“As brands in general move up Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, companies need to start adapting their tone of voice across all touch points. Moving beyond product features or basic human concerns means they can start adapting their messaging around how they can boost clients’ sense of self-esteem and ultimately answer a basic human question: “What’s in it for ME ?”.”

In an interesting presentation on slideshare.net, digital strategist and blogger Jordan Julien talks about how differences in perception result in varying degrees of success when trying to get a message across towards a specific target audience. In his presentation, Jordan talks about using what he calls “key perception indicators” to ensure maximum success across varying audiences.

Linking back to my earlier post and the Maslow model, I feel there are five different levels in which brands can try to engage with their target audience: physiological, appealing to safety, love/belonging, (self)-esteem and ultimately self-actualization.

I found Jordan’s model a useful variation for looking at the world in a different way: rather than taking broadly defined “needs”, he talks about the importance of “using standards and finite instructions” to get the message across and understood in the correct way.

As professional communicators, we are aware it is very difficult to make sure an audience perceives a message in a uniform way. Personal character traits, societal background, individual history and a million other factors play an important role in how a message is perceived. As leaders, it can be frustrating to see how our messages are re-crafted as they make their way down the corporate levels. As people, we feel frustrated when our intentions are received differently from what we intended, creating what we appropriately term a “misunderstanding”.

A few years ago, I was handed a card by a co-worker. The card had five simple lines of text:

• Thinking is not saying
• Saying is not hearing
• Hearing is not understanding
• Understanding is not believing
• Believing is not doing

Throughout the years, I have often thought about those five simple lines, and how they could help me communicate better. In terms of Jordan’s presentation, I would have only one useful addition to make – perhaps the ultimate goal of communication is not to have an audience perceive a message in a specific way, but rather to have them act upon it in a specific way.

Flickr.com, CCL, Jasoneppink

Earlier this week, I spent two days attending Eurocomm 2009, the annual get-together for the European chapter of the IABC. It is always interesting to spend time with marketing and communications professionals from other industries, and people that work on both sides of the fence (agency-/client-side).

The two-day conference delivered ten key insights that have somehow sharpened my understanding or created new awareness about a specific topic. So here goes – my “10 Key Take-Aways from Eurocomm 2009″. 

1. Even great companies experience growing pains

My personal thanks go out to Matthias Graf from Google for his very open account of Google’s journey as it transitions from former startup to corporate giant. Even great companies experience growing pains, and grapple with issues around how they move from one level to the next. It takes a open attitude, perseverance and a commitment to “maintain the good and avoid the bad” to successfully navigate the murky waters of culture change.

2. Change is inevitable

Over lunch, as Matthias and myself continued to discuss the impact of change on companies, we both seemed to agree change is inevitable, and clinging to “how things were” will not help make it into a success. All transitions, whether professional or personal, require a certain level of pain and difficulty – and that’s OK. It is through the process of “letting go” that we change ourselves for the better and acquire or build the things that are needed to propel us forward.

3. Social Media require a different communications paradigm

For companies looking to integrate social media in their marketing mix, merely setting up a Facebook-profile and blurting out corporate propaganda will not do the trick. The core issue is to get to what Andreina Mandelli calls “management beyond control”: relinquishing the (illusion of) message control and joining the conversation instead. Once you have crafted your message, put it out there and try to add value as best you can – rather than attempting to cling to control.

4. The days of “command and control” are over – for some

Peter Warne from Nestle reminded us all that, where the days of “command and control” communications may be over for some, different rules apply to different players. Dependant of various factors (size, business model, industry, …) some companies may find it easier to engage in social media conversations than others. For old-time industry giants, the playing field may be less level than they expected.

5. Storytelling does not equal “telling a story”

An engaging presentation delivered by Suzanne Tesselaar made it clear that storytelling requires hard up-front work and a clear commitment in order to be successful.

Amongst her insights, I found the following most worthwhile:

• To get buy-in and create a compelling story, bring many individual stories together into one;
• Use both positive as well as negative accounts to maintain balance and build credibility;
• Paint a picture with words – use visual descriptions and metaphors to create a mood;
• Use emotion to resonate with your audience – as the administrator for an NHS hospital did when he recounted the gripping story of an ill-treated patient, and then firmly exclaimed – “No more Mr. Smiths !”;
• Use framing to reframe past stories into today’s reality;
• End your stories with a concluding message and a strong call to action. 

