Brian Solis's Blog, page 111

A Return to Simplicity, Empathy and Imperfection in Communication: Human to Human #H2H

Guest post by Bryan Kramer, author of the new ebook, “There is no B2B or B2C: Human to Human” and CEO of PureMatter

Marketing has become so complex, in segmenting audiences into “B2B” (business to business) and “B2C” (business to consumer). Being here in Silicon Valley, surrounded by titans of technology like Google, Facebook, Cisco, Twitter, LinkedIn and eBay to name a few, I’ve observed a downhill slope of complexity in marketing communication. This, plus the rise of social, digital and mobile channels, have created an atmosphere of anonymity, and the entire marketing ecosystem felt like a very cold, distant and impersonal place.

I fear that the social/digital/mobile world has created an angry mob of anonymous reactors who take short form communication literally. Until we learn to be mindful of what and how we share – what I call our “social body language” – and exercise our human empathy toward the mistakes and failures of strangers and the people we know, the online world of communication will remain somewhat of the “Wild West.”

That’s where “H2H” came from; we’ve been saying it in our agency, PureMatter, for over a decade. It’s also lived in many forms from many people, most popularly with P2P (person to person or people to people). Doc Searls (Cluetrain Manifesto + VRM), Chris Heuer, Christopher Carfi, Brian Solis and many others have been talking about how the dawn of a more social web, i.e. forums, discussion boards, and pre- Web 2.0 online communities, would eventually equalize the media landscape and give a voice and brand to customers while introducing the need for a human persona in business. As Brian says of P2P, “people are now brands and brands are now people.” And, most recently, Humanize by Jamie Notter and Maddie Grant, shared the benefits of people-focused businesses and how to lead the shift from inside out.

This evolution has been guiding our society back into one that requires a more personal approach. It is time for a reminder about our humanity.

Speaking Human

Consumers are confused. Why can’t we make it simple for people to understand what we’re selling, so they can more easily share their experiences and the value they felt with others? More importantly, why is it that what we’re marketing most often does not align to actual consumer experiences? I don’t care what language you speak, who your brand is or what message you’re trying to send, we all need to speak more human. Too often we complicate what we’re trying to say. Ironically, as our world becomes more customer-owned and socially enabled, we continue to see complicated, redundant, over-technical, and over-thought mass messages getting pushed out – and lost – in the ether. Is it really getting harder to stand out, with so much data and information out there… or is the answer just to clearly say what you mean, in understandable human words?

A Human Approach: Social Sensory Marketing

Humans are social creatures; this is something we all know and understand. I had the pleasure of interviewing Scott Hebner, VP of Social Business at IBM, and friend Kare Anderson, author, speaker, columnist and coach, about how human behavior fits into the context of social marketing. Given that humans consume socially, I wondered where social marketing is headed as it continues to mature. Both Scott and Kare explained in their own ways that the future of social marketing involves “human sensory building”, and how it will become necessary to intertwine this approach into the marketing experience at each stage of the customer lifecycle. When we are able to weave directly relatable human experiences into social situations, it changes how we share and consume information forever. Human Sensory Building means connecting marketing to our most basic human sensory system. The more you can map what you’re communicating to these senses, the deeper and more meaningful your connections will be.

Customers are Fickle Humans

Customers, as humans, are fickle and are so empowered today that they expect extraordinary, over-the-top experiences that rock their world. Nothing less will do. Gone are the days where feedback was kept quiet and experiences were collected around a review form. Today, your customer’s comments are transparent to your competitors, making it easier for them to publicly see your pain points. Comparisons are easier to make and product switching happens faster than ever. Customers are ready to move on unless they have one thing – an undying relationship with a person or people at your brand who made them feel uniquely special.

Becoming Better Storytellers

Between the convergence of social, mobile and digital technologies, the way we have learned as humans to communicate with each other has changed forever. Texting has enabled us to eliminate face to face, or at least mouth to ear, communications in short bursts. Character limits, like on Twitter, force us to be more succinct about the words we share with the public. Over 90% of human communication is conveyed through visual body language cues. So what happens, when technology leaves us with just under the remaining 10% of verbal non-visual communication, is a floodgate of communication without context. This is a huge problem that’s rewiring our human brains, in my opinion. Humans require context to understand concepts. Without boundaries, short bursts of communication, coupled with a faster-paced, noisy society and shorter attention spans is affecting how we, as humans, tell stories.

We need to become better storytellers. A commonality between humans is our emotions; we can’t help crying when others cry, laughing when others laugh. You can’t expect anyone to connect with your content, message, brand, values, if you don’t yourself. It’s that simple. Storytelling is a great way to communicate how you feel, or how you want your audience to feel. A story helps us understand how things fit into our individual experiences and gives us context to make decisions. Stories add the color, personality and relevance about what you’re trying to sell.

Technology and unsexy products will never go away and need to be sold, but shiny pieces of metal on their own will never be as interesting as the human interpretation of why they exist. 52% of consumers stop following a business’ page because the content is boring and repetitive (source: SMI). So make your marketing interesting. Create a mood through imagery. Speak at your audience’s level. Be smart and clever when you can. Tell me, don’t sell me.

These topics and many more are discussed and explored in Bryan’s recently released book: Human to Human #H2H, available on iTunes and Amazon

Hello, It’s Nice to Meet you…Again: Your Digital Reputation Precedes You

My good friend Andy Beal just released his latest book, Repped, 30 Days to a Better Online Reputation. Late last year, he asked me to write the foreword for the book and when I heard what it was about, I was all in.

Whether you realize it or not—or even wish to admit it—you already have an online reputation to protect. It doesn’t matter if you’re fresh out of college and hoping your past Facebook indiscretions don’t torpedo your career prospects, or a Fortune 500 company trying to make a name for itself in a crowded market, your reputation online is vital to your success. With dozens of examples and actionable tips, Repped demonstrates how a better online reputation can lead to improved job prospects, happier customers, fewer detractors, and most importantly of all, greater income.  Repped is for individuals, professionals, small businesses, non-profits, and large corporations. Repped is for anyone that realizes the value of building a better online reputation.

As in every foreword I write, part of the deal is that I’m allowed to share the entire, unabridged version with you here (updated with a bit of tech news). Hope you like it!

Your Digital Reputation Precedes You: Do something about it…

With the social web and proliferation of apps, smart phones and always on internet access, we are becoming a society of accidental narcissists. I don’t believe we set out to become self-obsessed and to be honest, it’s not all that bad. Today’s digital lifestyle made self-expression not only possible but also acceptable. Selfies! What once would have been frowned upon as anti-social and narcissistic is now a form of everyday self-expression. It’s the new emoticon in many ways.

