Things Not to Do in a Job Interview

So far, I’ve noticed a lot of great commentary on this blog about what the industry is looking for in potential planners/employees. Since those topics have been well covered, I’m going to try something a bit different for my first post here.

Something I’ve been mulling over lately is how there is no such thing as common information. It’s been said that because of Google/the interwebz, people know more about individual subjects that interest them than what used to be considered “general knowledge”. That being said, I’m going to use it as an excuse for some crazy stories I’ve heard. I’m a recent addition to the advertising community, but here are some things I’m (almost) positive you’re not supposed to do in an interview.

1. Bring someone.

A senior planner once told me that one of the girls he interviewed insisted on bringing her boyfriend into the interview to negotiate her salary and answer tough questions for her. Yeah, I know.

2. Show excessive amounts of cleavage/skin.

As my heroine Kelly Cutrone says in her book “If You Have to Cry, Go Outside” (which I highly recommend), cleavage is not for the office. I want to edit it for the dudes out there as well: no excessive skin either. Think of it this way: Do you notice when someone is showing a lot of skin when you’re passing them on the street? If so, your potential new boss will notice the same thing if you’re sitting in right in front of them. A friend of mine was recently flashed in an interview. She did not work at Hooters.

3. Fall for the trick question.

Your employer may ask if you really want to be doing the job that is entry-level/not paid well/practically janitorial. Or what you think of the company’s current work. Or what your favorite ad or current trend is. All of these questions are actually asking, “How much do you want this?” If you say, “Welllll…. It’s not EXACTLY what I WANT to do…” or have no idea what who their clients are/what they do, your potential boss is going to assume you’re not passionate enough for the job. Know your basic stuff! All it takes is a quick trip to Google. Research takes about 5 seconds and is incredibly worthwhile.

4. Misunderstand your place.

If you’re a recent graduate like me, you’re probably not THAT experienced. However many internships you’ve had in the last couple of years does not make you brilliant. But that's okay because it does make you look eager to learn a new job and what it entails. And that’s what employers want – an employee who has an can take on new projects with ease because of their enthusiasm to learn. As a previous poster mentioned – you are a brand. Be confident, but not over-confident. And if anything, understand your place in the workforce because I’m tired of reading posts/New York Times articles about my generation thinking they’re going to be CEOs at age 24 and then getting told (rightfully) that that probably isn’t going to happen. You rock, Millenials! But you’re (and I am) still young. Know that and use it to your advantage.

In conclusion: getting the interview means you are halfway there. So if you prepare for it, you can relax when you get in the room. Just make sure your boyfriend isn’t next to you.

~ alicia

Push vs. Pull

I've heard a lot about these two words in regards to the evolution of marketing and advertising.

In an Ad Age interview with Brad Jakeman, the new marketing manager for Activision (Guitar Hero publisher), he talks about his goals for marketing:

I cam here to make our marketing at least as engaging, innovative and exciting as our games.

That sounds pretty cool when you think about it. A video game is a very interactive experience, just think if advertising was a game you could engage with? And really, he says, that's where the industry should be going:

The step before consumer action, which we all hope to get, is consumer engagement.
We are living in an age of content, and if advertisers and marketers start thinking of themselves as content producers that are tasked with engaging consumers around their brand, that is a much more enlightened view than people who think of themselves as disseminators of the information that the company wants consumers to learn about their brand.
If you're creating amazing content, consumers will find you and they will engage with you.

But then someone has to take that leap, an if we build it, will they come? sort of deal. What Jakeman is talking about is the "pull" of engaging content, content that will draw consumers toward your brand. Tools to use that would pull consumers in; if you make yourself useful, people will naturally engage with you more frequently because you provide a service they need.

...as opposed to crappy content that you push out and impose on broad-scale media.

So, I know we all feel overwhelmed sometimes by the amount of information available - cool websites to check out, applications to download, Facebook groups to join - but the influx of content is not going to stop; it's only going to flow faster, so jump in brands! Here's to learning how to swim.

SuperBowl favs

The ones that got my attention:
Doritos' "Power of the crunch" - love this. I think Pepsi-Co Corporate has got itself a good agency: Pepsi's ready to take on Coca-Cola and Doritos succeeds well with branding.
Bridgestone's "Moonmen"
Careerbuilder's "Punching a Koala" > not the actual spot title
NFL.com/superad
Hulu "Taking over the world"
GE's ecoimagination.com spots
Heineken with John Turturro
Pepsi's "Refresh Anthem"

Runner-ups:
cash4gold.com > I have an image in my head of a guy drinking a glass of cold, thought it was from this spot but my colleague recalls it in the Careerbuilder spot. Interesting confusion.

