The Vaporization of Marketing

Nuclear weapon test Romeo (yield 11 Mt) on Bik...
Image via Wikipedia

Was your company blogging ten years ago? If not then why? Google made it easy for you and now you’ve lost ten years of priceless link juice. Given the fragmentation of media in the last ten years, it’s clear now just how relatively little work you actually had to do back then. But that’s in the past. Still, I have bad news for you: what you have to do now is far harder than it was ten years ago. Let me explain.

CONTENT FRAGMENTATION AND SOCIAL DISTORTION

As the Web expands and proliferates novel media, messaging becomes increasingly diffuse and fragmented. The Web creates new opportunities and destroys old standards. It disrupts communication patterns, rattles social structures and ruptures attention spans. Ten years ago, you could leverage your audience-building skills for acquiring and retaining customers. You could even have learned and mastered a skill which traditional marketing didn’t really demand: conversational aptitude.

But now the honor of your presence demands you to be at many different places at once. You not only need to know how to create captivating content but you also need to know how to converse and lead with such conviction and remarkability that it could almost require you to be loved.

The choices open to you grow. Where to begin? Where to be? Twitter? Facebook? Blogs? Youtube? Foursquare? Gowalla? Flickr? The dozens of other places yet to come along? And if you show up and listen and play, will you be good at it? If you’re not good at it, you’re not going to achieve anything.

Here’s the biggest challenge for companies struggling to “figure out” social media: the convergence of Strategy and Practice becomes increasingly elusive as the Web mercilessly evolves.

What do I mean? Strategy and vision are essential parts of ultimately getting business done. But strategy without planning and mechanics and process worked out, nothing gets done: the going concern becomes aimless and bankrupt. Much of the daily work that has to be accomplished online has to be done manually and personally. Furthermore, the work has to stand out so it can be kindly remarked from one person to another.

Much of this work may not fit into any strategic category; as a consequence, the strategic directives can easily diffuse and lose their trajectories. Once that happens, it’s easy to lose balance and focus and clarity.

THE VANISHING POINT. BTW, JUST WHAT IS THE POINT?

The one question every executive asks every time a marketing or PR agency or internal manager tries to push social media is this: What on earth is the point?

Many of us who live in the echo chamber have answers. Or statements we think are answers. The truth is, however, that this is a vital question. The whole enterprise depends on it.

There’s no doubt: the Web is the place to be; and companies need the skills and confidence to incorporate all media into their day-to-day routine. But the vaporization of the Web creates a situation where:

  • so many choices have to be made;
  • conversations need to be quality and sincere;
  • attention spans are short;
  • messages are now real-time;
  • traditional Search is being disrupted;
  • new technologies are emerging which don’t necessarily communicate well with other
  • the prospect of walled gardens is rearing its head

Contrary to Social Media evangelist claims, the Web is becoming a mess. Messaging is being liquified, subject to evaporation – and worse: your message can be easily replaced with someone else’s within seconds.

Marketers used to have a landscape they could map out. They could harvest farms of attention. They could plant their feet on the ground and develop real estate which they could mostly control.

But the new landscape isn’t on land. It’s vaporizing. The vaporization of marketing will get worse. Not every business will figure out the point of being online, let alone be able to cultivate a captivated audience and converse real-time. Most will just be talking to themselves and an imaginary audience.

That’s what happened to Pharma giant GSK because they had too many meetings and consults and fears on how to do something as simple as running a blog. Mind you: this is a company with over $40 Billion in assets and which employs some of the smartest people in the world. From an investor’s perspective that’s managerial irresponsibility, indicative of severe creative anemia.

What’s the point? isn’t something you ask and answer once and then move on. No: it’s a daily question. It’s no different than asking What’s the point of our business?

The problem is this: there isn’t a point. Or one single point I should say. There are many points. All kinds of purposes and opportunities and needs. A thousand points of light flashing and fading and distracting.

This is only good news for marketers who have creativity, muscle, chutzpah, intelligence, pliancy and permission. For the rest, it’s a disaster waiting to happen – no matter if you play or not. The Vaporizing Web is Scylla and Charybdis for businesses.

HOW TO HANDLE THE VAPORIZATION OF MARKETING

What to do? You can read a million how-to posts, hire big agencies who know how to price and bill, attend overpriced conferences or have tons of meetings littered with streams of buzzword-stuffed PowerPoint presentations. But I’ll give you one simple answer:

Don’t take it so seriously! If you do, you’ll vanish into a mushroom cloud. 🙂

A sense of humor and a style of lightness are enduring qualities of successful long-run presence, especially online. Once operations become chores and jobs they cease to be useful. The Web is the end of the assembly-line.