Sharing our lives is easy and it’s rewarding as friends, family and followers react with Likes, shares, comments, et al. With each update we receive positive reinforcement and are heartened to share more. We now are at the center of our own universe and with each day that passes, we share more of our lives and encouragement pushes our behavior toward extroversion. The words privacy and publicity now take on entirely new meanings as we place on display the very thing our ancestors cherished as privileged. With each update, post, selfie, we share a bit of ourselves that in their own way contribute to a semblance of our digital persona. This though, works for and against us…

Online, just like in the real world, actions and words speak loudly. Unlike real life though, your digital footprints are there for anyone to find on Google, social networks, and in communities. These disparate pieces are then assembled by employers, schools, friends, lovers, enemies, and anyone and everyone who wish to learn something more about you. Whether pure, sinister or simply inquisitive, whatever the reason, today these pieces construct a semblance of you and whomever sifts through your online legacy is left to their own surmise. This is too important to leave to chance. Online is the new real world. This is your life.

Repped is something we should think about but rarely do. We should be more methodical about what we share and why. But online engagement is teaching us to think in the moment instead of anticipating how those moments collect and assemble into something we didn’t initially foresee. Andy Beal is on to something here. And, if we each think deeply about it, we are indeed the masters of our own digital fate by choosing what we share and how we reward those whom guide us online. At the same time, we are also the beast of our own burden by sharing whimsically.

As Andy defines, repped is the result of conscious contributions that are intentionally additive. By investing in positive reputation updates, whether for you or someone else, ratings rise. Relationships flourish. Trust build. Thus, we enhance and shape an individual’s online profile to a more deserving standing. Again, it’s intentional.

If we do nothing and continue to post along our merry way, we become the victim of chance and circumstance. What others see and assume, the impressions that form, the opinions that arise, and the decisions they make as a result, are defined for us if we do not first define and reinforce what we want them to be.

Think about it this way. When you look in the mirror, you see a reflection of who you are right now. What if you could transform that reflection each day into someone you hoped to see staring back at you. With repped, we become architects of our desired reflection. If heedful, this digital reflection will ultimately work for us rather than against us. It’s more than how we see ourselves of course. It’s the broad strokes we paint in addition to the fine detail that we dab to paint a portrait that helps us now and in the future.

What separates reality from aspiration are your actions and words. You earn what you deserve.

It is what we share and how we build relationships that communicate who we are, not only to those whom we know, but also those whom we wish to know as well as those who are seeking to know more about us. It takes work yes. But then again so does anything that matters in life. Where everything begins though is what’s important. Most jump into online engagement without taking what is quite honestly the most important first step…connecting the threads of who you are, your aspirations, and who it is you want others to see.

Take a moment to answer this question…Why do you use social networks?

Is it to communicate your life to friends and followers?

Is it a form of self-expression?

Do you cast your actions to the proverbial audience to enchant or entertain them?

Take heart in what it is that moves you and those who follow you. Consider what it is they see as opposed to what you do online. You’ll find a great divide between what you say and the intentions behind them and what someone else hears or sees and takes away from each moment. Such is true in life of course, but here nothing really vanishes. Again, everything either works for or against you.

What is it that you value and how could that change with a bit of self-reflection?

I refer to today’s value system in social engagement as the 5 Vs. With each update, we seem look for something in return and each represent a shifting balance between what we treasure and what we think we treasure. The purpose of this exercise though is to contemplate the meaning of worth and in turn put stock in what it is we value and what it is that others will value…in the short and long term.

The 5Vs

1) Vision (I learn something, I’m inspired);

2) Validation (I’m accepted or justified);

3) Vindication (I’m right, cleared);

4) Vulnerability (I’m open); and

5) Vanity (Not egotism, but accidental narcissism. I’m important),

To earn or bestow increments of repped require intent and diligence. Nothing though begins without describing what it is you want people to know and see and how that tracks toward your personal and professional goals. The 5Vs require careful balance. Sometimes its best if you audit your online behavior to see which of the 5Vs were out of balance in the past. Doing so helps align your future engagement.

Some teenagers are aware of the “drama” that arises when their posts or pictures are taken out of context. In fact, they’re smart about covering their tracks. In some ways this is a divergent strategy from repped, but its example teaches us a lesson about the importance of building online reputations over time.

Rather than intentionally construct a desired presence, they simply remove traces of their communication after initial sharing. Some “whitewall” their networks by deleting everything after immediate engagement. Others “super log off” by deactivating their accounts when they’re not online. This behavior is what inspired the rise of an ephemeral web, one that automatically vanishes after a fixed amount of time. There’s a reason Snapchat and other apps and networks like it are wildly popular.

Snapchat and the ephemeral web represent an interesting evolution in social media in that it helps people “share without care” or better manage their digital footprint. The ephemeral nature of “now you see it, now you don’t” lets users be themselves, or sometimes encourages deviant behavior, without worry of future leverage against them. This comes at a time when colleges and employers, and everyone for that matter, are reviewing social networks as qualifying criteria for consideration. With ephemerality, the challenge for you and me though is the very thing that makes it so special and that’s the temporary nature of the moment.

Among accidental narcissists however, attention, popularity, and reactions are also catalysts for open sharing. As a result, Snapchat is experimenting with a hybrid of ephemeral messaging that adds a touch of permanence, such as its Stories product. There’s a sense of narrative that tells a story the way a user defines. But they still vanish in the end.

The ephemeral web is just one of two factions of the social web evolving today. The other movement underway is that of the anonymous web thanks in part to apps cum social networks Whisper and Secret.

When I first heard of Whisper, my initial reaction was wow, that’s interesting and potentially addictive. When I then heard about Secret, I felt similarly but then added the words dangerous and finite to the list. Whisper and Secret are representatives of the anonymous social web, which is a branch of the overall private social movement. Similar to its sister movement around the ephemeral web, these apps are promoting a behavior of sharing without establishing a link between identify and legacy.

Secret is interesting in that it connects friends and friends of friends. This makes the content relevant while sparking curiosity and conversations behind the scenes, online and the real world. Because it’s someone you know or could know, it adds a layer of intrigue to the mix. By including social validation engagement such as likes and comments, users are conditioned to continually share provocative thoughts, observations, and also secrets. It’s a promising mix that will keep secret public for the foreseeable future. However, I see it as more as disruptive novelty than I do as a long term stand alone app. It’s the anonymous movement that will outlast many early players. But that’s not the point. It’s how behavior changes in how we engage and share and the levers of identity we pull to align, or chose not to, our brand with the updates we we find interesting.

The people who define the social web are fickle and suffer from extreme cases of shiny object syndrome.  But, anonymity can be healthy. Productive conversations can emerge beyond the juvenile antics of immature or mean people.

As founder of 4chan moot once said in a piece standing up for anonymity, “It’s incredible what people can make when they’re able to fail publicly without fear, since not only will those failures not be attributed to them, but they’ll be washed away by a waterfall of new content.”

The psychological conditioning of users though is shaped by how communities inside and outside of the communities react. And Whisper’s approach is among the most promising for a long-term play. With Gawker vial traffic czar Neetzan Zimmerman joining Whisper, the anonymous network will morph into a hybrid gossip, confessional, and allegation media network. And with Zimmerman’s first piece making the rounds that claims actress Gwyneth Paltrow is cheating on her husband, Whisper is officially on its way to competing for media and consumer attention while paving the way for anonymous social networking and sharing.

