The internal impulse to check our messages at such challenging times is fostered by the brain. By checking our messages in such circumstances, the brain rewards our apparent furtiveness with a minute release of dopamine. Dopamine is a hormone and neurotransmitter related to the pleasure system of the brain. In large doses, it can provide a real high.

Intrigued by this phenomenon, we approached UM’s standing panel of academic psychologists about the concept of Always-On. These psychologists are typically U.S. professors and other leading practitioners in their field. We wanted to solve the following riddle: How do we break through the obstacles created by Always-On and reach consumers in the most compelling and convincing way?

Our expert panel brainstormed the issue of Always-On and its implications for both brands and media marketing. Overall, we identified ten key areas essential to overcoming the barriers of Always-On which in summary are:

1. Celebrate the brand’s excellence. As one psychologist astutely noted, in a world of Always-On, it is easier for the digitally savvy to find strong brands. Once found, it is cognitively easier to stick with a winning brand that puts consumers first. As Robert Passikoff’s noted in his book, Predicting Market Success, “Brands are competing to meet or exceed customer values first, and against each other second.”
2. Tap into the key emotional needs the product satisfies. In other words, “Don’t sell the steak, sell the sizzle” or as Harvard Professor Theodore Levitt once famously exclaimed, “People don’t want quarter-inch drills, they want quarter-inch holes.”
3. Ask not what your consumer can do for you, ask what you can do for your consumer. Build the brand and its inherent consumer rewards for the longer term. Over time, consumers will immediately associate the brand with this powerful value that will break through many Always-On issues.
4. Ensure message simplicity. Make the consumer’s decision process of getting to ‘yes’ easy, and the emotional benefit clear.
5. Assess reward and loyalty systems. Added-value offers and promotions are very seductive to consumers in the short-term and can help marketers achieve break through when and where they need it most.
6. Consider personal, human icons. e.g. Kim Kardashian or Dr Oz. Here the idea is to humanize the communication by appointing a well-known personality as a focal point. Anthropomorphization of the brand communication helps provide personal relevance.
7. Request user feedback and respond back directly to the consumer. Social media fits this solution like a tailored-made glove. It provides scale and an immediate platform for consumer interaction. Apple has also shown an alternative approach by having Apple stores which offer advice as well as sell their product. iTunes will genuinely answer any account question within 24 hours.
8. Be Green or consider a cause that is close to the brand’s heart. Besides classic brands, cause marketing can work for brands which are less conventional but still evoke high consumer interest.
9. Pursue word of mouth and event marketing. Face-to-face marketing is the natural antidote to ‘Always-On.’ This type of marketing not only allows a deeper, personal connection with consumers, but it can also be readily harnessed by brands driven by short-term demands such as movies and music.
10. Engineer 360⁰ media communications. Custom-constructed, cross-platform activities provide opportunities to break through the morass of more standard media offerings.

Of all media-related opportunities outlined above, the last two can be especially powerful. In particular, UM has seen word of mouth trust levels double those for TV advertising. Moreover, our detailed custom research programs reveal that customized media solutions can often help boost ROI by +600%.

So where will Always-On take us next? Paradoxically, social TV, i.e. commenting on TV programs in real or near-real time via social media, also appears to be driving the totally unexpected revival of live TV! According to a study by TVGuide.com among its panel of 10,000 consumers, the number of people claiming to watch live TV in order to avoid social media spoilers has grown from 20% to 27% in the last two years. It’s an ironic twist of fate that the internet appears to be helping to rebuild TV, the very media channel it has competed with for viewers over the last ten years.

Intrigued by this phenomenon, we sought some insights from UM’s panel of preselected, academic psychologists about “Always On.” These psychologists come mainly from U.S. universities and similar institutions, and are typically leading professors and thinkers in their field. The panel pointed to academic findings that emerged last year – the culprit is dopamine.

In responding to calls, emails, texts, social media, etc., our electronic devices play to a primitive impulse to react to immediate threats and dangers. Our responding to that call, email or social media post provokes excitement and stimulates the release of dopamine to the brain. Little by little, we become addicted to its small kick in regular, minute doses. In its absence, people feel bored.

Dopamine is a hormone, a neurotransmitter, associated with the pleasure system of the brain. It reinforces certain activities and habits, which in turn creates habituation. Drugs such as cocaine, nicotine and crystal meth induce exceptionally large releases of dopamine, which is a testament to the addictive powers of the hormone.

