Understanding Influence - Part I

Social media has fundamentally changed the world of marketing and there is no gain in going back. Marketers may no longer consider that they can “own” their brand—if indeed they ever did. Brands exist in the minds of their consumers. And social media empowers those consumers to actively participate in the conversations that define their brands.

To understand just how powerful a tool of influence social media has become, and its potential to further reinvent how we market, it helps to gain a little perspective and understand where we came from—where Part I begins.

A brief history of marketing influence

Mass Market Era. During the 1950s and 1960s, marketers developed a mass approach to selling standardized, mass-produced products to similarly standardized, undifferentiated mass consumers. For major brands, decisions were simple. Advertise heavily on one of the three major television networks and succeed. If success wasn’t automatic, fire the ad agency, freshen the creative and heavy up the media plan. Minor brands were effectively blocked from the game (and turned to more creative solutions).

Communication in the Mass Market era was all top down, company out. Whether consumers had a problem, or wanted to sing their favorite brand’s praises, their influence was pretty much limited to a closed circle of friends and contacts.

Positioning Era. In 1972, Al Ries and Jack Trout wrote a series of three articles for Ad Age that led to their groundbreaking 1980 book, “Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind,” now in its 20^th printing. It recognized that advertisers and agencies don’t position products, consumers do. It suggested that companies need to determine what position their products occupy in the consumer’s mind relative to other products and then to act strategically to reinforce or change that position.

Communication options, however, did not advance with the theory. Brand marketers fought the battle for consumer’s minds with essentially the same mass media to which they’d long been accustomed. Warily, the book also identified communications clutter—that consumers were being bombarded with more and more advertising messages and beginning to pay less and less attention.

High Tech/Media Options Era. Technology and media advances in the 1980s and 1990s began to shift the tectonic plates of brand power.

Media options began to explode with the advent of cable TV. Video recorders enabled consumers to time shift their favorite programs and skip past commercials. Video games gained a large, loyal following. Special interest magazines experienced tremendous growth as well, their success providing proof of niche marketing’s value.

But most of all, the growth of the Internet and effective search tools enabled consumers to do something they never could before. Suddenly, they could find all the information about brands that they might want. Shopping for a new camera? Get all the facts before you buy. And they could get that information from sources they trust, outside of the brand’s control.

The marketer’s top-down communications monopoly was broken. With the ability for individual consumers to choose when they’ll be receptive to brand communication, consumer’s were at last in control. We demanded legislation that soundly trounced unwelcome telemarketers. And wise marketers recognize us as a market of “hand raisers” who can opt in and opt out the moment we aren’t receiving value from our membership.

Social Era. The rise of social media and the ascendancy of the individual alters the game again. Totally. You and I and the folks next door now have the ability to directly communicate with and influence large audiences, decision makers, CEOs and celebrities. Even President of the United States.

Social media levels the playing field. Big dollars don’t equate to success as they did in the Mass Market era. Niche marketing Davids can slay their Golliaths.

Blogs. Facebook. MySpace. LinkedIn. Twitter. YouTube. Wikis. Podcasts. iTunes. Hulu. Each of us can customize our online experiences as we wish. Invite friends and business associates into our circle. Participate as a brand fan. Create a group. Launch a business. Support a cause.

And actively converse.

Whereas earlier marketing eras were primarily one-way communication. Brand to consumer or brand to distribution channel, for example. The social era is about two-way communication. Success today is about relationships. Conversations. Give and take.

You can ignore the conversation that’s going on. Or embrace it and participate. And by your participation, influence it.

Tomorrow, “Understanding Influence – Part II” will continue with 7 thoughts on how influence works in brand conversations.

The day before St. Patrick’s Day, before onlookers lined Fifth Avenue in Dr. Seuss hats and everyone’s Éire went brách by midnight, the Washington Times reported that in Ireland today, only 30,000 fluent speakers of Irish (Gaelic) remain.  Irish is just one of thousands of languages dying today, and with less languages around, the world is losing out on the benefits of a diversified media, marketing and communications economy.

30,000 fluent Gaelic speakers represent an 88% decrease of Irish speakers from the country’s independence in 1922, even though Ireland’s population increased 25% in the same period.  Despite Irish’s status as an official language of Ireland and the European Union, its real implementation is limited to road signs and compulsory grammar-school courses, and is sure to be extinct by the early part of this century.

Forgetting the cultural loss for the linguistic world as Irish dies, there is an economic consideration that media, marketers and communicators should remember in losing a potentially vibrant marketing and communications industry in Ireland.  But Ireland’s largest Irish-speaking area, Donegal County, is not alone.  Since 1996, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has maintained an Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger, and most recently reported that half of the world’s existing languages may disappear by the end of this century.

