Mobile Connectivity has been redefined. Long gone are the days when the only novelty of the mobile phone was being able to talk or message while on the go. Today mobile telecommunications are offering an integrated lifestyle combining work and play, social and professional in ways never experienced by any generation ever before. What are such examples of convergence that you are experiencing in your part of the world? How is the use of mobile phones being redefined?

Picture this example - A typical day in a converged world! Checking emails without a laptop, PC or an internet café. Making gift buying decisions on the go by taking pictures from the mobile phone camera and sharing them as MMS messages instantly. Watching streaming videos on YouTube or better yet, watching Live TV over DVB-h. Capturing something unusual instantly and sharing it with the world using flickr on the mobile phone, geotagging them with GPS coordinates for added perspective. Meeting new people through Bluedating whereby a Bluetooth enabled network (Scatternet) matches and connects people in the vicinity based on preset preferences. Downloading RSS feeds onto your mobile and catching up with the latest on the web from hot new music, to stock market updates, to favorite blogs. Instantly micro-blogging and updating your boss, your friends or family on whatever you are doing now using Twitter or Facebook, from being stuck in a traffic jam to making a stop for coffee, updates can be instant and continuous. Traveling to new places and navigating through voice assisted GPS on the go be in a car or on foot. Sitting on a beach apparently alone but connected through fring IMing away or better yet playing a multiplayer game like “Call of the Pharaoh” with a bunch of friends. Downloading and listening to music as you soon as you hear about it on FM using the built-in mobile phone radio. Tracking miles walked or run using an in-built Pedometer. Using Location Based Services to locate ATM’s or restaurants or simply keeping a track of friends. If that is not enough using services like EDY (Euro, Dollar and Yen) to make transactions at select stores, activating vending machines or buying train tickets, all using a mobile phone replacing the need to carry cash or all kinds of credit/debit cards.

Wait a minute! Are we forgetting something? Using mobile phones to make voice calls of course! Please let me know your thoughts?

Posted on August 22, 2008 2:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Having now accumulated over 20 years of experience in global marketing, I have witnessed and participated in a few business cycles that have had significant impact on the efficacy of marketing. One that is unbelievably predictable occurs whenever the economy slows. The first reaction from the lionshare of companies is to cut marketing, advertising and business development budgets.

Lets think about that for a moment. Sales are down so lets reduce the spending on activities that are primarily responsible for sales! Imagine companies that actually maintain or even increase their spend in these areas during a slowdown. Their voice would be louder as many competitors would be less vocal. As well, their spend may be more efficient if suppliers and partners work with them to maximize their impact during the downturn.

So why do companies continue to cut these activities – because it is easy. What is harder is to capture the opportunity a slow down provides. Tom Peters has said, "Progress is mostly the product of rogues". Rogues or contrarians, these companies and leaders may prosper much more by making brave and intelligent decisions to invest and rise above the clutter rather than join their competitors in the same predictable and stagnant strategy.


Jeff Swystun, Chief Communications Officer, DDB Worldwide

Posted on June 9, 2008 9:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

We have had such fun with the Business Communications blog and have been extremely pleased with the visits and comments since launch. We want to keep the content fresh and frequent so are taking a new approach. I will be inviting more experts within DDB to provide their insights and points of view. This will give you exposure to a greater range of thought while covering regional and industry trends. Keep coming back because the content will be great.
--Jeff Swystun

Producing a music CD may seem like the last thing a company that manufacturers bleach would ever do, but if you listen to Clorox consumers it makes perfect sense.

And that is exactly what DDB San Francisco did. Postings on You Tube, multiple blogs, and an unprecedented number of emails from consumers asking where they could get the music from Clorox commercials, was enough to convince us to approach the client with the idea of creating a CD. And it took Tarang Amin, VP of Clorox Global Franchise about two seconds to agree to do it.

