Have a Pizza and Some Beer

Communication is essential in all aspects of life. It is defined as “the effective conveying of ideas or feelings or a means of connection between people and places” according to Google. Effective communication can make or break business and personal relationships. Throughout my studies this term I have explored topics such as effective listening and inspiring vision. I’ve learned about smart strategies for communicating during a crisis and effective leadership. Throughout each of these topics I have tried to examine my behaviors and strategies professionally as well as personally because essentially isn’t that what higher education should be about?

I have to laugh when I hear about initiatives like creating safe spaces on college campuses because opposing views are just too stressful for students to hear. How can you truly give a knowledgeable opinion on any topic without first being educated on that subject matter? In reflecting on the 75th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor this past week I thought what a stark contrast to the generation we have today. When I was pursuing my bachelor’s degree back in the old days before the concept of safe spaces and pony ride therapy for stressed out college kids, I was exposed to many different topics by professors from all walks of life. As a side note, we ate too much pizza and drank too much beer to cope with our “life stress”.

Men of WWII 

Anyway, I had a physical science professor who was supposedly an atheist who cut off his finger as a test to see if God existed. I didn’t find him scary or feel I needed play dough therapy in order to cope, I was fascinated by him and his view of the world from the perspective of science. When I encountered an English professor who said the bible was simply a book of stories and metaphors I didn’t abandon my religion. It inspired me to dig deeper to discover why I believe what I believe. In my ripe old age of forty-two I have come to believe you should constantly be learning. My children make fun of me because one of my favorite shows is Aerial America on the Smithsonian channel. But I enjoy it because it’s a beautiful exhibition of our great nation and I have learned so many interesting facts like the real von Trapp family settled in Stowe, Vermont in the 1940’s.

So my point to this week’s blog is that we should never fear education or expanding our views. It makes us more well-rounded and gives us the ability to see the world as the complex place it is rather than our two dimensional bubble of everything that this pleasing to our narrow palate.

Don't Be the One Left Drowning

“If a Marketer and an IRS agent were both drowning, and you could only save one of them, would you go to lunch or read the paper?” Unfortunately, this can be the attitude professional marketer’s face on a regular basis within their organization. Marketing departments are viewed as the team that makes things look pretty.

This challenge is exacerbated by marketing departments failing to show true measurable outcomes and how those affect the bottom line. Your CFO is likely to see value because your Facebook page has two thousand followers unless you can show him or her how that creates value for your business.
Fortunately, in today’s world measuring marketing impressions has never been easier. Clicks, visits, bounce rates and other metrics can be meticulously measured through analytics provided by sources such as Google. Customer engagement can be tracked through Hashtags and Shares. We have focus groups and surveys that can help us keep our fingers on the pulse of the public to measure how a campaign will be perceived before it ever hits the universal market. Today’s marketing campaigns can be measured in quantitative forms better and more than ever before.

Websites like Ted.com are great examples of seeing how quantifiable results impact business. In March 2016 there were over 2,400 TedTalks available and in 2012 over one billion views (Ted.com). The website has won seven Webby Awards, a Peabody Award and an OMMA Award for video sharing (Webbyawards.com, Ted.com). Social engagement is what Ted.com does best. Engagementlabs.com evaluated the quantitative results of the NCAA March Madness sponsors in 2016. By using their “eValue” analytics they evaluated how each brand performed during the playoffs. Northwestern Mutual upset giant Coca Cola by effectively marketing using the following:

• Leveraging their association with the March Madness tournament to expand their reach and catch the attention of tournament fans.
• Tying key brand messages to the tournament to stay top of mind for tournament viewers.
• Tapping into human emotion with motivational March Madness-related content to connect better with their audiences.
• Employing relevant hashtags to capture audience attention across various channels.
• Following the tournament in real-time to stay ahead of viewers who were staying updated via social. (engagementlabs.com)

This is a fun look at the overall impact of a marketing campaign. Here is the link to the article:

https://www.engagementlabs.com/media-madness-2016-the-evalue-social-media-bracket/

So what are some of the quantitative parameters marketers should evaluate? Forbes writer Jason DeMers’ 2014 article “10 Online Marketing Metrics You Need to be Measuring” gives a great overview of the criteria you should be evaluating for your website. DeMers discusses how Total Visits “will give you a “big picture” idea of how well your campaign is driving traffic” while New Sessions will tell you how many new visitors you have coming to your site and how many of them are returning. He goes on to talk about even deeper measurements like Channel Specific Traffic, Bounce Rate, Conversions and Close Rate. Taking an in depth look at all of these can help your team evaluate the effectiveness of your website. My team used these elements to determine we had too much interference keeping visitors from getting to the main page we wanted them to visit. We were able to evaluate where on the page visitors were leaving and therefore how we needed to better position our pages and buttons that led to a call to action.

