Advertising – Be relevant to the person, not the medium

I cannot but agree with Russell Buckley that,

brand does not need to be relevant to mobile in order to successfully run a mobile advertising campaign

And I am wondering who says otherwise?

BUT – if the question were, does mobile advertising have to be relevant to its mobile recipient, we should get a different answer alright.

Given that mobile advertising is far from being a settled matter, there is still an opportunity to do it right – this time.

CRM 2.0 – dead by natural causes?

What should we expect from the mashup of CRM and social, user-driven tools?

Although I’ve been a promoter of “CRM 2.0″ myself, I am not surprised by Paul Greenberg’s analysis of the state of affairs. The money quote:

Have the vendors really kept up with the strategy in their desire to provide CRM 2.0 applications? Is this even something they need to do? [...] When marketing is removed and a cold hard look is taken at the applications out there with a view from the CRM 2.0 precipice, the answer is that as of now, there is very little that can be called true CRM 2.0.” [taken out of context, rather ruthlessly]

But that’s only true as long as we’re talking an integrated, full lifecycle solution that would perform all the operational, analytical, and also social functions.

Instead, there is:

  • the traditional CRM 1.0 toolkit, now with “social” flavor. Don’t let that mislead you; as Paul writes: “Oracle Sales Prospector, Sales Library etc. [...] are designed for sales person collaboration (and other appropriate parties) so that the changes of sales success are increased by whatever multiples they can be. But they are not built around external customer engagement but, instead a model for employees and perhaps partners.
  • the vast CRM 2.0 userland of ad-hoc, beta-quality, loosely coupled tools that customers people are using to communicate and trade both among themselves and with vendors: blogs, Twitter, uservoice, etc.

Will and should those two be integrated more closely?

I thought so. I don’t anymore: vendors’ interests are dramatically different from those of the (small ‘p’) people, and only companies are buying Oracle, anyway. And companies are going to “open up” to those tool that people use, one way or another. As Paul writes:

It doesn’t matter if the fully integrated suite of CRM 2.0 products has been produced by a vendor somewhere now, somehow. Not as long as the capacity to combine traditional CRM with social tools exists in a less than onerous way. Which it does.

This conclusion is well aligned with the direction that VRM gang took: forget companies for a while, and build the infrastructure that people can use to connect to companies in their preferred way.

Companies will follow. Eventually.

Quote of the day

[B]uilding personas is an approach rooted in traditional identity notions of ‘we are different people to different audiences, or in different contexts and environments’. Though this is apparently true, I think this has always been a fallacy – even before the web has blown up the foolproof option of different identities without cross-contamination. I may behave differently so people see different aspects of me but that doesn’t mean I am a different person, a different persona. By putting emphasis on the persona, I become slave to my audiences and contexts who ’shape’ how I display my personas.Adriana Lukas, reviewing (emphasis mine)

Absolutely! And as I hinted a couple posts back, hiding on the web as well as trying to present multiple faces is a fool’s errand. Anybody determined enough will, praise be to mighty Google, put the pieces together. Me, I only have the energy for being me, not someone else’s idea of me.

Quote of the day

I have reached the limits of usefulness for apps that give me nice functionality but take away my ability to manage data across my entire ‘identity’.” – Adriana Lukas

Along the lines of “why would you need a multi-million dollar company to share your photos” – you do now, but as with blogs, that can change quite rapidly.