By crowdsourcing interesting revelations and curating or editing them a la TMZ, BuzzFeed and Upworthy, we may see these networks around for the foreseeable future.

We now live three lives online and will continue to do so in future; one that disappears, one that is secret, and one that sculpts our legacy. This reminds me of a poignant observation once shared by novelist and philosopher Gabriel García Márquez, “Everyone has three lives: a public life, a private life, and a secret life.” With the likes of Facebook, SnapChat and Secret, the thoughts shared by Gabriel García Márquez is now a digital prophecy come to life.

Now’s the time to consider how you want to be repped. Now’s the time to consider the value of online engagement and come to terms with what you want to invest into and take out of your digital life and the digital lives of others.

Repped will help you earn digital significance. Equally, repped will help you bestow significance unto others. The value you assign to engagement affects what you place and take out of this so-called digital life. The value we take away must only be surpassed by what we invest. This is the foundation for your digital legacy.

Give repped.

Get repped.

Brian Solis (@briansolis), digital analyst, anthropologist and author of What’s the Future of Business (WTF)

GoldieBlox vs. the Beastie Boys – What Constitutes Fair Use?

Guest post by Monica Corton (@momusing), Executive Vice President, Creative Affairs & Licensing Next Decade Entertainment, Inc.

Now that the Beastie Boys have gone on the offensive for the unlicensed and unauthorized use of their song “Girls”, written by Adam Horovitz and Rick Rubin, as used in the Goldieblox viral video campaign to feature their girls toy line . . . let’s try to unpack what actually happened and why songwriters and music publishers firmly believe that this was not a fair use. There have been rumors that the case was settled, however, I have checked, and the case is moving forward. More importantly, what is not moving forward well is the relationship between the tech/digital world and the music business.

There is a lot of misunderstanding on both sides. It is not acceptable for the tech/digital world to use our music, wait to be sued and then deal with licensing. No other industry exhibits this bad behavior more than the tech/digital sector. At the same time, I do believe it has not been easy for the tech/digital world to figure out where they need to go and what they need to do to secure licenses based on their business models. I also believe there has been a lot of bad advice that has been given to start ups from representatives who do not understand the music licensing world, and then there is the issue with the major music companies being difficult to work with. It’s complex and it has to end. They need us and we need them for the health of both groups. The Goldieblox vs. Beastie Boys case was highly publicized and I believe can serve as a spark for a positive discussion on a way to move forward.

Copyright Act

The introduction to the fair use section of the Copyright Act states that “[T]he fair use of a copyrighted work * * * for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.”

Fair Use

Many siding with the argument that the Goldieblox viral video of “Girls” was a fair use were focused on the “comment and criticism” aspects because this advertisement for toys was cloaked in a social justice message about girl empowerment. However, after all the excellent video footage showing the power and possibilities for girls, a big Goldieblox logo pops up on the screen in the last few seconds of the viral video. This is apparently a trend in advertising. According to Roo Ciambriello in this Adweek article, it’s an advertising strategy now to “sell product by convincing your target market that you are more invested in contributing to emotionally charged, globally relevant women’s image issues [or, in Goldieblox’s case, “girl empowerment issues”] than you are in advertising your product.”

A Pantene shampoo commercial does the same thing, but its social justice message is the role of women in the workplace and how they are judged differently from men.

With this new trend of “social justice advertising”, the “purpose and character of the use” start to break down. If the real goal of the “Girls” viral video were truly about girl empowerment, why would they need the logo of Goldieblox in full screen at the end of the video? If there was no logo at the end of this video, then it would be a better argument for a fair use of “Girls”, but that is not how the viral video was presented. If Goldieblox was that socially concerned about girl’s ability to engineer products, why aren’t they giving their toys away for free?

Parody or Robbery

Parody lyrics in commercials are not transformative. I know this to be true because parody lyrics are used in commercials all the time and I license them quite frequently. The use of parody lyrics in commercials en masse began in the early 1980s when advertising agencies decided to shut down their jingle writing businesses and use popular music to help sell and brand products. Sometimes they used the song as originally recorded, but many times they change the lyrics to suit the advertisement. One of the oldest examples that I was able to find is a 1984 commercial for Joy Dish Washing Liquid.

However, there are dozens of parody lyric uses every year in the commercial realm. Here are but a few to represent the many:

“Addams Family Theme”/Ebates.com

“Da’ Dip”/Zoopals

“Nobody but Me”/Little Caesars

“September”/Subway Restaurants

“Shake Your Booty”/Sensa

“Total Eclipse of the Heart”/Fiber One

As for the market harm (e.g. how this viral video use will affect future income for the song), beyond the fact that the Beastie Boys for years have never allowed their songs to be used in advertising, which is a kind of market harm, their future licensing uses in other types of synchronization uses were put in jeopardy by the use of “Girls” in the Goldieblox viral video. When a music publisher licenses music for an advertisement, they license based on a specific period with no limit on the frequency of the uses during the term of the use. Therefore, advertisers usually saturate the market with time buys of the ad to get the most bang for the buck in the limited amount of time they have to use the composition in the ad. In the case of Goldieblox, the “Girls” viral video was reaching a massive audience in a very short amount of time. There were over 8 million viewings in the few weeks that the advertisement was on the Internet and those numbers most assuredly would have increased significantly due to the media blitz and the quality of the commercial.

Guilt by Association

When a song becomes forever connected with a product, particularly with the use of a parody lyric, it diminishes a publisher’s capacity for licensing that work in television, motion pictures, videos and videogames because music supervisors feel that the song is “baked” or “overused” and that it would not be a fresh choice to utilize in other productions. This means the market harm is the actual advertising synchronization license fee that was not paid to the Beastie Boys, the potential loss of future income by being disregarded, overlooked, or rejected for future television, motion picture, video and videogame licenses and the fact that Goldieblox secured a Superbowl advertising spot via an Intuit contest using the “Girls” viral video as their contest submission piece.

An interesting footnote to this matter is that Debbie Sterling, President of Goldieblox who graduated from Stanford in 2005 and started Goldieblox in 2012, served as a brand strategy consultant for a wide variety of organizations including Microsoft and T-Mobile for the seven years in between her college graduation and starting her toy company. How could she not know about music licensing in the advertising sector with this kind of job experience? Wouldn’t she also know how to try to get around the law by claiming “fair use” in an alleged social justice based ad? In addition, the law firm that represents her, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe conveniently slapped the declaratory judgment on the Beastie Boys immediately after they contacted Goldieblox to find out under what authority Goldieblox was using their song “Girls.”

