Nós acabamos de lançar uma nova versão do site GuiaMais.com e adoraríamos ouvir sua opinião.

Por favor vote nessa pesquisa que criamos no LinkedIn: http://polls.linkedin.com/p/91505/otiyy

In 2002 we marketers cried of emotion watching Minority Report. When John Anderton (portrayed by Tom Cruise) walks in a commercial center, lasers scan his retina and display multimedia advertising custom made to his needs/behavior. We all loved the scene.

Targeted advertising has been the most sought after form of advertising since the early beginnings of Direct Marketing during the II World War. It’s a win-win situation: advertisers deliver the right message at the right time having better return and the target perceive more value out of the action, cutting through the noise and attracting his/her attention, thus generating action.

On the Internet that was the mantra since day zero. We all believed that by some time near now, we’d be surfing the web seeing ads that were “just perfect for me”. I’ve been a preacher of this Nirvana for quite some time, working at portals, search engines and social networks.

But why haven’t we reached yet this perfect scenario of targeted advertising? I believe in three deterrents for fulfilling this dream:

1) THE GROWING CONCERNS ABOUT PRIVACY

Regular folks are bombarded every day with menacing news that “someone is messing with your privacy, watch out! It’s the terror, it’s the terror!” It’s easy to simplify things, create some catchy news headlines in order to generate audience and mislead people.

There are many ways to control your privacy on the Internet, the most basic one is that watch what you post, upload, write, tweet, share, etc. We’re living in an age where everybody over share small stuff, the “Age of TMI”.  In that scenario folks tend to share things without thinking twice. Then a little “embarrassing thing” slips here and there and bazinga: the Internet is evil! People produce this kind of content, not robots, so why blame the web? It’s easier and simple.

What we need to do is to create an environment where people understand that they’re the ultimate guardians of their privacy. Just like in the “real world”, if you want to keep a secret, just keep your mouth shut.

Moreover there’s a great exchange going on when you give away some of your privacy for better services such as smarter advertising and content tailored to your needs. Don’t fear touching these waters, the benefits are greater than the risks.

2) IT GENERATES A LOT OF WORK FOR ADVERTISERS

Every April 18^th I keep checking my email and replying to friends wishing me a happy b-day. The funny fact is that I never get ONE SIMPLE message from an advertiser, even filling out thousands of registration forms where it’s mandatory to inform my birth date.

So, if advertisers can’t take care of a simple task such as congratulating me on my birthday, what do we expect when they have better targeting capabilities?

Every agency I’ve spoke in the last few years always mention that search and social media marketing is a pain in the back because it involves a lot of number crunching, deep analytics and actions for micro audiences. Easy were the days when you just showed a 30” spot on national broadcast and gone home to celebrate another victory.

But things have changed since the “Mad Men” days. As consumers we’re expecting more and more from our beloved brands, from advertising to consumption ending in post-sales relationships. We value our money, we have easy access to information and consumer reports, we trust our friends more and more when it comes to product/services recommendations, in summary: we take informed decisions. This is bad for the old mantra that “build and it’ll sell” from Henry Ford’s times.

Things will change only when brands view and follow us as individuals or segments that share tastes, likes and dislikes, providing a full-circle support to attract, transact and keep doing business with us.

But again, it takes a lot of work, brains and will to get there.

3) WE BECAME BORED WITH ADVERTISING IN GENERAL

That’s a fact. My 18-month baby boy already gets bored with Discovery Kids when there’s a break during his beloved LazyTown. And let me tell you that the breaks are short and fun, way better than other TV stations.

But the fact is that during so many decades we’ve been pushed right and left by advertising that interrupts our entertainment, pollutes our cities, annoy our dinners with phone calls, etc. So it’s easy to look into advertising with a negative feeling.

That’s why when targeted advertising comes along folks see it with a grain of salt. We’ve tried several experiments over the years and the initial response is of disdain or disbelief. But when consumers learn that the message was BUILT FOR THEM and that there’s something unique waiting at the end of the rainbow, they get excited as never before.

So, until advertising in general continues generating this feeling, the doors for targeted advertising will be closed for consumers.

But there are 2 caveats I want to make:

1) There’s no business generation without advertising

2) Smart marketers are moving more and more towards targeted advertising because they can have better ROI and smart consumers are taking note. Never before we seen search and social platforms growing so fast like these days.

Watch out. The waves are breaking.

I was watching a weekly Sunday night news magazine called Fantastico here in Brazil with my father. Little caveat: my father is a complete Luddite, he hates technology and only uses it when it’s extremely necessary. It’s common to hear my dad joking about how us “Internet boys” live such a dependent life, plugged to our gadgets and not living the “real life us normal folks live in…”

Well, back to that show where they reported on the latest stats about Internet usage. 25% of the Brazilian population has access to the Internet, according to study backed by three of the most serious public opinion institutes here. My natural reaction, being an “Internet boy”, was celebratory. Wow, we have now almost 60 million people using the web, dad! My father as a little more skeptical about it and I had to agree with him.