Sobe's "Lizard Lake" > everyone at our party said this was nothing out of the ordinary, but I liked it, thought it was hilarious; except for the lizard face morph at the end. again, wtf?

Pepsi's "Pepsuber" > pretty hilarious

Teleflora's "Talking Flowers"

Conan's Bud-light "Glam" spot

For a full list of official winners & losers check out the article at Ad Age, and I'm sure there are various others around the web.

Happy Monday.

let them design

This trend caught my attention with the 1800 Tequila "Essential Artists" campaign. Now I'm watching it continue with Mountain Dew.

1800 Tequila is launching the second part of their campaign with a "Design your bottle" campaign; the winner will be featured in the 2009 campaign.

Not only does this highlight the artist in all of us, it lets us "in" a brand's world, letting us feel a part of the advertising, thus making us more receptive to it in general. I would say that campaigns like this raise consumer morale for the industry as a whole. With that in mind, we should be promoting these more. :)

Plan on.

look what we've done

If you're in advertising, see this movie: America the Beautiful. With all of the Planning for Good and brand utility that gets furthered by smart agencies every day, let's not forget where our industry has come from and what the social ramifications are; the ones we must address and tackle before we can get consumers to really believe (buy into) our newly "good-hearted" and honest attempts at reflecting society rather than shaping it (no pun intended).

go to www.thisad.com

In the age of information, it seems we always want to communicate as much as we can. The client wants to get their message, contact information, website, and any other support points ALL in one ad ALL the time. I think it's silly to clutter a space with all of this information at once and believe it doesn't make any sense message-wise. If a consumer sees a billboard (or a bus ad), think about where they are: in their car. They're NOT going to be able to check out your website and most likely won't remember it when they do get to a computer, even if they repeat it 3x in their head (I've tried it, it doesn't work). Instead, a website might work better in a text message or in a TV commercial; a lot of people are combining laptop time with TV watching these days: This makes more sense.

Anyway, I don't have the answer yet. My podmate said it's a problem of media saturation which I'd agree with to an extent. It's also a problem of one-sided communication. We think that just because we give people information they'll use it or know what to do with it. WRONG! We need to do a bit more work these days and come up with ways in which we can help/remind people to use this information.

I hear a new Google app in the making...only if they read this post. :p

more to come...

FREE FREE FREE = DUMB DUMB DUMB

I heard a radio commercial today that went something like this:

Call now to get a free laptop! At BlueHippo we won't look at your credit score, no questions asked. Call now XXX-XXX-XXXX, and we'll give you a free flatscreen today. No credit checks, no questions. Have you been wanting a laptop? Get one today! And if you call right now we'll give you a flatscreen tv AND a printer. Call now.

Um...ok. I LOL because this is a)too much free stuff in one offer b)to free to be real c)very scam-worthy and d)down right ridiculous.

I can't believe this ad passed through all the checkoff points. This is DUMB, BAD advertising. I really hope people don't give this company the satisfaction of a call or a customer. Advertising like this should write you off the planet in terms of being socially acceptable. Boo.

Definition of smart?

I have a homework project to answer the question: what is your definition of smart? The task paper says "throughout life we have all used the word smart to describe a multitude of people, places, things, and ideas. In the world of advertising, this word followed by a brand name or campaign title has become the epitome of success for agencies and brands across the globe, yet it remains largely undefined."

When I think of smart, these brands come to mind: Google, Nike, Macintosh, and Barack Obama (Starbucks would be on this list, but I feel the brand's situation is sort of hush-hush these days, do we really want to talk about how bad it's doing? :( ). These four brands represent simplistic function, authentic intentions, forward-thinking activism, consistent personalities, and are both a mirror to society and change-makers. I think this is my definition of smart, now that I laid it out.

Does smart have value? To answer this, I ask you is brand loyalty worth something? And your answer should be damn right, I want cheezy poofs!

Does smart depend solely on its audience? I would say no. A smart brand, to me, is a brand whose smartness stands independently of its said actions which have an intended audience. A smart brand is holistically smart: smart intentions, smart mission, smart moves, thereby summoning a smart audience. :)

And there we have it. My opinion on what smart means in the world of branding.

Next generation brands have bigger shoes to fill

Just read another thought-provoking presentation over at Change This.

Their latest manifesto talks about the Invisible Badge: Moving past conspicuous consumption. I find it fascinating. Upfront Rob Walker says, "What the Joneses might think is, really, beside the point. Because what you are really doing is telling that story to yourself" - a greater sense of self-fulfillment with support from consumption of goods.