Social media is a relative new world of marketing and strategic communication. As has been discussed ad nauseam, too many organizations base their success on social media simply by their number of followers. Well having 20,000 followers on Twitter does you no good if those followers aren’t engaged. You are basically like a teenage girl just trying to gather as many followers as possible in order to have the bragging rights of “I have a gazillion followers”. Yet, no one cares really what your organization has to say.

There is tons of material available to guide marketing professionals on what they should be evaluating in their social media campaigns. In evaluating parameters like Reach which incorporate followers but also take it a step further to look at the number of Likes and Views to see how many people are really paying attention to what you have to say. Then by going a step further and looking at Engagement you can see just how compelling your communications were. How many people shred, retweeted or commented on your organizations posts?  Recently I wrote a personal blog about self-image and posted it really more for a couple of friends of mine who were really struggling with this issue. I was amazed at the engagement over this simple little blog that I thought only a couple of people would read. The page view is at close to 2,000 with tons of comments, likes and shares. Apparently, this topic resonated with a lot of women and even a couple of men.  When you are developing social media campaigns professionally you have to evaluate how and how often you are truly engaging your audience. Are you posting the same boring topics your competitors are posting? Would you be compelled to like, comment or share your posts? As I write this blog I am putting together my business unit’s social media plan for 2017. I want to evaluate the how and why but I also need to set some quantitative goals and parameters in order to judge our success. I am evaluating our sales goals and business unit objectives in order to develop a campaign that can help support those goals and initiatives. BY developing our social media campaign with these objectives in mind, I can relay these parameters and the quantitative results back to leadership in order to show that marketing does play an important role in the business efforts and results and is there for more than just to make things look pretty.

Marketers can make campaigns look pretty, however if they fail to produce a desired action then they are pretty much like the Hope Diamond sitting in the Natural Museum of History in Washington, D.C.. It’s great to admire but can never be worn and put to use. So when developing marketing campaigns be sure you are looking at as many measurable results as possible. Create value in what you do and maybe just maybe someone will think you are worth diving in to save.

Crisis Averted

“Sometimes you need a little crisis to get your adrenaline flowing and help you realize your potential.”  states Jeannette Walls in The Glass Castle and oh how true this is. Whether in life or business how you manage a crisis reveals a lot about your character and ability to weather the storms that come at you. I remember when I was a senior in high school and preparing to try out for majorette with the Sound of the South at Troy and I was having difficulty with a particular part of a routine. I was frustrated and sat down on the ground and begin to cry. About that time my father walked outside and asked what the problem was. I told him. He looked at me and said “Well you have two choices. You can sit here and cry about it and not accomplish a thing or you can get up and keep working at it until you get it right”. For some reason, those words have stuck with me throughout my life. Trying times will come and you have a choice in how you choose to react. Strategic communications in times of crisis is no different. You can’t “sit there and cry about it”, you have to have a game plan to deal with the crisis at hand and the impact it will have on your organization in the future. As Neil Chapman says in his 2011 Chartered Institute of Public Relations interview on the BP oil spill that resulted from the Deepwater Horizon explosion, “there’s not much you can say to make it better, but a lot you can say to make it worse”. He goes on to talk about how all of the different agencies involved in the incident and cleanup had to work together communicate effectively in order to get things back on track.  They had to repair the damage done to BP’s reputation. BP’s CEO Tony Hayward issued an apology and then a campaign followed discussing BP’s ongoing commitment to restoration and amends.

There are numerous examples of companies who faced crisis situations and chose to face the situation head on. In the study “Linking Crisis Management and Leadership Competencies: The Role of Human Resource Development” by Lynn Perry Wooten and Erika Hayes James, they examined leadership competencies during crisis situations. Alaska Airlines, Ford and Merck were a few of the companies whose executives exhibited most of the five phases of crisis management well. Consequently, all of those companies came out of those crisis situations faring well. Many of these organizations are stronger than before the crisis situation.
Now let’s consider a new public relations crisis of sorts fresh out of the headlines. A couple of days ago an unruly fan got an up close encounter with country music star Luke Bryan. According to video footage and news reports, the fan was flipping off the singer and continuously making rude comments. Apparently Luke Bryan had enough so he came off stage and had a brief physical altercation with the fan. As his publicist now what? What are your next moves? His team issued a statement saying “"A man in [the] front row was making crude hand gestures toward Luke during his performance," the statement reads. “It was insulting not only to him, but more importantly to the men, women and families sitting around him who were there to support and celebrate Charlie Daniels and the efforts of raising money for the military veterans -- some of who were in the audience. The concert security personnel saw the man's disruptive actions of the event and he was escorted out."

