Money is tight. Budgets are squeezed. You simply don’t have the resources to do everything. It’s decision time: do you spend what you have on growing the brand or on generating demand and hitting the numbers? If you are like two-thirds of the attendees at one recent B2B event, you’ll have chosen brand. If on the other hand you are in the grip of the bean counters, you’ll have opted for demand.

But here’s the rub: whichever you chose, you chose wrong.

In the land of the blind

After all these years, it still amazes me that so many in the industry think in these kinds of binary terms. Brand or demand. Strategic or tactical. Even marketing or sales. It’s a recipe for death by silo.

The truth of course, is that the decision is never binary. Every piece of demand activity you produce is an embodiment of your brand. Likewise every brand communication should drive demand.

To focus on demand generation for a moment – there is a tendency in the industry to think purely in terms of the numbers. How many clicks/downloads/sales/whatevers did this communication achieve? It often leads to a nail the problem, hammer the offer, forget the brand approach (well, we did follow the guidelines). And you know what? It works. To a degree at least.

The problem is that this tends to focus so heavily on what we do it leaves no room for how we do it. The end obliterates the means.

Demand meet brand, brand meet demand

As soon as we focus on how we generate demand and what it means for the brand, something interesting happens.

For one thing, the customer comes more sharply into focus. We think more about how we can help them deal with the problems they face and less about simply what carrot we can dangle to get them to do stuff.

We also take a longer term view. Not of the results – we still need to hit the numbers. But we begin to consider the legacy of what we create. What effect will it have on our reputation? What will the recipients say to friends and colleagues about us? What will they think, the next time they see something from us?

And, while I’ve focused on demand generation here, the benefits also extend the other way. By making more brand-focused communication responsible for growing demand as well as brand, we give it focus. We avoid the upward creep that ends with brands trying to capture lofty ideals that are irrelevant to the context their customers find themselves in (the world peace syndrome).

The result will be a stronger brand, greater demand and increased loyalty. Now doesn’t that sound like a good decision?

Landing pages would seem to be a fairly tedious topic of conversation; however they can often make or break campaigns. And all too often, it’s the latter. Many clients have separated marketing and web teams, leaving the IT-driven web team to produce the landing page. This can cause issues with the linkage between the creative and landing page content, less than ideal landing page structures with call-to-actions hidden below the fold and navigation bars diverting the users from the key action companies want them to take. Alternatively, it could be that the client has outsourced their landing page construction to an external agency that like to build pretty Flash-driven sites that are a nightmare from an SEO perspective and additionally, external hosting exposes the site to potential security attacks. It seems that due to the relatively short shelf-life of campaigns and thus campaign landing pages, the thinking and attention needed is not being given to the primary way of converting potential customers.

Changes are afoot though, driven by social media. Coke has announced that they will stop creating campaign sites in favour of driving people to their social media communities on Facebook and YouTube instead.  Unilever is following suit and the likes of T-mobile with their Life’s for Sharing campaign last year were already driving people to their YouTube community as the main call-to-action. And the social media sites are gearing up towards the trend: the latest news from Facebook is an Omniture partnership to provide (among others) corporate Facebook communities the web analytics expected before for campaign sites. Why the change? Well, marketers have had enough of creating disposable campaign sites (which I wholeheartedly agree with) that are dumped after the company has moved to the next quarter or the next big push they are focusing on. Secondly they want to drive people to existing communities where their audience is already, in a mindset ready to share and engage. I get that too, however am in a quandary about driving the organic rankings of social community site as opposed to the client’s own site. In my mind, only brands that are of certain size and don’t necessarily sell online would want to do that.

We are testing a best of both worlds approach instead with one of our clients (campaign due to launch in a couple of months, will keep you updated on the progress!): instead of the usual corporate landing page, we are creating a socially supercharged aggregator site. The site combines client and user created social content from YouTube, Facebook, Slideshare, Scribd etc with the client’s corporate content (trial download offers, reviews, webinars and tutorials).  This way, the experience for the user coming to the site is much more valuable, the social back-links are building the SEO rankings for the client, not for social sites and hopefully, with the improved experience, the conversion rates are improved as well. I believe the future of campaign sites is social and that long-term, “green” thinking needs to be integrated into marketing.

