably* also bought Scotia the rights to the once ubiquitous E*Trade Canada Brand.

Now this was a good brand, possibly even a great brand, especially when compared to the rest of stodgy category. It had a fun, cheeky personality; it was the anti bank (oh the irony of a bank purchasing the anti-bank and then axing it…). E*Trade Canada was the place with attitude that knew and understood the mindset of the self directed active trader. The recent US baby campaign is a fantastic demonstration of the brand’s DNA. E*Trade is also famous for starting the great Canadian price war. Thanks to them, lucky day traders are paying south of $10 bucks per trade today at their respective brokerages. But no matter, even though the singing baby is absolutely hilarious and the price has always been right at E*Trade, it is child’s play when compared to the chicken rebranding I propose…

When the news broke of Scotia acquiring E*Trade Canada, amongst the people for whom it really mattered, active traders and clients of E*Trade, the response seemed quite clear. Keep the brand intact, keep the trading platforms intact. Keep the E*Trade we love. Evidence of this sentiment is easily found on various sites – the comments and feedback from this CBC story are quite telling. Although it is only a small cross section of opinion, it would've certainly raised a red flag for me were I Scotia.

At every step of the rebrand from E to I, the signs must have been very clear to those involved...Some logical points that would have been raised are listed below:

"Maybe rebranding E*Trade Canada, a brand with more than 11 years of Canadian presence, a rich pedigree and brand recall scores that are through the roof, may not be the best idea."

"Perhaps the rationale of amalgamating our existing splintered trading platforms with E*Trade and eventually introducing a new trading platform, primarily to E*trade clients, because they now make up the bulk of our accounts, doesn’t make sense."

"None of these clients asked for a new brand or a new trading platform, they were happy with E*Trade."

Somehow the rationale listed above was addressed adequately - it must have been in order to proceed with the rebranding. No matter I say, chickens will fix it all!

And I say chickens because key people were too afraid to take a stand behind the E*Trade Canada brand. Perhaps they were afraid of the decision maker at the very top, the one who put the gauntlet down and said, “We are changing the vowel to “I” and that is final!”

Or maybe they were afraid because after doing all of the rebranding work, it finally dawned on them. A simple vowel change does not transfer the equity from one brand to another. “How can our red power ball compete with singing exchange trading babies?” They must have asked. Of course by the time they asked the latter question, too many red balls were in motion. Eating crow and reverting back to E*Trade was not an option.

Of course the competition is happy, probably even ecstatic. If the boys at Disnat and TD Waterhouse were consulted, they would’ve agreed with Scotia’s decision to scrap E*Trade Canada. “Why eat crow?” they would’ve said, “Chicken tastes much better and none of us have to worry about the anti-bank anymore. Trust us Scotia; you are doing a good thing by not listening to your new clients…”

* Scotia continued to operate under the E*Trade brand for several months, signing up new accounts until iTrade launched in March of this year.

Go Green or Go Frizzy… Why Make a Girl Choose?

It ain’t pretty to shop in the beauty aisle these days. That is, if you’re a green consumer intent on making environmentally responsible choices. Overpackaged beauty products, such as my bottle of frizz control serum, can literally make your hair stand on end, when you evaluate all the waste going into a relatively small amount of product.

Take, for example, my bathroom staple, Pantene Pro V Hair Serum in 50 ml glass bottle, with a plastic, unrecyclable pump top, non recyclable lid, wrapped in a non recyclable PVC insert, and inserted in a cardboard box. Compare that with the reduced package for the alternative Life Brand hair mist, which contains more than twice as much product, in a lightweight recyclable container (and is cheaper to boot!)

Why oh, why Pantene, must you make me choose between my hair and my planet?
You know I’ll choose my hair every time! Who wants to live on a planet of untamed ‘fro’s?

Now some would argue that the higher prestige Pantene needs the enhanced packaging to convey its quality and justify its price tag. But suppliers of luxury goods are proving that by being creative, it is possible to strike the balance between sustainability and high perceived value.

