marginally subversive

Ogilvy - Aim for the company of immortals!

are we more social because of social networking sites?

From the Economist:

Put differently, people who are members of online social networks are not so much “networking” as they are “broadcasting their lives to an outer tier of acquaintances who aren’t necessarily inside the Dunbar circle,” says Lee Rainie, the director of the Pew Internet & American Life Project, a polling organisation. Humans may be advertising themselves more efficiently. But they still have the same small circles of intimacy as ever.

The article tries to verify the Dunbar-hypothesis using Facebook numbers.  Essentially, from Wikipedia, the Dunbar hypothesis suggests that there is:

... a theoretical cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships. These are relationships in which an individual knows who each person is, and how each person relates to every other person.

Proponents assert that numbers larger than this generally require more restricted rules, laws, and enforced norms to maintain a stable, cohesive group. No precise value has been proposed for Dunbar's number, but a commonly cited approximation is 150.

And it arrived at the conclusion: we're not necessarily "more social" - if being social means having more friends, a wider circle of friends... but we are more adept at "advertising" aspects - and minutiae - of our life.

Hmmm.

So why do we go to facebook again?

causative and correlative research - which one's for you?

The Concept of Causation

Causation in ROI, measurability, and accountability measurement discussions is almost always never mentioned.  And if it were ever mentioned, it is in a manner that is simplistic and in a ‘by-the-way’ fashion.  A number of media and ad companies claim that ROI is as simple as running models after the gathering of data and transformation of these data and fitting them in models - most likely linear regressions using OLS or MLE, econometric modeling, or worse, how the numbers "fit" against norms.  Fits are measured by R-squared and areas-under-curves.

But causation is far more than that.

And that is probably why causation is rarely mentioned: it is far more than that - and is far more complex.

Because causation is very closely related to correlation:  a strong correlation between two variables, for example, would potentially imply a causative relationship.  Two variables - X and Y - that are strongly
correlated could suggest a potential causative relationship:  that X causes Y.  But the reverse may also be true: that Y causes X.

Alternatively, there may be an even deeper explanation - a third (or even a fourth) variable that explains the movements across the two variables.  Simply put, there might be a variable, say M and Z, that essentially a ‘catalyst’ between X and Y, such that X ‘increases’ the value of Y because there is also an upward change in the difference between M and Z.

The bottom line is simple, really:  Correlation doesn’t necessarily suggest causation.

However, because correlation is far easier to explain and calculate than causation/cause-and-effect, we stop at correlation.  And worse - assume that whatever we are looking at is "causative" rather than "correlative".

Which is “Better”: Correlative or Causative Modeling?

Nothing is technically better than the other - it’s really dependent on what you want to achieve.

If the end goal is simply to find out the nature of the relationship between two variables - say, advertising spends and sales - then, correlative modeling may be sufficient.  One can go as far as saying “A dollar spent in advertising appears to correspond with a 0.2 increase in sales revenues, assuming a linear model”. 

But that is only as far as one can go in correlative research.

There are no further explanations that can be gathered from the these research - no matter how many data points and no matter how robust the sampling methodology and framework is.

If the end-goal of the project is to explain the impact of advertising on sales and revenues, then causative modeling is what we ought to conduct. 

Note the subtle difference between the two objectives - so subtle that even analytics people seem to forget it: 

• The correlative approach simply wants to know the presence or absence of a relationship - if and when it does exist -and whether such a correlation is linear or non-linear.
• The causative approach aims to explain relationships between two or more variables, and underlying, intervening variables: It presupposes that there is a relationship - a hypothetical, theoretical relationship - between the two variables.  It seeks to explain - not merely to describe - the movements between the two variables, and ultimately arrive at an answer to the question “Why?”.

Neither is better than the other - it all depends on what one wants to achieve in the first place.

One is simply different from the other because simply, correlated variables do not necessarily indicate causal relationships.

The Perils of Correlative Research

Simply put, the perils of correlative research is when one starts to look at the data as if they were causative.

