Category: Interviews

CMO Insights: The Content Imperative

Posted on by Drew Neisser

Steve Rubel Steve Rubel is Chief Content Strategist for Edelman, the world’s largest public relations firm, so it shouldn’t come as a surprise that he is evangelizing about the importance of content marketing. Given that I happen to agree with Steve and having seen him speak at the Brite ’13 Conference, I was delighted to be able to dig into the topic a bit deeper with him after the fact. As you will see, there’s a lot more to content marketing than publishing a few articles.  In fact, it requires a comprehensive approach including a clear strategy, a diverse blend of media (paid, earned and owned) and writers that know how to start conversations.  But don’t take my word for it, read on…

Neisser: So, what exactly is The Content Imperative?
Rubel: It’s the belief that creating content is no longer optional. Rather, it’s imperative given the significant economic changes that are taking place in both media and, resultantly, marketing. With more ads bought/sold through trading desks, advertising is now far more efficient and effective. This is great for the marketers, but it’s a nightmare for the publishers since it erodes their margins.

Faced with a lack of viable options for generating new/replacement revenues – e.g. subscriptions, significant increases in video views (which have a higher CPM) – media companies are increasingly becoming open to taking sponsored content. Sponsored content is poised to become a significant, possibly even a major new advertising format. And it’s for this reason why it’s now an imperative.

Neisser: When it comes to content marketing, what does success look like in terms of business metrics that a CEO or CFO would appreciate?
Rubel: The metrics of success really depend on the approach. Are you building an asset and trying to attract an audience to you or are you trying to engage the public on other lands? In the case of the former, it’s traffic that leads to sales. In the case of the latter, it’s impressions that create brand awareness and/or potentially lead to traffic and sales.

Neisser: Presumably content marketing provides some kind of competitive advantage.  Can you provide a real world example or two of marketers that have gained competitive advantage via their content marketing efforts?
Rubel: Red Bull is just as known for the content it creates as it is for it’s brand attributes. The same is true for GE (an Edelman client). Both have a content vs a message mindset. One is a consumer brand effort, the other is corporate reputation.

Neisser:  So, does this mean every marketer needs to become a publisher?  And if every marketer in every category is pushing out their own content, at what point does the consumer say, enough already AND/OR at what point does content publishing no longer provide competitive advantage?
Rubel: Not necessarily. There could be a first mover advantage here in some categories. And, yes, it is possible that consumers won’t be receptive. That said, throughout history quality content has prevailed over junk no matter where it comes from. What’s different now is that the playing field has leveled. Brands have a viable way to get their message out and a cadre of media owners ready to help them do so.

Neisser: Creating great content is an art form that not every company can master.  And of course, content is what media companies do really well.  So, how can chocolate (marketing) & peanut butter (media) get together nowadays?
Rubel: Due to the economic underpinnings mentioned above, media companies are increasingly recognizing that content marketing is a viable revenue stream when done right. Many media owners have set up distinct content studios that exclusively serve marketers. They help customers understand their audiences, create content and build deeper relationships. However, they are limited to doing so within their walls.This is why we believe there will be opportunities for agencies like Edelman to integrate different partnerships in context of a broader program.

Neisser: Given an over-abundance of content (aka the WWW) and a dearth of free time (so we all say), should marketers be more focused on quality than quantity, striving to become a recognized curator rather than a prolific purveyor?  
Rubel: Absolutely. Slow is the new fast. Quality is the new quantity. (Although these are old ideas) However, scale is still critical. As is consistency.

Neisser: Content publishing has the potential to be a one way street almost like traditional advertising. Where does social / conversation fit into the content marketing picture? 
Rubel: The media owners seem open to experimenting on their social platforms. The faster we together make this about content as a means to building relationships, the better.

As always, if you enjoyed this post, feel free to share it with friends and subscribe to TheDrewBlog.

CMO Insights: Risk-taking for the Marketer

Posted on by Drew Neisser

If you’ve been in this business awhile, you have seen many an ad campaign launch strong and then fizzle out in just a year or two. Perhaps this is why I was so bowled over when I heard Terri Funk Graham (at last year’s CMO Club Summit) tell the story of the  “Jack” campaign that is now in its 18th year of productive service for Jack in the Box.  As a student of marketing, I couldn’t help but wonder, how does such a campaign come into being? How do those in charge keep it fresh?  What role does the agency play?  What’s the secret sauce here?

