“It’s weird…in a good way.  Like going to the gym drunk” - Jack Donaghy

On October 18th, AdAge released its Marketer of the Year and Marketer of the Decade awards to a flurry of approvals.  Ford (much to my agency’s pleasure) received the award for Marketer of the Year due to it’s highly successful foray into social media, as shown through the Ford Fiesta Movement.  Not to mention, Ford has started to create cars that appeal to millenials through their low price tags, aggressive styling, superb gas mileage and unmatchable technology, MyFord Touch.  Congrats to Ford and the all the success that is yet to come!

This post however, is more about AdAge’s Marketer of the Deacade: Apple (big surprise) and what that selection means about the field of marketing.  The last ten years for Apple have marked some incredible high points with the releases of the iPod in 2001, which is currently owned by one quarter of a billion people, to the unveiling of the iPad which changed the course of the personal computer over-night and sold eight million units.  Let’s face it, Apple can do no wrong at this point, the antennae issue with the iPhone 4 was swiftly and brilliantly handled, and even in a down economy when consumers are (supposedly) tightening their belts to resist unnecessary purchases, Apple’s sales are up by double-digit percentages.

But, what can brand marketers learn from America’s technological behemoth?  AdAge points out some key factors in their decision-making process to select Apple.  First their great advertising work with BBDO underscores the importance of long-standing client/agency relationships, as the “I’m a Mac” ads will be some of the most well-retained spots for years to come.  Secondly, they’ve cultivated tremendous brand loyalty by designing products that perform better and are a greater pleasure to use through their intuitive OSX operating system.  Additionally, their retail storefronts (while not perfect) are becoming a model for brands of how to build long-term relationships and affinity with customers in the offline space. 

What AdAge doesn’t underscore enough is that great products are still the best form of marketing.  This is by and far the most critical variable in Apple’s success.  They don’t design cheap products that are difficult to use, because they believe that people will pay more for something premium.  It’s that simple, Apple’s products are not designed to make consumers feel dumb, they’re designed to make them feel empowered, like anything is possible, whether that be creating a movie, a website or just surfing the web.  It’s all created with that single notion in mind.  I love it that with all the talk about the importance of social media over the last several years (and rightfully so), that AdAge’s Marketer of the Decade doesn’t have a Facebook page or a Twitter account.  Why?  Because they don’t need one, they’re products work just fine and as a result, I go to them to make sure I’m current on their offerings, not the other way around. 

Grant McCracken recently wrote a brief article entitled, “The New Normal is the Old Normal” for a Harvard Business Review blog called The Conversation (LINK).  The post is really a response to the Businessweek article that came out at the end of July, entitled “The New Abnormal” (LINK).  Both articles seek to explain some very interesting consumer spending statistics from this summer, which happen to be all over the place.  Luxury goods are up, home sales are up, cars are down (except for luxury), while sales for standard products like name brand toothpaste are down.  Things are very erratic to say the least.

Leonard, in his Businessweek article, seeks to compare this typified new consumer that has been transformed over the last year into a cautious, subdued, perhaps even responsible individual with the data which, in this writer’s opinion, argues otherwise.  But, the author knows better than to fall prey to the narrow mindedness of economists.  The purchasing habits of consumers have changed, but it’s not a reflection of any sort of permanent transformation.  As he offers up, people are buying $3 lattes everyday (Starbucks is up 61%), while purchasing Safeway brand toothpaste.  Or they’re cooking at home for 4 weeks straight and then buying an iPad (Apple is up 94%).  Sounds like people know they need to be cautious with their spending because their house is worth half of what it was, but they don’t know how.

McCracken, whose approaching the situation with his anthro hat, isn’t buying it either (ha), saying that when confidence returns, so will our old spending habits.  AMEX in a recent survey of it’s American customers has reported that 51% are feeling guilty over having fallen behind on their savings plans for the year.  Now that sounds more like it, an indication that confidence is growing.

But why?  Nothing has really changed.  McCracken cites ‘cultural forces’ and ‘social imperatives’.  While they’re is truth here: these forces create desires that appear to the individual as needs. I prefer to look at the pure psychology of it.  American consumers have been recklessly satisfying their spending urges for decades.  And anything short of another depression (a real depression) is incapable of altering our relationship to money and how we cope with our impulses.

