Tectonic Shift In Advertising
We've finally reached that point in advertising where we've gone through a tectonic shift in what defines advertising and who is producing it. Actually - one could extend this to the entire media industry. When I first started in advertising, working at a CRM agency back in 2007, direct was considered second class to above the line, brand agencies. PR was its own separate entity that advertising folks thought were relegated to a bunch of fashionistas with lots of magazine connections. And mobile didn't even exist. Blogging was owned by individuals or small publishers who didn't have much credibility as journalists but were fun reads.But then - the iPhone was introduced, influencing a major shift in consumer behavior. With the internet at our fingertips, we all started developing a relentless appetite for content. We became hyper-connected through Twitter and Facebook. Our online personas went from anonymous avatars to cleverly written, full-name-revealing Twitter profiles. And we learned that we are what we share. Sharing became a form of social currency among our social networks. What we shared mattered from network to network - could we stir up a political debate among our high school friends via Facebook or Tweet a link to a cool ad before anyone else in our feed? Fueling this growth was an increasing ability to consume content - wifi and 3G gained speed, websites became mobile-friendly and companies stopped blocking various website access.
Finally, brands started taking note. They realized that preaching from an unreachable pulpit was losing its efficacy. And if they wanted to stir conversations about their brand, they actually needed to create them. But like a preacher educating his congregation on the tenants of Jesus, they learned to talk about the happenings and interests in that person's own life - connecting the brands with that consumers day to day.
And thus, advertising was shifted on its head. Try looking for strategy jobs right now and you'll only see jobs for content marketing or social media strategy. Try looking for traditional editorial jobs and you'll be directed to online websites and blogs. We've reached a fundamental shift in how brands approach consumers. It's no longer simply a "two way street" with consumers having the ability to connect with brands. Consumers have demanded a deeper relationship with brands - seeking inspiration, advice, entertainment, support and accurate information just as we'd seek from our actual friends.
[slideshare id=22978918&w=427&h=356&fb=0&mw=0&mh=0&style=border: 1px solid #CCC; border-width: 1px 1px 0; margin-bottom: 5px;&sc=no]
There's No Straight Answer
I'm currently reading Baratunde Thurston's How To Be Black. "But wait," you ask, "why would this very white girl from New Jersey care about issues of black identity?" A few months ago, while meeting with one of the most thoughtful in house agency recruiters, I was asked to explain what interested me about account planning. I told her that I have always been interested in how people's backgrounds and culture shape who they are."That's interesting," she responded. "So Molly, how would you describe yourself on those terms? How has your culture shaped who you are?"
I thought about this for a moment and then realized that despite outward appearances, I'm the product of two very different cultures. When asked what my religion is, I proudly proclaim that I'm a Jewthuran; Jewish and Lutheran. If the person asking is Jewish, it is almost guaranteed that their next question will be, "Who's Jewish, your mother or your father." To which I respond, "My mother, but her parents were practically Atheist while my dad's religion played a more prominent role in my upbringing." Occasionally they'll say in a satisfied, matter of fact tone, "You're Jewish." At which point I'll role my eyes and change the subject because I find the idea that someone else can declare you a particular religion somewhat absurd. I think back to my confirmation classes, bi-annual church visits and fantastically cooked Jewish holiday meals and realize that I still haven't determined which religion I ultimately will choose.
Just as Baratunde grapples with pre-conceived notions of what it means to be black, many of us have aspects of our own identities that fall outside of what is expected. And sometimes the realities of who we are contradicts the perception of who people think we are.
Recently, I decided to wear my hair curly. I usually make some attempt to straighten it because it's more predictable. The choice to let my hair go curly often feels like I'm embracing my Jewish heritage. Which in itself is an interesting discussion. Is Judaism the only religion that is both a religion and ethnicity? As I waited for the train with my abundant curls framing my face, an elderly man came up to me, asking me a question that I couldn't understand because it was presumably in Hebrew. I explained to him that I didn't speak Hebrew because I wasn't Jewish. He looked at me like he knew I was lying, because I was, or at least not telling him the whole truth. Because I am Jewish, at least partially by ethnicity. I'm also Norwegian, French, English ... but like a second generation American immigrant, my apparence allows me to navigate between two world while never feeling a full part of either.