If your business doesn’t know how to have fun and to be spontaneous and swift, it probably won’t survive this century. Capitalism is destructively creative. It’s also creatively destructive. The Age of the Farmer is coming to its close. It’s Hunting time now. Prepare yourself for war.

You’ve been warned and advised. Questions? Call me: 484-372-0451 or Skype: Phil.J.Baumann or Twitter: @PhilBaumann.

Tweet This Post

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Do Normal People Follow Big Pharma On Twitter?

Do “normal” people – patients, doctors, nurses, pharmacists, life scientists, etc – follow Big Pharma on Twitter? I’ve long had a hunch that most of the followers (and by followers I mean people who are actually paying attention) of Pharma accounts are primarily consultants, marketers, PR pros, social media evangelists and others interested in Pharma’s use of the Web (including myself).

So I decided to gather the key words in the profiles of a select group of Pharma companies. I used the service TwitterSheep to generate tag clouds of these profiles. This isn’t a purely scientific approach, but it’s reasonable enough to provide some insight into whose following Pharma. My friends Silja Chouquet (@Whydotpharma) and Andrew Spong (@AndrewSpong) each provided great insight into Pharma and Twitter. You can read their posts here and here, respectively.

Based on the tag clouds, here are the top ten key words in the profiles of followers of selected Pharma companies:

  • Pharmaceutical
  • Medical
  • Healthcare
  • Time
  • Social
  • PR
  • Marketing
  • Research
  • Web
  • Health

“Normal” people don’t have words like Marketing or PR or Social or Pharmaceutical in their bios. Now, I don’t think this is a bad thing. Pharma’s adoption of Twitter is relatively recent. But I don’t think that Pharma’s providing the most value that it could with its primary audience being marketing professionals.

Here’s a slideshare of screenshots for each tag cloud of the eleven accounts I examined (if you can’t see the embed, check it out here):

Pharma’s core base – patients and physicians and pharmacists and health care organizations – are the most valuable followers. Pharma certainly can’t do things that non-regulated industries can do. Nonetheless, Twitter does have many diverse business values: dissemination of news, consumption of relevant content, engagement with followers who can spread positive sentiments within the community and many other practical uses.

Currently, it’s not clear what specific goals Pharma companies have with respect to Twitter. Each can have completely different goals – and most of these accounts are maintained by people whom I’ve met personally. But the concern here isn’t so much about how Pharma companies are using Twitter (that’s another discussion). For as much as Twitter is about the humanization of communications and the ability to converse, audience is still a critical thing to build.

I realize Twitter’s still a shiny new toy for some industries (it’s actually a staple of communications for many others), but Pharma needs focuses and purposes and goals as it matures from the unilateral broadcasting skills it honed in the last quarter of the 20th Century towards the pliant, two-way and multi-faceted characteristics of the kind of media which the Web is giving birth to every day. There’s no guarantee that all Pharma companies will learn these new skills and new ways of thinking. There will be winners. There will be losers. Hopefully, it’s the patients who win. (Which is a good thing for the industry.)

What audiences should Pharma focus its tweets on developing, cultivating and engaging? That’s an important question. I doubt the CEOs of Big Pharma companies are terribly interested in dazzling Social Medi Gurus and Marketers and PR Pros. 🙂

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Marketing Is Technology – Insight for the Perplexed

An ancient spoked wheel on exhibit in the Luri...
Image via Wikipedia

This post is the first in a series focused on revealing the essence of Technology.  These aim of these posts is to spark inquire into the nature of Technology and to provide some fresh insight for Marketers, PR professionals, technologists, bloggers, doctors, nurses and everyone else. It’s important that we understand the essence of Technology; to understand our relationship with it; how it influences our perceptions and feelings and actions; and how and why it’s critical to all of us to re-frame what we see and do in terms of a panning-out from our accustomed ways and habits. You can get these posts delivered to you by subscribing here. I’ve also started the blog Technescan: Revealing the Essence of Technology – you can subscribe to TechneScan’s Posterous here and follow @TechneScan on Twitter.

WHAT IN THE WORLD IS MARKETING?