Rob says "Really getting who the audience is you're trying to impress and tell your [brand] story to is freeing." I think he hits strategy on the head with this: Really what we are trying to do is get the product's selling point to fit seamlessly within people's lives, and if we truly understand WHO they are and what drives them, this should be easy, freeing, and attainable.

But what the real challenge is, he says, is "perhaps the fundamental tension of modern life: the challenge of feeling like both an individual and a part of something bigger than ourselves."

Yikes. How do we link a brand's relevance to attaining a sense of self while at the same time, linking people to the greater good? This is what a lot of brands are struggling with now: how to serve the greater good, a brand conscious that serves the individual while serving the world. Rob defines this new marketplace as finding material ways to express a connection instead of extracting a belief system from the mere fact that a lot of people purchase product X.

And this is rather revolutionary for the industry. Brands have figured out how to be brands, how to rally around an insight, and shine their uniqueness in an emotional way and drive sales. What brands need to do NOW is link people to a greater sense of something good for the world. And this will be successful because, as Rob says, "participation is its own reward."

The new marketing era of "Going green" does not only mean you should recycle more, it means think about others, think about the future, make conscious decisions to be a better person within society. And so, brands now need to "go green" and think about the greater good and not just themselves or their ROI. The world has made a cultural, life-serving investment for a long time and now it's analyzing its ROI. It's time now to give back. The Invisible Badge asks us to really reflect on who we are and what our life will mean in the great scheme of things.
Here here.

Hal Curtis: Creative Director

"Brand Heroism: Advertising As a Force For Good" was the topic of the evening. Beforehand, I made some notes about what immediately came to mind with the topic: Planning For Good, Likemind, Do the Green Thing, (RED), Egg. The nights' introduction talked about how ethical issues can be interwoven through the creative (and strategic) work. For most of advertising's career, this "good" work has been pro-bono, but a new era is emerging where this work is done first-hand with intention and (financial) pay-off. It's kind of like Google doing everything it does for "free" > providing a service beyond rational benefits, but inherently being a good brand that we trust, love, and are loyal too in return.

Google is deeply, radically purposive: they won't compromise much, if anything, to achieve the goal of changing the world for the better. - writes Umair Haque of the Havas Media Lab (check out more of his writing)

Anyway, Hal Curtis, who has worked on Nike and Coca-Cola at Wieden & Kennedy since 1997, took "heroism" in a different direction. He got me to think outside-the-box. He made me fall in love with advertising (again).

The spot below was not done by WK, instead, Curtis showed it after a spot they'd done for CareerBuilder.com. He compared the spots and said we should strive to do more work like the one below. Check out the incredible spot:



It's this sort of healthy-advertising that Curtis says, we should have out there. In this sense, advertising is heroic > it lifts us up, it makes us feel, it transforms an ordinary day into an extraordinary experience. Not only does this level of work do a great job of inserting itself into the minds of customers, but it does a great job of inspiring better work from the industry it comes from.

Do good work. Strive to make it great.

media snackers

Wake up: the media landscape is changing.

advertising High School

"Making young people see the relevance of advertising to their lives will be an important part of that goal." - says Ron Berger, CEO of RSCG Worldwide

Sounds like Ron has been smoking the "advertising is crack" pipe a little too long. Ya?
Read more at Ad Age about the High School for Innovation in Advertising and Media

In my personal experience of being a junior planner, real life experience and a diversity of dedicated studies/hobbies makes or breaks your career, not a major in advertising. I found the fact that I had said major to be debilitating when it came to presenting my resume. A focus in advertising seems to be as bland as a major in Business. Whoopdeedoo.

I'm not going to spend too long developing how I feel and why I feel the way I do about this high school concept; except to say that I think it's a bad idea. Unless of course the school is extremely well thought out and has teachers from all walks of life who understand the connections between business, cultural relevance and consumer behavior equally.

Amen to education. Say what? to this idea.

where the purchase happens

Just got back from an hour (I can't believe it either) at Target. The store is pretty quiet at this time of year: No one is pushing past you; customers are actually having a fun shopping experience; the atmosphere is blissfully calming - I feel like I have the store to myself. So I don't mind that I spent an hour in-store going up and down the aisles.

THIS is where products are purchased people! This is where "the advertising" brings people to, if it does it's job right. It's either in-store or on-line (phone or Internet). What do consumers want here? How do they shop? Paco Underhill has done a fairly good job of bringing this space into strategic conversations everywhere but what have we done with his information?

I read an article today about Apple being zee best retailer. Now I'll hand it to them, it seems Apple has been doing its brand store "experience" for a while... but why the recognition so late? OH, maybe it's because they've come out, owned it first, and totally kicked ass at it so we attribute them brand history (and loyalty) because they're s so damn good. I don't know. You tell me.