6. For a successful career in communications, brand yourself first 

Todd Civardi from executive search firm Shipley Todd claims that he tries to look for “the person behind the candidate” in order to find good matches for his clients. He taught me that, to have a successful career in communications, you need to find  your “secret sauce” and share it with the world. In trying times like these, it seems like we would all do well to engage in a bit of personal branding.

7. Visual Communication can help fight information overload, but is not a cure-for-all

A roundtable discussion with Martin Eppler and Jeanne Mengis reminded me that in the fight against information overload, visual communication may help, but is certainly not a cure-for-all. Even though a picture tells more than a thousand words, truly getting the message across requires adding other elements into the mix. Or, as someone put it ever so succinctly – “nice pictures don’t always tell the whole story”.

8. The most important function in creating strategic alignment is finance

In his presentation, Cees Van Riel highlighted the importance of the finance function in getting a strategy across. In the spirit of “what gets measured gets done”, he reminded us all that setting clear objectives and measuring performance is vital to ensure success. Corporate communication is important, but definitely not the only component.

9. Engage people through relevance and dialogue – but with a twist

An engaging case study by Mario Varriale from Italian telecommunications firm Wind brought home the importance of relevance and dialogue in creating social media buzz. Their online media campaign “abbatti aumenti” (“fight increases”) delivered great results through a combination of humour and a timely message. For another great social media campaign that uses humour as a vehicle to deliver a message, visit http://www.willitblend.com/

10. Goal setting works

Perhaps the most important insight of all, the conference once again reminded me that goal setting works. Exceeding my own personal expectations and the – written – objectives I’d set prior to the conference starting, I: 

• Made 30+ new connections
• Met 7-8 people that I have made concrete follow-ups with
• Got 10 new insights, or changed views on existing ideas
• Had a chance to experience a new part of the world

Thanks to the IABC for putting on a good show, and to all those that were present for making this an enlightening experience.

As usual, I look forward to your comments, or any additions you may have.

Flickr.com, CCL, Noah Sussman

A few days ago, Zack Brandit made an interesting point on the power of Enterprise 2.0 in organisation on his blog, zackbrandit.com.

In his post, Zack talked about potential problems in collaboration for organisations that go from start-up to established corporation and how social media can provide a (partial) answer to some of those.

It got me to thinking: what is the potential of social media when it comes to branding through people ? One of Zack’s comments really brought it home for me:

“I know this may sound unrealistic and I do not wish to be viewed as pedantic, but before a company can pretend to be customer centric, it should start by focusing on its work environment and employees. This is where Brand Engagement starts, or should we call it Brand Engagement 2.0?

Enterprise2.0 solutions might just be the little push needed to achieve greater effectiveness, productivity and accountability, while at the same time gaining in transparency and include more social values inside the company.”

I can definitely see the potential for social media to add a new dimension to corporate communications, and help organisations create true buy-in:

• Less suspect – where traditional “mainstream” corporate media (e-mail, newsletter) are often viewed as a corporate mouthpiece, social media may – for now – still be viewed as more authentic methods of communicating, provided they are used in the right way;
• Two-way – social media allow for two-way (rather than one-way) communication. As such, they can play an important role in improving not only the distribution but more importantly the understanding and feedback of messages;
• Networked – social media can be used to communicate towards those all-important unofficial communication networks, especially those that people join or create themselves (i.e. opt into). This ensures messages reach the right set of stakeholders, which would in some cases be impossible using regular channels. For an example, think CFOs working across borders;
• Permitted – in line with the principles of permission marketing, as people opt to join a specific network, they are likely to be more open to your messages. Where corporate e-mail may often get deleted, or simply not read, people may be more likely to pay attention with social media;
• Informal – typically, social media allow you to be more informal in your messaging, creating a tone of voice that fosters an atmosphere of inclusion and connection;
• Collaborative - finally, social media allow you to go much further than mere communication, encouraging feedback and collaboration.

 The real question with social media is: how much openness is your organisation ready for ? 

 In corporate environments that are used to honest and straightforward communication, social media could well prove to be a useful extra tool in the communicator’s shed, bringing added benefits that would be difficult to get through other channels.