This led us to ask the burning question: Is being “Always On” bad for us? To this, the panel of psychologists cited Sigmund Freud’s book, Civilization and Its Discontents, where Freud contends that since the dawn of man every technological advance has been met with a level of resistance and skepticism. For example, the ancient Greek scholar, Socrates, riled against the idea of writing because he argued it could destroy our motivation and need to memorize.

Nevertheless, “Always On” does cause unwanted modern-day anxieties. For example:

• It creates loss aversion when we are deprived of access to our smartphone.
• There is the stress of connecting with friends via social networks which is especially true for younger individuals where it may fire up:
• Jealously, e.g. a teenage girl’s boyfriend may “friend” another girl she doesn’t like, or
• Ostracism, e.g. a teen boy may see his friends organizing an event where he’s inadvertently not invited.
• Sexting, where even senior public figures who really should know better get caught.

We then probed further: is “Always On” bad for brands? Intriguingly, the psychologists on the panel said that the distractions created by “Always On” should not have to adversely impact strong brands. “Always On” increases on the simplicity for (younger) consumers to compare brands, making the best decision with regard to price, features, etc. They elaborated further and explained that “sticking with one good brand is cognitively easier than switching from brand to brand.”

Equally, mediocre brands and bland marketing communications may flounder in the new media ecology. Brand loyalty takes on a completely new perspective for many brands: “It’s less about driving customer loyalty to a brand and more about a brand being loyal to customer.” How many brands can rise to the marketing challenge of proving to consumers they are in it for the long-haul?

For brand communication, it’s about ensuring decision making is easy, pleasurable and emotionally rewarding. By emotionally rewarding, we mean it is essential to follow the most fundamental messaging ethos: “Don’t sell the steak, sell the sizzle!” Or as Harvard Professor Theodore Levitt famously noted, “People don’t want quarter inch drills, they want quarter inch holes.”

So “Always On” doesn’t have to be a quagmire for brand communications, but brand managers do need a powerful internal gyroscope to ensure a brand’s enduring qualities are clearly visible to uphold the brand’s abilities and to exceed consumer expectations over the savageries of time.

Let’s assume for one moment that we have a great ad, a creative asset that resonates well with the consumer. Is that enough? Our initial regression modeling suggests that besides a great ad, just maximizing the audience rating may not be enough. Critically, the quarter of the game that the ad appears in and securing the first position in the pod also count. In addition, :5 billboards, those announcements often seen at the beginning or end of an ad pod, may be an unnecessary luxury and, from the perspective of WOM value, possibly not worth the additional investment.

In 2010, UM won the Word of Mouth Marketing Association’s (WOMMY) Gold Award for Research for its paper quantifying how Sony Electronics’ media advertising helped boost its word of mouth. Through a multivariate analysis, we determined two key insights that had never been publicly demonstrated before:

1. Brand advertising has a direct effect on the effectiveness of word of mouth. In this instance, 14% of all Sony Electronics’ WOM was attributable to its own media activity.

2. A brand’s word of mouth is not just affected by its own ad activity. Competitive share of voice is also a critical factor. In the Sony Electronics model, 23% of Sony’s potential WOM was eroded by the impact of competitors’ advertising activity.

If we apply this type of modeling approach to ads in the Super Bowl, what can it reveal? To determine this, we analyzed the reported word of mouth from Keller Fay’s Talk Track Super Bowl study conducted in 2011. Keller Fay takes a unique approach in the world of buzz trackers in that it captures both online and offline word of mouth. Keller Fay was the data source fuelling the award winning WOMMY study. For the Super Bowl, Keller Fay specifically tracked 42 ads in the game with sample of 3000 individuals boosted during the week after the game with a custom survey.

It is well-known that word of mouth levels vary substantially by market category. Additionally, since several advertisers had multiple placements and various commercial time-lengths in the Super Bowl, we decided to focus on one category where these variables would be minimized. We chose to probe the movie sector since not only did this eliminate any cross-category effects, we were able to substantially reduce the variations from ad to ad. For example, there was only one ad for each film title and 30 seconds was the only commercial time-length utilized by all movie marketers. This enabled us to isolate the core media drivers of movie mentions as a direct result of their Super Bowl advertising.

To analyze the effects of the Super Bowl, we built a database of factors such as 18-54 TV rating, the game quarter in which the ad appeared, ad position in pod, use of billboards plus the word of mouth for each movie in the week after the Super Bowl that we applied to each ad. Interrogating this database via regression analysis, this is what the model revealed:

The model’s projection is very encouraging with a 99% fit between predicted and actual word of mouth. While one core factor was audience rating, it was also bolstered by the quarter in which the ad appeared – the earlier the better. We also saw that being first in pod provided great impetus to an ad’s WOM. By contrast, the often highly prized position of last in pod did not materially help WOM; indeed it actually reduced the ad’s effectiveness!