I got the chance to ask Ms. Graham these questions and many more earlier this year and it was then that I realized she is truly a rock star in our industry. During Graham’s long tenure as CMO at Jack in the Box which ended at the end of 2012, the Jack campaign consistently drove product sales, introduced new menu items, helped overcome recessions and bonded with a new generation of fast food consumers.  Graham, as you will soon see, has the courage to take risks not just once but year after year, has the wisdom to stick with one “genius” creative partner and has the curiosity to explore emerging communication channels.  Here is part one of our interview:

Neisser: So tell me how initially the Jack campaign came into beginning back in ’95?
Graham: Well, it came out of the E. coli crisis. So the reality was the company needed to do something to revitalize the brand and make the brand relevant again in the marketplace.  And so it came from a crisis.

Neisser: Which must have been a scary and interesting place to start, right?
Graham: I think that when you’re in a situation like this, you’re willing to put a lot more on line.  And I so I think it actually it drove the ability to take more risks.

Neisser: Really interesting.  So you decided to bring Jack back? 
Graham: Yes, but let’s bring him back in a way that’s relevant and different and will catch attention.  So it was 1995 when we launched Bringing Jack Back.

Neisser: So tell me about those initial ads?
Graham: Well, the very first spot had some controversy around it because it showed Jack coming back.  He had had plastic surgery and he blew up the boardroom because the folks from the boardroom are the ones who blew him up in the ’80s.

Neisser:  I see. A little revenge.
Graham: So he blew up the boardroom and basically reintroduced himself in the marketplace as coming back, better than before with plastic surgery and that he was going to be a big advocate for the consumers. The message was Jack was back and he was going to give fast food customers what they wanted.

Neisser:  So did that seem like an idea that could endure 18 years?   
Graham:  Well, that’s where Dick Sittig, the creative mastermind behind the Jack’s Back campaign, comes in. We constantly challenged Dick to keep Jack relevant, and because he used this sense of humor that was a bit unconventional, described often as irreverent, he kept rising to the occasion and the campaign endures to this day.

Neisser:  So why do you think the ads worked so well?
Graham:  I think what drove the campaign to continue to last is that we tapped into the emotional branding side. I think that often that is not given enough emphasis. We tapped into the emotional side that really gave it a personality that people could connect to.

Neisser:  So how did Jack end up having Dick Sittig’s voice?
Graham: That was actually by accident. That wasn’t planned. When he did the initial pitch, it was in his voice and then when we finally went to casting, we had the actor and we’re putting everything together that we’re looking at all kinds of different voices and the problem was everyone liked Dick Sittig’s voice more than anything that was put in front.  So we decided to go with his voice.

Neisser:  What does it take to keep a campaign like this together for so long?
Graham:  I think there are a couple of things to consider. One is I was always willing to take a risk. So we were unapologetic about who we were. Dick Sittig would present things that would make us feel uncomfortable.  But we knew that it was going to grab attention that it wasn’t going to hurt the brand as long as we were true to who we were. And so it was a combination of being unapologetic about who we were. It was about allowing great creative work to be done. I am not a believer in dealing any sort of pretesting of advertising. We never did anything of that nature. I also think that approval by committee is the death of a campaign, you end up with mediocre work. And, I think that, we truly trusted each other in our work and I think that’s also what helped build that campaign. And so we would constantly challenge each other to keep it relevant.

Neisser:  Very few CMO’s are given permission to take risks.  You must have had a lot of management support?
Graham:  Yes, I had full support and I had permission. Linda Lang absolutely let me run with it and she always backed it. And, there would be situations where I would come up and say, “okay, I have got one that’s going to rile up some folks, prompting phone calls, e-mails and potentially, this all will need to be discussed in the board.” And she would say, “okay, is it worth the risk? And I’d say, “yes.” And she’d say, “I’ll back you, but you need to stand tall.”  So I would have to do all the explaining in the boardroom anytime something went a little astray.