For those lucky enough to escape the grey monotony of London last week (I was not so lucky) and escape to Barcelona for the Mobile World Congress, they were in for a rare treat. In recent years the world’s largest mobile event has descended into a rather dreary almost boring litany of the same ol’ same ol’. This year appears to have been anything but…

Microsoft’s ebullient Steve Balmer literally charging back into the fray with MS phone 7 which, I’m kinda shocked to say, seems to be getting rave reviews. Android showing its mettle with some decent looking kit like the new Motorola CLIQ XT and the inevitably slick UI we’ve come to expect. In addition, Google CEO Eric Schmidt’s keynote on Google Goggles and the emerging augmented realityspace was great. Apple, in true brand fashion, deigning not to attend but still able to cause a monumental buzz with the runaway success of the AppStore. And Nokia? Despite the much-hyped but largely panned collaboration with Intel on a new mobile OS called MeeGo, Nokia unveiled no new devices at all which is a first at MWC. Rather they chose to extol (or is that excuse?) the virtues of their Ovi store which seems unable to slow the galloping success of AppStore. This piece of YouTube brilliance highlights the common perception.

As the mobile space seems, momentarily, to be fixated on applications, MWC was awash with hundreds of companies trying to muscle in. The recurring theme? A concern surrounding the lack of standards in the application space and the complexity that is causing throughout the mobile ecosystem. Manufacturers, understandably, seem slow to adopt a common standard and all are trying to desperately nurture a developer network to mimic Apple. However, operators and network providers are trying to lasso developer communities together (check out the Wholesale Application Community to see just how big that groundswell could become) in a direct assault on Apple.         

So despite the obvious allure of Barcelona at any time of the year, Mobile World Congress 2010 appears to have been a real barnstormer. Two predictions. MWC 2011 will definitely be even more engaging as the mobile space continues to evolve so frenetically. London weather in February 2011 will be just as shyte. I’ve begun begging for my ticket already.

Over the last couple of weeks, we’ve been working to produce an at-a-glance map outlining some of the main options B2B marketers face in using social media to engage their audiences.

And now, cue fanfare, it’s ready. Woo-hoo!

You can download a groovy hyperlinked PDF version here. Feel free to share it too.

And this is where you come in – what have we missed that really should have been on there? We’re looking for those forehead-slapping suggestions that’ll make us go Doh! and then scrabble to produce version 2. Ideally, we’d like them before 24th September when we’re hosting a social media huddle at our new offices (BTW if you’re a technology marketer and interested in attending, email steven@b1.com and you could grab one of the last remaining places).

Content marketing is one of today’s hot marketing topics – particularly in B2B. It’s been fuelled by the perception that traditional push marketing doesn’t work in a social media driven world – it’s too shallow, too manipulative, too inauthentic.

While this view is almost certainly overstated (plenty of push marketing campaigns are still generating healthy responses) it has a point. There is a widespread desire on the part of customers for more human, less spun communications that add value to their decisions rather than muddying the waters.

The answer for many marketers is content. While it is being touted as the bright shiny new thing, there is of course nothing really new about content itself (white papers, for example, have been around for as long as the technologies they talk about). The new news is really in the shifting of content to the core of B2B marketing strategy and the explosion of distribution channels.

Creating compelling content

The key to developing an effective content marketing strategy is, as with all marketing, relevance. More than ever you need to step into your customers’ shoes. What are they struggling with? What do they need to know? How can you help them? (Note: help not sell.)

On top of this, why would your customers send your content on to their colleagues and fiends? What value are you adding? This brings me on to…

Content shouldn’t be passive or static or a one-off

Going back to the white paper, there is a danger that content is viewed as the Switzerland of marketing – neutral, disengaged, passive. The reality is quite different. While content does not assume the overt sales role of advertising or direct marketing, it should be anything but passive. Good content is a conversation. It engages the audience. It is part of a process (not simply the end of one).

It is critically important to take the long view of your content marketing programme – how does one piece of content lead to another? How and where are you inviting customer participation? What tools are you building in to help customers achieve their aims (and which will give your content a viral aspect)?

Think once, create many

As I mentioned above, there are now a wider variety of ways to deliver content. So when creating your content, don’t simply stop at the usual suspects (eg variations on a PDF document). Not everyone wants to read off screen.

So in addition to ebooks, create variations of the content as a podcast, presentation, video, an editable wiki, blog post, dead tree book, a newsletter, a webinar, an application or widget – and that’s just for starters. Of course, you don’t have to do the lot but by widening out the media you use you will widen the reach and increase the effectiveness of search.

And distribute everywhere

There are so many distribution options for content it’s staggering. For PDF-like material (docs and presentations) – check out Slideshare, Scribd, HubPages, Authorstream and Slideboom. For video there is, of course, YouTube (where you can create a branded channel quickly and easily) but also Vimeo, Dailymotion and a bunch of others. For podcasting, there are iTunes, Podcast Alley and many more. And for community there are LinkedIn, Biznik, Facebook or, if you want to create your own, Ning.

