I stumbled upon this on one of my favorite websites, Ted.Com. This comes at a very apt time: we're stuck in quite a fierce debate about "what defines the youth culture - if it exists?" in the office. Perhaps, we should start with the language.
This is nothing new - and not nuclear science.
But these symbols are actually symptomatic of how things have dramatically shifted and changed. We cannot ensnare anymore with traditional thinking and thoughts the young - the "generation-M" ("M" for millenial, "M" for mobile, "M" for "me", and for whatever else "M" is supposed to stand for). We certainly will not understand them by imposing on them our own thoughtpatterns - woven by our parents and the traditions and values that they adhered and that were imposed on us. And we certainly cannot just by being behind a desk, staring at a screen full of numbers and research materials.
All we can do is, watch. Perhaps in awe.
And in humility.
That they are different.
And that they are not "mini-me's" and "copies" - or even "analogues" - of us.
I am not an American. I only watch from the sidelines. But nothing - at least in the first 30odd years of my life - compares to the story of Barack Obama's election to the Presidency of the US. In these days of seeming hopelessness, there could be a beacon of potential, a beacon of what could be, a beacon of the possibilities that lie ahead. Amidst the challenges. Amidst the difficulties. Amidst the uncertainties.
1995 - when I first joined the working world - I got exposed to the first email address. It was for a client who was from the US and who had a whole string of numbers for his email address - and if I recall correctly, it was a "compuserve" address.
I recall that if I needed to send something to him via "electronic mail" (yes, we called it that back then), I had to trek down to the IT department and plead with the IT guys to please send the email through and attach a file from my 5.25in soft-disk (yes, we still had those back then).
Of course, things have changed.
Everyone in the office has an email address - and everybody can send and receive emails with file attachments 5MB or more.
We all thought back then that the internet was going to be the next TV - the next best thing since sliced bread.
But it turned out to be more than that!
We thought we could use GRPs and R&F's and TARPs and CPMs and CPTs to measure the internet. We all thought it was "another medium".
But it was more than that: it challenged our thinking. And instead of using the same metrics to measure the internet, the internet forced us to rethink the metrics against which we use the old media.
All these talk about accountability? It was partly because of the internet. It forced us to think differently.
So what's next?
Hmmm. I don't know. But I am guessing, whatever it is, it will change the world.
This made me think: The most defining, key success factors for any company are strategy and culture, according to Ken Wilcox, President and CEO of SVB Financial. I specially liked what he said that "at SVB, people work hard not because they are required to, but because they want to".
How many companies these days can say that they do have a culture that is geared to succeed in these perilous times?
Strategies are fine - but people make strategies real. They 'enflesh' what is in the strategy.
Traditional advertising is inherently selfish. It interrupts in
order to generate money (part of which pays for more interruptions).
That approach doesn't work at a cocktail party, or at a funeral or in a
Traditional approaches to advertising make brand managers ask of the medium "What can you do for me?"
And this is where most awareness-interest-desire-action and other similar models fail in the new ad environment that we are in.
Non-traditional, new approaches to advertising compel brand managers to ask themselves "What can I do to make this medium more relevant to its innate audiences? How can I make myself more relevant to my audiences using this medium whilst respecting its innate position amongst audiences?"
A lot of people equate the traditional approach with TV, radio, press, and magazines. And a lot of people equate the non-traditional approach with all things digital - from internet advertising to SNS/social web advertising to search to digital content management.
However, I disagree with this 'delineation'.
One can have a traditional approach even whilst using a digital medium. And similarly, one can have a non-traditional approach with non-digital, traditional media.
It is the thinking that needs to change - not the media that are being used.
The distinction between digital planning and non-digital planning is not the same as the distinction between traditional and non-traditional planning.
Traditional planning can happen on either digital OR non-digital media. And the same is true of non-traditional planning.
What really matters is the thinking.
And as Seth Godin says: Traditional advertising thinking is inherently selfish.
Non-traditional advertising - the new way of thinking that could be implemented on both digital and non-digital media channels - is empowering.
And no: non-traditional advertising is NOT solely a property of digital advertising.
After all - when all is said and done - it is still about reaching business, marketing, and communication objectives that matter.
Not whether digital or non-digital media are used.
Risk management - as a discipline - is a founded on "fear" and the attempts to measure and manage things that contribute to fear - and profit from it. Probability and statistical sciences are also founded on fear - the fear of the unknown, the fear - and expectation - of the plausible.
However, when managers use fear as a motivator, things go awry.
A friend of mine succinctly summarized it for me in one of our conversations: You can't scare someone to follow you - you can only inspire them.
The Comprehensive R Archive Network I am a believer in making data analytics more accessible to the masses. R is a significant alternative to SPSS, SAS, and other stat software that cost an arm and a leg.