Let’s take the case of advertising spends and sales.  Assume that a correlation of 0.70 has been found between 104-weekly data points.  Can we conclude that advertising spending caused the improvement in sales?  Not necessarily. 

Whilst the correlation - and the R-squared - is close to 0.50, it is still is not sufficient to conclude that increasing advertising spends means increased sales.

Similarly, if another set of data points actually see a correlation of 0.30 - low by standards of correlative research - between sales and advertising spends, we cannot simply say “advertising efforts are wasted because they did not contribute to sales”.

Just to reiterate: There is nothing wrong with correlative research; what is worrying is when we look at correlative research results as if they were indicative of causal relationships.  It is when we start misusing these results that we get misleading results.

Thanks to Rob Ireton on Flickr.Com for the photo.

Causative Research - and Its Perils

Causative research is far more extensive and time-intensive than correlative research.  Causative research indicates a deep-dive into theories, hypothesis, and testing. 

It goes beyond pure equations and r-squared (or other indicators of goodness-of-fit) into areas that such as model-testing (through structural equation modeling and latent modeling across time). 

Causative research requires a deeper understanding of the variables - thereby making the equations far more complex.

But the beauty of causative research is that it can explain - or at least attempt to explain - why and how things work.

In the case of ad-spends versus sales, an inquisitive, curious mind might not just measure these two variables - but also intervening variables: recall, executional cut-through, correct-brand attribution, message-relevance and affinity, likeability, and believability of the message. 

This curious mind might also incorporate the characteristics of the respondents themselves into the model to determine if being female or male, or if being under-20 or above-20, could potentially ex-
plain the movements between ad-spends and sales.  She would also be interested in short-term, long-term, and base-effects of previous campaigns - and explain why these remain to be so.

Moreover, an inquisitive, curious mind bent on finding out “why” and “how” will dive deep into academic literature, best practices, and other models that have been uncovered  by others in the past to test if these models and hypotheses fit her own set of data.

Causative Research has more explanatory power...

Causative research is no panacea.  In fact, there will be lots of discussions from causative research - but the main discussions will be centered, disciplined, and rigorous.  Because causative research demands rigor:

• Causative research first defines the problem.  A clear definition of what the project is all about is the first step.  Are we looking for indicators of correlations or are we seeking to explain why and how things move?
  
  
• Causative researchers then trawl through studies of past cases, in search of potential underlying, latent, and intervening variables that need to be taken into account - either in the research or in the explanations.  These variables may or may not be included in the model itself.
• Causative researchers then come up with a potential model that could explain the “dependent” variable - together with the underlying, latent, and/or intervening variables.
  (In the case of advertising: If all that matters is "you advertise, you get sales", then we would have discovered the answer to the age-old question, "how do we increase sales?"  We would have found the answer to all marketeers and sales executives' problems: "Just advertise".
  
  
• They then come up with a research design and a data-gathering strategy that is appropriate for the hypothesis or hypotheses to be tested.
  I stand on the belief that there is no single research design nor a single data-gathering strategy that answers every single marketing problem there is.  Any research project or learning project needs to be customized - against the problem and against the hypotheses derived from the review of past cases, academic papers, and other sources.
• They then verify the results - applying statistical techniques including correlative techniques (if the model demands such), linear and non-linear model-fitting, response-sensitivity, structural equation/confirmatory factor analysis, and others.
• Causative researchers then either accept, reject, or revise the initial hypotheses that they have come up with and come up with explanations and recommendations for further fine-tuning of the research.
  No one research can answer all the questions in the world.  Research studies build on the results of previous research studies.

Causative research takes time, effort, patience, and curiosity - a deep-seated belief that there are stories behind numbers. 

And that numbers are typically shy - and secretive of their stories.  It takes some teasing to see the stories they tell.

hvd

OK.  At first, I refused to accept the fact that it's 14th Feb - and it's a Saturday.  Partly because I was working the whole day - and I will be working again tomorrow.  But I guess, it's the 'air'.  "My Funny Valentine" is perhaps the most apt song for today.  So... here it is.

Work/life balance: Is media getting the balance right?