Neisser: What do you think were some of your most risky efforts?
Graham:  Running Jack over  — that was a trying moment. We were essentially putting the most — the biggest brand equity that the company had, Jack, and putting him on the line to see if people cared because if they didn’t care that he got hit by a bus, we were going to be in trouble. So that’s when we had Jack Get Hit By a Bus and of course it proved out to be quite a success and that was in 2009.

Neisser: So how did this part of the campaign unfold?
Graham: We only showed the ad one time and it was on the Super Bowl. And then everything went basically digital and social from there. That was our way of stepping into the whole social media area. So all of a sudden it got millions of views on YoutTube and it was talked about all over the place. We had amazing press and impressions on that. And, we had people sending cards and teddy bears and everything that — flowers, everything that you could imagine for Jack’s recovery. And then we created a storyline. We created multiple ads that followed up afterwards that talked about how he was doing and it became a campaign within a campaign.

Neisser:  So what about the hallucinating kid who sees Jack on his dashboard?  That must of stirred things up.
Graham:  Yes it did. We really wanted to focus on selling our 99-cent tacos. And there is a real following to those tacos. And young people, after they’ve gone to the clubs tend to head to Jack’s for their tacos. And so we played off of that, if you will. And so we had, you know, a young guy in a van come up and he wanted to order as many as 30 tacos. And needless to say, that got quite a bit of attention.

Neisser: Did you end up selling a lot of tacos?
Graham: Everything that we did we also did with the premise of generating sales and driving traffic. I mean we didn’t do funny ads just for the sake of doing funny ads. Our goal was always to drive traffic to the brand. And that’s exactly what we start out to do and that’s what we accomplished each and every time. So in that case, we certainly sold a lot of tacos and we got a lot of buzz about tacos.

Neisser:  You know, I think you told the story of how on that one, some protestors were showing up at your corporate headquarters?
Graham: Yeah, and I turned on the sprinklers. Yes, then the true story — we were going to have protestors and media show up and at the time we had grass all around our corporate headquarters. And it was in the afternoon. And so my way of stalling that was we became a water park in the afternoon and we turned on the sprinklers and we didn’t have any protests that showed up at all the rest of the week!

FYI, After a 22-year run at Jack in the Box, Terri Funk Graham recently joined the Board of Directors at Hot Topic Inc., is working with The CMO Club as the Chairman of its President’s Circle and is consulting for HOM Sotheby’s Realty.  Fellow CMOs can meet Terri in person at the upcoming CMO Club Summit in NYC. 

 

Thinking Big About Big Data

Posted on by Drew Neisser

Rogers_bookThe term “Big Data” has quickly become the buzzword du jour garnering its own Wikipedia page and showing up in 21 million search results.  But frankly, every time I hear the phrase, it is lumped into a string of buzzwords that makes my head spin, making me wonder, could any self-respecting forward-thinking technology company present their transparent vision without paying homage to the game-changing paradigm-shifting potential of Big Data?

Fortunately for me, I got a chance to hear professor and author David Rogers speak about the genuine potential of “Big Data” (without a single cliche) at the recent Columbia Business School Brite Conference.  Rogers explained how IBM’s Watson (artificial intelligence computer system) has been fed exabytes of medical information that it can sift through in seconds to help doctor’s more accurately diagnose and treat patients.  Another example Roger’s mentioned is Waze, a mobile map app with 30 million users, that gets real world traffic information from users and then processes that information to re-route other users in real time.  Wanting to know more, I caught up with Rogers after the event yielding this informative interview:

Neisser:  Leaders have always been challenged to get the right information to make good decisions.  How do modern leaders take advantage of the excess of data available to find the truth they need?
Rogers: There is actually no excess of data. That’s a myth attached to the term “big data.” Digital data has been growing exponentially since the birth of the computer era. Before that, recorded data grew exponentially since the invention of human writing. I don’t think Napoleon complained that there was “too much data” as he pored over reports of historic battles to conceive his next campaign strategy. What he needed was insight, and the right questions to ask of the data available.

