Your agency should be actively providing ideas on getting more aggressive while optimizing your resources. It’s their job. Too many agencies view creativity as catchy phrases or images; how about clever ways to effectively reach more customers within your allocated budget? These are dynamic times and your agency should be actively creating strategies that build your brand, show you ROI, and sell your products as effectively, efficiently and creatively as possible.

Is your agency a strategic marketing partner?
Did your agency’s interest in your business drop right along with your budget? Or did they work on refined strategies that allowed you to continue your marketing efforts while sticking to a reduced budget? Depending on your sales strategy and competitive situation, were there alternatives available for getting your message out… select target marketing at tradeshows, specific online messaging, or customized literature for your sales channels? Whatever the answer, your agency should have come to you with the right solutions - before you even asked them to do so.

Does your agency understand B2B marketing and/or your market?
Creativity is great as long as it’s solidly based on sound market knowledge, research and strategic planning, and a true understanding of your customers. Advertising is not a one-size-fits-all, cookie-cutter proposition. If your agency does not have experience in your target markets and its buying influences, then it’s unlikely they will develop a very effective marketing communications program on your behalf.

Are you paying your agency and then doing their work?
How often have you had to rewrite copy because the writer or AE couldn’t express the right message? Or it was full of product features without any detailed customer benefits? Or the design didn’t complement your brand identity at all? An agency’s job is to develop strong sales tools that are useful. If you frequently have to redo the copy or make layout changes, then why do you pay them? They’re wasted dollars that you can’t afford to throw away.

Take a closer look at the entire relationship you’ve had with your ad agency, marketing firm, or in-house department. It is possible to have an aggressive marketing posture, even with an allocated budget that may not be exactly what you would prefer. But it requires a committed partnership with an agency that understands your objectives, your products and your industry.

Using a lite version of Apple’s Safari browser, they have created the closest thing to a desktop web experience on a mobile device. There are, however, a few caveats — chief among them is the lack of support for Flash movies. Though it’s not exactly good practice for a website to be built only in Flash, Apple does seem to be taking a risk by not including any support. There has been speculation that Apple has done this to try and muscle people into using their preferred video encoding method. But enough about the iPhone — this is not meant to be a review. I want to address is the burgeoning growth of the web across multiple platforms, predominantly on mobile devices.

Unfortunately, the iPhone is the exception, and not the rule, when it comes to displaying web content (nearly) correctly on mobile devices. Referencing my previous post about developing for multiple browsers, my arguments increase ten-fold when dealing with mobile browsers. Whether or not a website user’s phone supports CSS, JavaScript or even images is a guessing game at best.

So the question is: how long until the rest of the industry catches up to Apple? Many of the websites which function 100% correctly on the majority of mobile devices are watered down, text-based versions of a much larger site. As simple ESPN.com’s mobile version looks, though, it took time, and therefore money for someone to develop it.

This is where the web browser on the iPhone starts to excite us web developers. Rather than spending time, and invariably, the client’s money, building a separate version of the main content areas of the site, developers could focus on specific mobile applications made to enhance your Web site on a mobile device — not replace it.

With Apple setting the bar so high on their first mobile phone, I’m anxiously waiting to see what is on the horizon for mobile technology. Hopefully the spirit of competition will encourage innovation and help drive down prices – $600 is a lot of money.

There have been a few complaints about CNN being selective- picking only sensational videos and being a gatekeeper of questions. Well, isn’t that the duty of news? Isn’t this better than the clean and glassy way questions are usually asked? IMO, yes. The debates were real and even entertaining at times. I personally felt more connected seeing real people talk about issues that affected them, rather the polished Anderson Cooper asking all the questions. The debate was authentic and personal, something many campaigns (especially political debates) usually lack.

For me this was a pretty amazing night. The younger generation is getting a chance to get involved in a way they understand. Hopefully there were other Gen Y’ers like me interested and appreciative of the YouTube approach. But, for more than just Gen Y, I think this a stepping-stone for the way social and big media interact. Online media is not slowing down, and sure CNN was still the gatekeeper, but this is a landmark news station joining forces with the infantile social video site. User-generated content cannot be ignored and I give props to CNN for starting a new trend and implementing an exciting change.

BTW, if you’re interested the Republican YouTube debate is in September.

What’s your issue for the day? Just google it, and I am sure someone’s blogging about it. Blogs allow for an amazing interaction point. And, I hope further explanation about the impact of blogs is unnecessary. Because in 2007 if you still don’t get it, then perhaps you should let other bloggers convince you on why blogs rule.

Keeping up with blogs is another story. When you have a medium that is running 24/7 it can be a little straining on one’s own effort to constantly check and even more effort is required in actually posting. So I write this post today as a pseudo apology to blogs in general. It’s been a while since a post on this CG blog and I couldn’t wait any longer. Sorry CG blog, we took you for granted, we’ll try not to let it happen again.