That means that only 1 out of 4 people know what the heck is the Internet. If we compare that to other mass media such as TV, Radio, Books, Newspapers, etc… we’re still way behind. But we act in an arrogant way, as if our medium where a Mannah descended from heaven to be humanity’s only solution for all their problems. Of couse, the Internet has grown faster than any mass media and it’s poised to grow to an even larger share. But the reality is that we, Alpha Geeks, don’t understand that life goes on for ¾ of the population without access to the web.

One example is the meme “#iranlection” on Twitter. I remember when around the time the elections where happening on Iran, a lot folks made their “virtual protests” ranting on Twitter or even changing their icons to green as a form of “fighting against the injustices there”….

Come on… less than 0.04% of Iranians have access to Twitter, only 2.95% in Brazil… Do you really believe you can change the world just tweeting from the comfort of your Lay-Z-Boy chair while sipping a Coke and having some chips? Come on…

Our work, as pioneers sailing the waves of the web since the last century, would be putting down the barriers that separate us from the rest of the population. And that’s the lingo we use, the hermetic conversations we hold, the fact that we believe our notions are absolute truths and that we want to impose our ideas instead of emerging from common sense.

Folks always ask me why we don’t get the advertising dollars we deserve as a mass medium. The answer is that we make it so complex because we think we are the majority, when we are just a minority.

Food for thought, Internet marketers.

Thanks to the holidays, I’ve been catching up with the stockpile of books I wanted to read. Among these is “The Black Swan”, a fascinating book about randomness; “Super Freakonomics”, the new edition of the great Freakonomics; “The Drunkard’s Walk”, another great one about randomness and “Rock, Paper, Scissors: Game Theory in Everyday Life”.

I’m a nerd and having a background in Applied Mathematics doesn’t help escaping that.

All of these books provide great insight about our everyday lives. In fact that got me thinking a lot about Game Theory and how most social interactions are in fact ruled by it. Our life in society are in fact balanced by zero sum games, whether in micro/personal aspects (teamwork), communal engagements (recycling waste) or humankind level (the non-proliferating nuclear arms pact) we value the aspect of Cooperation as a way to move forward and advance our lives.

But where and when have we humans learned that? We’re a very communal species. Back in time when we were primates, we’ve found out that working together to hunt, cook and protect our offspring was the best payout for carrying out our genes into future generations.

Cooperation always bring better results than Defection, we humans learned that. But how that kept going throughout the millennia? Yesterday, watching my 16-month-old boy Lucca play with his older cousin at my home, I had an epiphany.

At first he was reluctant in sharing his toys with Giulia. That’s normal with kids. He’s just possessive with his assets in his own territory. My wife and me tried all logical arguments possible to convince him on sharing his toys. Nothing worked. Nada. Zilch. I swear that I’ve tried my best. He was adamant in protecting his little kingdom from foreign invasion.

But then along came the solution. Giulia got tired of Lucca’s tyranny and started crying. Aloud, with all the splendor of her God given lungs. Lucca looked at her, perplexed by the situation. After something like 10 seconds only, he reached out to his bag of toys, and slowly took one out and gave to her. The crying stopped almost immediately. No other word was necessary, for the rest of the day the two played along beautifully, sharing toys and smiles.

My epiphany was that we all learn that Cooperation is the best way at Kindergarten by sharing our toys. Or we do it to have access to other toys that we don’t possess or just to make that annoying kid stop crying.

And that goes throughout our entire life. So, at the next environmental summit in Copenhagen, instead of watching a complete failure, I recommend the Chiefs of State to cry aloud in the session. That might change something.

Now that the dust will settle on the Sean Goldman case, I’ve felt compelled to write about how difficult it should be for the Courts on reaching a conclusion.

On one side you have a loving father, who lost his only son that was taken to another country without his permission and with the Haia Convention on his side. On the other you have the mother’s family who’s executing the last wish of the deceased mother, raising this boy with all love and care. There are other complicating factors on the story, one of them being the fact that the Brazilian family can provide a better financial support than the American father.

Amidst all this confusion there’s a boy whose mother has died while giving birth to his only sister, now 18 months old.

The families aren’t making the life of this boy easier. His stepfather and grandmother mounted a media circus to deliver the boy at the US Consulate in Rio. The father, in his turn, sold his soul through many NBC exclusive interviews for a private jet and some money to pay for the lawyers.

At the end of the day the impression I have is that the families are fighting only for their own pride. Nobody is really caring about Sean. That’s the feeling I have after all this very public discussions.

But back at the reason of me writing about this, I can only imagine how hard it should be to judge a case like that. How could you choose which way to go once you have positive and negative factors alike on both sides? Well, the last speculation around here is that after 5 years of judicial bruhaha, the US showed it’s big stick threatening to cancel US$ 1 billion in tax relief for Brazilian products and in a matter of days the case was concluded, favoring the American father.

Nothing like an “economic stimulus” to get things solved. Better than any moral compass.

I just hope that this boy gets along well with his US family and that both families look for a truce, trying to create a sane environment where they live and be happy together.