Together with visual communication, language is the core of marketing communications.  With fewer languages available to express ourselves, what opportunity costs are we incurring from the decline of global languages?  I believe there are many.

If India loses its 2.7 million speakers of Gondi, would it effect their world-renowned and booming music and entertainment industries?  I would have to say yes.

As Belarusian - an East Slavic language that is not Russian - moves toward extinction, has the opportunity for the nation to develop a robust Belarusian-language media and marketing-communications industry vanished because oft the the dominance of the Russian language in that country?  Absolutely.

Let’s consider the economic opportunity to keep these languages alive.

A good example is French in Quebec.  Had Quebec’s strict but effective language policies of the last century not been implemented to make French the lingua franca in the province, there is no doubt Quebec’s economic importance to Canada would have been affected.  These policies have supported a vibrant market of Francophone media, advertising agencies, music companies and communications firms that drive consumerism and brand loyalty just within the Quebecer market in French. These could have easily been maintained by an English language agency based in Toronto, but instead developed into a successful industry.

Our world’s linguistic abilities are funneling to a few dozen languages.  Let’s just hope these languages become richer as their populations grow.  Much has been lost to get there.

Five to seven years of experience is the magic number. I recently spoke to the director of a mid-sized agency in Milwaukee at a BMA event.  He had a growing agency and needed to build his account service team. However, he had hit an impasse.  He could not find anyone with the 5 to 7 years experience he desired.  It is a conversation I have had with countless agency and corporate clients.  I thought I would share my thoughts on the topic here. I hope it is helpful in framing the issue and brainstorming potential solutions.

Here is my analysis in a not-so-small nut shell:

• Why 5-to-7’s have been the magic number
• Where did all the 5-to-7’s go?
• How this shortage negates the 5-to-7 magic
• Why these 5-to-7’s are even more magical
• Alternatives
• Light at the end of the tunnel
• Another tunnel after that
• Rethinking hiring

Why 5-to-7 is the magic number

For decades HR and hiring managers have gravitated to this candidate profile to build the bedrock of their teams.  5-to-7’s bring a mix of the positive aspects of both junior level go-getters and seasoned senior pros.  Here are just a few of the elements 5-to-7’s bring to the table.

• They are pre-trained with low ramp-up investment or time.

• They have been around the block (at least twice). They have real-world experience in the profession or industry.

• They have a level of business acumen and are able to navigate within systems.

• They have a track record that can help predict how they will produce in the future.

• They have started to develop a network of colleagues and resources.

• They are still open to learning.

• They are still climbing and striving to advance in their careers.

• They are entering a life phase (Marriage? Kids? Going back to school?) that would foster retention. They want stability and to grow with a company.

• They have held or could begin to take on management roles.

• There are generally lots of candidates within this experience range.

• And let’s not forget . . . 5 to 7’s salaries are generally lower than more senior level staff.

Sounds great, right?  It is. And it has been a very successful strategy.  But it isn’t working as well right now. Why?

Where did all the 5-to-7s go?

Like a scene out of “It’s a Wonderful Life,” the answer is…5-to-7’s were never born.

Actually, they were born; they just couldn’t get a job in marketing or advertising.

Think back to 7 years ago.  If you graduated with a degree related to marketing, creative or communications in the year 2002, you were more likely to be a barista than a junior copywriter or marketing assistant.

Classically, each year has a big cohort of recent grads who are hired together. They learn the business from the bottom up. Some are weeded out. Some decide to try other careers. The ones that thrive will have paid their dues, learned the biz, and “apprenticed” under a solid structure of management. They are ready to take the next career step.

For this to work, you need a large “freshman class” of junior candidates.

After the dot.com bust and 9/11, the economy hit a wall. Marketing, creative and communications professions were hit disproportionately hard. Struggling to retain the staff they had, companies simply could not afford to hire new grads and invest the training and vetting time. They had to use the work horses they could count on (yep – the 5-to-7’s of the day).

So, smaller cohorts then mean a smaller pool of 5-to-7 year candidates now.

How this shortage negates the 5-7 magic

HR and hiring managers still want to follow the tried and true practices of the past. They want their 5-to-7’s and they want them now!

But no amount of protesting to Clarence the guardian angel will allow us to go back in time to boost the 2002-2004 cohort. Government 10 year employment stats

The total population of that group is smaller. We are competing for fewer people. But that is not all: the current 5-to-7’s are fundamentally different from the classic 5-to-7’s.