Flickr.com, CCL, Dunechaser

Last week, I sat down to dinner with Erik Dirven, co-founder of boutique consulting outfit Kianga. Having dinner with Erik is always an enlightening experience – words like “authenticty” and “passion” are never far off.

Kianga is distinctly different in their approach to change management: where most mainstream consultancies will work on the “what”, they spend most of their time working on the “how” of change.

According to their website, they “specialize in unblocking situations that appear to be completely blocked through practical and hands-on sessions with the real stakeholders”.

It got me to thinking: how many times do we truly focus on what is important rather than tackle seemingly important but superficial tasks in order to appear collaborative and avoid conflict ?

I would argue that a great deal of time in organisations is spent on what George Orwell appropriately termed “doublespeak”: “language constructed to disguise or distort its actual meaning, often resulting in a communication bypass. Doublespeak may take the form of bald euphemisms (e.g., “downsizing” for layoffs) or deliberate ambiguity.” (Source: Wikipedia).

I sometimes wonder what causes this situation, but perhaps the more important question is: what are its long-term effects ?

In my experience, sustained levels of “organisational doublespeak” in any environment may lead to the following vicious circle:

According to a well-known statistic, over 70 % of all organisational change initiatives fail.

I would argue corporate doublespeak has something to do with this. Organisations that want to succeed in implementing their strategy and have it adopted through all levels of the company need to communicate clearly.

To quote Sam Walton, founder of Walmart: “The key to success is to get out into the store and listen to what the associates have to say. It’s terribly important for everyone to get involved. Our best ideas come from clerks and stockboys.”

Flickr.com, CCL, Twenty2wo

In line with my previous post, I thought I’d follow up with some thoughts on the changing role of communications in the creation of true employee engagement.

Time and time again, I have seen carefully crafted internal communications programmes go down in flames when they were confronted with office floor reality. The reason for this is simple : people are no longer happy to just take what’s handed out to them.

Rather than merely listening to what is being dictated, employees increasingly expect a chance to interact, engage and participate in the real dialogue. And, in all fairness, why wouldn’t they ?

In line with societal trends towards increased participation and true involvement, there is a similar (r)evolution waiting to happen in our organisations – call it corporate democracy.  If the company is truly the sum of its people, then they should be involved.

Unfortunately, this is still more the exception than the rule. All too often, the vast majority of the organisation continues to be left in the dark when it comes to important decisions being made. Top-level directives are still being « executed » or « cascaded into the organisation ». Decisions are still « enforced » and employees are still expected to behave in a « compliant » manner.

In my experience, this does not help organisations succeed. The human potential in many organisations remains vastly unexploited, in large part due to their failure to create a true relationship between individual goals and corporate objectives. This cannot be done by the CEO or a centralized corporate communications function alone. In fact, research suggest that carefully crafted internal communications strategies may do more harm than good.

The alternative is not easy. Peoples’ hearts and minds are won over one-by-one, through demonstrating authenticity, honesty and understanding as a leader. By following up with actions, and practicing what you preach.

In order to help their teams understand and accept certain decisions, managers can follow a very simple process that can lead to very different results:

1.       Talk plainly – Don’t try to sugarcoat the truth or “spare people’s feelings”. Instead, deliver harsh messages as soon and as clear as you can. There is no point in stretching the agony;

2. Show them “why” – give people insight into why certain decisions have been made. Better yet, involve them in the decision-making process and let them own part of it. It is not harsh decisions people disagree with, it is decisions they perceive as irrational;

3.       Listen – Stop talking, and give people a chance to vent, complain, rebel and show whatever other human emotion they need to get out of their system. Better this than than a prolonged silence with everyone thinking about creative ways to counter what you just said;

4.       Be empathic – Show them you care, and can relate to their feelings. This does not mean you have to agree; simply acknowledging feelings can go a long way. You can always “agree to disagree”;

5.       Be authentic – Respond in kind: show your true emotions to your staff; they can smell phony attempts to appear compliant a mile away. If you don’t agree, just say so – don’t be a corporate puppet;

6.       Give upwards feedback - Don’t be afraid to go back up the corporate ladder and ask for further clarification or engage in (productive) dialogue, or even try to renegotiate. Senior management has to take their responsibility as well, and the more enlightened ones may appreciate your motivations and include you into their trusted circle;

7.       Practice what you preach - Arguably the hardest part of management is walking your own talk. We are all human, and no one is perfect. It is vital for your credibility and reputation that you do not get caught being insincere. The two ugliest words in management are “lip service”. By the way, this includes acting out (impopular) decisions, after you have gone through steps 1-6.