The judgment lists a litany of copyright holders related to the Beastie Boys including the original master recording owners, the publishers and the songwriters of “Girls” even though the original master was not used in the Goldieblox viral video. This would indicate they were worried about the market harm in the master rights as well as the publishing when it came to claiming fair use. The aggressiveness in filing a declaratory judgment before the Beastie Boys even considered filing a copyright infringement case and the speed at which the declaratory judgment was filed which included every potential person or company that had a claim, seems very calculating, as if they were looking for the fight over the “fair use” issue in the area of advertising and the controversy would provide them with even more marketing power. In fact, Goldieblox had used another unlicensed copyrighted song, “We Are the Champions” in a previous viral video campaign, but it wasn’t as popular as “Girls” and its use never reached the massive market appeal that the “Girls” viral video achieved in an extremely short amount of time.

Who is Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe?

They are a global law firm with 25 offices in Asia, Europe and North America which boasts on the firm website the following: “In what is described as one of the most important copyright infringement battles in years, Orrick is defending DISH Network against claims brought by Fox Broadcasting and other major television networks on both U.S. coasts relating to DISH’s PrimeTime Anytime and AutoHop features on its innovative DVR system.” This case is also about circumventing creators’ rights, but in the realm of television distribution. Certainly, the idea that Goldieblox did not “know” that they needed a license seems hard to believe considering Sterling’s business background and Orrick’s notoriety as a firm that focuses on copyright issues.

It will be interesting to see how the Beastie Boys copyright infringement case plays out. I really hope it sparks a dialogue, especially among technology and digital companies in the San Francisco area who seem to think copyright protection for their own intellectual property has a great value, but copyright protection for works of music is a big joke. We are not helping either industry’s businesses by constantly getting into legal battles over licensing when we both would be best served by building business relations and working together to foster productive businesses for our respective industries.

GoldieBlox vs. the Beastie Boys – A Parable on Permissions

Guest post by Monica Corton (@momusing), Executive Vice President, Creative Affairs & Licensing Next Decade Entertainment, Inc.

Now that the Beastie Boys have gone on the offensive for the unlicensed and unauthorized use of their song “Girls”, written by Adam Horovitz and Rick Rubin, as used in the Goldieblox viral video campaign to feature their girls toy line . . . let’s try to unpack what actually happened and why songwriters and music publishers firmly believe that this was not a fair use. There have been rumors that the case was settled, however, I have checked, and the case is moving forward. More importantly, what is not moving forward well is the relationship between the tech/digital world and the music business.

There is a lot of misunderstanding on both sides. It is not acceptable for the tech/digital world to use our music, wait to be sued and then deal with licensing. No other industry exhibits this bad behavior more than the tech/digital sector. At the same time, I do believe it has not been easy for the tech/digital world to figure out where they need to go and what they need to do to secure licenses based on their business models. I also believe there has been a lot of bad advice that has been given to start ups from representatives who do not understand the music licensing world, and then there is the issue with the major music companies being difficult to work with. It’s complex and it has to end. They need us and we need them for the health of both groups. The Goldieblox vs. Beastie Boys case was highly publicized and I believe can serve as a spark for a positive discussion on a way to move forward.

Copyright Act

The introduction to the fair use section of the Copyright Act states that “[T]he fair use of a copyrighted work * * * for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.”

Fair Use

Many siding with the argument that the Goldieblox viral video of “Girls” was a fair use were focused on the “comment and criticism” aspects because this advertisement for toys was cloaked in a social justice message about girl empowerment. However, after all the excellent video footage showing the power and possibilities for girls, a big Goldieblox logo pops up on the screen in the last few seconds of the viral video. This is apparently a trend in advertising. According to Roo Ciambriello in this Adweek article, it’s an advertising strategy now to “sell product by convincing your target market that you are more invested in contributing to emotionally charged, globally relevant women’s image issues [or, in Goldieblox’s case, “girl empowerment issues”] than you are in advertising your product.”

A Pantene shampoo commercial does the same thing, but its social justice message is the role of women in the workplace and how they are judged differently from men.

With this new trend of “social justice advertising”, the “purpose and character of the use” start to break down. If the real goal of the “Girls” viral video were truly about girl empowerment, why would they need the logo of Goldieblox in full screen at the end of the video? If there was no logo at the end of this video, then it would be a better argument for a fair use of “Girls”, but that is not how the viral video was presented. If Goldieblox was that socially concerned about girl’s ability to engineer products, why aren’t they giving their toys away for free?

Parody or Robbery

Parody lyrics in commercials are not transformative. I know this to be true because parody lyrics are used in commercials all the time and I license them quite frequently. The use of parody lyrics in commercials en masse began in the early 1980s when advertising agencies decided to shut down their jingle writing businesses and use popular music to help sell and brand products. Sometimes they used the song as originally recorded, but many times they change the lyrics to suit the advertisement. One of the oldest examples that I was able to find is a 1984 commercial for Joy Dish Washing Liquid.

However, there are dozens of parody lyric uses every year in the commercial realm. Here are but a few to represent the many:

“Addams Family Theme”/Ebates.com

“Da’ Dip”/Zoopals

“Nobody but Me”/Little Caesars

“September”/Subway Restaurants

“Shake Your Booty”/Sensa

“Total Eclipse of the Heart”/Fiber One

As for the market harm (e.g. how this viral video use will affect future income for the song), beyond the fact that the Beastie Boys for years have never allowed their songs to be used in advertising, which is a kind of market harm, their future licensing uses in other types of synchronization uses were put in jeopardy by the use of “Girls” in the Goldieblox viral video. When a music publisher licenses music for an advertisement, they license based on a specific period with no limit on the frequency of the uses during the term of the use. Therefore, advertisers usually saturate the market with time buys of the ad to get the most bang for the buck in the limited amount of time they have to use the composition in the ad. In the case of Goldieblox, the “Girls” viral video was reaching a massive audience in a very short amount of time. There were over 8 million viewings in the few weeks that the advertisement was on the Internet and those numbers most assuredly would have increased significantly due to the media blitz and the quality of the commercial.

Guilt by Association

When a song becomes forever connected with a product, particularly with the use of a parody lyric, it diminishes a publisher’s capacity for licensing that work in television, motion pictures, videos and videogames because music supervisors feel that the song is “baked” or “overused” and that it would not be a fresh choice to utilize in other productions. This means the market harm is the actual advertising synchronization license fee that was not paid to the Beastie Boys, the potential loss of future income by being disregarded, overlooked, or rejected for future television, motion picture, video and videogame licenses and the fact that Goldieblox secured a Superbowl advertising spot via an Intuit contest using the “Girls” viral video as their contest submission piece.

An interesting footnote to this matter is that Debbie Sterling, President of Goldieblox who graduated from Stanford in 2005 and started Goldieblox in 2012, served as a brand strategy consultant for a wide variety of organizations including Microsoft and T-Mobile for the seven years in between her college graduation and starting her toy company. How could she not know about music licensing in the advertising sector with this kind of job experience? Wouldn’t she also know how to try to get around the law by claiming “fair use” in an alleged social justice based ad? In addition, the law firm that represents her, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe conveniently slapped the declaratory judgment on the Beastie Boys immediately after they contacted Goldieblox to find out under what authority Goldieblox was using their song “Girls.”

