Why ‘SMART’ does not work well for digital

Why ‘SMART’ does not work well for digital

 

 

Marketing has moved significantly into the digital domain, online. It appears to make sense, as it appears ‘SMART’ (Specific, Measurable,  Achievable, Realistic and Time driven).

The engineers and accountants amongst us warm to this sort of seemingly measurable expenditure, they can look at a dashboard of quantitative outcomes, and feel good that they are not wasting money.

However, a closer look might give them pause.

Specific.

Yes, you can have a specific, focused activity that either happened, or did not, and people can be held accountable for them.

Measurable.

Yes, you can measure an activity done on line, so long as you are prepared to discount the bots and fakery hiding in the digital supply chain. The ad did appear, we got X 000 likes, Y 00 email addresses when they downloaded the clickbait, and sales reps are now chasing them as qualified leads. Hopefully a few of them actually are, but we may never really know.

Achievable.

Yes, the goal of getting likes and qualified leads has been achieved

Accountable.

Again, you know the intern in the marketing department was accountable for ensuring that there were X entries in the twitter feed, Y   postings on Facebook and Instagram, and that the agency supplied a white paper a week as clickbait.

Timely.

Again, yes, the boss wanted this all done by the end of the month, as it was, Hooray!!

Problem with all of this is that we are measuring the wrong things. They are all about activity, nothing about outcomes. When we understand and can quantify the cause and effect links between activity and outcomes, a really tough problem, SMART goals may become useful.

‘Digital marketing’ has replaced using ‘digital’ as a tool of marketing. Those amongst us who do not understand the wide impact of ‘marketing’ have got it all the wrong way around. They have been seduced by the new shiny thing that appears to be useful, and sometimes it is, but not often as a standalone strategy, it is by its nature a short term tactic only.

How does value relate to utility?

How does value relate to utility?

 

My go to marketing guru, Albert Einstein said: ‘Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another, and relocated’. This has become known as the first rule of thermodynamics.

Perhaps ‘Value’ has a similar characteristic?

Recently I needed to buy a pair of sunglasses. I wanted polarised ones, that sat on my nose easily, and did not look ‘dorky,’ whatever dorky is. I went to a specialist sunglasses retailer in a shopping centre near where I live. The cheapest that met my very broad specifications was over $150. Too much, so I went into a pharmacy a few doors away that had sunglasses, and bought a perfectly good pair of polarised, non dorky glasses for $30.

My instinctive reaction was that the specialist retailer was a rip off merchant, but on reflection, he was not catering to mean old buggars like me, he was catering to the young hip crowd, who saw value in the brand name, and fancy curving design. There was value for them in the extra $120, the value of being seen in an expensive pair of sunnies, the feeling it gave them of being able to pay that much for something to sit on next week,

The value was not counted in the dollars, it was in another set of forms, ones I did  not value in this instance.

There is some sort of scale in our heads that measures ‘value’ to us, which will differ for each individual, and set of circumstances. The scale goes from the pure utility derived from the product, to an entirely emotive response.

The specialist retailer was not selling just sunnies, they were selling a feeling, and a sales experience, the street cred that comes from an expensive brand. The sense of ‘value’, whatever it may be made up of, makes the extra $120 for some, a good investment. That feeling comes from the context of the sale in the specialist retailer, combined with the investment made by the brand owners in building their own ‘brand story’.

In every purchase there is a trade-off between pure utility, and the price paid. The point of intersection is the value a buyer sees in that purchase at that time. A brand is the carrier of that value.

The pharmacist who got my money was just supplying me with the utility of sunnies. I wanted only to keep the glare of the sun out of my eyes, branding added no emotional value at that time, the value to me was entirely in the utility.