The Underdog Effect

College degrees of famous marketers.

To follow-up on yesterday's post, I got thinking about famous marketers I respect. Then I looked up their college degrees. Here's what I found:

• Seth Godin– Computer Science and Philosophy, MBA
• Guy Kawasaki – Psychology undergrad, MBA
• Jimmy Buffett – Journalism
• Tom Peters - Civil Engineering and MBA

Then, of course, there are the famous non-college graduates: Steve Jobs, Richard Branson, Jon Mackey, Paul Arden, and Walt Disney, to name a few.

Off-topic: On marketing degrees and careers in marketing.

This off-topic ramble is in response to a couple of discussions I’ve had recently about the value of marketing degrees in relation to actual careers in marketing…

I have an undergrad degree in Journalism and an MBA. I own an ad agency (at least we call it that for shorthand). I value formal education, but not because it trained me or made filled my head with a bunch of stuff I couldn’t have learned any other way.

In fact, the most important thing my formal education taught me, especially my MBA, is how to live within and effect change within the traditional business world. It taught me the language, values and cultural mores of that world.

But it was the 15+ jobs I held before that (frozen food manager, retail salesperson, UPS truck loader, bowling alley mechanic, etc.) along with excessive reading, talking and learning taught me how to be a marketer. That is, it my crazy life experiences that has/continue to help me understand people and the world around me.

I recommend that everyone take the time and effort to get a college degree. Even better if you pick a school that’s away from home, not the choice of your parents, and pay for it yourself. Then take eclectic classes (American Radicalism, African History and World Poetry were three of my favorites). Sure, take some marketing and business classes, but don’t let them fill too much of your time.

A degree in psychology, history or mathematics can set one up for a wonderful career in marketing. Just about any degree can. We should all stop treating college like it is a trade school. For most of us it isn't. Things simply change too fast. College is foundational education that helps you see the world from different perspectives and, yes, learn how to learn.

One last thought: I'm always tentative to hire people with business and marketing degrees. I find that path is often (but definitely not always!) a reflection of a lack of curiosity or love for the unexpected. That's a generalization, of course, but a person who has chosen that path, especially if they went straight from high school to college to study business or marketing, carries the burden of demonstrating that they are more adaptive, interesting and inquisitive than that life path suggests.

I don’t mean to offend or demean anyone with this post. We’ve all had different ways of getting to where we are today. What works for one, may not work for another.

Best of luck…with whatever route chooses you.

Modern brand building = commitment, not campaigning.

This election season (1.5 years?!) reminds us of all the problems with campaigns:

• They're constantly changing.
• The inauthentic.
• They're filled with lies.
• Etc, etc, etc...

But the issues that political campaigns have are exactly the same as the issues that brands face. So let's change it. Paul Isakson put together this great presentation on modern brand building. Reviewing it is a good first step.
Modern Brand Building

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: deepspace space150)

Marketing blasphemy: ignore your competition.

Ignore your competition? Really?! Yes, I know it is important to know what the competition is doing. Yes, I know the first step of a traditional marketing plan is a SWOT analysis that looks at you vs. your competition. Yes, I know just about everybody tells you to compare yourself to your competition.

I'm telling you to stop.

Let me explain why.

For starters, most people don't research their competition, they obsess over them. They critique them. They get all emotional about it. And it becomes a wasted effort. The goggles become too hazy to see clearly.

More importantly, while researching the competition can be fun and interesting, it rarely helps you make your business better. Quite the opposite. It contributes to lost focus. Most underdogs companies need to focus on the big three: creating a great product, a great experience and a great personality. The Holy Trinity of a successful underdog brand. Of any brand.

So just try it. Instead of obsessing over what they're doing better or different, try focusing on what you could be doing better or different.

"New Media" is soooooo old school.

I want to submit a simple idea: there is no such thing as new media. There is no such thing as traditional media. There is just media.