The judgment lists a litany of copyright holders related to the Beastie Boys including the original master recording owners, the publishers and the songwriters of “Girls” even though the original master was not used in the Goldieblox viral video. This would indicate they were worried about the market harm in the master rights as well as the publishing when it came to claiming fair use. The aggressiveness in filing a declaratory judgment before the Beastie Boys even considered filing a copyright infringement case and the speed at which the declaratory judgment was filed which included every potential person or company that had a claim, seems very calculating, as if they were looking for the fight over the “fair use” issue in the area of advertising and the controversy would provide them with even more marketing power. In fact, Goldieblox had used another unlicensed copyrighted song, “We Are the Champions” in a previous viral video campaign, but it wasn’t as popular as “Girls” and its use never reached the massive market appeal that the “Girls” viral video achieved in an extremely short amount of time.

Who is Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe?

They are a global law firm with 25 offices in Asia, Europe and North America which boasts on the firm website the following: “In what is described as one of the most important copyright infringement battles in years, Orrick is defending DISH Network against claims brought by Fox Broadcasting and other major television networks on both U.S. coasts relating to DISH’s PrimeTime Anytime and AutoHop features on its innovative DVR system.” This case is also about circumventing creators’ rights, but in the realm of television distribution. Certainly, the idea that Goldieblox did not “know” that they needed a license seems hard to believe considering Sterling’s business background and Orrick’s notoriety as a firm that focuses on copyright issues.

It will be interesting to see how the Beastie Boys copyright infringement case plays out. I really hope it sparks a dialogue, especially among technology and digital companies in the San Francisco area who seem to think copyright protection for their own intellectual property has a great value, but copyright protection for works of music is a big joke. We are not helping either industry’s businesses by constantly getting into legal battles over licensing when we both would be best served by building business relations and working together to foster productive businesses for our respective industries.

The Quality Prism: The secret to co-creating brands through social media

Guest post by Greg Narain (@gregarious) co-founder of Chute, a company that helps brands discover or collect relevant photos from social networks and incorporate the visuals into their websites and apps

Brands finds themselves at a challenging crossroads in their evolution. For decades, companies have utilized a command and control model as it pertains to their brands. Billions of dollars have been spent to carefully craft specific messages and deliver them via campaigns. However, as consumers continue to create and promote their own stories, brands now must decide how to integrate that content into their own stories.

At the heart of the matter is control. Brands are accustomed to crafting their message and controlling the way that message is delivered to the world. In fact, the entire marketing vehicle is hardwired to function on this very specific level. The quality of any campaign has become a metric of success, both financially for the business and as industry recognition for the agency.

Forward-looking brands, however, see a different opportunity in letting go of some of that control. Social networks have already proven an effective platform for distributing media. At the same time, consumers continue to demonstrate their creativity and capability to produce authentic, engaging content. The combination is hard to ignore, but the question of quality still persists.

Quality is like a prism – what you see is highly dependent on your vantage point. For marketers and publishers still constrained by their own idea of quality, the value of customer-centric stories is still impossible to see or understand. Others understand that customers are now telling interesting, relevant stories, but they cannot get past the lack of polish and quality. A growing minority, though, have learned the secret to unlocking this content.

Quality must be viewed through the lens of the consumer, not our own. If we focus on our own internal standards of perfection, we miss out on the opportunities to promote and leverage authentic content. The test of quality isn’t the aesthetics or production, but the value it creates. To that end, encouraging your customers to co-create with you provides you a broader base of content to draw from.

During the Visual Revolution Summit, I sat down with my friend Ben Huh — who is fairly familiar with what it takes to create a meme or go viral as the founder of Cheezburger. You can watch our discussion below and share your thoughts on the Quality Prism with #VisualRevolution on Twitter.

Here are some tips on how to get started:

1. Boost customer contributions

Your customers may not be professional photographers or writers, but they’re out there making content for you nonetheless. These contributions are real-time, authentic, and engaging – even if they don’t meet the same standard of quality brands are accustomed to publishing.

2. Incentivize

Getting quality content sometimes means rewarding the creators. This doesn’t mean you have to start raffling off huge prizes. Engagement in and of itself can be a reward – interact, retweet, compliment and promote.

3. Minimize risk

Create your brand voice and stick to it – even if it means you have to skip a meme, viral sensation, newsworthy moment or customer content. Keep it light, keep it classy. When it comes to tragedy or sensitive topics, if you’re unsure, just don’t post. Case in point: the backlash after AT&T’s 9/11 Facebook and Twitter post that came off more as a cold marketing tactic than a respectful tribute. A brand who got it right? The New York City Ballet, who created this moving film. It’s easy to fall into a scandal when rushing to jump into the discussion around a sensitive topic.

4. Move fast, (don’t) break things

Taking inspiration from the famous Facebook mantra, the cycles between iterations needs to be shortened. Often, the latest on Buzzfeed is already old news to Tumblr users, and what’s new on Tumblr is often already old news to Reddit users. And this transition from funny to old? That can happen in the matter of a day, which is also why real-time content from fans is so powerful. However, keep in mind point #3: faster publishing doesn’t mean the values or identity of the brand should be compromised.

The ultimate measure of how successful any tactic is remains the same: does it align with your goals and deliver as expected? There will always be a need for high-quality, professionally crafted marketing and branding. However, as consumers continue to tell their story with greater fidelity, there is an additional source of content (or minimally inspiration) to leverage for your brand.

Apple Still Lives in the Shadow of Steve Jobs and That’s a Problem for Its Future

Don’t be fooled by the coming iWatch.

Don’t see Apple’s new TV product as the dawn of a new era of Apple innovation.

The new products you’re going to see from Apple this year and next are the final new designs coming to fruition from Steve Jobs’ vision. And, that means that in just a few short years, Apple is at risk of losing its throne as the world’s most valuable brand.

Think about this for a moment…what happens after these products fall into the same iterative cycle of the current line of Apple products such as the iPad, iPhone, MacBooks and Mac Pros?

As an investor, stakeholder or simply as a fan of thinking differently and challenging the status quo, where’s the vision that will define Apple’s next legacy?

In a recent discussion about the future of Apple, I heard something that is becoming all too common these days. “I sold my shares in Apple,” muttered a chief marketing executive of a global spirits brand. He then sighed, “I’m losing my faith.”

In a post-Jobs era of innovation, I, like many others, wonder whether Apple’s current position as the world’s most valuable business has run its course. Yet Apple continues to perform notably hovering close to its 52-week high of $575.14, an impressive 67% stronger than its 52 week low of $385.10. Granted, $575 is generous these days considering its commanding $702.10 price on September 19, 2012. In a recent article in USAToday, Analyst at Brean Capital Frank Longman shared his professional assessment that Apple is “becoming just another stock.” He too believes, “The phenomenon is unwinding.”

