(or…  lighten up already)

Tell me, just who does your brand relate to?

Good branding is subjective.  “A good brand” is completely based on the perspective of its target audience.

One group of people can stand in a room and rip a brand from head-to-toe for everything from disconnected positioning, to poor logo design to poor packaging design.  While, at the same time, another group standing the room next door, can praise the brand for touching some place in their hearts - moving them to tears, changing their lives for ever.

Understanding that, shouldn’t we really be focusing on those that the brand is trying to target? Who really cares about the nay-sayers in the first room?  The brand is obviously positioning itself for those in the second room.  It RELATES to them.  The strategy was crafted for them…

Some of you are saying, yeah…  well, duh! Well, I’m thinking that some others out there aren’t listening so much to the subjective aspect.

There’s a lot of brand hate going on out there.  And for what reason?  Because it doesn’t relate to you?  Well my question is, “Who are you?”

Honestly, if I didn’t like the husband of my wife’s best friend, would it be smart to go through the trouble to write a post or tweet about it?  Would I run down the street yelling, “So-n-so’s husband is a pock-faced, ignorant, toothpick of a man and has no right to be married to her!”

I think not.  Not only would it be unwarranted, but it would reflect VERY poorly on my personal brand as to be labeled a shallow “hater.”

Humph…

Why do you think “Relevant” is the second required criteria of the TRUE Branding process (besides the fact it helped spell “True”…)? TRUE Branding is simply a framework for brand discovery.  It’s a list of conceptual criteria that we should judge every brand against.  If a particular brand isn’t TRUE to you, it may not mean that it’s not TRUE to others.

So, lighten up already.

Before you start criticizing a brand for “missing the point,” maybe you need to check to see if YOU were actually the target.

Also, as so appropriately Tweeted by our friend @RendaInDSM this morning:

“Tigger is all right, really,” said Pooh lazily. “Of course he is,” said Christopher Robin. “Everybody is really.” -A.A. Milne

Food for thought.

Keep Cooking (TRUE, objective perspectives)!
Andrew B. Clark
The Brand Chef

What does the recent addition of  Twitter Lists mean to you?  It’s another enhancement for Twitter, sure, but what does it mean to your daily social media routine?  That question was asked at the Central Iowa Blogger’s (#CIB) meet-up this morning.

At #CIB, the conversations revolve around everything from the impact of social media on our local economy to the impact of Dallas J. Moore’s beard on the local lady-folk.  But today’s group of 20 to 30 die-hard, as well as a handful of new faces, got into a pretty vibrant conversation about how Twitter Lists will affect their social media practices.

Below is a list of some of the concepts that came out of this morning’s discussion.  Which one will you practice when it comes to Twitter Lists?

I’ll use Twitter Lists as a viability measurement.

(# of List Appearances ÷ # of Followers = Viability Score)
Personal social media measurement is still a sticky wicket.  I know people that have well over 10,000 followers.  And for ages, that was supposed to be some kind of indication of how viable they are in the social media circles they were in.  Well, with the inception of Twitter Lists, their viability could be measured by a ratio of followers to lists they appear on.

Using the equation above, if you have 7,500 followers, but you only appear on 15 lists, would would have a “Viability Score” of 0.20%. On the other hand, if you follow 7,500 and you’re on 125 lists, your Viability Score would be 1.66%.

One would assume that the higher your Viability Score, the more PERCEIVED VALUE AND IMPACT you would have on your followers and prospective followers. (by-the-way, @thebrandchef’s viability score is 1.75% and Chris Brogan has a 28.01%.  One can dream…)

I’ll use Twitter Lists as a network noise reducer.

How many of those conversations can you actually track?
Like many of you, I started out using Twitter to track conversations about my personal brand as well as promote The Brand Chef.  That led to following hundreds of “Movers and shakers” in the marketing communications “twittersphere.”  Then, I began following targeted markets (restaurant chains, food professionals) to monitor and engage potential clientele.  Finally, I added friends, associates, local thought-leaders and networking acquaintances.

After 11 short months, I was following almost 2,000 conversations and close to that many were following me!  The noise within my traditional tweetstream was impossible to focus. How many conversations are you trying to follow?  Can you see how the noise can get out of hand?

So, using Twitter Lists as a network noise reducer, I’d be able to create segmented breaks from that conversation of 2000.  I could have a couple hundred on a list of  “Marketing Gurus;” a couple hundred in in a list called, “The Boffo Branding Brigade;” and finally pull another handful in to list called “Foodie Folk.” This gives me the opportunity to cut down on the noise form my “Des Moines tweeps” (sorry guys) and focus on Marketing, Branding and Food, respectively.

So much quieter - not to mention more productive…

I’ll use Twitter Lists as a reconnaissance tool.