Take Mary Kay’s Affection Fragrance sets, which use a lightweight, more sustainable cardboard box. Produced by MWV, the gift set box features a paperboard package that provides the same look as a rigid set box but costs less to produce and maximizes efficiencies in the transportation process.

See…you can get the pretty without the pollution! I’m not saying beauty products have to wear Birkenstocks. But with a little creativity and research into new packaging options, the beauty industry can capitalize on consumer willingness to go green, and still appeal to sophisticated, fashion conscious tastes.

With all that environmental goodness and none of the nasty granola aftertaste; next year’s Earth Day may yet be a good hair day after all.

Authored by Adina Zaiontz, Trade Marketing Manager, Yahoo! Canada

CRTC Crashes While Looking Through the Rearview Window

“Hulu.ca”… Has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it?

This particular post started out as a rant. It evolved. In the process I realized that, as a media consumer, I’m a temperamental 2-year old with ADD. I have no patience. I want my content the way I want it, and I want it now.

At Christmas I received some iTunes gift cards. I figured I’d be an honest consumer and go buy some content. After surfing the Canadian Apple Store site, I felt discouraged… Where were the commercial-free “Prison Break” episodes that I’d gone looking for? And why were they readily available on the American Apple Store site, where I couldn’t get them, alongside countless hours of other commercial-free entertainment.

A quick Google search brought up numerous ways to get those same episodes, but I was feeling lazy and wasn’t in the mood to forge my mailing address or buy a fresh US-based gift card on eBay. I simply wanted to redeem my existing Canadian-bought gift cards and be entertained.

Around the same time, I found that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) was surprisingly relevant in how it brings new content to market. On the Canadian Apple Store site, I could buy and download “Hockey Night in Canada” games and episodes of “MVP: The Secret Lives of Hockey Wives”.

I could also watch streaming episodes of the Canadian “Dragon’s Den” on CBC.ca for the price of watching one or two quick Rogers commercials. Seemed fair.

However, I didn’t want to pay to download any commercial-free CBC content since the publicly funded broadcaster already gets my tax dollars to send me its signal and its programs for ‘free’.

Besides, where were my “Prison Break” episodes? I had money (the gift cards); I wanted to buy. Another quick Google search reveals how to shield your I.P. to watch those same episodes but I wanted to stay away from the grey-market of 21st century media consumption. Why was it so hard?

Everyone in this industry – content producers, distributors, advertisers, and consumers – is searching for a new world order. Canada’s commercial broadcast stations are in crisis (according to recent CRTC hearings), losing money and rapidly losing touch with the consumer. It is a daunting position for them to be in, especially when advertisers go looking for ways to connect with buyers.

Advertisements are heat-seeking missiles – they go where they find audiences. Ultimately, they are channel and media agnostic. Even in a recession. The recent downturn in ad revenue is as much to do with audience fragmentation as with anything else. For many, it simply seems harder to find today’s consumers.

The majority of 21st century audiences, target markets and consumers will pay for either downloads (without ads) or they will watch ads in return for ‘free’ content (streaming online video). Apple pioneered the online subscription-based download model for music although they may have a harder time dominating online video without the benefits of first mover advantage.

The CBC gets all of this, but CTV and GlobalTV seem to only support the online streaming version of things – most akin to the traditional broadcast model. And since Peer-to-Peer sharing isn’t popular with the Canadian ISPs, these are the only aboveboard models.

Even so, the real challenge facing the industry is not whether or not Canadian content makes it out to the world (or at least, to other Canadians) or whether commercial broadcasters and cable companies continue to make buckets of cash… rather, the real challenge is whether consumers will cease to exist.

The world is full of users now, not consumers. We use the media and we create content too. User-Generated-Content splits our attention (already short, as it is) away from consumer-focused content, adverts, and general entertainment alike.

Jeff Zucker, president of NBC Universal and a member of the Hulu.com board recently commented: “Advertisers have made it clear that they want a safe environment, unpolluted by videos of cats on skateboards”. It was a blatant and defensive knock at YouTube and all UGC, neither of which inherently support traditional advertising but both of which steal mind-share from Hulu.com and NBC Universal’s mass-produced content.