The other thing that came to mind browsing in the refrigerated section (Super Target) was product design. Again, this creative messaging element is crucial to the in-store purchasing decision. I got struck by a SUPER COOL juice bottle with a sleek new design. I wanted it. I had to have it, forget my normal (the one I've been loyal to) product; this NEW bottle triggered a reaction, it got my attention. Hello, it said, Pick Me.

There's a statistic I found in one of those stacks of notes we all have: Something like 70% of purchases are made in-store while only 5-10% of a product's marketing budget is spent here; while 70% of the marketing budget is spent on advertising but ads only sway about 10% of all purchasing decisions. Hmm... I think we need to have another conversation team. :)

2007: A Year in Advertising

Best of...
Top 10...
Top 5...
A Year-in-Review...

This is a collection of what I could find on the Internet and then a final Best of Strategy list at the end for all you plannerly types.

TIME did a pretty good summation of TV Ads from 2007:

1. Dave and Oprah Super Bowl Ad
2. Adidas: "Impossible is Nothing"
   
3. Gatorade: "Thief"
4. Dove: "Onslaught"
   
5. Applie iPhone: "Meredith"
6. American Express: "Tina Fey"
7. Coca-Cola: "Happiness Factory - the movie"
8. Dos Equis: "The Most Interesting Man in the World"
9. Doritos: "Live the Flavor" (CGC)
   
10. Nationwide Insurance: "Rollin' VIP"

Top Viral Videos by TIME are:

1. Leave Britney Alone!
2. The Landlord (Will Ferrell and daughter)
3. Miss South Carolina Teen USA
4. Hillary, 1984
5. Prison Inmates' "Thriller"
6. I Ran So Far
7. Can't Tase This (mashup)
8. Dan Rather Collar Up (really?)
9. Clark & Michael (of Superbad genius)
10. Daft Hands
    

Top 5 Viral Video Ads by MarketingVOX:

1. Cadbury - Gorilla Drummer
2. Smirnoff - Green Tea Party
3. Ray-Ban - Catch Sunglasses
4. Blendtec - Will it Blend?
5. Lynx/Axe - Bom Chicka Wah Wah

A collection of AdWeeks' Best Spots (of the month) 2007 (in no particular order and definitely pared down):

• Apple - "Tech Support" (Mac v PC)
• Coca-Cola - "Videogame"
• Rembrandt - "Kissing"
• Pepsi - "Pinball"
• Adidas - "Gilbert Arenas" (Impossible is Nothing campaign)
• BMW - "Feats"
• Starburst - "Berries & Creme"
• Absolut - "Protest"
• JC Penney - "The Heart"
• Saturn Vue - "Money"
• Yellowpages.com - "Tanning Salon"
• EBay - "Foxhunt"

These lists are by no means comprehensive when you consider the creativity in thinking and 'strategy' that the industry was blessed with this year. I would like to draw attention to some other campaigns and make a new list. The first seven are insightfully creative, the last three are strategic genius. So here it is, the 10 Best of Strategy List:

• Apple: iPhone ads
• Rembrandt "Brilliant Mouth"
• Dove "Onslaught"
• ***watch Rye Clifton's parody here
• Axe "Bom Chicka Wah Wah"
  
• Cadillac "Life. Liberty. And the Pursuit."
• EBay "Shop Victoriously"
• Doritos "Live the Flavor"
  
• Radiohead "Name Your Price" strategy for In Rainbows
• Samsung "Charging Stations"
• Simpsonized 7-Elevens
  

My valid attempt to scan as many of my favorite blogs I'm sure has failed to capture all of the memorably strategic campaigns of the year. Input is appreciated; this list is by no means complete or final. Happy New Year!

ch-ch-ch-Chia

It's that time of year again. The Christmas trees are out, kids are lining up for Santa Claus, those Salvation Army people are ringing their bells, and the Chia Pet commercials have popped up on TV and radio (again). A little history...

In 1977, Joe Pedott attended an annual housewares show in Chicago where he first heard of the Chia Pet. A man named Walter Houston was importing the little figures from Mexico, and they were the show's best sellers. Pedott bought the rights from Houston believing he could do a better job of marketing them. Chia Pets are now produced in China (like every other kitschy thing we own), and about 500,000 Chias are sold each year. For 26 years now, the clay figures have been holiday-season hits.

Smithsonian magazine says:

• The ch-ch-ch-Chia Pet is so much a part of the American consumer lore that it was ch-ch-ch-chosen to be included in the New York Times capsule, to be opened in the year 3000, along with a Purple Heart medal, a can of Spam and a Betty Crocker cookbook.