The amazing challenges and opportunities of the Big Data era really don’t stem from the sheer quantity of data. They come from the new kinds of data that we are getting, and our new tools for analyzing them – especially for analyzing unstructured data like video, images, and social media conversations.

My first advice for business leaders is: don’t meet with anyone who wants to sell you some great juicy set of data they’ve got. Don’t be that sucker. Only work with people who want to help you solve a genuine problem, or capitalize on an exciting opportunity, using data.

Neisser: I think it was Einstein who said, “information is not knowledge.”  Can you provide a real world example (or two) of how this data/info is being harnessed by marketers right now?
Rogers: Sure, data is now being used to answer many of the most critical questions that marketers face. Who should I market to? When and where should I spend my budget? Which are my most valuable customers? How should I personalize my offer? What impact did I get from my marketing?

Many of these answers are coming from the domain of predictive analytics. When a customer makes their very first purchase on an ecommerce site, it is now often possible to predict, with decent accuracy, how many more purchases she will make this year, her total spend, and if she fits in the top 5% of your customer base in terms of lifetime profit to the firm. You might be wrong on a given customer, but on average over the entire behavioral segment, you’re quite accurate. That’s extremely powerful.

Neisser: Are these Big Data technologies going to be used just by big companies? Will they pose a competitive disadvantage for small and mid-sized businesses?
Rogers: Not necessarily. One of the key drivers of the big data revolution is cloud computing and the SaaS (software as a service) model. That means that hospitals around the world will be able to start accessing IBM’s Watson, the most powerful natural language processing algorithm in the world, to assist in their cancer diagnostics. Watson is an incredible supercomputer, but your local oncologist will just access it over the web via an app of their tablet.

In the marketing space, the startup Optimizely is providing incredibly cheap entry points for small business to start using its web-based tools to test and gather data on the effectiveness of direct response marketing. You don’t have to be the big boys to start reaping the benefits of the Big Data era.

Neisser: Bringing it back to the C-suite, what do you see as the challenges for leaders adapting their skills, and their teams, to the “Big Data” era?
Rogers: Firstly, formulating the right questions to ask of data will be a key leadership skill for the future. That also means knowing when and how to balance intuition and judgement versus data-driven decision-making.

CMO’s in particular will need to hire some new talent – data scientists who can apply these emerging data tools to unlock value for the enterprise. There will be a lot more math PhDs in the marketing divisions of firms, and not just where you used to find them, in the market research companies. But CMOs also need to train the rest of their team – the creative copyrighters, the ethnographic insight hipsters – to be facile with the world of big data, so they know what questions they should be posing to the data geeks in the next room. It’s really going to be a cultural change as much as skill training.

Neisser:  What about the CEO and strategy? You said at the BRITE ’13 conference that leaders need to see data as a strategic asset. Can you explain?
Rogers: Yes, truly successful leaders will see data not just as a tool to assist decision-making, but as a core strategic asset.

Think about e-tailers like Amazon or media companies like Netflix. They have spent the last few years building amazing data sets about the behaviors and preferences of consumers.  These are incredibly valuable assets, just as much as their hardware, their software, and their licensing and partnership deals. Amazon is using its data assets to not only improve its core retail business, but to offer incredible targeting to marketers. Netflix has used its immense data on what stories, actors, and creative teams its viewers have preferred, to plan and commission entire new TV series, like “House of Cards,” without having to go through the normal process of paying for a bunch of pilot shows and options with no clear idea which one will resonate in the market place. That’s a huge market advantage and risk reducer.   The best leaders in every industry will be those with a strategy for building powerful datasets around their markets and customers – and then leveraging these assets to drive innovation and value creation for customers.

David Rogers is founder of Columbia Business School’s BRITE conference on brands, innovation, and technology, and author of “The Network Is Your Customer: 5 Strategies to Thrive in a Digital Age.” His next book will show why businesses that use big data effectively will survive in an era of disruptive change.  You can find him at www.davidrogers.biz.