The media began with reports that the star “punched” the fan. Eonlinenews.com’s headline read “Here's Why Luke Bryan Punched a Fan in the Middle of His Concert”, however from the video it looks more like he really just shoved the man’s head. Nonetheless, Luke Bryan’s public relations team now has an issue to handle. In keeping with the discussion of the five phases of crisis management discussed earlier let’s discuss how some of these may fit this situation. Looking at Signal Detection, thankfully there does not seem to be a history of confrontations with fans for Luke Bryan. In fact, according to reports from 2013 (WKBR) and 2015 (whiskeyriff.com) Bryan has a history of criticizing violence at his shows and events. However, considering he got directly involved in breaking up a fight in 2013, it would seem the singer does have a history of stepping into situations he should let his event security handle. This leads to the next step of Preparation and Prevention, by allowing his event security to handle these situations, he can avoid potentially reputation damaging scenarios not to mention some that could result in legal issues. We know in our litigious society, people are always looking for a reason to sue a big celebrity and make a quick buck. I think Luke Bryan’s publicist handled Damage Control and Containment well. Instead of simply looking like Luke Bryan was defending his honor; the situation was made to look like he was defending the honor of veterans and their families, since the concert was in their honor. Using the Evading Responsibility through provocation component of the Image Restoration Theory, his team is able to suggest his response was warranted because of the fans actions. This is a perfect strategy especially for the typical country music fan. According to a 2004 Gallup survey, over sixty percent of country music fans identified themselves as Republicans which tends to support a strong military and veterans benefits. The typical “good ol’ country boy” won’t see a whole lot wrong with Luke Bryan “defending” the honor of military veterans and their families.

In conclusion, crisis management is a comprised of many different elements but the biggest piece is what you say and how you say it. Devising the right message, with the right tone, delivering it at the right time and following up with comparable actions will go a long way in managing a crisis situation. Whether you are BP, Merck or Luke Bryan, trusting your communications teams to craft that message is crucial. Strong crisis management plans can hopefully minimize the damage and help keep another crisis averted.

What You See Isn't Always What You Get

Sissela Bok, an American philosopher and ethicist said “While all deception requires secrecy, all secrecy is not meant to deceive.”  When thinking about product placement and guerilla marketing, strategic communicators need consider what their ultimate goal should be. Are you attempting to deceive the consumer in order to make them believe a product or service is better than it really is? Or are you simply trying to break down the walls that skeptical consumers have risen over the years in order to get them to evaluate a product or service openly and objectively? Varying degrees of deception are used in advertising every day. Placing product throughout a film or television show is simply a covert way to trick your mind into associating that product with that actor or show. If I’m a nineteen year old girl who sees Kim Kardashian drinking a Starbucks® drink then I naively may believe if I drink it too then I will be more like Kim Kardashian.

Lord help us all. Nonetheless, marketers have been using outright product placements to convince the general public that this athlete or this celebrity uses these products. The question is where do we draw the line? 

Consumers are inundated with marketing messages and sales pitches incessantly. Strategic communicators are challenged to find new and creative ways to make their messages stand out. In Michael Serazio’s doctoral thesis “Your Ad Here: The Cool Sell of Guerrilla Marketing”, he discusses how Song Erikson used paid actors to pose as tourist in Times Square in order to expose consumers to a new camera phone. Personally, I think this was a brilliant way to get some honest feedback about what the average consumer thought about the product. Perhaps to make it less deceptive they could have instructed to actors to reveal they were working for the manufacturer if asked, but most people probably wouldn’t ask because they would just continue under the assumption the actor was exactly as they appeared to be- a fellow tourist. Many organizations use semi-professional bloggers and social media gurus to provide hype and feedback on their products or services. In “Recasting Social Media Users as Brand Ambassadors: Opening the Doors to the First ‘Social Suite’”,  Avery Holton and Mark Coddington put together a case study analyzing the Cleveland Indians Social Suite experiment and its impact on the organization and sports organizations as a whole. By using the influence of semi-professional bloggers and social media influencers, they were able to affect the image and ultimately the number of seats sold for Indian baseball games. Now these bloggers were given some great perks. A box suite and all access pass to the Indians organization were just a couple. Granted, if a consumer were to research the Social Suite member, they would find out their affiliation with the organization. But not simply by reading a Tweet generated in the 7th inning. This method proved very successful for the Indians and other organizations went on to implement similar programs.  This was a great example of more covert marketing tactics. By using these popular bloggers and social media gurus, the Cleveland Indians were able to regain the trust and support of their fans. 

Chris Moore wrote an article for the Advertising Educational Foundation in 2006 discussing ethics in advertising.  I think he is right on track when he states “Let's start with Truth in Advertising. Telling the truth seems like a pretty basic ethical standard. But as any Philosophy major can tell you, there's Truth ... and then there's Truth”. He goes on to say

 “Something marketers are beginning to realize is that how a brand actually behaves counts more than what they say. This is good news. Advertising copywriters used to have a monopoly on telling a brand's story. Now, thanks to the Internet, the most influential voices in advertising are yours: You hear about a product, the first thing you do is go online and see what your peers are saying about it. Advertisers know this. Ads for reputable companies almost never lie. The cost of being caught out is simply too high. It can take years to undo the damage. Also, the people inside the company want to be able to look at themselves in the mirror. We often think of business people as belonging to some other, vaguely malevolent species, but remember that most of them are you in a few years. So we tell the truth - but not always the whole truth. We want to put our clients in the best light. McDonalds doesn't advertise the calorie count for Big Macs, but they make it easy to find out. Most people don't want to know. On the other hand, drug makers have to spell out side-effects because the information can mean life or death. How much of the truth we owe to others is an ethical question. In practice, the answer depends on who they are and what's at stake.” 

This is what advertisers must always ask- what is at stake? Where is that invisible ethical line in the sand? 

You can’t conveniently leave out information that a new weight loss drug on the market may cause cancer in order to sell more products.  But you can direct potential patients to a blog on your website loaded with testimonials from patients who have had major success while taking the drug.  You can show Kim Kardashian drinking Starbucks® but you can’t say it’s going to give you a rear end that when exposed naked will break the internet. Again, Lord help us. Where I believe advertisers must take the most responsibility in the degree of deception are with the most vulnerable in society. In a 2014 article, the American Public Health Association estimated that the tobacco industry spends $3.6 billion in advertising and the alcohol industry spends approximately $20 billion. Balancing between promoting free speech and protecting our children is a tricky quagmire. In 1992, the Surgeon General as well as the American Medical Association stepped in and asked RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company to discontinue the use of cartoon characters in its advertising due to the attraction of the ads with children.

As strategic communicators we have a responsibility to society to protect those whose minds are not fully developed enough to know they are being deceived. We must always ask if your secrecy or omissions in promotions for our organizations are there to intentionally deceive for dishonest objectives or for something more honorable.

As Visions of Leadership Danced In Their Heads

Leaders- all of us have been one, been led by one or wanted to be one. Massive amounts of literature have been written about this very topic. Yet, why is finding great leaders so difficult? Why is being a great leader challenging at times as well? I am the typical type A personality which makes me a natural born leader or well at least gives me the desire to lead in almost any situation- needless to say I like to be “large and in charge”. But having the desire to lead and even a few of the conventional characteristics leaders typically display doesn’t necessarily make one a great leader. Paul Johnson, a British historian and author, described a few essential traits of leadership in his 2005 Forbes article “Five Marks of a Great Leader”. In his article he discussed five key elements that I believe are essential in becoming a great leader. Moral courage, judgement, a sense of priority, the disposal and concentration of effort and a sense of humor are all traits Johnson describes as indispensable when in leadership.

Moral courage and judgement seem to be two of those attributes that are becoming a rarity these days. Decisions are made based on profit margins and the attempt to placate everyone you are in bed with in business. And while working to please stockholders and customers are certainly important, when you have to compromise your ethics and morality, it comes with a high price. There are boundless examples of a lapse in moral judgement costing organizations and the leaders who made those lapses in judgement enormous losses. A couple of examples in healthcare are the 2015 Turing Pharmaceuticals scandal in which CEO Martin Shkreli jacked up the price of HIV/AIDS medication Daraprim® over 4,000 percent. Mylan Pharmaceuticals followed suit in 2016 with a 400 percent increase in its product EpiPen®. These leaders chose to put profit over moral courage and sound judgement. Their organizations paid the price through massive public relations scandals. Shkreli eventually resigned amidst legal troubles. Heather Bresch, Mylan CEO, who is no stranger to questionable ethics, is still employed with Mylan and continues to defend her decision. As this scenario continues to play out, I think Mylan will find it will cost them in profit margins as consumers figure out alternative solutions to the EpiPen®. In healthcare, it never looks good to put profit over patient care. While there may be a great deal more involved in why those decisions are made than the public will understand, it’s hard to explain a 671 percent increase in your salary (NBC News, August 2016) while you massively increase drug prices to patients. Bottom line- moral courage and judgement matters. As a leader you want your employees to know you are leading with a sound moral compass. When they know you are willing to do the right thing, even when it’s difficult, it will instill a sense of loyalty that money cannot buy.

Great leaders also have a sense of priority. They know how to categorize their workload and business ventures in order to maximize their efforts.  They also learn not to sweat the small stuff. You have to be able to remain focused on the vision. You can’t get bogged down in every minor issue that comes up. You have to trust your people to do their jobs and go about the business of pushing the organization forward in order to achieve its vision.

The disposal and concentation of effort is a vital leadership skill. I love the example Johnson uses of him asking Winston Churchill what he attributed his success in life to. Churchill answered “Conservation of energy. Never stand up when you can sit down, and never sit down when you can lie down”. It’s a great example of the “work smarter, not harder” mantra. As a busy working mother of four children, even with two of them being grown, I have to stay organized and prioritize all that is required of me. I have a large personalized paper calendar where I track my boys’ activities, work schedule, graduate school requirements, social calendar and church activities for all. I use my iPhone calendar as an alert to when each of these are coming up in my day. But for planning purposes and time allocation, the paper calendar is my lifeline. I have a running To-Do list for work where I prioritize the tasks I need to accomplish. Each week this list is refreshed. These are just a few of the ways I try to maximize my disposal and concentration of efforts.

The last characteristic is one I think we could all use a lot more of- humor. The ability to laugh at oneself is immensely valuable as a leader. Too many leaders take themselves far too seriously.  In Forbes 2013 article “10 Reasons Why Humor is the Key to Success at Work”, the author mentions Michael Kerr’s book “The Humor Advantage: Why Some Businesses are Laughing All the Way to the Bank” (December, 2013) and how “In workplaces that encourage people to be themselves–that are less hierarchical and more innovative–people tend to be more open with their humor,” he says. “Even people who aren’t always comfortable sharing their humor tend to do so in more relaxed environments where the use of humor becomes second nature with everyone’s style.” This open and relaxed atmosphere can foster an environment where employees feel more comfortable sharing ideas and less fear about making mistakes. As a leader, if I can admit my mess-ups, laugh at them, learn from them then move forward, I am creating an atmosphere ripe for growth. Leaders who take themselves far too seriously seem less approachable. Johnson references the great humor of Presidents Lincoln and Reagan as great leaders who used humor as a part of their leadership style.

In conclusion, the real lesson found in each of these leadership characteristics is employees want their leaders to be strong and competent but they also want them to appear and feel human. It’s hard to muster up motivation to follow someone who seems cold and distant or whose moral compass is called into question. People are looking for leaders to follow.  The question is can you be that leader? Can I be that leader?

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.libproxy.troy.edu/pov/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=51d54600-b8dc-4e02-aea6-85c2c43c1a3a%40sessionmgr4006&vid=1&hid=4214

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/05/03/10-reasons-why-humor-is-a-key-to-success-at-work/#238951f92403

Can You Hear Me Now?

Effective communication starts and stops with leadership in organizations. I think the Presidential election has shown how failure to listen can cost organizations significant losses and create chaos.  In President-Elect Donald J. Trump’s acceptance speech he mentioned the “forgotten man”.  This “forgotten” man and woman are exactly who the Trump campaign built their foundation on. As described in William Graham Sumner’s “What Social Classes Owe to Each Other”, the forgotten man, “He works, he votes, generally he prays—but he always pays”.  Sumner goes on to say “The State cannot get a cent for any man without taking it from some other man, and this latter must be a man who has produced and saved it. This latter is the Forgotten Man” (108). Even controversial Hollywood director Michael Moore predicted Trump’s success because of his ability to listen and make the masses feel heard. The democratic and even some Republican leadership failed to listen to their once constituents. They became complacent; believing their accomplishments of the past would propel them into office.
The establishment failed to see there was a growing number of discontented members of the American population and a large percentage of those Americans help fund their programs. I believe when average Americans are thriving they are less likely to mind government intervention or reach into their pocketbooks. However, when the working class is being burdened to the point they cannot provide for their family- either through lost jobs or insurance premiums, they get fed up and fight back. Most Americans want to provide for the truly needy- the elderly, children and disabled. What they are sick of is able bodied men and women taking advantage of our social programs in order to live off of the system on the backs of hard working Americans. I think the liberal politicians underestimated just how fed up middle class Americans were.The other mistake made by the liberal politicians was assuming Hillary Clinton would claim the vote among women as President Barak Obama did in 2008 among African Americans, simply because she was a woman. They failed to make the connection that while women support ideas like equality among women in the workplace; they also support qualities like honesty and integrity while competing in a man’s world. Insulting comments launched at conservatives were also a perfect example of how the left failed to listen and understand the American middle class. It was assumed anyone supporting Trump was ignorant, racist, sexists, homophobic, xenophobic and a whole host of other adjectives. They failed to hear the perspective of those who didn’t support every liberal issue that the left proposed. If you disagree then you are “deplorable” and “irredeemable”. Yet somehow I doubt you would see those “deplorable” and “irredeemable” people out rioting today because they were disappointed in the election outcome. By ridiculing and isolating the conservative moderates, they created an environment where moderate conservatives were left with no option but to vote for Trump in order to simply be heard and evoke change.The Trump campaign, led by Kellyanne Conway, listened to the “average Joe” in America. By the way, I don’t hear feminists congratulating her on being the first female to run a successful Presidential campaign. I guess feminism only extends its hand if it supports the liberal agenda? By listening and tapping into the pains and fears of the average American the Trump campaign was able to motivate this base to get out and vote for change. According to Pew Research article “High- Income Americans Pay Most Income Taxes, but Enough to be Fair?” in April 2016, 62.3% of those filing income taxes make less than $50,000 annually. When these individuals lose their jobs to overseas labor or gets hit with high insurance premiums because they are now required to carry insurance by law and cannot afford to provide for their families, a revolution is inevitable unless they feel like their government officials hear them. Therefore, in my opinion, Trump’s victory was, as one friend put it, “giving the finger to current politicians and the current system” for the pain they have caused middle class Americans. It wasn’t so much of a vote for Trump as it was a vote against the current administration. Sort of a mindset “hey you’ve had your 8 years to fix this mess, now let’s see what the other side can do”.  I saw a Facebook meme with a map of the country and the breakdown by county of the election results with the former slogan for Verizon “Can you hear me now?” To me, that summed up why this election had the outcome it did.
So now what? Well I think Republicans and Democrats alike better start improving their listening skills. Perhaps every member of congress should be required to take classes on effective listening. In order for America as a whole to become “great again” we have to start listening to those around us. I mean really listening- listening to understand. Our leadership throughout this country from the local level all the way up needs to start listening to the pains of the majority of the American people. In this day and age, you can’t please everyone. But you can develop policies that have positive impacts on the majority who are the backbone of this country. Social programs do not fund themselves. The “forgotten man” is paying for these initiatives. So perhaps politicians on both sides of the isle better start practicing effective listening and leadership. And even more importantly, fellow Americans need to start listening to each other. We can lead by example. I have never walked the path of an African American or homosexual, but I can listen to the path they have walked with compassion and understanding. I can examine my behavior and correct ways I may be inadvertently contributing to the relations issues in our nation. As I tell my children, you cannot control the actions and attitudes of others but you can control yours. You can be a leader by being the good others see. 

Michael Moore Predicts Trumps Victory

Social Media: Friend or Foe?

Whether we like it or not social media is a part of our everyday life. It impacts presidential campaigns, can be career breakers or even friendship killers. Now don’t get me wrong, I do think there are some admirable attributes to social media. I love being able to see long distance friend’s and family’s lives play out on social media. Cute Halloween pictures, milestones and uplifting comments and educational articles are just a few of the reasons I love social media. But lately I’ve been wondering if social media and people being so connected will be the downfall of society due to what seems to be a lack of restraint and integrity.

Mark Zuckerberg’s 2004 founding of Facebook forever changed the landscape of modern civilization. At the click of a button I can instantaneously get connected with people throughout the world in a personal way. I can read commentary on my “friends” political views, movie and restaurant tastes and a myriad of other information. I can post my own thoughts and feelings on whatever subject I choose for all of my connected Facebook world to read. In many cases this is a delightful experience. I love reading enlightening articles on parenting, how to get my sons to make 30 or higher on the ACT, new recipes and other topics of interest. I can rekindle old friendships and stay in touch with friends and family who live far away. Comedy is one of my favorite genres I see on social media. I love funny videos of kids or popular “memes”.  On a professional note, social media is a great way for corporations to obtain and maintain a “human touch”, if you will, with their customers. They can manage crisis situations such as Southwest Airlines praised handling of the 2011 plane malfunction and subsequent flight cancellations discussed in “Corporate Facebook pages: when “fans” attack” that appeared in The Journal of Business Strategy in 2012. My organization uses social media to convey various messages to patients and caregivers battling cancer. Sometimes the pieces are informative and sometime they serve to inspire or entertain. Companies can also use social media as a platform to promote their products. The BlendTec YouTube videos which made Tom Dickson practically famous are a great example of how social media was able to help an organization develop a human connection on something as mundane as a blender. So social media, if used correctly, can be a friend to an organization. But let’s take a look at examples of when social media is a foe.

Unfortunately, there are multitudes of examples of how poor social media management hurt organizations.  One Bloomingdale's holiday ad in 2015 went viral and caused quite a lot of embarrassment for the company. It seemed to suggest date rape. The ad was pulled. Employees from the Red Cross to KitchenAid have been guilty of accidentally posting to their organization’s social media accounts on what was intended to be for their personal account. Apologies were issued but reputations were damaged. These examples are just the tip of the iceberg and perfect examples of why organizations need to have social media policies and response teams in place. A poorly thought out Tweet can cost an organization money and its reputation.  However, one particular issue I see unfolding on social media is everyone is a critic yet at the same time everyone is easily offended. It’s sort of the mind set “I have a right to express my opinion, however don’t you dare disagree or I will be offended therefore making you a bad person”.  As individuals this sensitive terrain can be hard to navigate but for organizations it is almost impossible. Case in point, Target and their transgender bathroom policy that drew so much attention that once the decision was made they were in a no win situation. They suffered a huge backlash from their decision. 1.2 million people signed a pledge to boycott them. According to CNNMoney.com, ultimately it cost the organization over $20 million dollars to install private bathrooms in many of its stores nationwide on top of lost sales.  Social media was a huge factor in the steam the boycott gained. Twenty years ago had that policy been adopted most people would not have even known about it unless they read a newspaper article or saw an in-store sign. Social media not only gives the general public a voice, it gives them power to take action and create movements. Organizations need to consider that when developing their social media strategies and routinely audit their social media accounts. There’s a fine line to walk in trying to be cutting edge and risking offending a sensitive society. Organizations should consider “how can we create a win for everyone”. When scrolling through social media this morning I saw the CNN.com Live feed where Chicago was dying the rive blue for the Cubs. Only a few minutes in to the live stream people were posting negative comments critiquing the city, questioning the toxicity of the dye and so forth.  Seriously people, it has been 108 years! Let the people celebrate in peace.  