A Chia Pet is a gag-gift, is it not? Wisegeek says, "The faces of past and present Presidents are often found on gag gifts." Now wouldn't that be funny? Bush + Chia... "And laughter - the best gift of all - is priceless."

creating Fansumers

My blogreads this AM started with "PR is useless...when actions create the real story." Real PR = Real WOM if it's 'generated at the roots'. Frontline employees tell the greatest and most authentic stories when it comes to what's really going on with a brand. After spending two years in customer-service, I definitely support deploying more of a brand's budget in creating advocates out of these people. Ben McConnell says "Campaigns are designed. Movements are born." Love it! It's just another notch in the brands-need-to-be-honest belt.

Then I hopped over to Interactive Marketing Trends where I read "Google defined the market as a 'when' and not a 'who'. Demography means little when someone is actively searching for your brand or product." The post is titled "Facebook ad model - the new Google?" While I agree that it's important to be "hanging out" in the consumers environment, I'm not sure how I feel about behavioral targeting. It makes sense, but if we're taking the brand-as-person model as an example: who lets their friends use them? That doesn't feel cool at all.

At Unit Structures, Fred Stutzman says, Project Beacon (as the Facebook app is called) is "trying to turn us all into lifestyle marketers. It might be breaking the user-experience."
My planner ears are perked.

"I saw the commercial"

I heard this quote this morning on NPR. It was a story on everyday American citizens getting swept up in candidates' marketing efforts. I think the quote was mentioned in relation to Obama's TV campaign. A woman had seen the commercial and therefore trusted (?) Obama and his message a bit more. Does advertising work? I think so.

My posting reason was not to high five advertising but rather to make note of its simplicity with middle America. It made me think about planning > we're smart people; we've got a good pulse on culture; we have conversations about strategy for pete's sake. But sometimes I think we might forget that the average person "doesn't get it." Advertising is on TV. It's what they see; what they experience unknowingly.

I don't like to admit that advertising does something to people. I like to think of the active consumer. I'd like to give them more credit than mere marketers do. I want to engage them. But... I need to think about this post: It will bring me back to reality. Advertising is a message and middle America gets it. They saw the commercial.

ps: the small print in the picture says: the Simplest solutions are often the cleverest. They are also usually wrong. - I wish the second part would meet Planning. :p

calvin & hobbes

These two are a riot. Each album by Bill Watterson offers up new parodies on everyday life. Me gusta mucho.

And alas, Calvin has something to say about TV advertising:

Look at these TV commercials. Each one is a jumble of lightning quick, unrelated images and film techniques.

It duplicates the effect of rapidly flipping through channels. It's a barrage of non-linear free association.

Hobbes: I guess they're admitting that a 15-second commercial exceeds the American attention span by a good 14 seconds.

Huh? Are you still talking about that?

I've always thought of TV commercials as little movies. Each one setting up a problem for a hero character/product to over come and all the while, vying for our attention with flashy photography and images. Some commercials shouldn't be missed, but I have to agree with Hobbes's wisdom: Americans don't hang out long enough unless there's a reason to. Hmmm, a second. So significant and yet so precious and completely innocent.

breaking the chains on advertising

Advertising v. marketing v. branding: what's the big idea here? (pun intended)

In a recent post over at Adliterate, Richard develops his idea that branding is getting crammed into advertising. Like, if we just clump the two together, then one equals the other. It's something I've never thought about, but I really like his thinking.

BIG BRAND ideas, he says, are the driving philosophy of the business rather than just a strategy for marketing communications; or short lived creative; or even one-dimensional advertising ideas that just have tactical responses.

• The desire to communicate the entire brand experience can compromise advertising's ambition to sell.

FREE Advertising! Let it be as ambitious as it can be when attached to a specific business problem. When sales are low (easy example), let advertising focus on increasing them.

• Advertising is always sharper when it is attached to a specific business problem rather than wafting around conjuring up beautiful brand worlds.

A problem ad agencies are facing these days in the new (brand) world is that of branding being stymied by traditional media: 15, 30 or even 60 seconds is not a lot of time to communicate a brand, and if you're dealing with a banner ad or other digital tactic, it's even less time. So why are we forcing branding into the small confines of advertising? If it's so hard, let's look closely on why it's so hard: maybe Richard has hit on it -- because advertising is just not meant to be the (one and only) branding tool.

It's something to think about. It's here that planners can play the biggest role. For now, let's free up advertising to do what it needs to do: stay close to the product; involve the consumer and his/her attention; and when it comes to real engagement, then (and only then) pull out the branding guns (if the client has the budget).

Plan on.