What is Marketing? Is it an Art? Is it a Science? It’s possible to attribute characteristics of Art and Science to Marketing of course. In its essence, though, Marketing is neither an art nor a science. Rather, it is part of the domain of Technology.  And we must understand Technology before we can understand Marketing. Let me provide the first installment of what I mean.

WHAT IN THE WORLD IS TECHNOLOGY?

The essence of Technology is not just tools and gadgets. That may be how most people view Technology but that’s an incomplete understanding of Technology. A definition of Technology is very difficult without understanding its essence. Define Life – it’s not easy: and yet, like obscenity, we know it when we see it. Similarly, Technology is a difficult thing to define. The difference, however, is that we don’t always see or recognize things as Technology.

The root word of Technology is Techne. The ancient Greeks’ conception of Techne was not just tools or craft (in the sense that we conceive). Techne for the Greeks was a way of knowing and being – a way of understanding our relationship with the world around us. For them Art and Technique were bound up together into a way of interacting with the larger environment. It is this angle that can rescue us from our narrow conception of Technology which will reveal deeper insights into its essence. NOTE: This is a much harder task than one may think at first. You can read the philosopher Martin Heidegger’s works on the matter: but it’s very heady stuff.

Examples of Technology include but are not limited to: Culture, Law, the Internet, Capitalism, Democracy, Reading, Writing, Twitter, Politics, Civilization and Humanity. Think about the world you live in – the one which influenced your personal and professional history: it’s utterly bound up within the contexts and influences of Technology. Kevin Kelly is right to assert that Technology is the Seventh Kingdom of Life.

When we do things with Technology – say build telecommunications networks or cars or medical devices – the effect of our use is something beyond our initial perception of the technology. Technology offers us a new view of things: it reveals what was hidden to us before. Twitter, for example, has revealed a social construct which always existed but we just never realized. We didn’t know how much we could learn about each other in just a few bursts of 140 characters; nor did we know how far we would adopt Twitter and incorporate it into our daily communication and news gathering and sharing behaviors. If you were told four years ago that millions of people would be messaging each other en masse in 140 characters, you just wouldn’t believe it.

Thus: Technology is a Revealing influence.

MARKETING IS A REVEALING

So what does all this esoteric babble have to do with Marketing? Well, when marketers seek to solve problems such as getting the word out (WOM) or Branding or positioning or distribution, they are enframing their solutions within a Technological context. What technique shall we employ here? What metrics will we measure our success or failure? How can we engage our base? These are technological frameworks.

Oh yes, many professionals will respond: Well, what we’re doing is a human activity – we’re reaching out to humans and we engage in person-to-person communication. And this position is becoming increasingly popular in light of the emergence of a two-way Web. But even here, marketers who are just awakening to the conversational nature of modern Marketing are asking themselves technological questions: How can we properly use social media to reach and engage our customers?

How is a part of Techne. And that’s not to say that Marketing can’t be Human – it should be. But Marketers can easily confuse a Technological engraming for a human one.

So Marketers need to ask themselves what their efforts reveal. They also need to pan back from their day-to-day operations and re-frame what they’re looking at, so that they can reveal the essence of what they’re doing.

HOW MARKETERS CAN GET UNSTUCK

…if you’re not present, you can’t persuade.

Marketers often get stuck in certain ways of thinking and often over-focus on tools and tactics and techniques and algorithms. This explains why so many traditional marketers are struggling with “Social Media” and the shiny new social software and gadgets that continue to pop up. Even those who understand the need to dovetail traditional efforts with conversational ones maye risk forgetting the role Technology plays within the context of person-to-person communication.

If Marketers understand just how big Technology is, what it is in its essence, how it influences our daily perceptions and conceptions of the world around them, and what it might reveal, then they will find themselves with freshened perspectives and important insights into the essence of Marketing.

Marketing, just like Technology, is about Presence. Some marketers believe “all Marketing is Persuasion”. The fault in that mantra is simple: if you’re not present, you can’t persuade.

Technology reveals what is present in our world. Marketing reveals what is present in an organization’s or individual’s realm of possibilities. If you don’t understand Technology, you aren’t realizing the potential of Marketing in its fullest and most human form. After all, that’s the proper goal of Marketing: to transcend technique towards sincere human relationship.

Confused yet?

It’s OK if you’re confused by this. It’s a completely new way to view the world. That’s why I’m devoting a series (and a blog) to this topic. I hope you follow along, contribute in the comments and even contact me (Phil /at/ PhilBaumann /dot/ com or on Twitter or by phone – 484-3726-0451.)