Is the Magic Gone?

I guess the answer depends on whether you place your value in historical performance or in futures. Certainly Apple’s recent performance is helping the company recoup billions in market capitalization. And, other analysts are taking notice. Research firm UBS upgraded its position in December 2013 from Neutral to Buy. In October 2013, wealth management and private equity firm Robert W. Baird upgraded its position from Neutral to Outperform.

None of the above changes in status or outlook answer the question though of whether or not Apple’s magic is fading. Financial performance is not enough to restore my faith in the company’s ability to enchant customers and markets. With the passing of Jobs, Apple lost a public leader and a voice for change. He was not only a visionary, he was also a convincing showman, equally captivating customers and investors.

Tim Cook is a proven CEO and was hand-picked by Jobs to helm his juggernaut. Although charming in his own right, Cook is not a gifted showman nor visionary. More so, Cook is not an architect of the future and without the gift of vision and persuasion, he cannot communicate the future of Apple. This missing link is affecting the company’s potential and testing the faith of Apple’s devoted fans. As the world’s highest paid CEO, Cook’s leadership is set to be tested in just a few years.

Why?

Incrementalism vs. Innovation

Since the passing of Jobs on October 5, 2011, Apple has demonstrated a product release pattern that communicates a culture of incrementalism versus that of innovation. Thinking back to the past two-plus years, we’ve seen incremental changes in the company’s flagship products ranging from the iPhone to iPads and MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs. The company’s greatest innovation is courtesy of the Mac Pro, which initial technology reviews place it in a league of its own. Even with a dramatic redesign and groundbreaking performance, the cylindrical dynamo remains progressive rather than inventive.

Beyond incremental product releases, market share advances only help prolong the inevitable. Apple’s pre-holiday agreement with China Mobile to supply it with the latest iPhone 5s and iPhone 5c sent the stock up 3% on December 23, 2013.

In fact, each product is garnering greater market share.

But, where’s the “next big thing?”

Prior to his passing, Steve Jobs knew that Apple could lose its shine, and more so, its dominance if the company shifted into cruise control and ceased disrupting or inventing markets. He was after all a visionary. Many believe he was even a genius. Many eventually learned that he also jerk. As author Walter Isaacson noted in his best-selling biography Steve Jobs, there was a “good Steve” and also a “bad Steve.”

Skate to Where the Puck Will Be: The Four Year Roadmap

Regardless of what he was like to work with, Jobs competed for the future instead of the moment or the next earnings report. At the Macworld Conference and Expo in January 2007, Jobs famously quoted Wayne Gretzky, “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been.” He then shared that his mantra for Apple was to always do just that.

Shortly after his death, reports circulated that the Jobs left plans for four years of new products. Additionally, he also fought to safeguard plans for the company’s spaceship-inspired headquarters in Cupertino.

For years, rumors have circulated around the infamous iWatch and other wearables, TVs or TV-related products, gesture-based controls, in-car platforms or perhaps even iCars, etc. Based on Apple’s recent hiring and acquisition movements, educated deductions point to the enlivening of some part of these rumors or something altogether new in the near-term.

In September 2013, Nike’s famed FuelBand designer Ben Shaffer joined Apple’s supposed wearable project.

In November of this year, Apple acquired PrimeSense a 3D motion-tracking company behind the first Microsoft Kinect sensor.

Also in November, Burberry’s turnaround queen Angela Ahrendts joined Apple to spearhead strategy, expansion and operations of its retail and online stores.

What does each move have in common beyond a shared employer? They now possess the opportunity to create history.

Even Steve Jobs left us with a tease about the future. In his biography, Isaacson quotes Jobs as revealing a hint about his vision for the future of television, “I’d like to create an integrated television set that is completely easy to use,” he told Isaacson. “It would be seamlessly synced with all of your devices and with iCloud.” Isaacson shared that this ultimate product would no longer make users fiddle with complex remotes for DVD players and cable channels. “It will have the simplest user interface you could imagine. I finally cracked it,” exclaimed Jobs.

If speculation around Apple’s product pipeline is true, the company’s future will indeed be bright and shareholder value will again mount. Certainly wearable devices from Apple will change consumer behavior. A TV could be a game changer and a TV-related product would disrupt the cable industry. I’m sure there’s another product under the veil of secrecy that Jobs envisioned. Combined, these products will remind us of the eminence of its once artful leader.

But what happens after this supposed four-year plan?

“Death is very likely the single best invention of life. It’s life’s change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new.”

Steve Jobs once said, “Death is very likely the single best invention of life. It’s life’s change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new.” In a post-Jobs Apple, the company now needs its change agent to shift from mourning and incrementalism to innovation.

Tim Cook should be commended for his work in steering Apple toward lucrative waters in what was a disconcerting time following the passing of Steve Jobs. Success though takes more than promises, stellar progress reports, and positive financial outlooks. Competing for the future takes leadership. Although Tim is promising “big things” for the company in 2014, it is 2015, 2016 and the years after that I question.

This is Apple’s time to think out of the orchard. Acquire Tesla and secure its chief visionary Elon Musk! Crazy? Veteran tech analyst at Berenberg Bank Adnaan Ahmad, wrote an open letter to Cook and Apple Chairman Art Levinson on October 25 suggesting just that. If anything, it’s this kind crazy thinking that demonstrates the limitless boundaries in which Apple can move.

Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish

Raise the pirate flag.

Raise the anchor.

And set sail into bold new waters…once again.

Apple wasn’t just another great tech or consumer electronics brand; it became a lifestyle and a pinnacle for creative aspiration and innovation. As such, Apple needs more than the next Steve Jobs. The company needs someone who can see beyond what Steve secretly left behind; someone who can “put a dent in the universe.”

See, Jobs wasn’t just another great business leader. He captivated the world’s imagination. He set out to challenge the status quo. He urged people to think differently. As of now, the church of Apple is without its preacher. To change that though, Apple must become much more vocal, more daring, and give the world something to believe in again. This takes more than company memos and analyst calls. To survive beyond Steve’s alleged four-year roadmap, the company must not only “stay hungry,” it must also “stay foolish” and persistently remind us that brave words supported by diligent actions can also instill faith and confidence.

The conversation continues…

FOX Business’ After the Bell asked me to share my thoughts on the state and fate of Apple. Watch the segment here.

Connect with me: Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Google+ |Youtube | Instagram

Image credit: Jonathan Mak

Empowering Employees with Social Media Improves Customer Relationships and Grows Revenue

Employee empowerment is about creating brand advocates to scale customer relationships and effectively compete in new digital markets. Organizations can no longer rely on inbound and outbound sales reps, people willing to jump through hoops and obstacles via call centers, or traditional marketing to boost awareness and demand. Customers demand engagement, in real time, and that takes human beings, training, and support.