Entering the music business for the first time, The Clorox Company ventured into un-chartered territory, but together we were able to navigate the terrain. Our team collaborated with music houses to extend original tracks from various thirty second commercials, named the CD "The Blue Sky Project" and designed the original album cover art. Both agency and client agreed that half of the profits from the CD should be given to a charity. Seeing that the Clorox Brand was focused on healthier lives and specifically the well-being of children, we identified the perfect beneficiary: MuST (Music In Schools Today), a nonprofit organization that supports music programs in low income public schools (mustcreate.org).

The Blue Sky Project was released in early March and is now available for purchase on iTunes® and 50+ other online retailers for $6.93. In addition to the original compositions, the CD includes recordings from independent ,artists featured in commercials. A cool story that further proves that consumers today are both channel and audience for marketing messages.

Lisa Bennett, Chief Creative Officer & Managing Partner, DDB San Francisco

Posted on May 12, 2008 9:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

We currently have a question on our homepage asking that when you have a great brand experience, do you tell others about it.

No real surprise that approximately 80% say that they do. It is kind of funny that we are largely surprised these days when something truly surpasses our expectations in the use of products and services. For the most part, it seems we get what we expect and only that. And in some highly emotional cases we can be deeply disappointed.

The "brand experience" has been talked about for years. It is identified as the key differentiator, yet, most experiences are of the "me too" variety. With precious few standing out when that is the aim of branding — what is going wrong? Why do organizations have such a difficult time consistently delivering differentiation and a brand experience that creates advocates?

Jeff Swystun, Director of Global Communications, DDB Worldwide

Posted on March 26, 2008 5:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

A recent ANA study on marketing re-organizations demonstrates that all that activity might reflect a lot of busy work.

Centralization and integration seemed to be the main pursuit, most probably for cost savings and messaging consistency. However, only 13% of senior marketers say they're "very satisfied" with their companies' marketing structures. Here are some key stats from it:

• 29% of marketers are undergoing reorganization and another 39% having done so within the past two years (sample size 132)


• Fewer than half (48%) of respondents said structural changes to marketing had actually improved their companies' marketing abilities during the past two years. Another 17% said restructuring had worsened abilities, and 36% saw no change


• 49% of respondents believe marketing has become more centralized the past two years, and 52% described their companies as centralized vs. 30% decentralized and 18% as a hybrid

Posted on March 11, 2008 2:42 PM | Permalink

I learned years ago in traditional management consulting at Price Waterhouse, that you solve problems by listening.

This is so true in communications. I know the most impressive communicators are great listeners, aggregators of information, makers of relevance, and of course, entertaining when they do communicate. The more challenged someone is in communications the more the root cause may be poor listening skills. These people do not listen because:

they "know" what they are going to hear

they seek confirmation, not information

what's being said gets in the way of what needs be said

In effect, they have already made their conclusions and have run to a solution that may not be helpful. Communication professionals need to be constantly aware of their own biases and perceptions (control your biases and validate your assumptions). These days in a time of speed and overwhelming communication clutter, we need to slow down and listen to attain the nuance and real issues faced by customers, colleagues and others. Before you just react (ready, shoot, aim), think about the following to help you listen better:

put yourself in the other person's shoes

keep the conversation on what the speaker says, not on what interests you

spend more time listening than talking

pay attention, never become preoccupied with your own thoughts when others talk, take brief notes to concentrate on what is being said

do not finish the sentence of others

ask questions, but do not answer questions with questions

plan responses after the other person has finished speaking, not while they are speaking

summarize - walk the person through your analysis

The result is you will be better communicators. In fact, the applications are endless. Being a better listener can improve customer service, new product and service development, media relations, social responsibility efforts, etc. Do you have any examples to share?

Posted on February 25, 2008 4:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

This is a call for help!

I was asked for a cheat sheet on what makes for engaging communications. I am looking to build the definitive list. Among my current notables are engaging communications must be relevant to the target audience, different from competing communications, creatively delivered in channels that the target audience uses, etc. Can you help me build the list?