In conclusion, social media can be both friend and foe. Organizations must be diligent in managing its social media strategy and online presence. Slip ups can cost millions and damage reputations. With a fickle opinionated public, organizations must carefully but expeditiously manage criticism and complaints made through social media. Social media can be applied to create human connections with customers and create a sense of community. You can develop strong advocates for your organization through social media. Steven R. Covey said “Wisdom is your perspective on life, your sense of balance, your understanding of how the various parts and principles apply and relate to each other”.  If organizations can have this mindset relating to social media and understanding how it relates to various parts of the organization and society as a whole, they can effectively use social media to promote its organizational core values. Understanding social media is just that-social. It has a life of its own and needs careful consideration before jumping too far out of the box. Below I am attaching a screenshot of a snipit from my Facebook page this morning as a reference to the vastness of content. I’m also attaching one of my favorite moments I posted on my social media accounts-my 15 year old learning to shave for the first time.  

Everybody’s An Expert

For some time now I have noticed that everybody seems to be an expert these days. Social media is filled with armchair critics who are happy to fill you in on their expertise regarding anything from politics to nail salons. In reading several articles on the impact of Word of Mouth I began to ask myself, how do marketers effectively manage these so called “experts”? Case in point, the current political season that is upon us. Daily I read commentary from various friends on how their candidate is the best choice because of multiple reasons which usually amounts to whatever mainstream or social media has pushed out to them. Despite the fact that as demonstrated in Simon Sinek’s Ted Talk “How Great Leaders Inspire Action”, their view is skewed because their information is tailored to their particular world view- their safe little bubbles. Yet, their information “bubble” is all about comfort and profitability for those designing it. Most Donald Trump supporters believe he is going to win despite polls because their social media feed is booming with other like-minded Trump supporters. Their feeds are filled with anti-Hillary news and commentaries as well as complimentary Trump anecdotes. The same applies to supporters of Hillary Clinton. Conservatives are more likely to watch Fox News while liberals turn to CNN for their information. All the while their neighbor posts of picture of their new premium for health insurance and this alone is proof Obamacare is a failure. Another friend passes along a photograph of Hillary Clinton with what appears to be some sort of device underneath her clothes and speculations from “her team is feeding her the questions during debates” to “she’s on a pain pump” abound. Then all of this information is collected and the armchair critics begin their discourse on why you should believe they hold all of the answers. What is scary to me is the impact these self-described experts hold in Word of Mouth circles. If you read a bad restaurant review are you really going to give the place a chance or not risk a disappointing meal? Perhaps had the Kansas City Voltaire restauranteur’s response to a particular snippy customers review on Yelp not gone viral, we would not know that her demands were unreasonable and her review highly unfair.

So how are marketers to handle these armchair critics? We know that the theories and methods surrounding WOM marketing have evolved over time from a marketer controlled environment to a multi-faceted, multi-directional model. Robert V. Kozinets, et al. "Networked Narratives: Understanding Word-of-Mouth Marketing in Online Communities." that appeared in the Journal of Marketing in 2010 describes consumers as “active co-producers of meaning and value”. But I argue that their meaning and value is not always a credible one. In today’s social media world anyone can become a self-proclaimed expert. According to DemandGen Report-2016 Content Preferences Survey, over 66% of consumers surveyed used blogs to influence their purchasing decisions and with the increase in blogs this percentage will only grow. Nowadays stay at home moms or a forty year old living in his parents basement can become a viral success and be viewed as an expert by his or her followers.

So back to my original question, how do marketers use the rampant explosion of so-called experts in their given field to communicate the message they need conveying and promote the true experts? And how do they weed out and promote the real experts among the want- to-be aficionados? First off, I think it is vital to decide which media outlets are the best formats for promoting your expert and facilitating the kind of Word of Mouth (WOM) marketing you want. A detailed look into your target demographics and how they correlate to various media outlets is a great starting place. For instance, research shows if you are looking to connect with women forty and younger, Pinterest or Instagram are great channels. The next step is establishing credibility. Why should followers believe your expert over another? What is the emotional connection to your message and messenger? Are you placing keywords your audience would be searching for in your written communications online? All of these are just a few of the factors marketers need to consider when looking to market their desired communication and expert.

By using the right channels WOM and expert positioning can be highly effective. Many national brands use bloggers and social media users with influence in order to promote marketing messages. One only needs a hashtag to create a virtual conversation about a certain event, public figure or idea. When the Jonbenet Ramsey story aired on CBS a couple of months ago, Twitter blew up with loads of tweets with armchair detectives giving their estimation of the case. All you had to do was look for the #jonbenetramsey, #jonbenet or #burkeramsey hashtags in order to follow the national dialogue on the case. Everyone was an expert. My kids and I even got in on the action. We debated back and forth the evidence presented during that broadcast as well as others shown on other channels around the same time. Each of us believed we had solved the twenty year mystery.