The jury remains out on billboards. In our best model, displayed in this column, billboards did not help word of mouth reach, i.e. the net number of people discussing the ad, but in other models, the gross volume or frequency of conversations were helped by billboards.

For UM, the surprising reveal of this analysis is the low value of word of mouth derived from being placed last in pod – a media position which, otherwise, can often be highly regarded. We hope to build and share on this analysis in future years. 2012 should be another great year for Super Bowl advertising and its legend ability to motivate consumers to talk about brands.

In today’s world, agencies often need to use a different ad serving system for each different media type.  It’s not unusual for a single campaign to be delivered using 4 or 5 different agency ad servers: 

• Standard server for all basic Flash placements
• Video ad server that can deliver a VAST/VPAID tag as well as track a site served video
• Rich Media server for expandable and multi-functional ads
• Dynamic ad server that can do true Multi-Variate Optimizations, and
• Mobile server for running ads on smartphones and tablets

Not to mention any site-served placements, which can range from integrated content hubs to homepage takeovers.

Needless to say, this creates a lot of extra work, and maximizes the inefficiencies that have become infamous in our industry.  From the Agency Ad Operations perspective, this means creating multiple traffic sheets, generating many sets of tags, and doing many creative uploads.  Often times, agencies rely on their ad serving partners to also traffic out the tags to the various Media Partners, so a Publisher could be receiving 4 different sets of tags from 4 different ad serving vendors….all for a single campaign.

Then, there is always the inevitable problem with billing, as in which numbers to use for invoicing.  According to the IAB Terms & Conditions, the “controlling measurement” has to be compliant with “IAB/AAAA Ad Measurement Guidelines”.  Not all ad servers are considered compliant, which means we are often using multiple sources of impression data to reconcile a single monthly invoice.  Multiply this by thousands of live media campaigns at any given moment, and it becomes clear as to the inefficiencies involved.

Bottom Line:  The fact that I have to use 4 different ad servers to run a single campaign is absolutely ridiculous.  There has to be a better way.

So what will the Ad Server of the future look like?

Tomorrow’s Ad Server will allow an agency to confidently manage all possible media types in one central location.  It will enable us to run Flash, Video, Mobile, Rich, Search, Dynamic, and whatever else the future holds, efficiently and easily.  I will be able to generate one complete set of tags that can be sent directly to a Media Partner, and will include everything they need to run that campaign.  No more need to generate tracking pixels and click trackers, and no more need to argue over which numbers will be used for billing purposes, because in my vision of the future, all Ad Servers will be accredited and certified.

I know there are many people out there who are probably saying, “Hey, my company can do all those things today.  We should talk.”  The fact is, most Ad Serving companies can handle multiple asset types today, but I still haven’t seen one Ad Server that can do all these things expertly.

I also realize that the Single Ad Server dream is completely dependent on industry adoption of guidelines and standards, particularly around Video and Mobile.  But I do think that at some future point in time (let’s go with 5 years from now), we will look back on the days when we used to use one Ad Server for Rich Media, a different one for Video, a different one for Mobile, etc. with a feeling of “we’ve come so far since then”.

The Long and Winding Road – Gamesmanship of Shopping – Snapshot

In the past few years, new digital tools have led to a renewed energy about shopping that ultimately benefits consumers and brands. The growth of online tools like social networks, the mobile web and coupon sites have transformed shoppers from passive recipients of information — merely taking in communication from marketers — to active creators and distributors of product information and opinions.

Consumers have become an integral part of the process and are having fun with it. This has led to a new shopping mindset that is analogous to playing a game. The result for advertisers is a shopping landscape that is more complicated but provides a wealth of opportunities. How can marketers influence purchase behavior in this new shopping paradigm and where in the purchase path they can leverage new tools?

Yahoo! and Universal McCann partnered to help marketers understand the new dynamics in the path to purchase so they can use digital media more efficiently to engage shoppers.

Click the link above to download.

All three concurred that the industry as a whole needs to do a better job of recruiting and developing top talent, with Sorrell noting that the current trend of simply poaching talent from competing agencies is counterproductive to grooming future leaders. Roth chimed in and agreed, but also pointed out that IPG has made diversity a major priority. Sorrell countered by repeatedly asking Roth if there was a Chief Talent Officer on the IPG board and then stated that he felt the holding companies were simply “paying lip service” to the issue. Roth quickly responded: “Maybe you are, but we’re not.”