Flickr.com, CCL, Tchao Photo Du Jour

In an earlier post, “Building brands in a downturn”, I referred to the term CEO being increasingly used as an acronym for “Chief Engagement Officer”.

It is generally well-accepted that one of the most important roles of a CEO is to inspire the troops. Stacks of management literature have been written about the importance of engagement in leadership and an entire industry has sprung up to help senior managers build their skills and become better at communicating and creating “buy in”.

Interestingly, if you Google “CEO”, you turn up around 150.000.000 hits. Doing the same with “Chief Engagement Officer” results in a “mere” 8.340.000. At first sight, a nonsensical comparison – but it does help drive home a point: should the CEO really the “hero communicator” when it comes to engaging people ? Or are we putting too much weight on his shoulders, continuing to put our trust in an increasingly outdated model of top-down communication ?

One can wonder whether this is sustainable towards the future: in a society that is becoming increasingly dominated by the power of connection, why do so many of our organisations stick to basic top-down models of leadership and communication ?

A recent survey by Chief Executive Officer revealed some interesting facts.

Out of all Fortune-1000 CEOs:

• 775 are over 50 (77%);
• Those 775 control over 85% of the total market capitalization of the Fortune-1000;
• The average age for a Fortune-1000 is 55;
• The tech industry features 33% of CEOs under-50s;
• In wholesale and general merchandise, entertainment and leisure, paper and printing, insurance, and auto services and parts the average number of CEOs under 50 is zero;
• 24 of 1000 CEOs are female;

Could it be that such a homogenous audience has similarities in beliefs, style, convictions and values that make it difficult to reach at least part of their constituency ? Could it be that companies need a more diverse approach to ensure all stakeholders are reached in a way that is in line with their needs and values ?

According to Chief Executive Officer, “taken together, the various findings show a new generation of executives making CEO earlier than their predecessors and demonstrating capable performance once in the job. Interestingly, the youngest CEOs in the world, based on average age, come from China, the emerging economic superpower, as CEO magazine’s Global CEO survey in 2007 revealed.

Maybe the global economy that we operate in today and China’s willingness to allow executives aged 50 and under to run major corporations has set an example that other nations, including the US, are now beginning to follow.”

In order to help their organisations transition and keep up with the increasing pace of change that marks society as a whole, business leaders and internal communicators could start asking themselves the following questions:

• What other models are out there we can emulate to improve the communications flow ? Think social media, guerrilla marketing or even grassroots activism;
• How can we get true buy-in across target audiences that are different in terms of beliefs, values, goals and motivations ? Think in terms of aspirations and ambitions rather than the usual differentiators of sex, age and race;
• How can we ensure we are truly authentic, not only in terms of what we say but also how we say it ? Think about the ways in which you deliver the message rather than the actual message you bring – being authentic, open and bringing your sense of empathy usually carries a lot further than reading off a carefully crafted script;
• How can we enlist input from a wide base across the organisation rather than bombarding them with top-down messages that come out of an opaque decision-making process ? Think political rally rather than boardroom closed-door decision making;
• Finally, how can we make sure the goals of the organisation are aligned with the goals of each individual that is part of it ? We seem to have lost sight of the fact that the principal goal of organisations is to serve people, and not the other way around.

The world has recently witnessed a seismic shift in politics when Barack Obama was elected. In line with changing times, his victory was accredited to underlying changes in society with younger, more educated and racially varied groups exerting their influence in the election process. Not to mention his excellent communication skills and his ability to connect up close and personal with his electorate.

Barack Obama, aged 47, will be the 5^th youngest president in US history.

Interbrand, "Leveraging Brand Value in a Downturn"

As I was coming home from a trip and reading the Wall Street Journal, I came across an interesting article entitled “In Asia, Too, Marketing Budgets Face Pinch”. According to the Wall Street Journal, “a new survey of marketers across Asia has found that the majority expect their ad budget to shrink next year, with a quarter expecting a decline of more than 20 % from this year”.