MediaWeek posts a very significant question:  Are media people getting the balance between work/life right?

Media is known for being a "work hard, play hard" industry, where late-night pitch preparations and hard-nosed negotiations over ad space go hand in hand with a relentless round of boozy lunches, after-work drinks and corporate entertainment.

And, with the recession creating almost daily announcements of further redundancies and cutbacks, the pressure to perform has never been greater. Many media employees, fearful of their job security, are putting in extra hours in an already overloaded schedule.

To which I ask back... "There is supposed to be a balance?"

Kidding.

It is possible to find the balance - it exists.  Somewhere.

One may be tempted to say "it doesn't exist" because it's difficult to pinpoint.  But like the elusive operational definition for "engagement", it does exist - it's just that it's somewhere.  And we have yet to find it.

But when found... What a glorious day that would be!

(Now off to write two more pitch documents...)

Scott Ballum writes in a manifesto his belief about our contributions to the world by making the right choices - however small they may be:

"When we align ourselves with the opinions of others without examination, we are robbing ourselves of the opportunity to analyze our own preferences and desires, to determine our own solutions. We miss the chance to review the criteria others are utilizing, to question their biases and seek our own inspiration. In stunting the development of our own individual perspectives and initiatives, we trap ourselves in lives that appear to be predestined, and deny the possibility of realizing our personal potential."

How many of us are actually actively involved with our lives?  In the choices that we make?

I can't say that I have been 100% involved with everything that I do.

I honestly hope that I am getting there.

a culture of fear... and paranoia

I picked this one up from Twitter.  It's from Curt Hurding, who used to be a journalist, and he writes about how the media is essentially fueling a culture of fear and of paranoia.  He recounts his time in a press room deciding which stories get to be on frontpage - and which ones don't get to see the light of day.

He has since left the business.

He writes:

I’ve been close enough to big-time media to decide that it’s not malicious. Most people in journalism genuinely feel like what they do each day helps people. Visit Columbia University in New York and ask the young journalism students why they are there and they’ll tell you; Because I want to make a difference. Never mind that your primary job as a journalist is to report facts - at all angles. If by doing that you “make a difference” then fine but that should be secondary.

So my advice is try it. Shut out the press for a few days. Read a book. Listen to a download. Crank the i-tunes. When you get back I guarantee you our economy will still be in shambles, people will still be criticizing the president, and climate change will still be happening - much to the chagrin of firefighters everywhere.

First, I tend to agree with him: I have this feeling that we are living in a very fearful, paranoid society.  And whilst there is reason to be fearful, seeing news every single day about how bad the economy is and how global warming is going to kill all of us and our children's children - it's just too much.

I have tried what he has suggested - shut out the news.

But I can't help it: As soon as I get into a taxi, the radio is blaring about how things are so bad in the US and how it is affecting the rest of the world.  As soon as I get into the office, the headlines on the newspaper by my table greets me with how this and that company has filed for bankruptcy.  And as soon as I open my inbox - more news!  Either from friends and colleagues, or from newspapers I have signed up for eons ago...

I have tried to be on what I can only call "information diet".  But it seems impossible. 

Well.

I am looking forward to being able to shut out the news one of these days.  When I go on holidays, it will be no news.

Then again...

Let's see.

blithe insouciance

My eyes are dry, I cannot cry,
    I’ve got no heart for breakin’,
But where it was in days gone by,
    A dull and empty achin’.
My last boy ran away from me,
    I know my temper’s wearin’,
But now I only wish to be
    Beyond all signs of carin’.
            Past wearyin’ or carin’,
            Past feelin’ and despairin’;
            And now I only wish to be
            Beyond all signs of carin’.

-- Henry Lawson, Past Carin’

All of us have got to come to a point of blithe insouciance, bordering on apathy – and go beyond that.  It’s like when one is so tired that one cannot even fall asleep for falling asleep in and of itself requires energy – and there simply is no more to expend.  So one lies in bed – staring at the ceiling, enveloped by the darkness, hoping that sleep will come on its own and soothe one’s soul, perchance recharged the next morning.