Now you know who “they” think is important.
With Twitter Lists, while there IS an option to make your lists private, I’m not seeing a lot of people protecting them. Segmentation isn’t anything new.  I made the lists mentioned above in my Tweetdeck, and for months I’ve been able to “reduce the noise.” But most have been making lists willy-nilly and for all to see.  What does that mean to competitive advantage?

As a reconnaissance tool, searching certain competitor’s Twitter Lists would give you easy market research of the conversations that “they” deem important enough to list.  For instance, if my #CIB buddy Claire Celsi had a list of “Clients That Tweet” (which she doesn’t), a competing PR Firm could “happen upon” her list and see who she’s working with.  It’s a pretty black-hat tactic, but it DID come up in conversation.

What will you do with Twitter Lists?

So, with that, how do YOU plan on using Twitter Lists.  Do you have other applications?  Like the network noise reducer, what are the advantages to Twitter Lists.  Or, as illustrated with the reconnaissance tool, do you see a draw back to using it?

Thanks for listening!  And please, help me “up” my Twitter Viability Score and add me to your lists…

Keep Cooking!
Andrew B. Clark
The Brand Chef

When it comes to a little friendly competition, I’m all game.  I love the challenge.  I love the strategy.  And obviously, my friends over at Lessing Flynn advertising agency, think the same way.

At the end of what was an extremely busy social media week for Central Iowa, we were made aware of a little competition brewing in the advertising agency social media ring.

The competition?

In short, there was a Michael Glass poll created asking, of 45 ad agencies listed, who had better social media reach?  Who had true social media skills? (click the image below to go to the poll)

As the poll started to grow legs, it was evident that the two overwhelming leaders in the group was an agency out of North Carolina by the name of Media Two and our own Ad Mavericks (Lessing Flynn) from little ol’ Iowa.

For me, it started Thursday afternoon when I saw a tweet…  innocuous at first, but in its tone was more of a challenge, thrown down to all central Iowa social media professionals, purveyors and hobbyists.  As I continued to monitor the conversation, the tone became, well, more of a battle royale. Here’s a sample…

You can check out Ad Maverick’s complete Twitter stream here.

The game was on.

Some of the contenders never had a chance, but as Mr. Glass’s poll grew from a couple hundred respondents to well over 600 (at the time of this post), the competition for “Social Media Agency of the Month” was obviously between Media Two and Ad Mavericks.  The two pulling away with double and triple the number of votes of other agencies.

What was driving the polls?  Well, social media, silly!

Both agencies had a reputation to define and defend.  So much so that Media Two, in typical, politicized, mud slinging fun, posted a (sightly) myopic commentary on the viability of social media surviving  in the Midwest, trying to discredit Ad Mavericks. (shame on you Media Two…)

With true, Midwestern grace and poise, Ad Mavericks responded with their own post, or should I say call-to-arms; making a great argument for their cause as well as some of the best examples of social media success one could think of for Iowa and the Midwest as a whole.  Iowans - social media savvy businesses, compulsively connected individuals, huge social media celebrities - have made the medium truly viable for the “fly-over” states.  In contradiction to Media Two’s tongue-in-cheek jab at Iowa, Ad Mavericks raised the flag of social media superiority for the state and solidified the reputation Iowans have taken pride in - humbly and honestly.

I encourage you to review the poll entries.  Weigh your thoughts on both Media Two and Ad Mavericks and vote your conscience.

With that, what a week it’s been in Iowa.

On top of the usual social media buzz Iowa generates, Iowa’s week started off with an astoundingly successful Highlight Midwest, where entrepreneurs, techies and the social media strong merged in downtown Des Moines to spread the good word, educate and perpetuate the great things that are happening with technology and social media throughout the Midwest.  Even more specific to advertising agencies, Love Scott & Associates just sponsored the DSMCVB Social Media Marketing Workshop where top Iowa businesses converged to discuss social media as it applies in marketing, public relations and human resources (more here).  And promotions for the upcoming I_Blog Conference started hitting the social media stratosphere in earnest to bring businesses and individuals together to create an even stronger force in Midwestern social media.

Competition is good.  Cooperation is better.

Social media fosters both competition and cooperation in a way that traditional media has never been able.  While the competition on Mr. Glass’s poll is fun and driven by silly jabs at the competitors; the nature of the poll is serious. Who does have true social media chops?  Is it a Midwest vs. East coast competition - Iowa vs. North Carolina?

Or what if we took this week’s experiences and made it social media driving the greater good through communication within and between our respective communities?

Food for thought…

Keep Cooking!
Andrew B. Clark
The Brand Chef

P.S. As a side point, if there were a write-in option for the poll, this post would be solely about The Brand Chef and the silliness between Ad Mavericks and Media Two would be a moot point. I wish luck to both agencies.  They’re both great social media purveyors and advocates, providing great value to the medium.  May the best agency win.