Changing our spending habits is as much an internal struggle as it is one guided by external forces.  The external forces (credit crisis, devaluation of homes, employment instability) determine how we view the necessity/importance of each of our purchases.  But, it’s the day to day battle to simplify ones spending habits that for most of us is just that…a battle.  And today’s American consumer (eventually) loses.  The only thing the “new normal” camp is right about is that people are trying to simplify…they just suck at it.

Most are familiar with Abraham Maslow and his pioneering of the field of humanistic psychology.  More specifically Maslow came up with concept of the hierarchy of needs, the idea of self actualization and peak experiences.  Humanistic psychology, simply put was the pre-cursor to what only recently evolved in to positive psychology.

I recently discovered a quote from Maslow’s Business Reader (yes, apparently he wrote about business), a collection of essays pertaining to commerce and it’s analysis through his psychological lens, and found an excerpt about entrepreneurship that is worth sharing:

The main point that I could make in communication in this area would be to point out that the difference between the great and good societies and the regressing, deteriorating societies is largely in terms of the entrepreneurial opportunity and the number of such people in the society.  I think everyone would agree that the most valuable 100 people to bring in to a deteriorating society…would not be 100 chemists, politicians, professors or engineers, but rather 100 entrepreneurs.

Maslow describes the entrepreneur as an inventor, someone who recognizes a need and finds a unique way to satisfy that need to the benefit of himself and more importantly, those around him.  A good quote from what appears to be an impressive collection of essays I never knew existed.  The entire text is available HERE on Google Books.

Earlier last week Vail Resorts launched Epic Mix, it’s online and mobile social gaming application for Colorado ski and snowboard fanatics who purchase a pass to it’s group of mountains.  The pass operates off of RFid technology embedded in the ski pass that tracks skiers’ locations as they move from run to run and lift to lift.  Think adidas micoach meets foursquare (or something like that).

Epic Mix records total ski days, vertical, lift rides, and every run that you take all accessible through the app or online portal.  Skiers and snowboarders accumulate points throughout their ski day that get them pins (think: badges) for various noteworthy accomplishments.

For example, earn the “Echo” pin for covering 350,000 vertical feet in one season.  Or the “High Five” pin for riding the High Noon lift five times.  Or even the “Arch Angel” pin for spending 25 days at Heavenly.  Achievements (similar to foursquare) can be automatically shared through Twitter and Facebook.

The Epic Mix mobile app will also show riders exactly where their friends are located on the mountain, a feature that is long overdue for ski resorts.  Users can then easily send meet-up requests to members of their network.  The app also covers off on the basics: weather forecasts, snow reports and traffic updates and will be available on Android and the iPhone.

This technological development reinforces that Vail is up on it’s social media and is actively working on ways to improve their on-mountain experience through digital technology.  For additional information, go HERE to see a video of Rob Katz and other Vail resorts executives talking about the application and it’s associated technology.

But, let’s take this post to the next level.  Last week I was watching a very insightful speech given by Seth Priebatsch (link HERE), the founder of SCVNGR at the 2010 Tedx Boston conference.  In the talk, Seth describes the “game layer” as being one of the more significant developments that will come out of the next decade of digital dynamics and technology.  In short, Seth argues that the last ten years have been about using digital technology to connect people in various ways.  He says, Facebook won this battle and has instituted a set infrastructure for how social dynamics will play out on the web moving forward.  However, the next step is really about leveraging this infrastructure and other behavioral dynamics to influence individuals’ behavior.  Foursquare has made the first successful attempt at this, but there is much to improve upon.

In the talk, Seth points out some of the dynamics, which originate and exist in our offline lives, that his company is trying to understand to influence and promote ideal behavior.  For example, there are appointment dynamics best illustrated by the societal creation of happy hour: go to a certain place at a certain time and receive something special (free drinks).  Or communal discovery dynamics where individuals must work together to achieve something that would have been more difficult if not impossible to do on their own (think: Digg, or the McDonald’s Monopoly game).  The talk is excellent and well worth the 20 minutes.  But, more importantly, it makes me realize that Vail Resorts as well as other social gaming applications still have a ways to go towards creating something that fully understands and leverages the factors effecting human behavior.  But hey, this is just version 1.0! 

I’ve been thinking about the concept of the human brand for quite some time and I feel more strongly than ever that brands must serve as a sort of living, breathing companion to the individual.  But, it’s not enough to simply display humanistic tendencies, brands must use them as the basis for growth and innovation.

