Car Buying Highlights A Dilemma

Bill Green over at Make the Logo Bigger is currently chronicling his car buy experience. And I have to say that these insightful posts are eye-opening about the classic disconnect between sales and marketing.

For those of you who don't know him, Bill is a regular panel member on our marketing podcast, The BeanCast. And his blog is a look not just at advertising and marketing, but the cultural relevance of our industry.

The Great Brand Divide

This particular series of posts starts with impressions of the dealership ad and marketing materials. And in his latest post he tackles the on-site experience. But what's striking to me (beyond the humorous take on the process) is that he is revealing how the dealership/promotional part of the auto-buying equation systematically dismantles the brands.

Think of the effort that goes into the creation of a car brand. You have the design and manufacturing elements, crafted carefully with the marketing potential in mind. You have numerous focus groups to make sure that the identity of the car is clearly communicated in the user experience. You have logos and design guidelines to create, ads to design, photos to shoot, videos to produce -- it's seemingly endless the details that must be addressed.

Then all that hits Big Dave, who won't be undersold...and neither will his dog.

The Universal Marketing vs. Sale Conflict

But isn't this what always seems to happen when marketing objectives are put in the hands of sales realities? I've talked about this before, but this has always been the number one internal dilemma of marketers -- especially B2B marketers. You go into any knew program with the assumption that sales is going to ignore it and do what they want anyway. It's inevitable.

In the case of the car dealerships, I won't even venture to say I have a solution. I think it's clear that it's time for them to be ejected from the model. Or at the very least, take on the retail model of a single dealer selling many brands. Kind of a CarMaxfor new cars, like was discussed on Twitter during a recent #carchat.

But when you don't have a sprawling network of dealers to contend with, I have a suggestion.

Enlist Rather Than Fight

I offer up this simple reminder: 

You can't win against sales.

 They will short-circuit you every time. Sometimes they'll do it just for spite. So always enlist rather than fight.

Dealing with internal sales teams is exactly the same as dealing with external customers in a loyalty scenario. You engage, you enlist, you listen, you respond and you create advocates who do your work for you. Just like any retention effort, you find the key influencers among your sales staff and make them your friend. Give them extra attention. And then rely on them to do you selling of new programs. Pretty soon this person's success will be all the pitch you need.

So good luck to you and your internal efforts. And good luck to our friend, Mr. Green. Personally, I'm rooting for the Fords.

Amazon Fail Or Measured Response

The Twitter world was in an uproar again this weekend. And this time the subject of their ire was Amazon and their supposed segregation of Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual and Transgender content.

We've talked about this type of thing before on The BeanCast. Brand does something perceived as bad. People trend the subject up with their commentary on Twitter. Brand usually over-responds. Everything blows over. And then in hindsight, brand reason just how small the negative response really was.

A Vocal Minority in an Uproar

I don't know what your experience is with negative online posters, but my own is that angry people tend to post a lot. There's a reason we call them the "vocal minority" in marketing. They make enough noise to seem bigger, more threatening and more damaging to market share than they really ever could be. They also attract a lot of tacit support in terms of people who essentially agree enough with their comments (enough to re-tweet at least), but who in the end won't change their purchasing behavior.

Social Media Strategy in Question

However, the Amazon case is especially interesting because it's also attracted a lot of commentary from people claiming that somehow Amazon was caught with their pants down on the whole social media issue. And just today, B.L. Ochman posted this to the DigitalNext blog at Ad Age.

Let me first say that I love B.L.'s work on Ad Age. I've quickly become a huge fan since I started reading her. But here she is dead wrong in her opinion on the subject, as are many in the social media space who were up in arms. And the reason is because of the extenuating facts to this case.

Did Amazon Really "Fail?"

According to the best sources available at the moment, this whole situation was caused by a hacker going by the name "Weev." Amazon is claiming they had nothing to do with the segregation of the content and is correcting the situation. Barb points that out in her post, which makes it even more inconceivable to take the position that Amazon did wrong by not responding to the situation until Monday.

If the facts are true, this is a major security issue, not just a social media problem. And it's unfair to make statements like, "Amazon should have been monitoring its brand in social media 24/7. And clearly it wasn't."

In the comments section of the post I responded like this:

Okay people, let's for the benefit of the doubt say that Amazon was indeed hacked as they claim. While a little suspect, there really is nothing to doubt them on this. So with this assumption, how many companies do you know that immediately tell the world that their website has a vulnerability and that ithas been exploited before you've a) identify that vulnerability and b) plugged that vulnerability[?]

We can get all high and mighty that Amazon said nothing and that somehow this was a social media fail, but that would be forgetting a few important facts. First, they did respond. Second, they are obviously placing security above social memes. And third, they realized that the so-called "huge" uprising was actually quite small considering their total user base.

Abbey Klassen's recent article on this very site highlights this subject beautifully. Using the Motrin "fail," we discovered that in the scheme of things no one really cared. Sure the topic was a top-trending topic on Twitter, but the actual users posting to that topic was a small sub-set of an even smaller sub-set of the Internet community. And most mom's (customers) in post research really couldn't have cared less about the ads.