How Intuit Drives Innovation (and you can too)

Posted on by Drew Neisser

Small companies are often founded by innovative individuals who by design or necessity lead their business into new and unchartered territory.  As a company matures that innovative spirit is often squashed under the weight of a fearsome bureaucracy.  One company that seems to consistently break this pattern is Intuit, extending its product line well beyond Quickbooks and TurboTax with a steady series of innovative offerings including SnapTax, a mobile tax filing app.

Kaaren Hanson, VP of Design Innovation at Intuit, believes that the trick is “creating a culture of rapid experimentation” and is speaking about that very topic at next week’s Columbia Business School’s Brite ’13 Conference. As you will see in my interview below, Kaaren is refreshingly honest, reminding those that want to innovate (at any size business), to “fall in love with the problem, not the solution,” that today “leadership is about experimentation” and “innovation is part of everyone’s job.”  But read on. There’s a lot more to this innovation thing than grabbing a white board and gathering the usual suspects!

Drew: Are we currently in the “innovation age” or is innovation simply an imperative for companies looking to thrive (versus survive) in a rapidly changing global economy?   
Kaaren: We have a long way to go. I would say we are entering the “innovation age.” Changes in how we work and think are beginning to take place, but most of the results and impact are yet to come.

Drew: Can you share a specific recent innovation at Intuit and speak to how it came into being?
Kaaren: How about preparing and filing your taxes in less than 10 minutes on your smart phone? That’s a recent innovation from Intuit we call SnapTax. After announcing mobile as a key priority for the company, Intuit CEO Brad Smith was asked by an engineer in an employee chat: “What the hell does mobile have to do with taxes?” He told them he didn’t know, but he knew they’d figure it out. A few months later a small team had an idea.  Intuit gave this small team the freedom and the resources they needed to dream and develop – and they came up with a mobile app to prepare simple tax returns on an iPhone, easily and accurately. That team’s work became SnapTax, which makes it easy to file a simple tax return on a smartphone in the amount of time it takes to find a parking space at H&R Block.

Drew: Does creating a culture of innovation also require a certain tolerance for failure?  Are there ways to mitigate the risks?
Kaaren: Who likes failure? A string of failures and you’re out of business. You have to learn from failure and use it like road signs that direct you to success. Having a culture where people savor surprises is important.  That surprise could be a big upside or a big downside. Intuit’s co-founder Scott Cook says it well: “If there’s something that’s really a big surprise, upside or downside, that’s generally the real world speaking to you, saying there’s something you don’t yet understand.” It’s less about mitigating risks and more about carving out space for people to experiment and learn from failure. One example from Intuit is our Lean StartINs. These are one or two-day events where small groups of employees come to test their ideas for new products or services.

Drew: What are the other big cultural changes required for companies to become more innovative?
Kaaren: Leadership models need to change, especially when it comes to how decisions get made. In the innovation age leadership is much more about Thomas Edison than Dwight Eisenhower. Leadership is about experimentation. It’s no longer about the boss making the decision or judgment. Instead, we  make the decision based on testing the hypothesis and experimentation. This is moving decision-making from the boss’s opinion to enabling the answer to prove itself with customers voting with their feet.

Drew: Innovation often seems to align with the corporate growth cycle—younger companies tend to innovate more than bigger ones either out of necessity or because the culture is younger and less risk averse.  How does the proverbial old dog learn new tricks?
Kaaren: It starts with having a strategy that will fuel growth through big economic and technological changes. Then give employees the freedom to experiment, and ultimately bring to life those groundbreaking innovations that will inspire more innovation.

Drew: Can the big guys do this without creating “skunkworks” or other splinter operations that are not just empowered to innovate but are really required to do so?
Kaaren: At Intuit innovation is part of everyone’s job. If the big guys want to see new ideas come to life at their company, they should democratize innovation. We offer unstructured time to all employees at Intuit, to give great people with great ideas the time and freedom to pursue them. Having an innovation awards program is also a good way to celebrate successes and reinforce the importance of innovation. When it comes to our innovation awards program, we provide the three things that innovators wanted most: recognition allowing access to leaders and other innovators, time to innovate on a project of their choice and financial reward.

