I was listening to a presentation by marketing leaders at a major consumer packaged goods (CPG) company this past week, and it made me think about the issue of the sustainability of our marketing campaigns and investments online. One of these marketers was talking about how her team, as part of a major brand marketing initiative, had launched a Web micro site. The site was well-produced, but it was little more than an online brochure (with some value-added content, to be fair). It was not bad, but my immediate thought was about the half life of such a site. Sure it would help drive traffic and subsequent exposure and attention for a period of time, but it was static, with nothing special to keep people coming back once they had gotten tired of it. It wasn’t serving as an ongoing catalyst for the customer relationship and for longer-term brand community.
I had a similar experience listening to another presentation by marketers at a different CPG about a month ago. They were talking about how a key piece of a new product launch was a ‘buzz campaign.’ It made me wince, but — yes — they were talking about paying people to go online and create buzz for their new product. The ethics of such a campaign aside, it also made me think about sustainability. As long as these ‘buzz agents’ were being paid to talk about the product, there would undoubtedly be dialogue in chat rooms and on blogs, but once the campaign was over, how long would this continue, and what would be the impact on the brand’s reputation if people found out about the paid buzz agents?
Dr. Justine Foo, a scientist and marketing researcher, perhaps said it best in a post, titled “New metrics for sustainable marketing,” on her Brains on Fire blog earlier this year: “Our current market is driven by short-term forces: get next quarter’s numbers up, what it will cost me now, # of mass impressions, etc. As a result, we create campaigns, not movements … .”
Where is the sustainability in all of this?
This to me is the core challenge of Internet marketing. Are we investing in campaigns that are little more than one-way ads/brochures online with diminishing returns, or are we investing in a long-term marketing presence that will establish a foundation for growth, that will really stir the passion of our customers and that will, as a consequence, be self perpetuating over a longer period of time? This is an issue that impacts not only the strength and life of our brands but also the ROI from our marketing investments.
What is marketing sustainability, and why should I care?
To answer this question, it’s worth taking a moment to understand what I mean by sustainability — getting away from the environmental associations — and how it is relevant for businesses.
> Business context: Sustainability in a business context is the concept of creating business strategies that meet the needs of today’s stakeholders, especially customers, employees and shareholders, “… without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs,” per the World Commission on Environment and Development in the G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines document from the Global Reporting Initiative. That means running a business in a responsible way that enables continuity and growth over time — i.e., creating a context for sustainable stakeholder value.
> Marketing context: This concept of sustainability is highly relevant in a marketing context, especially when considering marketing investments. A sustainable marketing presence is one that can be built upon and grown over time, contributing to sustainable and growing commerce. This means that a dollar invested in marketing today should not only generate revenue today, but it should also contribute to a growing stream of revenues down the road. Sustainable marketing is also integral to building and growing brand equity — a key asset for every business.
What are the key factors in Internet marketing sustainabilty?
The core of marketing sustainability is the effectiveness of programs that facilitate and grow customer connection. In the Internet environment, there seems to be two major levers that are most significant: engagement and ownership. To what degree are customers engaged in the marketing (i.e., actually interacting versus being passively exposed)? And to what degree do they take ownership of their engagement and proactively participate in the program?
When our Internet marketing programs promote customer engagement and ownership, we find that minor investments lead to tremendous returns. Not only do we convince these customers to buy our products, but these customers also become vested stakeholders in our marketing programs and brands; thus, our marketing investments produce multiples of returns through word of mouth, buzz and true brand advocacy. The impetus is then on us as marketers to build marketing programs that lead to engagement and ownership.
There are other ways to think of these key factors. I ran across an interesting, recent presentation by David Armano, vice-president of ‘experience design’ at marketing firm Critical Mass, (via Bob Kosovsky’s Furtive Librarian blog, BTW). Armano framed the issue of building a sustainable Internet marketing presence via what he calls the ‘three U-s.” They are:
- Usefulness: marketing that “serves a purpose”
- Utility: marketing that “fosters meaningful interactions”
- Ubiquity: marketing that is “effective across multiple touch points including social [media]“
One of the most basic ways to approach both engagement/ownership and the ‘three U-s’ is through technologies that invite user-generated content and experience — perhaps the most significant trend in Internet marketing today. This stuff changes everything, and yet many business leaders still question whether social media, social networking and user-contributed media is really in the mainstream.
If you don’t ‘believe’ that this ’social stuff’ is really happening, consider these data points:
> Participation and user-generated content dominate the top global Web sites: Among the top 10 Web sites globally, according to Internet-tracking service Alexa, 5 out of those 10 are social media, social networking or user-generated media sites. They include: YouTube (3), Facebook (5), MySpace (7), Wikipedia (8) and Blogger.com (9). And even for the other 5, including Google, user-generated content is a critical piece of the overall equation.
> Growth among ‘produced’ sites is diminishing; engagement is critical: User-generated content increasingly rules the roost, not polished, professional and ‘produced’ content on sites such as Yahoo!, especially when it comes to news and information. “[O]nline news audience growth is flat and the market is highly fragmented, with nearly one-half of traffic going to sites that are below the top 100 news sites,” according to Jupiter Research in a press release issued in March of this year. And this is occurring even as the total number of Web sites globally continues to explode. In response, the same press release urged, “… site publishers must actively engage online users to combat audience fragmentation.”