Over and over again, the subject of Twitter uprisings comes up on my show, (http://beancast.us). And the opinions from those who know social media marketing always run along the lines of, "Don't do anything." Or "Don't over-respond." (And we're talking people like Scott Monty, John Wall, Peter Shankman, Chris Brogan and others.)

We forget that the value of social media marketing is to bring the corporate identity down to the level of the individual. So response should try to remain at the individual level. When brands like Facebook or Motrin respond with sweeping corporate decision-making to their "Million against..." postings, they miss the point of what it means to monitor the social streams and how to react to them.

Just because someone calls you[r] customer service center and says they hate the red on your site, doesn't mean you take red out of your brand. Twitter and social media sites are in many ways just a public analog to the call center. And we shouldn't be too critical of a brand taking time to gather facts and respond carefully and individually in such cases.

A Measured Approach

In the end I think Amazon handled itself quite well in this situation. They took time to consider the extent of the problems they faced, withheld from over-reacting to the situation and then responded in a manner appropriate to the situation. And far from lampooning them for inaction, I would say others companies would do well to follow their example when facing such crises.

(P.S. Make sure you also read Ken Wheaton's comment on the post. He makes some really good points on this issue.)

Reflections From A Year Of The BeanCast

I can hardly believe that the marketing podcast I started as a way to to stay busy and connected as I was getting my marketing consultancy, The Cool Beans Group, is now a year old. The BeanCast has been an awesome experience and I'm so thankful that we're reaching the 50th episode this coming Sunday.

So as I prepare for the show, just thought I'd call out some of the key things I've learned this year.

The Truth Behind Pseudo Fame

I knew that a show coming out of the woodwork would need a certain amount of help. So in the beginning I set out to convince some of the established podcasters and bloggers I respected to be on the show. I figured they had audience and I needed an audience. Made sense, right?

What surprised me, though, was how little convincing I needed to do!

And over the months as I've gotten to know John Wall, Scott Monty, Steve Hall, Peter Shankman, Chris Brogan, the ever-energetic Mr. Bill Green and many others, I've found very good role-models in how to navigate the waters of Internet-fame. The secret? Be helpful and approachable to everyone and don't drink your own bathwater.

These guys helped me out and showed me (sometimes by contrast with those who were reluctant to help me) that anyone can appear famous on the Internet. It takes someone special to get past all that and realize that what we are doing takes a symbiotic relationship with each other.

Never Be the Expert

Over and over again I've heard this said a million different ways on the program. There's a difference between a person with an expertise and an expert. The person who says they are an "expert" has to waste too much time proving that they are the best. Whereas the simply competent person is more able to focus on finding the best solution.

I started the show with the self-description, "Hosted by the man who knows a little, but knows everyone" for exactly this reason. I do this show not because I have a lot of knowledge to share, but rather to keep myself sharp by debating with the smartest people I can find. I find this to be true of my guests as well and I think this is what makes the show so valuable to people. You don't feel stupid listening. You feel like you are just part of an ongoing conversation. I like that.

There's Always Another Good Idea

So many times I've heard prior to a big presentation during my agency days, "We don't want to give them too much or they'll just take this and run without paying us." Here's what I think of that:

Hogwash!

The minute I run out of a good ideas is the minute I should walk away from this business. Good marketing is all about new ideas. Which is why I don't mind giving away the farm in each show and in each blog post.

My content here on this site is proof positive that the more I share, the more it forces me to innovate and reach beyond the expected. And I think there's a lesson in that for all marketers. We are so afraid of the competition getting our strategies and taking away our advantages, that we stay secretive with our thinking. What I'm learning now, though, is that the more open we become the more it forces us to get sharper, brighter and competitive. Assuming what we have is "the best idea" is what kills even better ideas.

The Needs Are the Same, Only the Means Have Changed

Probably my biggest insight from this year is that in spite of all the changing ways in which we communicate with our audience, the basic needs remain the same.

I've had people on the show who bring vast experience in all of the traditional and new media disciplines. We've discussed everything from social media strategy to direct marketing response measurement to media placement for TV. And while I've learned a lot about best-of-breed thinking in all of these areas, I've been shocked at the universal agreement that the basic goals of marketing still need to be addressed:

You need to always be building a brand identity
You need to drive measurable sales
You have to justify every dollar spent
You need to build loyalty with your customers
You need to engage your customers to prevent churn

It's easy to lose sight of the basics in the excitement of changing times. But our discussions on the show have helped me stay rooted in the fact that changing marketing tactics don't negate basic marketing needs.

Thank You

So to end this little reminiscence, I want to say thanks to those of you who listen. I've said since the beginning that I would do this show even if no one listened. It's just too valuable an experience to talk to such smart people each week. But I have to admit that it's a lot more fun doing it when lots of you are listening in. And I hope you find it as enjoyable as I do.

Here's to another 50 episodes!