On the subject of the holding company format, all three executives agreed that acquisitions will remain an important part of the future, though they all stated a preference for more organic, internal growth. Technological and digital advances were also a focal point, with Wren stating that he anticipates a total integration of traditional and digital marketing within two years, doubting that agencies will still have Chief Digital Officers at that time. Roth shared a similar perspective when he stated that digital must be ingrained into the DNA of all parts of the business, but he felt the opportunity for specialists and digitally-focused agencies would likely remain.

The discussion ended with the three sharing their views on what role clients can play in the fostering of stronger relationships. Wren pleaded with clients to trust the agencies and frankly suggested that they should “pat someone on the back instead of prying $5 from their wallets.” In a rare moment of agreement, Sorrell stated that praising agencies when they do good work goes a long way in improving morale. Roth opined that both sides get the most out their symbiotic relationship when they view each other as partners with common goals.

After the CEO panel was a one-on-one interview with Miles Nadal, Founder, Chairman, & CEO of MDC Partners Inc. He followed up on the above discussion by stating that he believes the role of the CEO is synonymous with Chief Talent Officer, and he shared his views on the underestimated impact of social media and being accountable to clients who are seeking a return on the investments they make with their agency partners.

The second half of the morning’s program kicked off with a panel on television programming, with executives from AMC, History and Lifetime Networks, and Science Channel and Animal Planet discussing the future of what is still the biggest and most important screen that advertisers use to reach consumers. All felt that the use of social media to connect with viewers changes the game, though Nancy Dubuc (History and Lifetime) said that a show’s potential social media reach doesn’t determine whether or not it will be green-lighted. The importance of Netflix and streaming video services was also touched upon, though Charlie Collier (AMC) said, “we don’t’ dive in for the pennies,” with Dubuc agreeing that the main focus remains on TV screens and Nielsen ratings.

Geomentum CEO Sean Finnegan took part in a discussion on mobility and place-based business models, focusing on how local marketing is being transformed by emerging platforms. On the topic of new engagement standards, Finnegan stated that the universe of new technologies has added measurement complexity; however, Geomentum continues to focus on the most important metric to its clients: sales and business results.

Next was an eye-opening look at the present and future of gaming as presented by Ken Simon from Microsoft, a UM client. He took attendees through a close look at the “war for the living room,” providing staggering numbers on the reach, ever-expanding scope of the gaming target audience through innovations such as Kinect, and innovative means advertisers can use to appeal to consumers.

The day’s last discussion centered around new advertising guidelines, particularly as it pertains to digital marketing. All speakers agreed that it is of the utmost importance for the advertising industry to properly police itself in this realm, or run the risk of the federal government intervening and constructing strict guidelines that could limit the effectiveness of targeted marketing.

Transformation 2011 provided opportunities to think about the present and future states of the media, advertising, and marketing worlds, and IPG, Mediabrands, and their affiliated agencies were crucial to the discussion.
Special thanks to Jonathan Nierman at Mediabrands for this recap. Check out Mediabrands online at www.facbeook.com/mediabrands

After some opening remarks by 4A’s representatives, the action immediately kicked off with an in-depth conversation with Keith Weed, CMO & CCO of Unilever, an Initiative client. He spoke at length about how digital technology in particular has changed the game, noting that there’s so much going on, marketers can literally make things up on the fly. He gave an advertiser’s viewpoint on the need of the industry to evolve, removing the classifications between traditional and digital marketing to empower brands with the ability to connect with consumers through multiple channels simultaneously. Weed also commented on dealing with conflict between advertisers and agencies, sharing his opinion that the most fruitful relationships often are those that are the most enduring. He even stated that “everyone has failed” if an advertiser feels the need to walk away from an agency partner and begin anew elsewhere.

Fareed Zakaria, Editor-at-Large of Time Magazine and CNN on-air personality, then took the podium for a fascinating look at how events are transforming the world. He cited three big trends in particular: political stability around the world thanks to the end of the cold war, the extraordinary level of economic convergence globally and the resiliency of the worldwide economy, and technology and connectivity linking people together virtually in real time. He ended his remarks with the poignant opinion that the USA “globalized the world, but that it has forgotten to globalize itself.”

Robert Groves, Director of the U.S. Census Bureau, took the stand next, leading attendees through some of the most interesting findings from the data collected in 2010. He pointed out that while the U.S. population continues to rise, its growth has slowed significantly. However, foreign-born residents are flooding into the U.S. at astronomical rates. Marketers in the room were certainly taken aback by some of the figures he presented, but the changing face of America is also a huge opportunity for the growth of brands.