I’m spending this week in a corporate strategic planning session in a very nice place in Bogotá, Colombia. It’s a private club called Club El Nogal (http://www.clubelnogal.com/). It’s a very traditional, upscale private club. Men are not allowed without wearing ties. Yesterday I went to have lunch with the group and when I’ve tried to remove my jacket, the waiter came to me saying that this is not allowed. Men are not only forced to wear ties, but a full suit.

That got me thinking about dress codes. I’m not used to wearing ties, not even suits. Most of my life I’ve worked for technology/internet companies where casual dress is the standard. So, based in my own experience, I never measured the “respectability” of someone based on his outfit. In fact it doesn’t matter to me what someone dresses. Most of the brilliant people I’ve had the honor to met didn’t use imperial robes, but rather very casual clothing. Most of the folks that inspires me on an everyday basis (Steve Jobs, Dalai Lama, Mandela, Eistein, etc) are not know for wearing ties…

Companies often used dress codes and I understand the need to establish standards for groups, in particular when you’re representing a corporation, like salespeople. My opinion is that is more important to ACT on a respectful way than DRESS TO IMPRESS. And that applies to representing your company as well. Being ethical, honest and smart comes first and is more valued than your outfit.

Nonetheless I’m a true believer on not “standing out” when you’re meeting with your customers. I’ve always enforced that on the sales teams I’ve managed. The best strategy to establish a good rapport is “blending in” with your customer. So, if you’re visiting a SMB owner that wears jeans and t-shirts, do the same. If you’re visiting a CEO of a big bank that wears the finest suits, do the same. Blending in is important in sales. Other than that, allow your employees or colleagues to wear what makes them more comfortable on a working environment.

Respect them for their ideas, not their outfits.

The best golf player history, Tiger Woods, is all over the US media. Looks like he cheated his wife with 13 lovers, so far. What catches my attention is the fact that we’re talking about a guy who’s the leading sponsored athlete of the world. If you think celebrity sponsorship, think Tiger.

Accenture, Nike, Gatorade, Gillette, AT&T, Electronic Arts and Tag Heuer are his sponsors. No one walking the earth has so many sponsors. Of course this can change, with Gillette reducing his appearances on their advertising pieces and Accenture already cancelling his contract.

Celebrity sponsorships are a risk more than a benefit for the brand, IMHO. Who would ever think that this poster boy would have so many lovers, with the number growing day-by-day? Tiger looked like the perfect guy, almost a hero without imperfections. His sponsorships only confirmed the idolization of his personal brand.

But he’s just a human, full of personal flaws and shortcomings as you and I. we’re not perfects and brands should consider that when sponsoring celebrities. As consumers we must also don’t mix the qualities of a product or service to the qualities of a person. I never bought anything because mister X or Y used the same product… Our shopping decisions must be based on perceived value more than aspirations. I know that this happen with a minority, but that should be the compass for consumption during recession times.

As for companies looking to sponsor celebrities, think twice. You might be risking all the valuable brand assets you’ve built along the years.

Conectando canais de relacionamento existentes

Muitas empresas aderem agora a uma tendência que é a interconexão de seus canais atuais de relacionamento (central de atendimento, email, site corporativo, fax, etc) com as suas ações nos meios interativos.

Hoje não basta apenas desenvolver um sofisticadíssimo site para interagir com seus clientes, você precisa dar um passo além e ir aonde seus clientes estão se encontrando e vivendo. As plataformas sociais da web hoje geram metade do tráfego da Internet Brasileira e são acessadas por pelo menos 85% dos internautas tupiniquins. Portanto é natural que uma empresa estenda sua presença para esses meios.

As três fases de manifestações pós-compra

Já discutimos aqui como medir sua reputação na web, como desenhar estratégias para novos canais de relacionamento na web e como cada canal requer uma estratégia diferente. Hoje queria abordar o que motivam as pessoas a participarem de comunidades na web, redes sociais, etc no que tange a suas experiências de consumo.

Se você tem pesadelos e suor frio quando houve a palavra “comunidade na Internet” associado ao nome de seu produto, saiba que você não é o único. A emergência das plataformas onde as pessoas podem manifestar sua opinião atinge a você e a todos nós.  Como já discutimos, não adianta se enganar, sua empresa e seus produtos já estão sendo comentados nesses diversos fóruns. Porisso é importante tentar entender o que motiva essas pessoas a se manifestarem e de que maneira você pode intervir nisso para reverter uma situação negativa.

Olhe a sua mão e concentre-se nos seus dedos

Olhou? Então percebeu que cada dedo é diferente do outro certo? Pois bem, isso acontece com todas as ferramentas sociais da web. Cada uma delas é diferente da outra e é justamente por isso que as pessoas usam diferentes canais. Se um só resolvesse tudo, não precisaríamos dos outros.

No artigo anterior mencionei que iríamos discutir qual a melhor maneira de reagir por esses novos canais.

A essa altura você já deve ter mensurado a sua reputação na web (artigo 2) e desenhado uma estratégia para isso (artigo 3). Lembre-se que qualquer comunicação com o consumidor deve priorizar também uma oportunidade de negócios. Alguns fatos que você deve levar em consideração: