Tom Fishburne: this one time at Brand Camp

influencer stalking

I doubt there's a marketing plan in the world nowadays without some form of influencer marketing focus.  Reaching influencers is part of every agency pitch. With mainstream media becoming less effective over time and widespread recognition that influencers play a big role in buying decisions, the influencer hunt is on.

The challenge is how to do it right.  How do you identify who is really an influencer?  How do you reach them?  And with everyone else targeting influencers, how do you break through the clutter?

Many brands apply the same heavy-handed approach to influencer marketing that they do with mainstream marketing.  They shout.  

Somehow I ended up on agency influencer lists this last year, and I now receive dozens of emails a week, asking me to write about some piece of news or another. Aside from the fact that these emails are unsolicited, they are usually badly targeted, often lacking any news that is even moderately relevant to what I cover.  The other problem is that they usually arrive in an impersonal press release format with "for immediate release" marked at the top. One recent note was addressed to "Dear <first name> <last name>" because their email mail merge didn't work.

It's a common pitfall to assume that influencer marketing is just the same old marketing, only targeted more finely. If whatever you're trying to share is mediocre from the start, it's simply not going to spread, no matter how loudly you shout it or how many people you put on your shouting list. It doesn't matter if they're influential or not.

One of my favorite (albeit 5-year old) examples of a bootstrapped influencer marketing program is the Stormhoek winery 100 Blogging Dinners in 100 Days, developed by Hugh MacLeod. The winery credits this event for doubling their sales in 12 months. They sent out a free pre-release bottle of wine to any blogger who was interested (with no obligation to write about it), along with a great manifesto about wine and blogging.  It didn't shout.  It started an intriguing conversation and talked to bloggers as people, not as press contacts or direct marketing targets.  

I like this quote from Hugh after the event: "Blogging as a marketing tool is easier when you think of it as a chemical catalyst, not as a hammer and nail."  I think that "chemical catalyst" is a good description of influencer marketing in general too.

communication etiquette

I was struck by a recent Joel Spolsky column in Inc. magazine on dysfunctional communication in growing companies.

“What used to work with three people in a garage all talking to one another about everything just doesn’t work when your head count reaches 10 or 20 people. Everybody who doesn’t need to be in that meeting is killing productivity.”

Joel goes further by describing Brook’s Law: “Adding people to a late project tends to make it run later still.”

This counter-intuitive observation highlights a serious business problem: well-intended over-communication. Each additional person needed to keep in the loop exponentially slows down progress.

I’ve struggled with this exact dilemma. Three years ago, I arrived in the UK to help launch the method brand there. At the start, there were three: a sales guy, a supply chain guy, and me. We all knew everything about the business and could practically finish each others’ sentences. Here we are in our first day in the office (we didn’t have a printer yet, hence the sideways laptop).

As we grew the team to 10 people and needed to coordinate more with the home office in the US, the lines of communication were stressed. We could no longer have everyone involved in every decision. But, those who weren’t involved felt excluded. We were damned if we did, and damned if we didn’t.

We ultimately realized that democracy in the workplace doesn’t scale. Not everyone can have a voice on every decision. To even try to accommodate everyone results in peace treaties. They slow you down and ultimately sand the edges of what you’re trying to create.

Joel recommends addressing this problem head on: “as the boss, you need to design ways to reduce communications paths.”

This sounds harsh, because it runs counter to etiquette. We intrinsically feel that we need to communicate more to have a healthy office culture. To restrict communication feels impersonal.

Yet, there’s a fine line between etiquette and habit. The accepted code of behavior can actually be what is slowing you down. As you evolve, it’s good to question all of your conventions and decide whether you’re still well-served by what served you before.

Even J&J periodically questions their famous “credo”. CEO James Burke once instructed his executives to either recommit to the company credo or “tear it off the wall”.

It's a good discipline to continually challenge ourselves what etiquette is making us more successful and what should be torn off the wall.

the career trapeze

My mentor Jim Lawrence inspired this cartoon with an insight he shared recently that a career is more like riding a trapeze than climbing a ladder. Most careers are not rung-by-rung linear paths. Instead, they involve a series of flying leaps, not knowing whether those leaps will take you up, down, or sideways. Or if you'll miss the trapeze altogether. Or if there's even a net. 

It takes courage to take each leap. And patience when you're not headed the direction you'd like. 

When I started at General Mills after business school, there was too much focus on the career ladder and your place on it. Promotions were awarded based on seniority. The best performer in your class was always in line behind the worst performer in the class ahead. No matter your past experience, you started at the bottom and climbed. It was a great place to learn. It was also a source of frustration whenever the career ladder slowed (which inspired this cartoon in 2003).

Thinking about your career in purely a linear way focuses you on all the wrong things and blinds you to the actual experiences along the way. Worst of all, it can make you risk-adverse. 

One of the entrepreneurs I admire most is David Hieatt, who founded the Welsh clothing company howies, sold it to Timberland, and made the hard decision to leave this last October: 

"From this day forward howies will begin to appear in my rear-view mirror. At the same time I will be sitting in my shed with Sonny (my dog) working away on the future. Keeping me company will be the knowledge that Patagonia was not Yvon’s first company, Esprit was not Doug’s first company, and Steve Jobs got sacked from Apple. For me those are good role models to have in the shed with you." 

David started a blog a few weeks ago to chronicle his soul-searching as he takes this next leap of faith. I find his journey incredibly inspiring. 

"It’s called a leap of faith for a good reason. It’s a risk. And the outcome is far from certain. And that is why we tend to put off these life-changing decisions. Say ‘what the hell’ and jump. And hope you can build some wings on the way down."

the six types of ideas

Missy Carvin emailed me this week asking if I had any cartoons about Zombie ideas, "those terrible ideas that exist within an organization that never, ever die, just resurface every few years". 

It struck me that there are different types of ideas in organizations. Most time is spent chasing the elusive "Eureka" moment, where the clouds part and an idea appears fully formed. Ideations are staged to encourage this type of idea. Yet, not only are these "Eureka" moments few and far between, they don't appear in an orderly fashion, just because 90 minutes are scheduled in a room with beanbag chairs. 

The vast majority of ideas in an organization fall in between these two extremes, the Eurekas and the Zombies. The real innovation challenge is guiding ideas to a progressively better place. 

Last week, a method scientist named Kaj held up a prototype with the word "FAIL" written in Sharpie on the front of it. He said, "I'm glad this idea was a complete failure. Because this idea failed, we were forced to change course entirely and come up with this other idea instead." And then he pointed to the new product we were in the midst of launching. 

I think the art of managing ideas is less about generating new ideas than in managing the ideas already in your organization. Less Zombie, more Phoenix.

As David Kelley at IDEO famously says, you have to "fail faster to succeed sooner." 

the critical path

I'm gearing up to talk at SXSW in Austin in March.  My topic is titled "Drawing Board: Innovation Lessons from Cartooning" and it's loosely based on a few talks I gave last year about cartooning as a metaphor for innovation.  Both activities involve coming up with ideas and bringing them to life.

As I prepare for the talk, I've been thinking a lot about why so many new products are mediocre and uninspiring.  I don't think they result from a shortage of ideas.  Instead, I think that the blame falls on the innovation process itself.  Far more important than the Eureka moment in the Ideation is what happens back in the office long after the flip charts and markers are put away. The magic is in the process. Great ideas are either watered down or made stronger depending on how they are brought to life.  

The Critical Path is a project management process coined by DuPont in the 50s.  It boils down a project into the few key steps that dictates how long a project will take.  Far too often, the Critical Path gets bogged down by inconsequential stuff.  Too much emphasis gets placed on upfront navel gazing and not enough on actual development.  

The result is that the edges get sanded in development and the ideas (however well brainstormed) become less and less remarkable.  This is ironic because ideas theoretically should become stronger by the diversity of thought that goes into them.

The best rule of thumb is to get to development quickly and start building prototypes. Prototypes are the best way to communicate ideas, dispel naysayers, rally the troops, predict flaws, and spark improvements. 

We should spend less time word smithing and more time building.

definition of insanity

I’ve always liked the Albert Einstein quote, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." 

I recently started following the witting observations of @MeetingBoy ("Say or do something stupid in a meeting and I'll tweet it").  He's putting out a 2010 MeetingBoy calendar in the next week or so and asked if I'd create a cartoon to illustrate one of his tweets. So, this cartoon is based on one that I liked the most: “Definition of insanity: holding the same meeting with the same people every week and expecting different results.” 

Last year I heard Seth Godin speak in London. After his talk, someone in the audience asked Seth how he found enough hours in the day to be so prolific. Seth answered that he never had to go to meetings. This gave him an extra four hours a day than those in the audience who did. 

A month later, Seth wrote a great post called, "Getting serious about your meeting problem."  He squarely addresses the dysfunctional meeting habits that most businesses have and offers a few suggestions to break the cycle of meeting insanity, including these nuggets:

"Understand that all problems are not the same. So why are your meetings? Does every issue deserve an hour? Why is there a default length?

Require preparation. Give people things to read or do before the meeting, and if they don't, kick them out.

Remove all the chairs from the conference room. I'm serious."

First thing this week, I'm going to question all of the recurring meetings on my calendar, see which ones I can overhaul and which ones I can remove entirely.  Probably the best new year's work resolution I can make.

the six types of twitter users

This cartoon sprung fully formed from a great post from Guy Kawasaki. I always learn something from Guy's blog, so it's a tribute of sorts to put together a cartoon entirely inspired by one of his posts. 

Twitter can be overwhelming at first, like drinking through a firehouse. It definitely helps to understand the different archetypes there. Seek out the Mavens and Mensches. 

But, more importantly, consider the type of Twitter user you want to be. Evolve beyond simple lifestreaming. Become a Maven or Mensch yourself. This is particularly essential for Brands. Tone down the overt selling, and inspire consumers by offering them something of real value. 

Guy has a useful Twitter 101 primer.

voice of the brand

As businesses wade into social media, there's an interesting choice to make about the voice of the brand. The falacy is that social media is free. But the people costs to do it properly are important to understand going into it. As much as I love Tony Hsieh's approach at Zappos, not every CEO is capable of personally fronting the company in social media. 

I enjoyed Ann Handley's post on this topic: "The Right Voice for Your Brand Online is ... (Pick One): The CEO? Head of Marketing? An Intern? or Who?" 

I think the laziest (yet very common) option is the "Intern", which illustrates just how low social media really falls on the priority list for many companies. Social media is a classic Intern assignment because it has unclear upside and little perceived risk of screwing it up. 

But the Intern is often the least connected person in the organization. The Intern approach runs counter to the promise of social media improving the dialog between organizations and their consumers. Interns also need supervision, and the approval process detracts from the immediacy of social media. 

I recently heard someone describe tweets and facebook updates as "copywriting". It was a good reminder that social media dialog is every much a part of the voice of the brand as any other form of marketing (perhaps more so).  It's crucial to consider who is doing the talking and what they're talking about.

If yours is a brand that markets from the inside out, this voice should come naturally from what you are already doing. If instead your voice is applied externally from an agency, you may need a bigger overhaul. Social media exposes Cyrano de Bergerac.  Your consumers are increasingly demanding a real and meaningful conversation with your brand. And they likely won't have that conversation with an Intern. 

To think through the true investment of social media programs, I found the "Basics of Social Media ROI" from Olivier Blanchard a useful place to start.

innovation stew

Last year, business battened down the hatches and prepared for a hunger year. As I parodied in another cartoon at the time, a few companies with deep pockets used this opportunity to invest, but most companies cut back and slashed budgets. Some tightened their belts more than others. 

Budget cuts test to force priorities, and the immediate essentials usually trump the long-term. The innovation pipeline is often one of the first casualties. 

Innovation is the lifeblood of consumer products. Retailers are constantly hungry for new products and brands need to feed the beast or they risk losing space. Yet this year, many of the pantries are empty, and companies are playing catch-up to pay for last year's short-sightedness. 

It all reminds me of a classic Simpson's sketch, which I reference within this cartoon: 

Lisa: There's nothing to eat for breakfast. 

Homer: You gotta improvise. 

Lisa (going through the fridge): Cloves, Tom Collins mix, frozen pie crust... 

To inspire those of you staring at an empty pantry, I thought it was funny that a Simpson's fan actually tried to make a Clove and Tom Collins pie. What recipes are you going to make this year?

Here's another cartoon I drew on the subject in 2004:

 

driving by the rear view mirror

I get most of my cartoon ideas in meetings.

I was in a strategy discussion recently that became stuck in a competitive debate. We charted the minutia of each recent competitive action and overdosed on two-by-two matrices.  

In the middle of this war-gaming, someone observed, “We’re trying to drive by the rear view mirror.”

It was a wake-up call that reminded us we were so focused on the competition, we had lost sight of the actual consumer. Sure, you need to know the competitive landscape.  But others can only guide you so far.

I most felt this competitive fever pitch in the Low Carb gold rush a few years ago.  For a year, every food manufacturer set up Low Carb task forces to rush products to meet the earliest possible ship windows, worrying all the while that they might be too late. 

In 2000, there were 26 Low Carb products in the US. In 2003, there were 392. In 2004, there were 3,375. In 2005, the Atkins company filed for Chapter 11. Brands hit the gas and followed each other off of a cliff.

I read once that a company can either become a rule breaker, a rule maker, or a rule follower. The only companies that succeed as followers are those with scale, lower cost, and higher efficiency.

If you're a rule breaker or rule maker, it's good to remember to take your eyes off the rear view mirror and look to the horizon.

Here's a cartoon I drew in the midst of the Low Carb fever pitch.