Useful and immediateresting

 

 Nowism

1. We ran a stim day for GSK back in february, where the guy who founded Seatwave talked about responsiveness and the move to shorter (45 day, 30 day, even 7 day) planning cycles. Since then, Google have given us a taste of real time insights, and here our friends at trendwatching have got some interesting thoughts on the importance of “now”….. More in this vein coming soon…

http://trendwatchingcom.cmail5.com/t/y/l/ulglt/jhwurttu/j

2. In line with quicker, faster, stronger, maybe rational behaviour is a thing of the past?

http://www.predictablyirrational.com/?p=679&date=1

3. Comms as route to your product or product as route to your comms? The line is blurring and more than ever, comms is becoming a brand experience and consumer destination in its own right…. Which means increasingly brand advocates aren’t only those who buy your products. Question is how to monetise that- Nike have found ways to do it and are apparently moving to a model where product purchase via any channel automatically triggers entry into their comms…..

Word of mouth almost twice as likely to get people to buy new products

A couple of useful charts from Research International, with some fairly dramatic ‘proof’ that wom really does make a difference when it comes to flogging new products- and not just when they’re shiny exciting new products either….

They also make the point that there’s a misconception that word of mouth is all happening online these days- and suggest that trusted word of mouth from someone you know is still more important than recommendations you might see online from people you don’t have a relationship with. Discuss….

Excitement creates buzz

Good WOM needs early adopters

Disconfirm what you believe…

right or wrong?

Stevie G did a great session on behavioural economics this morning, covering stuff like anchoring, priming and so on, which I’m sure will get posted up pretty soon for anyone who didn’t make it. So for those of you who enjoyed the population of Birmingham experiment, here’s another interesting one, with some fairly important implications for the way we do research amongst other things..

You’ve got a sequence of numbers which follow a certain rule. The first three numbers of the sequence are 2, 4, 6. You’re asked to figure out what the rule of the sequence is  by writing down three more numbers and asking if they’re in line with the rule.  You can do this as many times as you like, once you think you’ve figured out the rule, you say so and we’ll see if you’re right…

Seems fairly obvious that the rule is ‘even numbers increasing by two’, right? So you might ask, what about 8, 10,12? And you’d be told that yes, this follows the rule. Far too easy isn’t it? So you try another set of numbers- does 14, 16, 18 fit the rule? And you’re told, yes it does. Just to be absolutely sure, you might just try one more set- 20, 22, 24- and again, it fits the rule….

Most people who take this test follow this exact pattern. Every time they guess, they’re told they’re right and so, it seems the evidence that they’re right builds up. Inevitably, they become convinced that their original belief is correct- and so they stop the test and announce that the rule is ‘even numbers increasing by two’. And they’re told they’re wrong. The rule is actually any three numbers in ascending order.

The point here is it’s too easy to try and confirm what you believe- and a lot harder- but more enlightening- to try and disconfirm it. We all do it- gather evidence that supports our theories and tend to ignore anything that doesn’t quite fit or worse, contradicts them. So maybe next time, it’s better to try asking if ’5, 7, 9′ fits the rule and see what you learn….

Nickable workshops

Jamie as CEO

I’ve found myself sitting in a lot of workshops recently and since it’s something a lot of us have to do and more to the point sometimes have to run, I thought it might be worth sharing a couple of tricks and techniques I’ve come across so you can pass them off as your own ;-)

First up, Simon Cowell as CEO…. Not ours, your brand’s. Yes, it’s related worlds but picking (strong) personalities (rather than categories or brands) and asking yourself what mission/role they would give your brand, how they’d define and treat the brand’s audience, what tone/imagery they’d use and what channels, gets you to some really interesting places and feels easier and more fun than other ways of doing similar things. Try it next time you’re doing a stretch session….

Federer

Next up, tennis… So here you have people/teams ‘serving’ ideas (in our case brand territories) at each other across a metaphorical net. One side is trying to land their idea and win with it, the other side is trying to slam it down. Basically each takes turns to try and find what’s great/weak about the idea, just a fun way of torture testing ideas- and even better if you have someone defending an idea they clearly hate….

Brand categories- less of a technique this, more of a philosophical question and one that’s already raised hackles in team binns…. What category does your brand really play in? Ikea as family experience rather than furniture anyone? Marmite as food enhancement not spreads? The olympics as global movement not a sporting event? Is it defined by what you actually sell/make as a brand or the space in which you’re useful and interesting to your consumers? And does it really matter as long as it helps you think about who or what you’re really competing with and how you can win?

And finally, because often getting started is the hardest bit of a workshop, a couple of nice warm-ups/ice-breakers.

List out some different categories- food, city, job, river, sports star, body part might work for starters- and then get one person to name a letter. Everyone then has 1 minute to write down something for each category beginning with that letter. You score 1 for each answer, 2 if no-one else had the same as you. Great for weeding out the intellectual snobs and pedants in the room.

And to finish up, a neat way of mixing people up a bit is to get them to line up round the room in order of anything you like- what month they were born, number of their house, whatever- they have to talk to each other to find out where they should be and they can’t all stick with their mates for the rest of the session. I’ve seen someone make the mistake of doing this by what time people had gone to bed the night before- turned out the clients had been out on a team piss-up so apart from causing a bit of speculation and a few red faces, it also meant you had a load of uselessly knackered people stuck together….

Let us know how you get on and pass on any favourite  tricks of your own….