Meanwhile the Canadian government, in the form of the CRTC, is still attempting to make mass media serve various mandated, national goals. Mary Vipond noted in her historical research of “The Mass Media in Canada”, that too much foreign content threatens Canadians’ identity, filling our minds with foreign attitudes and images while crowding out our attempts to speak to each other.

That old Can-Con issue seems quite dated now as more and more Canadians are indeed “speaking to each other” through social media and UGC. Doesn’t that count for something?

Were the CRTC to turn its gaze from the rearview window toward the road ahead, it would be preparing for a future of even more user-generated content and on-demand consumption. The CBC could show them the way.

(NB: My skateboard-riding cat charges ACTRA rates).

Authored by Joy Boyson, Director, New Business for Technical Marketing, The Marketing Store

Writer's Block Cured by Twitter

They say that confession is good for the soul. So I’ll admit something. I’ve had writer’s block for a while. I just couldn’t think of something interesting to write. Until Twitter helped me. I’m sure you’ve heard all about Twitter as it’s the latest and greatest social media sensation. Oprah’s on it. Ashton Kutcher is on it. Even Borat is on it.

So recently I read a terrific article in the Toronto Star (full disclosure: my employer is owned by Torstar which also owns the Toronto Star) by Ellen Grossman. She wrote about a situation where Aeroplan charged the widow of an Aeroplan member to transfer his accumulated Aeroplan points to her account as she wanted to take her grandchildren to Disney World. You read correctly. They wanted to charge the widow almost $2k to transfer her deceased husband’s Aeroplan points to her account. When the Toronto Star asked Aeroplan about it they had no comment.

I was so stunned I tweeted (posted) about the article in Twitter. The next thing I knew my tweet (post) got re-tweeted (re-posted) by at least ten other people. All of them very smart and talented people. Some of whom I’ve never met before. In fact a few of them are respected journalists for the Globe & Mail and La Presse respectively. None of my previous Twitter meanderings generated such a ‘viral’ effect. I now had something interesting to write about for my next post. And so here we are.

I’m an Aeroplan fanboy and I’ll admit it. The credit cards I use are because of it. The gas I buy at Esso is because of it. I buy Tropica orange juice because of it. I fly on Air Canada because of it. I have friends who work at Aeroplan and at agencies who represent them. A couple of years ago my wife’s Aeroplan account was de-activated because she hadn’t used it within the required amount of time and she was at risk of losing thousands of points. She missed the deadline by a matter of days so I emailed the President of Aeroplan, Rupert Duchesne, and he graciously re-instated her points without penalty. So as you can see, I’ve had a good relationship with Aeroplan over the years.

Which is why I’m torn by the article by Ellen Grossman. It really bothered me and based on the re-tweeting it bothered many others as well. I just don’t get why such a respected brand would act that way. The optics in this situation look nothing short of ridiculous from a marketing or branding perspective. As Mathew Ingram succintly tweeted “Stay classy Aeroplan – soak those widowers for all you can get.”

So is the morale of the story that spouses should tell their partners their Aeroplan account information? So in the event of an untimely demise their spouse/partner can still book reward tickets otherwise they will have to pay penalties to re-acquire Aeroplan points? (Naturally I would never do or advise such a thing as that would be a contravention of Aeroplan’s rules that members must agree to when they sign-up.)

It just doesn’t seem right Aeroplan. Even to a fanboy like me. Even if you did help me cure my writer’s block.

Lessons of a Recovering ROI-aholic

I admit it. I used to think ROI was the be all and end all of analytics. If it couldn’t be measured, it wasn’t worth doing. I brushed off measures of awareness and “eyeballs” as relatively useless terms that were thrown out to prove the success of a campaign or initiative when nothing of substance really existed beyond the printed page or website. Then, something changed - the broader marketing industry became gripped in this cycle of having to prove everything and show ROI on all marketing activities. I expected to be happy when that day arrived, but I’ve realized that we created a monster. We are starting to get crippled by ROI paralysis. You can’t measure everything – or, better said – you are limited to the extent to which you can measure some things.