Posted on February 20, 2008 4:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

At a conference I recently attended on Corporate Image, a representative of Harley-Davidson spoke about the success and ongoing challenges of that brand.

It occurred to me as the material was presented that Harley-Davidson still carries the spirit of a rebellious challenger brand. Its influence is indisputable within its category. The speaker, Joanne Bischmann, attributed this to "block and tackle" branding and communications. It was not specific strategies that have built the brand but day-to-day simple messaging that is understood inside and outside the company and that is applied consistently. This supports an observation that I have long held - much of marketing is not sexy. Sure there are exciting advertising campaigns, viral and guerilla promotions, celebrity endorser situations and many more tools and strategies that project sexy elements. However, when you get right down to it, marketing is also repetition, database management, copy review, budget debates, ROI struggles. Harley-Davidson has embraced this fact and are successful because they undertake the sexy and unsexy with equal energy.

Posted on February 14, 2008 4:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

As a former and passionate member of the Interbrand team, I am well aware of the value of branding. I was recently thinking of the traits and behaviors of a company's leader and how much that drives brand. We are constantly bombarded with the charismatic and capable examples of Richard Branson at Virgin, Steve Jobs at Apple, (the return of) Howard Schultz at Starbucks and there are many more. If the leader is so integral to brand and motivating their employees to live the brand then perhaps there is another equation or metric to be explored - "the brand value or contribution to brand value of the CEO". Thoughts?

Posted on February 11, 2008 4:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

I am confident that I have read almost every paper and article on the plight of the CMO. Partly because I occupy a similar responsibility, but more because I could not understand why public failures dominate any successes in the role. It is almost if we are all attempting to eradicate the title of Chief Marketing Officer. The press love to dump on CMOs, CEO's love to fire them to buy themselves time, clients are largely unimpressed, and staff reject their czar-like status.

Try to find a generic CMO job description and that will be a clue as to the challenges such a role faces. It seems that those who take on the job must possess an incredible bundle of talents and personality.

CMOs must have the ability to craft and deliver messages and experiences that engage employees, markets and other stakeholders. They must be fantastic storytellers. Their formal and informal networks must grease the channels of communications.

They must stretch from (traditional) advertising and brand development to a rare combination of leadership, creative, analytical and financial skills. At the same time they are wholly comfortable with media alternatives, emerging markets, fragmentation, social networking, digital and other technologies. They are the trend spotters

CMOs are more like "Chief Coordination Officers" with great intuition and ability to convince many on everything. Their natural curiosity makes them a strategic aggregator and magical disseminator (the dot connector). They lead cultural change efforts while being the voice of the customer so engage all company functions not just communications.

They must boost returns on marketing investment while possessing P&L savvy and ensure that top-line revenue growth is consistent. All the while being fresh, innovative and unconventional.

Anyone who occupies the role has to be a team player, be well respected and credible, avoid and abhor star status, balance the left and right brains, be confident, intelligent, smart, streetwise, well educated. Self deprecation and self effacement are good too. Their power of persuasion allows them to reject command and control - they exude influence.

In other words, they must be nuts to take on the job.

With these excessive expectations how can one succeed? Yet 47% of the Fortune 1000 have CMOs according to Booz Allen Hamilton. At the same time, Spencer Stuart informs the world that individual CMO tenure is in no danger of exceeding 24 months. That means there are approximately 235 vacancies per year for top tier CMOs (good business for those in executive search).

One has to wonder what the talent pool is like for filling this position even if the crazy expectations were reduced. It is no wonder the CMO attempts to justify their existence by firing the incumbent ad agency and marketing consultants, drives knee-jerk tactical course corrections, contributes to messaging and positioning confusion, and makes excuses to the CEO who wonders why performance is not through the roof.

Posted on February 8, 2008 5:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)