Okay, it’s been a while. I haven’t posted in months. It’s not for a lack of thought, but rather wanting to make sure that what I think (and share) is actually of relevance. And that’s the topic for today. Relevance. A few weeks back I saw an old movie called “He’s Just Not That Into You”. Not a great movie but a really cold reminder that if your lover doesn’t call you/call you back, he or she probably doesn’t love you that much. You are just not relevant enough. The economic downturn has turned the heat up on business relevance. In good economic times, “interesting” can suffice as relevant. Companies and consumers will buy your products or services because they can afford to, because what you offer is interesting, mildly helpful, feels good, whatever. A great example of that are research expenditures. Big brands spend gobs of money on interesting research. They don’t actually do anything with the research, it doesn’t guide decision making, there’s no “return” expected, it’s just interesting. But when the economy softens, the definition of relevance hardens. It shifts from “interesting” to “influencing”, i.e. the investment has got to connect in some, even if indirect, way to an action or benefit. Management starts asking the question, what are we getting for this? The consumer begins contemplating what life will be life without that pair of shoes. But even then, there’s some latitude on how consumers and businesses assess the return, on how relevant the relevance is. Now, serve up an economic setback like the one we experienced in the last year, and the definition of relevance becomes rock hard. Relevance = Essential. Essential = our business cannot operate without the benefit of this product, service (or employee). Essential = my personal life will suffer in tangible forms if I don’t buy this thing (or call my girlfriend back). The definition of relevance as essential puts intense pressure on all of us but I think it’s a healthy pressure. Good economies delude us. They make us think that the value equation (and relationship) is solid and secure when in fact it is not. Our capacity to grow as individuals and companies, through good times and bad, is purely predicated on our ability to be essential to whomever we serve (or love). So I encourage you to ask yourself the tough question: Are they returning your phone call? And if not, you know what to do.
Your example of research relevance is a telling one.
I have the feeling that research managers (and certainly research agencies) WANT to do research. Because it is a good thing. So when a ‘client’ wants some research, they are so pleased they don’t ask the hard questions: “What are you actually going to do differently when you have the results? (What did you do differently with the results of the LAST piece of ‘research’ you did?)”
Of course they’ll try to make the research as relevant as possible, but they’ll probably stop short of saying: “I don’t think you’ve got a good idea of what you need to know or what you’re going to do with the results when you get them”. The logical next step would be to say: “So I’m not going to let you do the research”. (Can you imagine a research agency even HAVING that thought?)
So people (senior management especially) get used to a fair amount of ‘research’ getting done, but not much getting done ABOUT it. Which budget would you cut first when money gets tight? The ‘nice to know’ goes away and people only get to do what’s really needed.
Maybe if research managers had more clout in the organization (I don’t sense they have much) only essential projects would get done, research would be more focused and better decisions would get made. Or maybe they/we just need to be more focused on the RETURN to the business.
You are right: a forgiving economy masks wastage and lack of discipline in the marketing department. (No one says: “Look, sales would have gone up anyway because unemployment just went down”.) If, instead, people said: “Would I do this piece of research if it were MY money?” they might wait until a more relevant and essential question came along before spending the money.
The trouble is, we will ‘learn’ this lesson for a relatively short time – while the recession lasts and a little beyond. Then mission creep will set in and researchers will once again see their job as ‘doing research’ instead of ‘helping make better decisions’. (Don’t expect them to admit that, by the way.)
Maybe if ad agencies and other pariahs (like independent brand planners – like me) were more robust with clients upfront we’d have ACTUAL relationships with them? We’re famous for the rhetoric: “We don’t want to be vendors, we want a real relationship”, but very few of us know HOW to actually do that. (Maybe we’d be better trying to work out how to be a good vendor, and stop kidding ourselves we’re in a ‘relationship’?)
As for relationships between brands and masses of consumers, maybe we could learn from what they do in other countries (perish the thought!) For example, the most successful supermarket chain in the UK has a clearly defined and simple three level hierarchy for its own-label product range (you don’t get Tesco Value balsamic vinegar). Which means that, when harder times hit, a shopper can trade down (or up) to a more relevant level in the price:value equation across hundreds of product lines. (Instead of going to a cheaper supermarket). In many parts of the States (whisper it) grocery supermarkets haven’t worked that out yet, and still think they’re doing a great thing offering ‘brands’ no one has ever heard of like “Southern Home”. (Which do NOTHING to build the relationship with the brand).
So I think you’re relevance theme is timely, but it’s not only relevant NOW during a recession – it’s always relevant.
I think you should continue writing thought pieces on the three Rs – RELEVANCE, RELATIONSHIPS & RETURN – because, if you really mean it, these are things that will set an agency apart from the common herd.
To keep yourselves honest, maybe each thought piece should end with the statement: “So here is one thing we’re going to do differently now because of what I’ve just said…”.
That’ll keep it relevant.
The art of conversation is not dead – it just smells funny.
I thought my comment might have sparked into a little dialogue, but no.
Perhaps we were just both in broadcast mode, Chris. And certainly my comment didn’t demand a reply. Or maybe even deserve one.
But without a little bounce-back, you do feel a bit like you’re talking to yourself. And therefore will be less likely to engage in the future. Which I think is a pity.
Maybe I just need to learn blog etiquette and end every post I hope to get an answer to with the words: “what do you think?”
What do you think?
Love, love, love!
Jim