How this cohort is different:

• Not all 5 to 7 years are equal.  Some individuals with 5 to 7 years of professional experience did not have all 5-7 years within the related discipline.  They are not as seasoned in the role.

• Others are more advanced. Many of those that started in the early 2000’s were relied on to wear many hats and to take on responsibility earlier. Therefore, they are further along in their careers.

• The age/life stage sync is out of perfect alignment.  Many of these individuals had to delay their start in the profession. Therefore, they are older than the classic 5-to-7’s and at a different life stage.

• This group had to do more with less. Therefore, they tend to be strong generalists.

• Because they are in short supply and high demand, the current 5-to-7’s can command higher salaries.

Why these 5-to-7’s are even more magical

The 5-to-7’s who started their careers in 2002-2004 were able to gain solid experience. They worked in departments stretched to capacity. They were given opportunities well beyond those they would have had at other times. This may have included managerial experience, coordinating with cross-functional teams, and assisting with strategy. They also had a chance to simply do a lot of work at top speed to compensate for small staffs.

Therefore, when a company hires one of these 5-to-7’s, they are often getting a powerhouse of experience.

That company will also pay more for these super 5-to-7’s.

Alternatives

So, you are a hiring manager and you want to build a team. You want a 5-to-7 candidate. But you can’t find any that hit the mark. Their salaries are out of line with your budget. They have had either too much or not enough experience. They are unwilling to make a move from their current companies.  What do you do?

Think creatively. There is no reason to stay locked to this single strategy if it is not working for you.

• Hire a more experienced candidate.  Those with 10-15 years of experience may be a solid fit. They may also be more competitively “priced” with the 5-to-7’s.

• Hire multiple junior candidates and “grow your own” cohort.

• Hire individuals with experience outside of your niche.

• Restructure work to allow a different mix of workers, including freelance/contract specialists.

• Pony up the cash and adjust the pay grades to gain a superstar 5-to-7 employee.

Light at the end of the tunnel

After 2004, the marketing, creative and communications fields began to rebuild. That means we will have only a few years to wait for this trend to right itself.

The new group of 5-to-7’s is just around the corner.

Another tunnel after that

Looking ahead, we can see two trends looming in the future:

• The same issue will follow the 2002-2004 cohort throughout their career stages.  Therefore, HR and hiring managers will be wise to step up efforts to build succession planning for their mid- and senior-level manager positions within the next 10+ years.

• With the new economic woes of today, we can anticipate a potential reduction in the 2009-2011 entry level cohort, and therefore, a smaller 5-to-7 group starting in 2014.

Rethinking hiring

There are lessons to be learned from the upheavals in our profession over the last 10 years.

• Flexibility: Being able to veer from the tried and true path if it is not working for the organization

• Creativity: Making use of the talent and skills available

• Development: Fostering and retention of the talent we have in our teams and in the profession.

Having begun my career in several of the country’s largest PR firms, I know what it takes to be successful in an agency: the ability to juggle a seemingly impossible list of deliverables in one day; developing a finely tuned attention to detail; becoming an expert in multiple industries in order to speak intelligently to clients; maintaining a voracious appetite for the news; and the commitment to burn the midnight oil day after day – the list goes on. And despite the rigors of working for an agency, the demand to break into a communications firm world remains high – and it remains elusive for the majority of corporate-side communicators.

Having made the transition from public relations to recruiting, I meet candidates every week who work in corporate side communications departments and would love to make that jump – and they’re frustrated about the agency doors that have been closed to them again and again. Why the resistance from top management at these firms to hire from outside the agency world?

The fact is that agencies tend to “raise their own”. They have developed vigorous internship programs that often span four-to-six months and provide their emerging talent with the chance to make major presentations to clients, participate in strategy and braining meetings and the opportunity to author their first media relations documents.  Junior staff has been put through their paces, and they prove they can handle the lifestyle and the high caliber of work that clients demand – if not, they don’t survive long.

The majority of successful upper agency management have spent their entire careers in that world – albeit moving from firm to firm. They develop a unique mix of skills: the ability to deliver outstanding service to clients as well as develop new business. They’re networkers who are always strengthening relationships within the business community because they’re held accountable for generating revenue within their firm or practice.  The fact is that many corporate-side communicators simply are interested or passionate about this aspect of the business.

With all this said, there are the few who break into the agency world at the senior level. How do they do it? They offer a firm and their top clients something agencies haven’t been able to cultivate on their own – a truly deep expertise within an industry. Former journalists who come from top national media outlets are a perfect example. The former corporate communications manager from a global pharmaceutical corporation is another. The bottom line is that to successfully make the transition to the agency world from corporate, you need to find a unique value proposition that can make you invaluable.

What is yours?