Drew: Henry Ford is famous for saying, “if you asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses” and Steve Jobs was also a skeptic of the consumer’s ability to recognize the need for what would become a totally new category. How important is consumer input/feedback in your innovation process?
Kaaren: Just listening to what customers say is a waste of time.  Customer Driven Innovation is one of our core capabilities that differentiates us and allows us to deliver solutions that truly change people’s lives. One of our signature methods is something we can Follow Me Homes, observing customers “in the wild” – it may be their homes, coffee shops, or the train.  We notice what and how they are going about their daily lives and then probe deeply to understand the motivations and emotions that drive their behaviors.  These nuggets provide rich material for our innovations.

Drew: Presumably Intuit has had some failures along the innovation road.  Is it true that you can learn as much from failures as you do successes and if so, what have you learned?  
Kaaren: You can certainly learn from failure. It goes back to my earlier comment about savoring surprises. We recently learned this important lesson: fall in love with the problem, not the solution.

Many of Intuit’s customers are small businesses. We had a team that had been exploring opportunities in adjacencies to our payroll business, and found that health coverage is the most important employee benefit. Yet most small businesses don’t offer this benefit because it’s too expensive and too much work to administrate.  The Intuit team took that customer problem and found a way to create a new, low-cost health insurance plan solution. The insurance plan got positive feedback from customers and good overall results in market testing. However, when the team began offering the plan, they only sold four plans in five months. The team then went back to drawing board. They again examined the learnings from customers and added some new members to the team with different perspectives. This led to the team taking insurance out of the solution. Instead, they created a health debit card product to which employers would contribute an amount that they set for their employees to use for healthcare expenses. So the employer sets the cost, and employees get full choice with pre-tax dollars.

A key learning from the failed low-cost insurance plan was, fall in love with the problem, not the solution. In this case the problem still existed. The team needed to have a mindset that as long as they understood the problem, they could be flexible, iterate further and in the end make a product more likely to succeed. The team continues to iterate, and the Intuit Health Debit Card is performing well in a limited market release.

Spoiler Alert: Mobile Advertising Works (Sometimes)

Posted on by Drew Neisser

digitalDigital Display is often considered the homely step-child of the advertising family shown up regularly by its precocious cousin Search. So it would stand to reason that Mobile Display would be equally destained.  Well as the analysts like to say, “data trumps opinion” and according to Professor Miklos Sarvary, Faculty Director, Media Program at Columbia Business School, who studied the impact of Mobile Display ads, this emerging channel does work “but only under certain conditions.”  Sarvary will be presenting his findings next week at the Columbia Business School’s Brite ’13 conference and I am delighted to provide a sneak peak of his report via the following interview:

Drew: I love the title of your presentation “The Truth about Mobile Advertising: Does it Even Work?”  Let’s start there.  Does mobile display advertising work?
Yes, our empirical analysis seems to show that it works but only under certain conditions (for certain products).

Drew:  Digital display advertising has a bad reputation already relative to say Search advertising. Why would or should advertisers expect more from mobile display?
The reason is that it is hard to observe systematic effects for display advertising, which is not the case for search advertising. Search advertising is “self-contained”, in the sense that you can have an independent campaign and if the search words are well chosen it generally works. Our research suggests that display advertising may work but only if it is part of a bigger campaign. The role of the mobile display ad is to remind people of the deeper messages of “higher bandwidth” campaigns. We show that this only works for high involvement and utilitarian products. In other words, it is harder to make the case for mobile display ads.

Drew: For marketers considering mobile display advertising, which success barometers should they focus on in order to most satisfied with this particular medium?
Actually, we found that mobile display ads seem to influence many stages of the decision funnel (we could only verify attitude and purchase intentions but I believe that they may pretty much influence the entire decision funnel). This is consistent with the idea that mobile display ads only remind consumers of another campaign transferring richer information. If this is true, then each stage of that campaign might be affected.

Drew:  Can you provide an example or two of successful mobile display campaigns?
Unfortunately not. We are not allowed to reveal the products that we have studied and I don’t have a good specific case study. Moreover, a really successful campaign might not be attributed to mobile ads alone.