If you enjoyed this post and what to keep up-to-date at your convenience, subscribe here.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Can We Ever End Social Media Nonsense?

Tweety Bird

Disclosure: I’m fascinated with Technology in general and social software and communities in particular. I’m one of Twitter’s biggest fanboys (here’s proof). I blog and  tweet often about these media because I believe it’s important that we understand our relationship with Technology (and for me, Technology is more than just gadgets – for instance: I consider Law, Democracy, Religion and Capitalism technologies – but that’s another post).

I also believe that we need better or more original conversations about the Web and its deepening influences on our lives, our businesses, our sciences and our health care. Social Media pundits (or however they refer to themselves: gurus, evangelists, mavens) for too long have held the dominant voice in these discussions.

One phenomenon which our Web has engendered is the ability for virtually anyone to express their opinions and experiences and perspectives in accordance with their mastery of media. And therein lies a pesky issue: one’s accumulation of social attention for a particular field doesn’t always correlate with their expertise.

Over the last decade, many brilliant contributors have offered important and refreshing perspectives on the promises of the web. But some of these ideas have yet to be vetted and validated by closer scrutiny and scientific inquiry. The truth is not always intuitive. It’s easy, therefore, for appealing ideas to have fundamental flaws.

Here are three beliefs which many social media enthusiasts propound virtually daily. I’m not going to say that these beliefs are wrong – or right. But I think we need to scrutinize them much more deeply and publicly before they become permanently embedded in our collective conscious.

  1. Privacy Is Dead. Is it? In some regards, my opinion is that it is. Furthermore, I think that may not be such a bad thing: opening ourselves up can provide community benefits. Health care data has the potential to improve our medical knowledge – and yet we have many critical concerns about how we share that kind of data. Privacy is more than data. We shouldn’t make the mistake of confusing one aspect of privacy with other features which make us human. Don’t be too surprised if privacy resurrects itself in 2010.
  2. Social Media Is Democratizing. Are you sure? Our species is replete with examples of disappointed hopes that novel technologies release us from cunning manipulation and the concentration of dangerous powers. Don’t get me wrong: elements of our evolving interactive technologies are doing wonderful things for democratic efforts. The danger in thinking that these media are absolutely democratizing is that we will acquire a mentality which overlooks those tiny dislocations of freedom which lead to tyranny – and it may be us who abet terror. For it is possible that future tyrannies will not be some centrally-governed dictatorship: rather, it may be ourselves who generate communities of sibling rivalry.
  3. Traditional Marketing Is Dead. No, it isn’t dead. Traditional marketing was just incomplete. New media is helping to complete the circle or marketing life cycles. There’s no doubt that marketing will have to undergo radical changes in beliefs and hypotheses and models and practices. Why? Because realtime conversations will forever take place and businesses owe it to themselves to invest in the training and efforts to be remarkable with their ears and eyes and voices. What’s dead in traditional marketing is talk-to-the-hand and clockwork-orange marketing. Most traditional marketing last century was atrociously mediocre and annoying – utterly lacking in creativity and kindness and care. All that the new media are doing is making it clear that the cost of those approaches are skyrocketing.

We need smarter voices to contribute to our understanding of the Web. The marketers have had the loudest voices – some of them have been quite enlightening. But marketing is a tiny component of how we can use the Web. (Plus: Marketing isn’t a science. Physics is a science. We need more scientists.)

We need more physicians and nurses and physicists and journalists to profess their views. But in order for them to do any of that, they will have to master the skills demanded of new media. Just because many of these voices have been a bit missing in online discussions doesn’t mean that the louder voices of amateurish meme-makers are the right ones.

There’s a lot of nonsense that takes place on tech blogs and social media blogs. Twitter has become a virtual cesspool of retweeted rubbish. Can we end all this social media nonsense? Probably not. But we can counter-balance it with the wisdom of those who have deeper and broader real-life experiences which the social medi(ocrity) lack.

I hope that in 2010 we hear a lot more skeptics (note: skepticism is not the same as cynicism).

I hope that in 2010 journalism makes a come-back. And I hope it doesn’t take a painful failure of public mutual misleading on Twitter to demonstrate the need for rigorous journalism.Traditional journalist may have missed the opportunity of a lifetime to learn the powers of the Web. But the newer generation will have to do the hard work of dovetailing the structures of journalistic discipline and integrity with the needs of a real-time Web.