Take the ascendance of Social Media. There are now huge streams of data at our disposal but none of it can easily be tied to a sale, making it really hard to measure in terms of a return. My colleagues and I have argued over how to measure this thing, how to prove an ROI. Truth is, you can’t. Get an ROI that is.

Oops...did I say that out loud?

Even beyond whether you can calculate an ROI, the first question you should ask is, do I really need to? What other measures are good enough?

Every business has to engage in advertising, marketing, promotion, public relations and sales. They are all part of the mix, but only a few can be tied directly to a sale in a meaningful way. Does that mean you should stop advertising because all you can measure is GRPs or number of views or capture awareness through a research study? Of course not - unless staying in business isn’t one of your objectives. Awareness is the first step in closing a sale, so it has to be done.

Back to Social Media. Ultimately, it is a promotional and public relations tool as well as an engagement mechanism. At the moment, there is a lot of activity that can be measured around interest, buzz and the adherence to blogs and tweets. That’s a pretty good starting point to gauge interest and awareness of whether customers and prospects are circulating in your universe.

Once they are in your universe, then you can start to do some things that can prove an ROI. Increasingly, there are companies out there that are offering capabilities to deploy offers via Twitter using a Tinyurl. Companies that created Facebook pages are targeting offers with campaign codes attached so they can start to track and measure ROI out of this environment. Now that they have prospects and customers in their sphere of influence, they are using more traditional, measurable tools to generate provable ROI.

It may be time to wean-off from the ROI Kool-aid and consider a well rounded measurement plan that incorporates elements that are appropriate to the objective. ROI can be measured on many things, but trying to apply it to everything under the sun is folly.

In the meantime, I’ve got a few extra cases of Kool-aid in my basement if anyone wants them.

Sort of

Banks are under a lot of scrutiny these days especially south of the border. Candidly, I’d hate to work in the PR department for a US bank as it probably ranks right up there with being a defense attorney for Bernie Madoff or fertility doctor for the Octo-Mom. (The fact her last name is similar to my first name is purely coincidental.)

Now I’ve never hesitated to call out banks here in Canada where I’ve felt it’s warranted. Some of them are generous supporters of the CMA but that hasn’t stopped me either. But this time I’m going to compliment one. Sort of.

You see I’ve been an RBC customer since I was four-years old. So for over 20 years I have been a loyal customer. (Banks aren’t the only ones good at creative accounting.) Pretty much anything financial I have is locked-up with RBC. They have made a fair amount of money off me over the years. Don’t even get me started on service charges but I digress.

Last week I got a voicemail from them saying I should call their fraud/security department. Don’t you just love those calls? I spoke to them and they advised me that my bank card was used at a location where 'skimming' had previously occurred before and therefore as a protective measure they were disabling my bank card. I’d have to go to any RBC branch and get a new one.

Slight inconvenience but I’d rather take that over some punk enjoying a brand new entertainment system or trip to the Bahamas on my nickle. Nothing fraudulent had occurred yet so I was appreciative of their efforts. I then had to go in during business hours and get a temporary bank card until a new one was mailed to me. With me so far?

I get the temporary bank card from the RBC employee and then ask her the following question: “Can you tell me where the suspected fraud happened? That way I can avoid that establishment in the future and not have to see you again for another temporary bank card.”

“Unfortunately our fraud department doesn’t give us those kinds of details Mr. Ahmed.”

Right. So now I automatically get suspicious of anyone I’ve used my bank card with in the past week? So now I just pay by cash everywhere I go? The financial experts love that idea. I suspect the folks at Interac (the processing company that facilitates bank cards) do not. Maybe the bank doesn’t want to name the firm where the suspected fraud occurred for fear of legal implications? I’m not sure what to think.

I explained my rationale to the RBC employee and she agreed with me. But there was nothing she could do. Oh and I had to enter a new PIN code as the one I used for the past 16 years was no longer valid. Security measures and all of course. And if it happens again? “It's unlikely but in such event we’ll be happy to replace your card for you Mr. Ahmed.”

So thanks for looking out for me RBC. Sort of.

Don't worry. Be optimistic.

A couple weeks ago, the cover story of the Sunday New York Times was about an executive who went from a $70,000 a year middle management job to a $12 an hour janitorial job for a friend's company.