Greg Paull, co-founder and principal of Beijing-based R3 consultancy told Forbes that “Post Olympics (polls), particularly in markets such as China, showed a positive trend — but all that has changed now. The same base of companies was re-contacted this week to measure changes: 21% forecast a reduction of more 20% from their initial budgets, and 73% saw some reductions now.”

It is interesting to see that now even in economic powerhouse China, ad spending is predicted to decline. In light of Chinese domestic GDP-growth slowing to 9 %, companies are taking the safe route by cutting ad and marketing spending.

I wonder whether that is such a good idea: in the graph shown above, the shareprice of Merrill Lynch significantly outperformed that of Bear Stearns in the early 1990s.

The reason ? According to a Interbrand report, “Merrill Lynch was seeing the return on its early ’90s branding investment in its ability to build and leverage its reputation in a broader market. It may have outspent Bear Stearns to do so, but the positive return was clear.”

In Times of Trouble, Stay The Course

In an article written March 2008 by John Quelch, Harvard Business School professor, he outlines eight factors that companies should bear in mind when making their marketing plans for 2008/2009.

My own personal interest was attracted in particular to numbers 3 and 8.

3. Maintain marketing spending. This is not the time to cut advertising. It is well documented that brands that increase advertising during a recession, when competitors are cutting back, can improve market share and return on investment at lower cost than during good economic times.

I could not agree more with John on this one. I often argue that short-term pressure on the bottom line should not detract from the longer term vision, and it is in uncertain times companies have a real opportunity to grab market share and differentiate themselves from their competition. Even though senior management may appear to be more concerned with controlling the bottom line, most of them understand instinctively that cutting marketing spending too much will come back to haunt you later on.

An important point John makes is that advertising may be far cheaper to buy. As anything else, advertising is subject to the law of supply and demand, and suppliers may be willing to negotiate large discounts and enter favourable multi-year agreements. I myself have recently been offered ad space at significantly reduced rates, often times going far below official “market value”.

In addition to maintaining marketing spending, now may be the time to look for opportunities that are cost-effective, focused and in line with target audience needs. In a time of crisis, a targeted campaign delivering a reassuring message may have more impact and a higher ROI than a series of page-wide “brand awareness”-building ads in major business dailies.

As always, aligning channels so they support each other is a good idea: try to create an approach in which you “link” different marketing messages together in a reinforcing loop. For instance, launching a targeted online campaign supported by a clever use of social media leading into a series of webinars allows you to cost-effectively reach your intended target audience.

CEO = Chief Engagement Officer ?

The second point John makes is even more compelling. I have included it in full as it really illustrates one of the core beliefs this blog is built on – brands are the result of tangible encounters.

8. Emphasize core values. Although most companies are making employees redundant, chief executives can cement the loyalty of those who remain by assuring employees that the company has survived difficult times before, maintaining quality rather than cutting corners, and servicing existing customers rather than trying to be all things to all people. CEOs must spend more time with customers and employees. Economic recession can elevate the importance of the finance director’s balance sheet over the marketing manager’s income statement. Managing working capital can easily dominate managing customer relationships. CEOs must counter this. Successful companies do not abandon their marketing strategies in a recession; they adapt them.

In an earlier blog post “How mass layoffs could impact brands”, I argued that open and straightforward communications are one of the most impactful levers companies have to ensure they continue to motivate and engage remaining staff members.

Ensuring external and internal messaging is aligned is crucial to sending an integrated message across stakeholder groups. By projecting a message of confidence and stability that is shared widely both internally and externally, companies can successfully influence separate target audiences in one fell swoop.

By having the CEO walk the talk and deliver an authentic and reassuring message, he automatically becomes the brand ambassador par excellence. If he comes across as authentic and steadfast, people will start to feel inspired and demonstrate similar levels of confidence in the future of the company.

Whether talking to analysts, shareholders, employees or suppliers is not important: the extent to which he is able to link his key messages with existing brand values will reinforce their strength.

We people are social creatures – we tend to emulate and be influenced by feelings and emotions that others transfer to us (whether intentional or not). If we succeed in coming across as confident and communicate positive messages, chances are others will follow our example.