I hope that in 2010 more  doctors and  nurses start blogging and tweeting.

For example: there’s a  chat on Twitter which aims to discuss how healthcare communications can improve patient relations via social media: but that conversation needs to involve a lot more clinical practitioners and patients who more fully understand the nuances of health care in all its forms. It’s a start in the right direction, but it won’t evolve unless more diverse and experienced perspectives enter the conversations.

We need to be clear in our understanding of Technology and the Web. We need to dampen the retweeting of nonsense and pay more attention to what matters most. I’ll close this post with a message from  William Stafford. It’s the most important sequence of words every written about social media (too bad William can’t blog and tweet):

A Ritual To Read To Each Other

If you don’t know the kind of person I am
and I don’t know the kind of person you are
a pattern that others made may prevail in the world
and following the wrong god home we may miss our star.

For there is many a small betrayal in the mind,
a shrug that lets the fragile sequence break
sending with shouts the horrible errors of childhood
storming out to play through the broken dyke.

And as elephants parade holding each elephant’s tail,
but if one wanders the circus won’t find the park,
I call it cruel and maybe the root of all cruelty
to know what occurs but not recognize the fact.

And so I appeal to a voice, to something shadowy,
a remote important region in all who talk:
though we could fool each other, we should consider–
lest the parade of our mutual life get lost in the dark.

For it is important that awake people be awake,
or a breaking line may discourage them back to sleep;
the signals we give–yes or no, or maybe–
should be clear: the darkness around us is deep.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Components of Hospital Branding: A Rant

Along the lines of social capital, I’ve thought about hospital branding and why it’s an important part of any health care system. Marketing has a bad reputation (and deservedly so in part), but it’s a critical feature of delivering the values of any organization.

This morning, I saw some tweets about branding, and I was spirited with this.

Beyond the colorful jest, there are points to be made. What follows is my rant on hospital branding:

How do you feel about this. I’d like to hear from you professional marketers. Is this delusional? Or am I on to something important?

[Link to video if it’s not viewable here.]

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

1001 Remarkable Pharma People to Follow on Twitter

Twitter Bird
Image by Paul Snelling via Flickr

Online, everybody loves lists. A number like 1001 is impressive. But would it be useful? I’ve compiled an extensive, curated list of people (and feeds) focused on Pharma and Life Science. The list continues to grow as more people hop on the Twitter hype-train.

I was going to publish the list a while ago, but then it occurred to me that a Twitter directory is in effect a mechanical tool that – while practical and useful – could actually discount the most important value which Twitter offers: the re-humanization of traditional communications. That’s not something you can achieve by pushing 1001 follow buttons in one afternoon. Twitter is discovery.

FELLOWSHIP AND PHARMA

So what if you follow 1001 people on Twitter who specialize in Pharma (or any other industry for that matter)? What matter most are the purposes, meaningful conversations and valuable links to interesting and relevant content which Twitter can enable. Taking a mechanical and technology-focused approach to Twitter deprives you of the core experience – the one that will ultimately help you to accumulate social capital.

Also, it’s my opinion that the Pharmaceutical industry’s traditional marketing philosophy and approach won’t square with the realities and opportunities presented by the Web and the communities which it has the power to engender.

I’d rather Pharma marketers and doctors and nursers and researchers take advantage of Twitter’s ability to connect people in meaningful and productive ways. And that can only be accomplished by starting out Twitter small, following the exchanges and links of who you follow, participate in conversations and following whomever you find interesting. Social relations involve time not numbers.

1001 REMARKABLE PHARMA PEOPLE TO FOLLOW ON TWITTER

You can follow thousands or millions of people on twitter. But if you followed 1001 of the “right” people on Twitter all at once, you’d lose any sense of meaning and orientation. If, however, you follow and engage a few people at a time, you will slowly but surely develop a strong fellowship – you’ll be following 1001 or more before you know it if you’re sufficiently active.