And in the RFP, is it really necessary to know my mother’s hat size? OK, I sound a little frustrated. But, for marketing/communications firms, time is our product. Smart ones should be perfectly willing to invest such time in reasonable new business presentations. However, when you invest that time in an RFP, make the cut, then find out you are one of six presenting, that means you have (statistically, anyway) a 16.7% chance of gaining the business. Those are bad odds, and the final decision can sometimes hinge on strange intangibles [We once won a pitch where we were pretty evenly matched, but the client thought our competition had bad taste in shoes…I kid you not.]

So, what would I suggest? How about this for a common sense approach:

• Initially, take a quick look at as many agencies as fits your comfort zone. But then narrow your search to less than ten agencies. It’s not that hard if you do some checking with industry publishers, Business-to-Business magazine, industry associates, professional agency search firms or just some basic Google searching. Find agencies that:
  • Know, and work within your market(s)
  • Have the critical B-to-B focus
  • Are the right size to handle your business
  • Have a good reputation, and are stable
• If you intend to issue a formal RFP, have a long discussion with the contenders before you do so. There may be some factors that will lead to immediate cuts. Are they too small or too large? Do they really have experience in your markets or are they just blowing smoke? Are they 2,000 miles from your office when you really wanted someone down the block? Do your personalities mesh? And so on. Doing this will save you a lot of time, and get you to the “short list” much more quickly.
• If and when those RFPs go out, make sure they provide you with the information you really want and need, and are not unnecessarily cumbersome.
  • And… in those RFPs, do not ask for, or imply that you will consider spec creative. Once that implication is put forth, every agency will assume that the others are doing it, so they better do so as well. There is no way effective creative can be done at this stage of a relationship. If the decision is going to hinge on who does the coolest layout, we’re all playing a guessing game. [Ok, here’s another “no kidding” story: We got involved in a situation like this recently where spec ads were required…but we could not present them personally…had to FedEx them. Turns out this company had an internal “grading sheet” and the ads were passed to just about anyone within the company who could walk and chew gum simultaneously. If I would have known those rules going in, I would have said “no thanks.”]
• Give the finalists a reasonable timeframe for putting together their presentation.
  • Speaking of time frames, here’s a situation that still gnaws at me: Very short timeframe for formal RFP. Short time frame for preparing presentation, with the stipulation that the decision would be made and new agency in place very quickly. We did everything as instructed, but the three months later the company had still not made a decision. We were obviously put under the gun for no good reason. That is just plain rude.

OK, I feel better now… and I gotta get to work on that next presentation.

“CAPRI PANTS REQUIRED FOR USE OF THIS POST OFFICE. GET THEM HERE.”

Frustrated by their lack of cross-pants compatibility, you leave and purchase the required garments to use their service, even though they hinder your walking ability and have holes in all the wrong places.

Where is this going? Indulge me just a bit longer…

You return to the post office, and see that there is a friendly face waiting to help you behind the counter. That counter, however, is located on the ceiling, just out of reach for you to hand over your package.

“To view this post office as gravity meant it, please upgrade to the latest version of those capris,” he says.

Sending a package shouldn’t be this hard (and thankfully it isn’t), so why do some companies insist on putting you through this rigmarole, before you can even use their Web site? Why can’t everyone play nice and develop Web sites that are cross-browser compatible? Is it laziness? Complacency? I can’t say for sure, but it’s important that we try our best to make sure everyone can use every Web site we build.

Bear with me, as I feel compelled to share some statistics with you.

In 2002, it was much easier to make an assumption about which browser someone might be using to look at your web site, as over 80% of people were using some version of Internet Explorer to surf the Web. As of February ‘07, however, IE’s market share is down to about 58% — spread over three different versions, each rendering sites in their own infuriating way — while Mozilla Firefox now has a share of over 31%. Numerous different browsers make up that last 11%, and we can’t forget about the ever increasing number of Macintosh users on the web; but statistically speaking, a web user is likely to be on a Windows machine, using IE 6/7 or Firefox. As is par for the course with technology, these numbers are shifting constantly, and it requires due diligence on our part, as Web developers, to make sure your Web site is “in the now.”

It’s easy to develop a Web site that functions and displays correctly for that 89%, and stop there, but is it really wise to possibly alienate 1 out of every 10 people that visit your Web site? Or should you just suck it up, take the time and money and test your site on as many browsers (within reason) as you can? I’ll go with the latter. Is it the quickest way to develop a Web site? No. But it’s the right way.

The best visual design for a Web site isn’t always the most aesthetically pleasing.

Oh great…the Creative Director heard me. But really Mr. Creative Director, sir, I know you’re an artist and everything you produce could proudly be displayed in a gallery. But a Web site isn’t a piece of art meant to be interpreted: it’s a functional tool that people interact with.

Ahhhh, the key word — interact. That’s the main difference between a design destined for a substrate (like paper) and one destined for a computer screen. People use Web sites and expect not to have a learning curve attached.

While designing for interaction is a discipline in itself, I’ll touch on a couple of key points. Take this short quiz. Which links are easier to identify?