It is all bollocks, I believe.

One cannot go past caring – because in spite of everything and of one’s wanting to not care and just be blithely unaware and uncommitted, one remains.  It’s as if by swearing not to care, one is ensnared – yet again – to care.

We cannot go beyond past-caring.

We cannot go blithely insouciant.

We cannot go blithely, quietly insouciant.

the problem with being efficient…

The problem with being efficient is that you tend to finish stuff quick and fast.  Your inbox gets cleaned up fairly fast – and your in-tray gets emptied by the end of the day.  However, it doesn’t mean that you’re going to ever see an empty tray or a complete-read/no-unread-mails inbox.  You’d have more.

Sometimes, I honestly wonder if being efficient and fast is worth the energy that I am expending.  If I finish something fast, new things get thrown my way – which I will get to finish quite fast – and…

It’s a virtuous – or shall I say, vicious? – cycle that never stops.

Darn.

 

(These are days when “TGIF” does not offer any consolation – but dread.)

so what’s trending up in the digital world

Games Will 'Eclipse' Other Media

Video games are poised to "eclipse" all other forms of entertainment, according to games studio boss Mike Griffith. Social gaming, more interactivity and better technology would help gaming dominate the entertainment landscape in future.

Last Word: Advergaming’s integration with social media technologies will become inevitable.  With the push of Microsoft XBOX LIVE and its competitors in invading the living room and being a part – if not the center – of the consumers’ entertainment lives, we will see more this medium.

For audiences, this will mean having a new dimension in their current gaming lifestyles.  For brands, it means a new way to connect with consumers.  For media planners, it offers a new dimension – and a new set of questions – to measurements and metrics.

Read the full story on the BBC

 

Microsoft Begins Windows 7 Push

The first public trial, or beta, version of Windows 7 has been released. Windows 7 would be the pivot of a broader Microsoft push to improve the way its separate software and service families work together. “Connecting all these devices together is the last mile in creating a real breakthrough experience,” says Steve Ballmer.

Last Word:  With a new wave of OS coming from Microsoft we can expect consumers with more tools for becoming authors of content – as well as centralizing and organizing the information they have on their PCs.  Consumer control of the media and the entertainment that they have access to will become even stronger.

For brands, this offers opportunities – and challenges.  The challenge is “Is your content good enough to be kept at arm’s length (or at a click) away from the audiences?” 

	Read the full story on the BBC

 

No Spam Please: Mobile Content with a Difference

Spam – a word that went from describing a tasty can of processed meat into something that now brings horror to anyone using e-mail – is, Charles Ash believes, the curse of tech fundis across the globe. You know the emails: "Enlarge your appendage"; "Cheap Meds"; "C1@l!$"; "Buy your PhD" and billions of other annoying unsolicited marketing mails sent hourly, from which there seems no escape. The Spam curse has shown its hardiness, stumping tech funds the world over and now evolving to proliferate and infect the mobile universe, with millions of unsolicited SMS messages sent daily.

Last Word: Mobile advertising will require more regulation, and a transformation from an “easy” form of delivering a message. A new creative pull-form of advertising using mobile devices will rise trying to avoid this turbulent sea.

	Read the full story in Marketing Web

 

Do You Know Where Your Kid Is? Check Google Maps

With an upgrade to its mobile maps, Google Inc. hopes to prove it can track people on the go as effectively as it searches for information on the Internet. Google also is promising not to retain any information about its users' movements. Only the last location picked up by the tracking service will be stored on Google's computers.

Last Word: This new application will open a gate for a new generation of services, from commercial to security.  What would be interesting though is how audiences and the general public feel about this development: will this new development shift (once again?) our views about privacy?  With the continued emergence of twitter and other microblog-everywhere services that encourage consumers and audiences to share their lives anytime anywhere, our “views” on privacy may have changed.  Will this new Google service accelerate that even further?

	Read the full story in the Herald Net

 

The preceding excerpts and commentary were compiled by the leadership team at UM’s Global Digital Communications Practice. Please write to trending-up [at] umww.com for more information.