Drew: Are there product/services that tend to do better than others on mobile? Are there products/services that simply don’t work at all on mobile display?
Sure. This is the essence of our findings. Specifically, and somewhat surprisingly, high involvement, utilitarian products work better for mibile display advertisemements (as opposed to low involvement hedonic products). Examples like regular cars, expensive durables, heath insurence, financial services come to mind….

Drew:  In theory, mobile display has the opportunity to be incredibly customized based on user behavior and/or location. Did this level of customization play a role in your study?
No. And you are right that this is where the real power of mobile may actually lie. We only studies simple display advertisements – little banners appearing on the screen. What is surprising however, is that a large proportion of mobile ads are still these simple display ads. And the forecasts don’t seem to indicate that the proportion of spending on these is going to decline.

Drew:  Will the advent of larger mobile phones like the rumored iPhone 6 help the mobile display cause?
Yes, I think that there will be a lot of development here. Ads will do a better job at capturing attention, reminding people of other marketing messages etc. Already now, many people count some rich media ads as display ads.

Why the Future of Facebook Looks Bright (part 3)

Posted on by Drew Neisser

Just any case any of the digital / social agencies out there are panicking because they aren’t among the 12 Facebook designated as Strategic Marketing Development Partners, I have one word of advice: don’t.  While this designation is a coup for those 12, the rest of us will be just fine and so will our clients when it comes to providing Facebook-related services.  Part of the reason I can say that with such certainty is that these SMDPs offer self-service solutions that are available to all who seek them, including major digital agencies like Resolution Media.

I talked with Erica Barth, VP of Products & Partnerships at Resolution, about this issue, which we will be talking about again and in greater detail at the upcoming Social Media Insider Summit.  Erica remains bullish on Facebook as a powerful advertising vehicle especially if you are customer-centric.  Enjoy.

Drew: First, please provide a brief description of what your company does and how Facebook fits in.
Resolution Media, an Omnicom Media Group company, is a leading digital agency with operations in 40 countries. Resolution helps brands bond with evolving audiences by providing services in the areas of paid search, search engine optimization (SEO), digital behavior analysis, social media, mobile, local and other complimentary services.

Drew: Can you provide a recent success story that you’ve executed on Facebook?
We used Facebook to generate awareness for a client’s new online product by promoting their organic page posts to mobile and desktop Facebook users.  In particular, mobile newsfeed ads were very successful, generating over 60% of all the “Page Likes” for this initiative.  Overall, Facebook was one of the largest drivers of traffic to this client’s new online product.

Drew: Do you think not being a Strategic PMD has hurt your ad buying and or application development skills?
Resolution Media partners with Facebook PMDs to buy Facebook media on a self-serve basis using the PMD’s technology platform to streamline management, optimization and reporting.  We do place importance on the standing of the API vendor with Facebook, but also look at other factors when selecting our technology partners such as technical support, training, global scale, etc. However, speed-to-market on supporting changes to Facebook’s platform and overall innovation in the space are very critical as well.

Drew: Have you noticed a decline in the usage and/or effectiveness of Facebook apps?   
We help our clients support the promotion of their apps from a media perspective and we haven’t seen our advertisers move away from leveraging them.  However, the biggest limitation we see in driving results today is apps that aren’t developed with the consumer at the center to ensure relevance and a great user experience.  In our experience, simple and entertaining apps tend to perform the best.  It’s really important to understand consumers’ behaviors on different channels and make sure your content and advertising strategy align to those in order to drive success.

Drew: Are you bullish on the future of Facebook applications?  
When done well, one of the greatest strengths of apps is that it’s a great way to develop content quickly and with limited investment, as opposed to a microsite or other channel that could be more time intensive. Limited mobile compatibility and Facebook’s focus on Timeline can make it challenging to maximize traffic to an app, but expect this to continue to evolve as Facebook continues to expand its products to reach both mobile and desktop users.

Drew: How do you see Facebook advertising evolving?   
Facebook has moved in the direction of having its ad formats tied very closely to the organic content that is published, which should help increase the relevancy and effectiveness of Facebook advertising as long as advertisers invest in a solid content strategy that is appropriate for this type of channel.  I think understanding how audiences are evolving and want to be engaged with on each social channel is the foundation that is needed to make any sort of paid amplification effective.