New media gurus love to talk about how the:30 spot is dead. Print ad campaigns are history. Billboards are spam. And that may be true. But the thing is 99.9999% of companies have always implemented many tactics beyond these.

Businesses have been using events, sales calls, sampling, skywriting, sponsorships, brochures, and gazillions of other mediums since the beginning. Especially underdogs. We've always had to choose which media would get what share of our budget.

It is no different with so-call new media. Much of it works. Every company should be considering it as part of their media mix. But if, somehow, its newness becomes an over-riding reason to pursue a tactic (instead of effectiveness) then you'll likely find yourself on a slippery slope to nowhere.

Twitter.

Rizen finally did it: we're twittering.

Find us at http://twitter.com/rizencreative

Well said.

"I demolish my bridges behind me...then there is no choice but to move forward."
  - Fridtjof Nansen

Bridging the marketing tactic chasm.

Today's marketing environment is filled with nearly endless tactical options. It can be overwhelming.

Should you blog? Twitter? Run a magazine ad? Hold a promotion? Start a Face book group? Create a YouTube video?

The answer is simple: maybe.

Unfortunately, what makes sense for you won't make sense for everyone. Yet self-purported experts are quick to try to sell you on their magic recipe.

Don't buy it.

There is a growing chasm between everything you could be doing and the stuff you will realistically do. Underdogs should focus on the latter, not the former. By this I mean you should focus on the tactics that you have the time, resources and inclination to do right.

You can't do it all. (Sorry, if this is the first time you've heard this.) So what can you do? Research. Learn. Talk to people. Especially your customers. Then pick ONE NEW TACTIC and try it. Don't phone it in. Do it. Dedicate a bit of time every day to it. Then (I think this is the hard part) stick with it. I think it takes at least six months to judge whether almost any tactic is working or not. Sometimes longer.

Don't let yourself me overwhelmed. Despite all this discussion about "new media,"  the core issue has  not changed. We all enjoy a scarcity of resources. So we have to pick which media, new or old, to pursue.

Stop being washed over by all the blather about this or that tactic. Focus on one thing you can do well and try it.

Control what you can. Luck will come.

Seth has yet another great post today about effort, luck and their relationship to one another. It comes down to this: we can only control what we can (effort), the rest will just happen, good or bad (luck).

The best part of this post are the tangible action items he suggests. I'll give you the first two:

1. Delete 120 minutes a day of 'spare time' from your life. This can include TV, reading the newspaper, commuting, wasting time in social networks and meetings. Up to you.

2. Spend the 120 minutes doing this instead:

Exercise for thirty minutes.
Read relevant non-fiction (trade magazines, journals, business books, blogs, etc.)
Send three thank you notes.
Learn new digital techniques (spreadsheet macros, Firefox shortcuts, productivity tools, graphic design, html coding)
Volunteer.
Blog for five minutes about something you learned.
Give a speech once a month about something you don't currently know a lot about.

Read the whole thing here.

Reach vs frequency -- second verse, same as the first.

Had someone ask me to day about the best way to buy media in terms of reach vs. frequency. It reminded me of this post from a couple of months ago, so I thought I'd dig it out:

Reach vs. Frequency

Let's say you have a tight advertising budget, but you feel a need to maintain some sort of presence in the media.

Here are my suggestions:

1) Question your premise. Chances are your print advertising ain't working for you. Otherwise your budgets would be bigger.

2) If you already have awareness -- your perfect prospects have heard of you -- go big and don't worry too much about frequency. Worry about making an impression.

3) If your perfect prospects don't know you, go small, but with more frequency. Be patient. Use your media as the first introduction. A way to warm up your perfect prospects before they begin dialog-ing with you via other means.

Yes -- I know this isn't right for everyone. But I'm telling you, the old saying that "half my advertising works, I just don't which half" is only about half right. It's more like 1/4 of your advertising that's "working." And it's less if you're doing it on a skinny budget.