Over the last year (and just this week), I've heard so many stories about friends and acquaintances, business associates and former colleagues and staff getting laid off. They range from intermediate to senior level. And certainly, it's happening more than any time in my lifetime. So, it got me wondering. Do people really know what to do when they get let go? Do they know how to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and carry on?

I've had to lay many people off in my career as a Creative Director and unfortunately, all too often, it wasn't for performance related issues. A client consolidated their business somewhere else or "New York" insisted we "hit a number" that probably wasn't realistic in the first place.

However, today good people are being let go everywhere because of the economy and it must feel like there's no end in sight. And yet, there is hope.

Here's some of what I've learned (from people wiser than me and from my own excellent adventure) over the last year since I left the agency world and started my own creative consultancy.

1. Clients want to work with people who project a positive attitude – even on the days you're not feeling particularly positive. This might seem basic, but it's easy to forget -- especially when the news is all bad. Someone gave me this advice before I had even one client, but it's proven to be the best advice I've gotten.

2. Decide early on what you're going to focus on, then focus on that one thing. I knew I wanted to start my own business. So that's what I focused on. If I had divided my attention between that goal, talking to recruiters for another agency job or changing careers completely, I wouldn't have accomplished anything.

3. Network in the way you feel most comfortable. Not everybody likes to cold call or go to industry events and shake a lot of hands. Email, Facebook and Linkedin are great ways to break the ice. It gives your contact an opportunity to be thoughtful about their response and lets you craft your words more carefully than you might over the phone -- or worse, in a voice mail that inevitably ends up being way too long-winded.

4. Journal your experiences, thoughts and feelings. Whatever you're thinking makes more sense when you get it down on paper. It also helps you shake yourself out of a funk when you see that you've been throwing yourself your own pity party for way too long.

5. Exercise. It's a great way to deal with stress and whatever anxiety you're dealing with. If you're like most people I've spoken to over the last year, you wake up in the morning thinking you'll never work again. By noon you're worried about how you're going to handle all the work on your plate. Exercise gives you the fortitude to deal with both kinds of stress.

If you're reading this and you've recently been "economized", take solace in the fact that you're not alone. In fact, there are far too many people going through exactly what you're going through right now and they're not hard to find. So find them and commiserate.

Then decide what you're going to do next and get on with it. You might just discover, as I did, that your decision was the best one you ever made.

Good News, Any One?

We received unemployment numbers for Canada and the USA. As expected, the situation is bleak and so is the short-term outlook. Canadian economy shed 129,000 jobs in January 2009 pushing up the unemployment rate from 6.6% to 7.2%. The US lost 598,000 jobs last month increasing its unemployment rate to 7.6%. The economy has taken a down turn, we all know this and in fact many people have been feeling the pinch for last few months. Whether you choose to call it by its first letter “R” or by full word “Recession”, we are in it.

Most of the news is of despair. Business confidence is very low! Consumer sentiments are down! Bad news sells faster so media accentuate the feeling of despair by abject reporting, by floating phrases like Cash is King, Hold onto your Cash – Do not Spend. Deep-freeze winter, record level of snow and winter blues don’t help either. Bad news works as a catalyst in the economic downturn, bringing down business confidence, consumer sentiments, spending and demand, and economy. I think the only good news we had on politco-economic front during last few months was the inauguration of Barrack Obama and it is too early to expect positive outcome from the change. As the bigger the ship, the longer it takes to turn it around.

Governments are introducing effective polices on both sides of the border; however, the economic recovery will take time and the government cannot drive us out of this economic slowdown by itself. We all have to contribute our bit and do things differently, positively and do more of it. Changing times require a change in attitudes, behavior and performance. These are the times to remember the popular words of JFK and ask what we can do for Canada and for ourselves.

First thing we could do is trying cutting back on the bad news as an initial step towards checking and reversing the economic slide. Filter the irrelevant bad news. Information overload is not good and bad news overload is worse. It can cause indigestion. There must be good news around, small victories, successes, triumphs and achievements. Let’s make good news public and announce them. Good news is worth mentioning. No victory is small enough not to be rejoiced. This would help improve general confidence and performance, consequently rejuvenating consumer sentiments, demand, spending, business and economy. This along with government’s efforts and recovery package could re-generate the environment that will be conducive for jobs creation and would initiate an upward spiral.