Then there’s promotion which can cover everything from traditional media through to rich online media  housing your content and on to Twitter, blogs, RSS, Delicious, Digg, StumbleUpon – the list goes on and on.

The trick, once again, is to take a holistic view of your entire programme. Although, importantly, to also relinquish control allowing your audiences to share and distribute your content too.

Isn’t all this just thought leadership in new clothes?

Well yes and no. Thought leadership is a legitimate and laudable aim of a content marketing programme. But it is not the only aim. The end result of pretty much any content marketing programme should be the perception that you are the go-to people to talk to. However, pure play thought leadership is not the only game in town.

If we have all learned anything in the last couple of years, it’s that community matters. Consumer generated content has already gained adoption in B2C. And B2B itself has a long history of round tables and testimonial case studies. What this means is that it is not always necessary to be the thought leader as long as you know the people who are and can get access to their heads and opinions.

5 approaches to try for starters

There are numerous approaches you can take to begin developing a content marketing programme. Here are 5 to get you going:

1. Grow your own expert – every business has a few experts (in B2B they tend to have more than a few). Find yours and use their brain(s) mercilessly. If they are articulate and presentable, use the rest of them too. Just make sure you remember this is about helping customers (not showing off).
2. Rent someone else’s expert – short on experts? Need greater impartiality? Speak to an analyst house to help you create high value content without it being tainted by the suspicion of spin.
3. Make a stand – what do you hate in the market? More importantly, what do your customers hate? Take a stand, rail against it, begin a movement.
4. Research – traditional or social research can arm you with invaluable content and an excuse to engage customers and prospects. Make it really good and it could get you on Radio 4.
5. Community of gurus – bring customers and partners together to create a thought leadership community. Run invitation-only summits and round tables. Create a home for them online. Hang a forum off it for everyone else to get involved. Poll for opinion and incorporate it into the discussions.

There are of course many, many other options.

I’ll leave you with a final round up:

• Content is an important tool for today’s B2B marketers
• It is fundamentally about helping customers achieve more
• You need to take a holistic view
• Think once, create many
• Distribute everywhere

With the next Demand Generation Summit just a couple of days away, one question to ask is once you’ve got the leads, then what?

For classic B2B sales this often ends up in a conversation around the hand-off process to sales and closed loop marketing. But just as important a question is: is your website playing its part?

Over on Conversion Rate Experts they have an excellent article of the worst offenders when it comes to killing a lead stone dead. These include:

• The ‘empty cart’ button positioned where you’d expect the ’submit’ button
• The ‘too easy to click’ button (or hover state) where you have to have the precision of a ninja to select what you need
• Session expiries (I’m glad this one is on because it sends me postal)

It’s a great article and they are also looking for submissions for a hall of shame.

Image by Mugley on Flickr

Ever since we held the last (and first) European Demand Generation Summit at Altitude last November, we’ve had a thirst to do it all over again.

As part of the feedback process on the last event, we asked what people thought of the day, the content and speakers. We also asked what changes they’d like to see in the format of the event in the future and what topics they’d like to see covered.

Perhaps predictably, it was the day’s agenda and calibre of the speaker line-up that attracted most people to the first event. Not to mention it was free to our invitees. Of course our speakers scored very highly, but coming away from the day almost all commented on how much they’d valued the opportunity to network. I’m sure they found it cathartic to share some pain and understand that others out there were trying to overcome the same hurdles.

Three key pieces of feedback came through, which we’ve tried to listen to in putting together the agenda for the forthcoming summit:

1. People want more practical content and less of the theoretical. There’s an appetite for stories of bloodied knuckles, as well as a hunger for real learnings from people who’ve been there and done it. We were very conscious not to make last year’s event a beauty parade of vendors and ensure it was client-side marketers telling their stories. This time round we’re trying to encourage our speakers to tell their success stories, and what mistakes they’d avoid the second time round. As an example, Shawn Burns from SAP is coming along to tell the story of how he and other marketers transformed sap.com from a largely brochureware site to a ‘demand generation machine’. Good stuff.