By humanistic tendencies I mean the development of an opinion or point of view, the desire to form new bonds and to assist in the connection of likeminded individuals, the capacity to listen and empathize and entertain, all while creating something of value.

With all of this laid out, I found myself more lost than when I began, so I set out to simplify and organize the key human tendencies that might apply to brand evolution.  What followed was a preliminary model based on the key characteristics possessed not just by average people, but highly functioning people. It is by no means comprehensive at this point, but represents what I think is a very solid first draft.

Three main tendencies make up our ideal human (or brand): growth, connection and production.

Growth

Characterized by the natural desire to learn new information and skills, develop behaviors that indicate greater social responsibility and heightened consciousness, as well as a desire to seek out new experiences and cultivate of an increasingly more evolved point of view and unique identity.

Connection

Demonstrated by the tendency to share knowledge and opinions, form new bonds and strengthen existing ones, engage in two-way dialogue, and connect other like-minded entities.

Production

Exhibited as the will to create for the sake of self expression and the unwavering belief in a better tomorrow.

All three components are of equal importance for the human brand and are mutually dependent on one another.  For example, the development of a more complex point of view is meaningless if it is not shared with others and used to create something new.  Similarly, seeking out and engaging in new experiences lacks significance if it doesn’t serve as a means for connection with other likeminded individuals.

The model isn’t worth anything if it isn’t applied as a means for growth, in this case to ask the right questions that will lead to the formulation of intelligent strategies.  For example, if a sports apparel brand realized that it wasn’t connecting with high school youth, it could use this framework to pinpoint areas of potential weakness like a lack of a formulated identity that resonated with young people, or a failure to share their years of accumulated knowledge about sport performance.  The next step would then be to reverse these statements to become questions, like how can we more effectively share our vast body of knowledge about performance to create a devoted following?

With this preliminary model in place, we can begin to develop strategies that are more in line with the needs of today’s consumer.

I recently had the pleasure of reading Seth Godin’s newest book, Linchpin and I must say, it was a worthwhile read.  The premise of the book is that our economy is changing to reflect a marketplace in which goods can no longer be made smaller, cheaper and more efficiently (we’ve maxed this out).  Rather, what today’s consumer is more interested in is products, services and brands that are extraordinarily unique, and help them to portray the complex story of their lives as they ideally see it playing out.  As a result, Seth argues that those workers (in any industry) who are capable of producing new ideas and ways of doing things are the individuals who are most likely to become ‘linchpins’ or indispensable employees in their own company.

The book then goes on to explain how a linchpin must think and act in her given field, as well as the obstacles that she can expect to encounter.  Overall, Godin’s Linchpin can best be described as motivating, remind us all that we have a responsibility to go into our jobs ready to produce new ideas, services and ways of getting things done, all things that Seth describes as ‘art’.

This brings me to the topic of this post.  The most inspiring and beneficial chapter of the book is rather inaptly called, “Is it Possible to do Hard Work in a Cubicle?”.  The chapter successfully urges us to consider that, as Roy Simmons put it, “most artists can’t draw”.  More specifically creating great art isn’t really about drawing, painting or sculpting.  It’s about paving new ground, by doing, thinking or producing something “that resonates with the viewer, not just the creator”.  Being an artist is about developing insight and being brave enough to communicate it to the world, without concern over how it will be received.

When we start to open up these terms, we naturally begin to feel a sense of responsibility to produce art, regardless of our specialty.  However, doing so requires us to overcome what Seth and others before him deem to be ‘the resistance’, otherwise known as fear - fear of being rejected, fired, laughed at or otherwise failing at life.

If fear can be overcome then we become free to produce beautiful art, that extends beyond the visual, taking on the power to change it’s recipient for the better.  Many of you may be thinking that there isn’t room for this in your job, and I would argue against that.  Being an artist can be as simple as being the catalyst in a successful brainstorm session or finding a more efficient system for completing expense reports on time or mentoring a new employee as they learn the ropes at a new company - all actions that have the capacity to change an individual or organization for the better (the true essence of artwork).

Seth carefully goes on to point out that there is no map or set of directions for becoming an artist.  Some are born with the creative fire inside themselves, others must learn to cultivate it.  But, as our increasingly divergent culture continues to infiltrate every aspect of commerce, those individuals who produce art in their own right, will be the most highly valued, the most likely to succeed and (as Seth fails to point out) the most fulfilled.