In January 2014, the San Francisco Chronicle, one of the country’s oldest remaining metropolitan newspapers, opened a technology incubator. The declining but still important media company is investing in a rigorous digital boot camp for reporters to learn how to use social and mobile media to boost views, amplify sharing, and increase views and engagement. The Chronicle has no choice. Circulation plummeted 50% between 2009 and 2012. Revenue too is just not what it used to be. More importantly, readership is no longer the same as it was. Gripping headlines, animated GIFs, infographics, punchier copy, and innovative content marketing techniques are changing how people read and also how and what they share.

This move sends a loud and alarming message to executives everywhere, “adapt or die.” And to do that, businesses need to embrace not only new technology but also empower employees to engage with customers and stakeholders in the places where their attention is focused in ways that are culturally relevant. Employees must add value in every touch point and at every moment of truth throughout the customer lifecycle if they hope stay competitive.

The truth is that we live in a digital economy now and how people connect with businesses isn’t just changing, it’s continually evolving. There isn’t just one new strategy or technology investment that helps you become relevant though. Merely flocking to social media isn’t enough. Launching mobile apps without vision or purpose isn’t effective. To compete, organizations have to understand customer preferences, behaviors, technology, and their evolving preferences and expectations in real life and in each online network they use to make decisions and share experiences.

With or without you, customers will talk to one another online. They already are to great extent. Even the quiet customers will find the engagement of others instructive. The point is that without you, they will make decisions and form impressions either for or against you. Why leave it to chance?

For years now, experts have begged companies to embrace social media to build bridges to customers where they’re already engaged. And for years, many businesses have experimented with stepping outside of owned media channels to engage with customers in social networks and online communities. For those who know what they’re doing, success has been reeled in the form of improved customer satisfaction, referrals and sales, and loyalty…basically, everything that matters.

So what’s standing in your way?

Fear of risk?

Lack of confidence or ROI?

Ask yourself, what’s the risk of you not engaging? The answer is as stark as it is true. If you don’t compete for relevance, you by default open the door to irrelevance as customers eventually go elsewhere or competitors step in to help.

What of the ROI of empowering employees to engage customers in social channels? Aside from the aforesaid benefits, what’s the ROI of ignorance?

There are great benefits for any organization that realizes that the initial return on engagement and experience is more valuable relationships and reciprocity. That equates to increases in customer lifetime value and also referrals.

In either case, reward is great for those empower employees to reach beyond the everyday customer engagement strategies of laggard companies that ignore the perils or opportunities of digital Darwinism. Thankfully there are companies that help other companies adopt new technologies not because of trendiness but instead to do great things.

Brand Case Study – H&R Block

SF Chronicle is not alone in its play to compete in this digital economy. Enterprise social media management software provider Expion shared a convincing example of how a leading financial services company empowered 100,000 employees to engage customers in social and mobile platforms. Out of the gate, such an example would prove almost impossible. 1) Financial services is bound by regulation and lawyers are extremely reticent to rock the boat, 2) 100,000 employees presents scale and risk challenges, and 3) budget and training to enable so many employees to be effective would be astronomical.

H&R Block sees customer engagement is a powerful and effective form of service and public relations. In fact, H&R Block believes the entire workforce is part of the PR and marketing team. To “deputize” them, H&R Block partnered with Expion to co-develop a mobile app, H&R Block Publisher, that connects helpful social content to clients seeking direction. As you can imagine, during tax season H&R Block representatives are in high demand every tax season. By empowering them to share useful content that speaks to the tax and money issues that are important to clients and also answer question, the program developed deeper and more meaningful relationships with clients.

Scott Gulbransen, Director of Social Business Strategy for H&R Block views employee empowerment as a direct link to customer relationships, “They [H&R Block reps] are already seen as trusted resources to their friends and family. By our corporate team offering tips, it takes the ‘marketing’ out of the equation…it’s relationship-based value add.”

Said another way, representatives are able to earn trust beyond their friends and family. They now extend their communities to also build trust and relationships with clients.

In both the SF Chronicle and H&R Block examples, empowering employees is an investment in relevance and relationships with social and mobile serving as an engaging platform for connecting with customers. Good intentions are just the beginning. What we’re also building here is trust and value and that is priceless. But doing so isn’t a stationary gesture. It’s an investment that requires commitment and ongoing support to scale. In the process, you learn more about the evolving expectations and behaviors of your connected (social and mobile) customers. And by learning to engage with them on their terms, in their networks of preference, in ways that are mutually beneficial, everyone wins. More so, everyone learns and grows together. And that’s what social is about…empowerment, engagement and relationships.

10 Steps to get started on the path to social and mobile relevance…

Care.
Identify where your customers are spending most of their time online and mobile.
Learn what they are asking and how their questions are being answered and by whom.
Run an audit to see who from your team is already engaging and observe what’s working and what’s not.
Put together a pilot recommendation to earn buy-in from an executive sponsor. Make sure to outline the benefits on all sides and the expected business outcomes.
Develop content and engagement strategies that matter. Introduce value, share useful but engaging information, entertain, and engage.
Invest in technology that facilitates seamless engagement and scale.
Train employees before you turn them loose on technology, expectations, best practices and performance measurement.
Test and learn.
Repeat.

 

Connect with me: Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Google+ |Youtube | Instagram

Originally published at Expion.

4 Steps to Connecting with—and Engaging—Generation C

Connected, empowered consumers—also known as of Generation C—have come to expect businesses to know them, to understand them, and to deliver what they want, where, when and how they want it.

I recently published an ebook with IBM, The Connected Consumer and the New Decision-Making Cycle, that explores the new decision making cycle of connected customers. You can download it for free here. Thanks IBM!

The goal of the ebook, and also this post, is to introduce readers to the differences that exist between touch points that connected customers rely upon to make decisions or inform those of others and those in which many organizations are investing. The idea of course is to discover new ways to realign investments while improving customer experiences and relationships. Even with this information however, it takes champions to make the case internally and bring together disparate groups that control various aspects of customer engagement today.

Together, we can learn and share, how businesses can adapt and lead the future of customer experience.

They demand superior service, competitive prices, and quick delivery. And when they don’t get what they want, their friends, followers and fans hear all about it.

How can you effectively communicate with this audience? You can start by realizing that we’re all part of Generation C (it’s not an age group, it’s a digital lifestyle), and in order to make the link, you need to think like a connected marketer.

Here are the four steps I view as essential when it comes to engaging with this elusive audience.

1. Don’t Be Shy: Getting Comfortable with Digital Exhibitionists

Members of Generation C are virtual attention-seekers. Everything they do, think and experience is shared through multiple networks. Breakfast is blogged about, breakups are broadcast, and if there aren’t any pictures, it didn’t happen. The good news? You no longer have to guess which messages will be relevant to your audiences. You can study conversations and connections and use up-to-the-minute insights to inform global, national, and hyper-local campaigns that resonate with customers.

2. One to One: Understanding Each Unique Customer

Once you’ve captured the attention of your customers and gained their interest—even kindled their desire—how do you move them to take action? By tapping into the wealth of insight that your customers give you during every step of their journey. Rather than forcing everyone through the same chute, your marketing, sales, and service should act as trusted guides, helping each customer along an individual path.