Rather than following some arbitrary number at once, here’s who I recommend you focus your following on:

  1. @BoehringerBoehringer Ingelheim’s Twitter account. Perhaps the first Pharma tweeter to “get it”. Providing pertinent and interesting content, the interaction with the community is outstanding and probably sets a standard for how Pharma can use Twitter to provide value to its communities. You could just follow this one stream and find just about anybody who’s tweeting about Pharma and related fields.
  2. @WhyDotPharma – Silja Chouquet blogs over at WhyDotPharma with a focus on patient-focused social communities. She’s obviously sincere about leading the use of social media for Pharma, interacts heavily with the Pharma Twitterverse and provides links to intelligent content.
  3. @Arthur_Alston – Arthur tweets from Down Under and is an oncology marketer and project manager for Big Pharma. In addition to tweeting about Pharma, he understands social technologies and for that alone he’s worth the follow for anyone interested in exploring where social media is heading.
  4. @WendyBlackburn – Wendy blogs at EyeForPharma and has an active presence on Twitter. Always engaging, and scouring the web for high quality content she brings an intelligence to Pharma’s social media needs that is hard to find. Follow her. Period.
  5. @Shwen – Shwen Gwee founded Social Pharma, blogs at  Med 2.0 and is currently Lead, New Media Communications at Vertex. Shwen is the arrow head for the industry’s trek into emerging technology and new media trends in science and medicine. In addition to tweeting most of his day ;) he promotes some of the best material and people related to life sciences. View his presentation Twitter Power Tools for Health Activists.
  6. Bonus:  @swoodruff – Steve Woodruff is Pharma consultant who brings in a marketing perspective important to online presences.

I selected the above six because I’m certain you could connect to the right people in your own way just by following them. I have literally thousands of remarkable people I could recommend for life science tweeting. Any of those deserve to be mentioned. Twitter’s like a universe of connect-the-dots: Twitter reduces the degrees of separation between us.

SOME CHEATING TIPS FOR TWITTER FOLLOWS

Feel like cheating?  #FollowPharma is a hashtag that helps to collect Pharma tweeters. Feel free dump yourself into that stream and learn to swim. In addition to following the above, it’s a way to follow Pharma activity and introduce yourself to the community.

Also  @jonmrich has a Pharma social media wiki from which you can find talent.

PARTING THOUGHTS ON TWITTER, PHARMA & MARKETING

Everything is marketing: 21st Century marketers need to understand that (there are lessons in this post’s title). The old model of massive unilateral communications is being inverted by real-time conversations. Hopefully, I have pointed you in the right direction to exploring just what that means.

You can follow me, but less than 10% of my tweets are Pharma-related. My interests in Pharma & Healthcare social media marketing lie in creating living spaces for remarkability in how we come together, share experiences and increase social capital in health care for the next generation. I’m just an idea man. You need focused executioners, like the people above.

For me, Twitter is useful chaos. As for yourself, perhaps that’s just what you’ll see it as too.

Related articles by Zemanta

Lie, Disappoint and Steal…21st Century Tips for Marketers

Everyday on Twitter and everywhere else on the web I read variations of this question: “How do I use Twitter [insert a million other social media services] to market my company/brand/product/service?” I see this question raised by smart people who have degrees in marketing or PR and who have worked in the field for years. Successful, bright people ask this question every day. And yet I can’t help but thinking Why such an obsessional focus on gadgets?

Here’s what I think: whatever you market, do it long-term. Forget about gaming the system or the searching for easy-buttons. Realize that the web makes it harder and harder every day to hide your mis-behaviors, shoddy products and miserable customer services from the public. It’s possible. But the brand-cost of lying, disappointing and stealing goes up every day.

LIE, DISAPPOINT AND STEAL…THE OPPOSITES OF

When you know that something doesn’t work – can’t work – looking at its opposite is usually worth a look-see. Established and engrained assumptions and business models that evolved out of the mass-assembly, mass-communication, mass-consumption economy of the 20th Century are collapsing. Micro-assembly, micro-connection and micro-sharing are re-shaping the way we interact with each other.

Do you know what elements you need to succeed in this century? I’ll give you three: trust, hope and sharing – the exact opposites of lying, disappointing and stealing. People need to trust that businesses are reliable, they need to hope that products and services are meaningful to them and they need to share in the wealth created by trusted and hopeful assets. If I can’t trust you, or if I think you’re hopeless, I’m not buying.

HOW TO MARKET. PERIOD.

Here’s the secret algorithm for marketing anything in this century (or any other), the answer to the question I raised at the beginning of this post:

  1. Invest in trust
  2. Sell hope
  3. Share the wealth
  4. Repeat daily.

Sometimes tweeting inspires. If you need me to expand on what I mean in this post, then maybe it’s just not for you. If that’s the case, I especially welcome your comments.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]