So as planners, when we look at who our consumers are, we must look at them in the context of their culture. Did they grow up in an urban environment, exposed to a myriad of cultures and influences? Are they second generation Chinese whose only indicator of their ethnicity lies with their appearance? Self-made or family money? Private school or public? Artist or doctor? Gay or straight? What information do we need to tell the whole story of who these people are? Because until we get the whole story, we run the risk of speaking to them in a language that they don't understand.
With these questions in mind, what cultural influences have shaped who you are?
Can Psychology Help Us Understand Our Changing Relationships with Brands?
I always find it fascinating and exciting that the craft of planning requires so many different levels and ways of thinking. One must approach a brief from a psychological, creative and business perspective, to name a few. But one thing that remains constant is the focus on relationships; between the client and agency, planners and creatives, and most importantly between consumers and the brand. Max Spiegelberg points out how as advertisers, we should think about the relationship between our brand and the consumer in the same way we'd look at interpersonal relationships and note the implications.This article is re-blogged from Popsop Brand Magazine Online written by Max Spiegelberg.
You are welcome to share your thoughts on this article written by Max Spiegelberg, Brand Director at Bloom The saturation of markets, congestion of media and maturity of consumer understanding of brands has steered marketing practice in recent years beyond ‘image branding’ towards ‘relationship branding’. Loyalty is no longer simply won through passive respect. Consumers demand more.
The brand’s role today has evolved from being an object of desire to being a champion of its own philosophy. This is no easy feat for marketers. It takes time, confidence, continuity and a lot of money.
So it’s important to get it right from the start. It’s important to understand how we as consumers relate to brands and why we enjoy the relationships we have with them.
In 1997 Jennifer Aaker published the paper ‘Dimensions of Brand Personality’ in the Journal of Marketing Research. At the root of this paper, Aaker outlines a brand personality scale, mapping out 5 dimensions, or human characteristics that could be associated with brands. These are Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication and Ruggedness. This scale is often used to determine the current perceptions of a brand and to describe the desired future status of it.
This is all well and good but how do these traits strengthen a brand’s relationship with its audience? Should we profile consumer personality traits and map these against brand traits? Which characteristics are right for the brand?
These questions have led some academic marketers back to the Psychology text books to try to understand the affinity we as humans develop in our own relationships and whether this thinking can be applied to the consumer-brand relationship.
Social Psychology, put simply, is the study of how we perceive ourselves and how we interact with each other. Potentially there are some rich pickings amongst the research and models that this discipline has created.
As an example let’s look at a study of the development of interpersonal relationships. One of the most influential models in this field is proposed by psychologist, George Levinger (1983). According to his ABCDE model, the natural development of a relationship follows five stages:
1. Acquaintance: Becoming acquainted depends on a number of factors including, proximity, first impressions, attractiveness, similarities in personality, attitude, and interests and association to positive situations. Acquaintance may lead to the next stage or can continue indefinitely.
2. Build up: Beginning to trust and care about each other. Here there is a need for compatibility and filtering agents such as common background, cultural background and related interests. Compatibility will influence whether or not interaction continues.
3. Continuation: Following a mutual commitment to long-term relationships this is generally a long and relatively stable period. Continued growth and development will occur during this time.
4. Deterioration: Relationships deteriorate as a result of boredom, resentment and dissatisfaction. Individuals may communicate less and avoid self-disclosure. Loss and betrayals may take place continuing the downward spiral.
5. Ending: This marks the end of the relationship by complete termination or separation. There are some obvious parallels here with our own developing relationships with brands. Jooyoung et al (2008) point out that true brand loyalty is derived from brand credibility, attitude, strength and brand commitment, which form the basis of Levinger’s first three stages here.
There are plenty of other studies that could be investigated. For the purpose of this article I have explored one model as an example but it serves to demonstrate the potential of Social Psychology to generate interesting parallels and further develop brand models.
All of this is predicated on the assumption that brands carry human traits and that consumers interact with brands in the same way that we interact with each other. Could it be that our richer understanding of brands and more complex relationships with them justifies a closer look at the field of Social Psychology?