3. Shopping is Social: Finding Friends and Gaining Trust

Everyone is talking about your brand behind your back. That is, unless you’re tuning in to the right networks. Your potential customers are asking questions in social networks, comparing prices using mobile apps, reading real-time reviews, and watching videos with product information. They might decide to buy—or not to buy—without ever interacting with your brand. But you can’t just force your way in to the conversation.

4. The Future Funnel: Developing a New, Dynamic Customer Journey

By aligning your marketing and service strategies with the needs of Generation C, you can become a trusted partner to your customers as they shop and buy. And when every channel and message lines up with precisely what they’re looking for, exactly when they need it, you’ll gain more than loyalty and trust. You’ll transform your marketing strategy—as well the way you do business.

Connect with me: Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Google+ |Youtube | Instagram

Photo credit: MJTH / Shutterstock

Build Experiences Not Just Products

Music is the one thing that accompanies me on my journeys, experiences, as well as my adventures in writing. While earbuds deliver sound, they do not deliver the essence of the song, the waves of sound, nor the soul of the artist. At the same time, I have a hard time justifying the need to buy overly expensive headphones just to enjoy music the way it was written or meant to be heard.

One day I was shopping for headphones and I stumbled across SOL Republic, a new company that sang to me beyond the sound. What struck me was more than the design or the sound. It was the company’s message that stopped me from looking further, “If it sounds good it feels good. We are music lovers committed to change the world one listener at time.”

Needless to say, I bought the headphones straightaway. I was both surprised and not so surprised when I learned that the company was started by a few dear friends. I couldn’t wait to hear the story behind the company. On this episode of Revolution, I welcome Seth Combs, CMO and co-founder of SOL Republic.

As you’ll learn, the idea for SOL Republic was hatched at MONSTER by Kevin Lee who was part of the original BEATS team. Lee along with Combs and Scott Hix started SOL Republic with the goal of creating a great pair of everyday headphones at a more approachable price point. More so, the team set out to not only deliver premium sound but also develop a line that could be personalized by each individual. And, that’s where this story begins.

SOL represents the “Soundtrack of Life” where every great moment has a song that goes along with it. The way the founders see it, SOL Republic is a new lifestyle company that happens to make headphones. But it is the company’s philosophy statement that explains “why” its approach is one that other businesses should emulate. It’s empathy in action and when leaders care about the experiences great things can happen.

SOL Republic Philosophy Statement

We are Music Lovers, committed to changing the world… one listener at a time.

We are Saviors of Sound, ready to rid the world of hollow sounding headphones and speakers.

We believe music has the Power to touch you, move you and inspire you.

We believe a Good Song can help you be happier, run faster, think clearer, and love better.

We believe for every great moment, there is a song that goes with it, we believe this is the Soundtrack of Your Life.

We believe musicians are modern day storytellers. Their songs unite a nation, ignite a revolution and move mankind. Their Songs Deserve Respect. Their music deserves great sound.

We believe you don’t just hear music… you feel it, and that if it sounds better, it Feels Better.

We are committed to incredible Music Experiences for Everyone.

While today it means building great sounding headphones, our future will take us Far Beyond.

Subscribe to BrianSolisTV here.

 

 

Business Transformation: Why General Motors is Investing in Customer Experience

As editorial director and conference producer of The Pivot Conference, I have the privilege to meet with the people who are bringing about real change inside organizations. During the 2013 conference, I had the chance to interview Dr. Rebecca Harris (@RebeccaHarrisDr), who leads the Social Media Center of Expertise at General Motors in Detroit. Her role is all about transformation and integration as she works across brands and around the world on social strategy, social tools, social processes, points-of-view on multiple social topics, and overall integration between brands, divisions and countries.

As companies continue evolve their social channels, one area I continue to hear brands struggle with is how they work across the company for social. That is why I wanted to know more about General Motors’ social media wins. More specifically, what Rebecca and the GM team have learned in trying to coordinate and collaborate with all the functional areas at GM and how that has shaped the GM customer experience.

Just to give you an idea of the GM social footprint, Rebecca said that GM owns more than 100 different channels with more than 21 million fans, followers, and subscribers across all their brands in North America alone. And, that doesn’t include sites like blogs, forums and Yahoo! Answers, where the team has also established a presence. Clearly, with a company the size of General Motors (they have a footprint in more than 120 countries globally) it’s imperative to operate in a highly coordinated and integrated fashion to seamlessly support customers around the world.

According to Rebecca, one part of GM’s success in the field is attributed to GM’s willingness to invest in integration. GM recently invested in a 6,500 square foot co-location space at their Detroit headquarters that allows Social teams from marketing, communications and customer care to all come together, take off their various hats, and do work that makes sure the customer stays at the center of every effort.

Co-location, and the integration it fosters, works. GM’s social teams have dramatically improve their average cross-functional response time – from upwards of 24 hours, to now, approximately 90 minutes on social media channels like Facebook and Twitter and under 3 hours on independent automotive enthusiast forums.

When I asked her how social integration has impacted the company beyond social media she said that it has created a collaborative culture where everyone takes a step back to make sure that all the boxes are checked, all departments are leveraged, before moving forward. This alone has helped make sure that all levers are pulled to expand the story, share the message, help the customer. Once GM began checking all the boxes and pulling all the levers, it became clear that there needed to be one specific representative from each department (Communications, Marketing, Customer Care, Legal, IT, etc.) to help make social successful.

Rebecca said that one area that has truly benefited from this collaborative culture is GM’s social media customer care team. By no one team owning social, Rebecca says they all own social, GM gives the customer a 360 degree experience. And allows for a trained team of 20 customer care agents to help customers from finding a vehicle to buy to helping answer questions or resolve issues with their vehicle or a dealer. As a result of this, GM has the opportunity to turn any customer experience into a great one.

An example of a huge win recently, according to Rebecca, was when a customer had a bad experience with an order process for his new Chevrolet Corvette C7 and posted about it in one of the 100 independent automotive enthusiast forums GM monitors. Through internal collaboration and information sharing between marketing, sales, engineering and others, a customer care agent was able to promptly address the matter, shepherding the customer through the order process and drastically changing his attitude toward the entire experience. Rebecca said he went as far as to send a photo of his C7 once it arrived at his home in Houston with a thank you to Kelly, the social customer care agent who assisted him.

There were more examples from Rebecca on integration successes, but Rebecca ended the interview emphatic that the focus every day is even more integration, enterprise-wide. And they are not done yet. There is still work to do.

Finally, Rebecca said it’s about figuring out what is best for the customer – and how the brand can provide value to the customer. Social is just another channel and day to day it’s keeping everyone on the same page and it’s communicating, sharing, integrating and being a team player. In this case, it does take a village.

#AdaptorDie

Connect with me: Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Google+ |Youtube | Instagram

Image Source: Auto Guide