2. Attendees wanted more opportunity to network and learn from their peers. We had some great table conversations at lunchtime last time round, and we tried to allow generous breaks. For the most part people resisted the lure of their BlackBerries, made conversation and benefited immensely. This time round we’ve gone a bit further and we’ve made the afternoon sessions entirely interactive. Attendees will have the opportunity to attend three out of four workshops on social media, accelerating sales, using webcasting and online video, and measuring and optimising campaigns. We’re going to have people capturing learnings from one group to another so that through the course of the afternoon we generate a body of knowledge which can then be shared with all attendees afterwards.

3. In terms of the content, there was a lot of call for tips on making the most of a credit-crunched budget, using social media and proving a return on marketing activity. Our first speaker of the day, Jim Cassidy, is an ex IBM marketer now at European company StepStone. In his previous life with a budget of millions, his greatest challenge used to be how to spend marketing budget fast enough. He’s now in a position where every penny (cent) has to be accounted for. Jim will talk about what he’s prioritising, how he’s making a case for spend with the board, and how he’s making his marketing assets sweat. We’ve also got a great panel line up, led by Cisco’s Amanda Jobbins. They’re going to give their take on some of these topics.

So hopefully that gives you something of a taster for what’s to come on the 30th April. If you need any more encouragement, the venue we’ve chosen this time is simply stunning - a private member’s club at the top of Centrepoint.

About time you registered I think: www.demandgenerationsummit.com

Remember, we’re only accepting registrations from client-side marketers from the B2B services, technology and telecoms sectors. No offence intended to others, but demand for places is extremely high.

Hopefully see you there.

P.S. If you’re of the twittering kind, you can get regular updates by following us at www.twitter.com/demandgentweet or subscribing to the RSS feed

From Flickr Creative Commons

There’s a comment that gets made about military strategy that goes something like: when the war starts the first thing to go out of the window is the plan.

While in marketing no one is generally in danger of dying (at least not in the kind I do), the principle is a pretty sound one. If, like me, you’ve sat in any number of planning and strategy sessions, you can quickly get the idea that the future is being mapped in front of your eyes. First this will happen, then that, then that… It’s quite seductive.

But, of course, the world doesn’t work that way. As soon as you do X, your competitors will simultaneously do Y and the whole damn market will do Z. At around this point, all that future-gazing slideware doesn’t look quite so certain anymore.

Of course, this is a problem the military had to overcome some time back (primarily in the wake of the carnage during World War I). The result was an approach that spent a long time determining the overall objectives (the ‘commander’s intent’) and which left precise tactics to officers in the field who were empowered to adapt to changing circumstances as long as they kept moving towards that overall intent.

The approach was then further refined (primarily by US Air Force Colonel John Boyd) to focus on the ability to make very fast, very adaptable decisions (within a ‘decision loop’) that would outmanoeuvre the opposition.

It’s a principle that, I believe, is critical for today’s marketers. You will never be in possession of perfect visibility. Events will never pan out exactly how you envisage them. That’s just life.

The key is to have a robust, defensible ‘commander’s intent’ and to look at strategy more from the perspective of if X then Y rather than first X then Y. And finally, to never be wedded to any one set of tactics – if traditional media isn’t working, shift to social media, if that isn’t working try face-to-face. Better still try multiple approaches in a low-cost way and let the fittest survive and thrive. In doing so, you can create a living strategy that can react and adapt to changing circumstances while they are changing and while there is time to make a difference in the market.

See Positive Sharing for details.

So how much do you want to work for Lego right now? (Or at any time for that matter.)

Admittedly, I’ve come a bit late to the whole Twitter thing (and I’ve always tried to be such an early adopter – well, ok, BMX bikes passed me by too – and don’t tell anyone but I’m not on FaceBook).

As it stands, a whole week in, I can kind of see the attraction of Twitter. Essentially, it allows me to get a quick thought out without writing a whole blog post. Of course there’s also the ability to stay in vicarious touch with other people - either those I know or those I’ve heard of. But really it’s a time thing.

It’s interesting to note that at one time putting your personal thoughts ‘out there’ meant creating a website (well, there was a bit of a period pre-internet but let’s skip past that one). Updating was a pain and not exactly conducive to a dynamic, real time experience.

More recently came blogging which made publishing the content of your head way, way easier. Everybody waded in, writing lots, updating regularly. Until life and work got in the way and the posts began appearing at more sedate intervals.

Now, with the imposition of the 140 character limit, dashing off a quick thought is, well, pretty quick. It’ll be interesting to see how this latest phenomenon affects the volume of blog posts. Will people increasingly take the quick and easy over the considered? We’ll see.

Of course, this makes me wonder about what comes next. Micro-tweeting with a 20 character limit? Emoticons only? Only time will tell.