“How in the heck can 140 characters make any impact on my customers?”
Just a one of the response I’ve received from Nay-Sayers when I talk about using Twitter as a marketing tool.

“Mindless babble…”
“Fanboy frivolity…”

I usually sit and listen (patiently) while they list out the need for a drawn out conversation with their customers to explain the intricate mechanics of their products and the magnitude of value that their employees’ commitment provides to the bottom line – NOT TO MENTION their commitment to quality and the….

SNORE….

“Cult obsessions…”
“Waste-of-time…”

“INSANE”

Before you use that particular word, consider a recent example:

How hard do you think it would it be to produce and then promote a musical about a woman with bipolar disorder? Imagine the media.  Imagine the freakishly insensitive commercials and awkward attempts to make bipolar disorder “entertaining” (let alone make it a MUSICAL)!

The Broadway hit “Next to Normal,” did just that.
(Please click through to read about the musical.  It’s moving - Wikipedia-Synopsis, Show Site)

The producers and marketers of this compelling (and painful) story about a woman with bipolar disorder and her troubled relationship with her family, used Twitter to build audiences. According to a recent report by The Wall Street Journal, the play’s marketing team tweeted the entire show at 140 characters per installment, over five weeks through May and June.  At the time of this post, their Twitter account (@N2Nbroadway) had more than 730,000 followers and had sold more than 90 percent of their available seats!  Talk about ROI!

As added flair, due to their unique approach to using the tool, Twitter selected “Next to Normal” as a featured tweet. Saying so makes them an automated opt-in for new users of the service.  To be featured by Twitter is one thing, having almost three quarters of a million followers in just a few months (auto opt-in or not) makes quite a statement for this little bit of insanity.

There’s plenty of coverage about the massive success “Next to Normal” has had using Twitter to market (just to a Google search for “Next to Normal” and Twitter)

Think it’s so “insane” now?

How could Twitter fit into your marketing strategy like it did for “Next to Normal?” What could you or your company do to harness the power of Twitter’s network – or any social media marketing network for that matter?

Food for thought…

Keep Cooking (remarkable ways to connect to your audience)!
Andrew B. Clark
The Brand Chef

Straight jacket image from: http://theshockdocshow.com/

Disney and Marvel? As an illustrator, as an artist, as an appreciator of all things cartoon and comic; heck as someone that used to be a kid, this buyout just doesn’t sit well with me.  Why would Disney, THE pinnacle of family entertainment choose to side-step their core competency (wholesome, family-values based entertainment) to buy Marvel Entertainment?

Don’t get me wrong, I love Marvel, but I’m confused with the combination of the Disney family values and the edgy, spandex-clad, buxom breadth of sexuality and violence that Marvel generates.  I definitely see a brand disconnect here.

Disney seems to be diverting from their core competency to skirt the need to be truthful and relevant (let alone innovative) to their audience (very unlike them). A move that both I and Jonathan Salem Baskin, over at Baskin Dim Bulb blog and I think may be a bit like cheating - or strip mining as Mr. Baskin calls it. His analogy is dead on.

It feels like strip mining to me.

I wonder what comes next. I’m surprised that the biggies haven’t started producing “updated” (i.e. twisted and exploited) versions of the classics; Moby Dick and hundreds of other greats and near-greats at public domain, so the cost of content would be free, and any kid who paid some attention should recognize the characters. Wouldn’t realizing, say, Nicholas Nickleby only with supernatural powers (or a robot white whale) be somewhat of a competitive barrier to another version coming to market?

Where does it end?

Okay, I may be targeted for death by all of the Mikey Mouse fan-boys out there, but rather than buy the biggest superhero and fantasy comic entertainment brand out there, why wouldn’t Disney just do it themselves? Disney created the road map to character entertainment.  If they wanted to get into the superhero biz, why not just call the creative department, the illustrators and story board artists and say “GOOFY SMASH…  RooAAaar….” (envision silly Hulk/Dog-thing here)?  Did they take the easy way out?  Isn’t this kinda’ like having Poindexter take your mid-terms for you?

Marvel has managed to create, foster and perpetuate some of the most well known characters, books, movies and fans that any brand could ever want. But even Stan Lee, the glorious creator of X-Men and Spider Man, seems to be wringing his hands, waiting for the check from Disney (with ALL THOSE ZEROES). Have Stan and the other creature creators at Marvel sold out?

What happens from here?  What does Disney Land / World look like in the future?  Do we expect the brass at Disney corporate to start censoring Wolverine?  Will Jean Gray need to be illustrated wearing shawls or over-sized sweaters, from now on (gasp)?

Food for thought.

Until Next time…

Keep Cooking (Incredible Branding Powers)!
Andrew B. Clark
The Brand Chef