UM’s Jacki Kelley then took part in a discussion on communication planning, verbally sparring with other members of the panel and drawing applause when pointing out that some agencies, such as UM, are already leading the communications planning charge and being compensated based on results, as opposed to impressions or other outdated measurement metrics. Kelley also remarked that listening to client partner insights is crucial when developing communications and overall marketing plans, a fact she has learned from sitting on both sides of the client/agency table.

Immediately following that breakout session, Mediabrands Chief Digital Officer Quentin George helped spearhead a lively discussion on improving targeted marketing, stating that it makes advertising more relevant for consumers and more efficient for brands. Yet, he also noted that targeted marketing is an augmentation – not a replacement – for traditional media planning, as this highly-specified way of appealing to consumers is still in its infancy. Many issues – most notably privacy – are still being worked out both by the industry and governing bodies such as the FCC.

Much more is going on Wednesday, including a panel discussion on agency and advertiser collaboration featuring holding company CEOs Michael Roth (IPG), Martin Sorrell (WPP), and John Wren (Omnicom). Mediabrands Communications will bring you the highlights on Thursday.

Special thanks to our Mediabrands reporter, Jonathan Nierman, for this recap. Check out Mediabrands on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/mediabrands

Over the past year, our Ad Operations team has met with countless new startups that are popping up out of the digital media ecosystem.  Everything from new ad exchanges to data providers to optimization engines to analytics aggregators.  These companies all bring something new and innovative to the table, along with a great deal of enthusiasm and energy.  It’s an exciting time to be a part of the Digital Media world and witness such fast-paced growth and development.  If someone in our industry were to take a 6-month leave-of-absence, there is a good chance they would be completely lost upon their return – that’s how fast things are moving.

Along with all of this high-growth comes much confusion and anxiety.  How do I know what is right for my client?  Is this service “legit”, or will it be added to the junk pile of internet startups?  How do I make sure my client is not missing the boat, while at the same time protecting their Digital investment?  Should I wait for others in my category to take the plunge, or should I be the pioneer and try something new before all of my competitors do?  These are all reasonable, normal questions that I find myself asking everyday.

I believe it is the role of the Digital Ad Operations team to help answer these questions. Of course, Ad Ops cannot provide all the answers.  But what Ad Ops can do is help our internal teams make sense of all the noise and clutter in the marketplace, and help find the right fit for the right client.  This should be done by taking a true team approach.  If our Planning teams are not well informed, then our clients won’t be either, and, as an agency, we will not be performing to the standards our clients expect.

On my team, each Ad Ops staffer is responsible for becoming a Subject Matter Expert in an area related to ad serving or targeting technology (known internally as Project SME).  For example, Christina has chosen Dynamic Ad Serving as her area of expertise, and David has chosen Video.  Some other areas being covered are Mobile, Verification Services, and Data Providers.  The list goes on.  It is then each person’s responsibility to do a deep dive on that particular topic (meet with providers, follow the news, attend conferences, etc.), and then eventually present their findings to the Ad Ops team.  The presentation and all supporting materials are then saved in a central location for the entire Digital Planning department.

Having an expert on my team for these types of topics is extremely valuable.  During the course of day-to-day business, we regularly get asked many questions related to technology and targeting.  And it’s very difficult for one person to have all the answers.  For the appropriate question, I can simply say, “Let’s ask Brooke.  She’s the expert on Research services”, or “Send a note to Kate.  She covers ad networks”.  Then it’s up to that Ad Ops Expert to work with that Planning team, and help them find the best possible solution for the client’s objectives.  There is also an opportunity to be proactive with this information, and seek out situations where we can provide value to the Planning Teams and clients directly.  This is where the rubber meets the road, and each SME must put into practice all of the research they’ve done.

Things do get a little tricky when a question comes up that crosses different areas of expertise, such dynamic ad serving in the Rich Media space.  Nothing is ever cut and dry in our industry….but that’s ok.  Situations like this present an opportunity to get two different points of view on an issue.  If those points of view are in agreement, great.  If not, it’s another opportunity for discussion and healthy debate.

Project SME also helps the Ad Ops team get out of the daily grind, and see the big picture.  It is the role of Ad Operations to focus on the small, granular details of Digital Media.  However, having each team member pursue a particular area that interests them, gets them out of the day-to-day stuff, and allows them to see that our industry is much bigger than the particular task at hand.  This helps keep the role of Ad Ops in context as we go about our daily jobs.

This type of approach is not just limited to Ad Operations, and can work in any department, Digital or otherwise.  Having a team of experts provides good depth of knowledge and ensures all bases are being covered, and it also helps each team member build and define his/her own career.