We need good news and need lots of it. Let’s spell out goods new, if you have one, post it here. Share it with your friends, family and colleagues. Have you landed a new account, closed a deal lately, received positive findings from market research, increased market share, made a difference, are your kids are doing well at school? What ever it is under the sun and over the belt - share it. I begin by seeing a ray of light and sharing it here. Despite the current job losses, 31,000 jobs were added in Healthcare and Social Assistance sectors in January ’09.

Moreover, stay focused in inceasing your performance and productivity. Look inward and see what you can do. Go an extra mile, make more calls, develop another consumer promotion, consider another business perspective and add value. Stay on your toes and cover yourself. Make more money for your company to minimize voluntary retirements, lay-offs and plants shut downs. I believe that good news, good feeling, confidence and higher individual productivity will collectively create synergy for success. Your positive attitude and hard work will assist in weathering the current economic storm and prepare you to ride the wave of economic growth, when the economy recovers. As we all know, recession is an economic phase.

Are you thinking how small initiatives like cutting back on bad news, staying positive and working harder and smarter can check the massive economic slowdown? Well, if you are working with the GM, Lehman Brothers or Bank of America and other similar organizations, this might seem far-fetched. However, our economy does not end at these firms. Together, we can make it happen through power of numbers and the abovementioned small and simple initiatives will reach a tipping point for economic growth and prosperity. So let’s take the first step and share good news.

Good news, any one! Please share it.

The Kindle. Yawn?

I’m still catching up on my year-end reading. You know, all those magazines that come out with their Year In Review issues. They’re stacked on my nightstand like so many left over holiday cards, begging to be read or recycled.

The best of the bunch is the Newsweek with Obama on the cover. It had a brief mention of something that caught my eye -- Jeff Bezos’ brainchild, The Kindle. It’s described on Wikipedia as “… an e-book reader, an embedded system for reading electronic books (e-books), launched in the United States by prominent online bookseller Amazon.com in November 2007.”

Most reviews are glowing. You can carry a whole library around in your briefcase. Amazing. Apparently, it’s even been endorsed by the big “O” (Oprah, not Obama), making it to her Favourtie Things List of ’08.

You can’t get it in Canada yet. But when I asked several of my U.S. friends how the Kindle has captured the imagination of our neighbours to the south, the response was something close to a tree falling in a forest.

So here are the tough questions: With a nod to Malcolm Gladwell, why hasn’t it tipped? Why isn’t it, according to my U.S. friends, dotting subway cars and park benches and restaurants like ubiquitous iPhones, iPods, and dare I say it, real books? Where are the cool commercials with U2 or Feist singing its praises? Why aren’t there spoofs about it on YouTube? Why aren’t the “Millennials” snapping them up? And will Canadians be a better market for the Kindle when it does arrive on our shores?

Perhaps the secret is revealed in Newsweek’s backhanded compliment… “Amazon’s electronic reader is awesome, but the early adopters skew old, while kids opt for point-and-click.”

That excerpt is interesting for two reasons. Early adopters? The Kindle has been available since 2007. Would the iPhone be considered a success if it took this long to capture the imagination of its intended audience? I'm not talking about just dollars and cents here. There was the day before the iPhone launched in Canada. And there was the day after, when it seemed everyone on the TTC had one or was looking over the shoulder of the person next to them who had one. Can an e-book reader capture the imagination in the same way as an “e-music player”? There's a very specific difference today between capturing the collective imagination and selling units. Arguably, the former is much harder to do and predict than the latter.

And ‘skews old’? I guess Oprah viewers don’t influence the zeitgeist anymore the way some think they do.

The day will come when Canadians will be able to get their hands on a Kindle. The question is, will the “right” target audience (Millennials?) want one?

So from a business perspective, can Amazon continue making and selling them if they remain the technological equivalent of a television series like “NCIS”? It’s there, and by some measure successful, but does anyone care?