The Cleveland Indians used local bloggers in their social suite experiment in 2011 in order to change the local conversation about their team. It began with simply having a section of seats out in the stadium then evolved to a VIP box where local bloggers were treated like a cross between official media, given all-access pass to the team, and VIP fans. The experiment was a success and other teams and organizations followed subsequently. This is a great example of how organizational marketers were able to turn armchair critics into advocates for their cause. The right marketing vehicle, the right messaging and careful crafting of the communication strategy can turn this new form of marketing and communication into wins for professional marketers. By looking at the evolution of Word of Mouth marketing as well the evolution of the venues for WOM marketing, strategic communicators can tap into another realm of possibilities for promotion. Just remember, everybody’s an expert. Why not make them your expert. 

Illusions of Communication

Welcome to Illusions of Communication. I determined  the title of my blog after reading the quote by George Bernard Shaw "The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion it has taken place" because I think whether in business or interpersonal relationships effective communication is  fundamental to success. The inability to communicate effectively can lead to failure of both business ventures and relationships, thus it is one of the most important components of our lives.  

My name is Brandy Jensen and I am a graduate student pursuing a degree in Strategic Communications. I have worked in some degree of sales, marketing and public relations since 1998. I currently work for a Fortune 16 company and work regularly in the field of strategic communications. Throughout this blog I hope to discuss various communication topics that bring value to anyone interested in the subject of strategic communications and emerging media. I will post weekly updates covering topics from communication theories to social media. You can find my blog at http://illusionsofcommunication.blogspot.com/. 

In today’s blog I want to discuss the illusion of communication and its relation to the Diffusion of Innovation. Throughout my career I have seen many launches of new products and services. I have also seen how the effectiveness of communication can make or break these launches. For our discussion today, let’s look at the latter. Referencing George Bernard Shaw’s quote from earlier in the blog, many times there is a complete disconnect between what marketing departments communicate to sales teams, customers and vice versa. It is easy to miss the mark in communicating a message that resonates with customers by becoming so focused on what you believe is the important part of the product or service and failing to see what is important to the consumer. In my days as a pharmaceutical sales consultant I saw product launches flop because companies failed to see what was truly important to the physician or patient when marketing a product. They became so focused on the message the marketing department deemed was the priority and failed to adjust their messaging when necessary. For example, one product was the first product in its class of drugs to be developed in almost 15 years. It could have been a huge success. However, when the product was launched the communication surrounding it failed to convey to physicians and patients what they needed to hear most- that it was safe. Furthermore, it was completely overpriced. The sales team kept relaying the message back to corporate that physicians were more likely to prescribe it and patients were more likely to get those prescriptions filled if the price point was more competitive. For example, rather than making $100 per prescription but only selling 50,000 prescriptions, a strategy of selling 750,000 prescriptions with a profit of $50 per prescription, as well as owning the market share of that class of drug, would have been a better strategy.  However, once the company decided to adopt that strategy there were three new competitors on the market and they were struggling for even a small percentage of the market share. If the company had used some of the principles of Roger’s “Diffusion of Innovation” and recognized their product launch was failing in the areas of showing relative advantage, trialability and ability to reach the point of having early adopters perhaps it could have successfully launched its novel drug and realized the financial success it wanted.

Let’s start by looking at how they could have shown relative advantage in launching this new drug. In a market that had not seen any new developments in almost 15 years, there was a lot of excitement surrounding the development of this new product and its competitors that followed. The disease state it treated is an epidemic in this country so the need for treatment was definitely there. The two biggest obstacles were to show the medication was safe and cost effective. Its predecessors had a history of causing cardiovascular issues. The Federal Drug Administration required years of safety studies on this class of drug to rule out any high incidence of cardiovascular events so the evidence was there to support the safety of the new class of drug. By effectively communicating the advantage of efficacy as well as safety, the company could have shown this new drug offered patients a real advantage over older treatments for this condition therefore quickly gaining the innovators and early adopters.

By focusing on the trialability of the product, the company could have moved to the next segment of adoption- the early majority. This drug was not covered by insurance companies right out of the gate, which is typical of new drugs on the market. Until pharmaceutical companies have the opportunity to negotiate with insurance carriers’ pharmacy & therapeutics committees, most new drugs on the market are not covered under healthcare plans’ formularies.  In order to make this drug accessible to its target market, the price had to be right. While the pharmaceutical company had to recoup its cost of years of research and development on the new product, not to mention other products in development that fail to ever make it to market, it also needed to set the price at a rate that the vast majority of patients with this disease could afford it. New patients needed the ability to have a trial period on the drug in order to truly see its effectiveness. One other important note about this drug; unlike its predecessors, it took longer to see its efficacy but the efficacy lasted for longer periods of time. Hence, another reason patients needed the ability to try the drug with minor financial risk.  

In conclusion, failure to effectively communicate led to the downfall of this product launch. The company had the illusion they were communicating what patients and physicians wanted to hear, however, they grossly missed the mark. As communicators we must be sure our audience understands what we are trying to communicate and that our message resonates with them. Otherwise, we are just communicating for the sake of communicating.