Example A is a trick question. You can’t identify the links because there’s no difference between link and non-link text. Links in Example B certainly can be identified as a dark shade of blue. However, depending on how well a particular visitor’s monitor displays color, the deep blue may actually look quite a bit blacker. Example C links are very easy to see. They’re 100% blue and underlined.

The moral of this story isn’t to make all links blue and underlined, but to make links look, well, like links. Visual cues are important on the Web. Define a style for links (ex. Maroon font color with an underline that changes to no underline when the mouse is over it) on your site and be consistent.

Let’s try one more fun example. Which button is easier to click?

If you said “the big one”, you’re right!! Why? Because it’s big! Simple concept, but one that’s far too overlooked. Important action items, such as order buttons, should be easy to find and not tax the user’s ability to aim the mouse.

Again, the moral here isn’t to make all buttons on a site huge, but to keep in mind that the larger the object is, the easier it is to click. Now, I know a site with blue underlined links and big buttons may make some designers run for the hills, but the fact is an ergonomically-designed site is easier to use.

If you’ve ever driven a Porsche (which I highly recommend), the minute you sit in the driver’s seat you realize this is a car that’s meant to be driven. Attention to detail in cabin ergonomics - feel of the gear shift, placement of the pedals, size of the steering wheel, etc - makes you want to drive the car.

Small changes to the ergonomics of your Web site - bigger buttons, easily readable text, identifiable links - can transform your site from one that’s meant to be looked at to one that’s meant to be used.

NOTE: The Creative Director depicted in this article is fictional. Any resemblance to a living individual is purely coincidence - especially the one employed by Cummings Group.

The Windows machines rule the greater population. More applications and software, easier attainability, better prices…and the list goes on. But, when I found myself perusing Newsweek’s recent interview with Bill Gates I never would have thought it would evoke such an emotional response.

Why is this corporate goliath knocking his competition if there really isn’t any threat? Is Microsoft finally concerned with the 5% of the population they don’t have control over?

If it’s irrelevant, why criticize Apple by saying there’s not the slightest shred of truth to their recent ads. Is there really no truth? I may not be a Vista developer (who according to Gates are miles ahead of the Apple OSX developers) but as an average user, I find real truth in their ads. Even more than that — effectiveness. I believe this to be advertising in its true glory. Calling out your competitor on their disadvantages and showing your audience that you could actually have a better product. Brilliant. To me (I may personally find Apple computers to be much more “out of the box” than the clunky piece-o-metal my spouse calls a computer), Gates comes off as not only bitter, but also agitated his products may be subject to the pillar of this great capitalist society: Competition.

And then again perhaps my thoughts are merely irrelevant because let’s face it, the Apple is much prettier and really, that’s all us artsy folks care about isn’t it?

Which do you think is better? Weigh in on the great debate.

“Yeah, we’re all ready to go. We have our new corporate literature here and the web page looks good. The new ad campaign started this month as well. So we’re on schedule. Next week I’m gonna sit down with our CSRs to tell them what we’ve done, and then we’re calling in all of our sales guys in 3 weeks to walk them through the new brand too.”

What?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? You must be kidding me. Microsites and print ads and slick looking literature are all fine tactics to do — but there must be a reason or a purpose behind it all. As well as a proper order to it all. How can you possibly spend weeks planning for “The Brand-New Brand,” then execute and publicly release all the marketing materials, and then decide to get together with your own “front-liners” to tell them what you’ve done?

Your Brand is what people believe about your company and what it stands for, and outlines a promise that defines what your customers can expect from your business, your products or your service. It represents value. Before you can start selling The Brand to the market, you must ensure that your internal organization understands the promise your Brand plans to deliver and the message that will be communicated, and that everyone fully supports it. Your people need to be involved with the Uncovering of The Brand from day 1, and then be exposed to the process during its progress. Encourage input and engage thought, and then confirm that each person knows their role in this effort — and they believe it. This is critical since your entire company will deliver on the message of the Brand.

You may say, “But I can’t lead or manage this entire internal process myself,” and I agree; that’s exactly right. You need to find a Doer (or a team of Doers) within your company that believe in the mission and will help you share information, gather feedback, reinforce the message, and execute the branding program internally. Doers who understand the purpose behind the rebranding or repositioning, and are also willing to work on making it all succeed in addition to, not in place of, their normal daily responsibilities. Meet with your Branding Doers on a regular basis — even for 5 minute briefings — so that you stay on top of “internal buzz” whether it be positive energy or conflicting assumptions, address questions or add to the excitement as it pops up, and that way you ensure the new brand message or product positioning is correctly and consistently understood throughout your organization.

From top management to customer service, from outside sales reps to your project engineers, from your dealer network to your receptionist, all of these people have an impact on your Brand and you really never know which one will be faced with the opportunity to leave that first impression with a customer — current or potential. Secure “it” on the inside before taking “it” outside. Because once “it” is launched and out there, It Is.