> User-generated/social media IS a reality today when it comes to ’best practices’ among Internet marketers: Former Forrester analyst Peter Kim, who is today working on an ‘enterprise social technology’ venture, keeps a tally of ’social media marketing examples’ on his blog. It lists some pretty major companies with brands many are envious of. Most importantly, there are many companies on this list that have really embraced sustainability of their Internet marketing. I’d take a second to check out this list; the extent of the examples may surprise you.
What are the benchmarks for determining whether my company is building a sustainable Internet marketing presence?
I’ve been thinking a lot about this issue over the past week. Below is a working set of benchmarks. It’s not definitive, but it’s a good start:
> Is interactivity a feature or the focus? The number-one Web site on the Alexa rankings (from above) is Yahoo!. Some would argue that there is a tremendous amount of user-generated content and contributions on the Yahoo! site. I would agree. But I would push back on this point: Interactivity is a feature on Yahoo!, it is not the focus. What do I mean by this? It’s easy to add the ability to comment to your Web site, but does this lead to user-mediated interactions that breed engagement and ownership. No. It just means that users can comment. As a consequence, are you really building a sustainable relationship? Interactivity has to be the focus.
> Is your customer dialogue ‘produced’ or ‘authentic’? This gets into the issue raised earlier on by the CPG that was investing in ‘buzz agents.’ Sustainable marketing is predicated on building brand community. But when you are paying people to pretend like they are community members to drive excitement, what happens when those buzz agents are no longer in the mix? The buzz — not really sustainable — will die.
I might take this a step further, though, to include how honest your communications are with your customers. Is everything perfect in your online world — i.e., is everything polished and ‘produced’ — or can you — ‘authentically’ — admit when things don’t go perfectly in your customer relationships and engage in real dialogue?
It’s a good question, and I was impressed by some recent comments on the Meet Innovators blog by Best Buy CMO Barry Judge, who addressed this in the context of his company’s Internet marketing:
As a retailer in this space, it is important for people to trust us. The only way people will trust us is if we are behaving in a way that makes us trustworthy. Part of that is sharing and being honest, genuine and open about what’s good, what’s bad, what’s working, and what’s not working.
Going forward with social media, maybe we can start to somehow get all those conversations on our Web sites. It’s not hard for people to see what’s being said about Best Buy, both the good and the bad. Whether we want to acknowledge it or not, it’s being said, so why not make it easy.
Robert Stevens, the founder of Geek Squad who still works at Best Buy said to me, “Let’s make it real easy for customers to complain. We want to hear it. Then we can do something about it, so let’s do all we can to make it easy.”
> Are you advocating for your brand or building brand advocates? Push versus pull. That’s what it comes down to. Does your marketing make people want your brand, or are you focused on pushing your brand to people through an unending stream of campaigns, direct-mail pushes, etc.? Marketing that builds brand advocates (who then pull) is much more sustainable than marketing that constantly has to re-validate and remind people of its brand.
Related to this, in your Internet marketing, are you delivering tools to help support your brand advocates? Small things such as commenting and participating in the blogs of your brand advocates, rather than just letting them do this on your site, and helping them stay in touch via mechanisms such as RSS feeds and tags such as del.icio.us make a huge difference.
I think this also touches on the topic of brand community, which was the topic of a past post on this blog. That dialogue was about keeping up with your ‘mobile’ brand community. Does your Internet marketing strategy take into account the cross-channel reality of your brand advocates’ lives? I’d check it out.
> Are you helping or hurting return on brand equity? A business needs to generate revenue in increasing amounts over time. That comes from leveraging assets, and brands need to be a key asset in that scenario. Are you leveraging your brand equity to generate growing revenues, or is your Internet marketing actually using up your brand equity?
What’s next? What do you think?
As always, this dialogue is just beginning.
What can you add to the initial list of benchmarks, above? I’d love to hear more on the dimensions you think should be considered.
What do you think are the keys to sustainable marketing, and do you agree with the premise that we as marketers should care about business sustainability?
Please share your thoughts.





Very interesting thoughts Adam. I never thought about internet marketing in the context of sustainability, but now it clicks. The only way to achieve sustainability in internet marketing is when consumers participate by contributing. The perfect example is this blog. With all do respect, many of the most insightful and interesting comments are from the perspectives of the readers who contribute.
@ John – I wholeheartedly agree with your statement. And that’s the key point of value for me, too, on this blog.
It’s really interesting to put together these blog pieces — to frame the dialogue — but it’s particularly interesting to hear the new ideas that you guys come up with when you comment. You always make me think about the issue in new ways.
So thanks, and keep it coming!
Adam, nice post. I think you’re right. It’s about creating genuine interaction between a company and all of its evangelists and critics that will eventually matter. Even if the movie “Dare Devil” makes up some bogus review like “Best movie ever!” it still won’t break any box office or DVD sales records. (They did get caught falsifying a review!)
While the creation of an artificial buzz campaign sounds a little goofy (especially when admitted to someone outside the company), it’s well to remember that promotion is only one piece of marketing. If the product in question isn’t all there, customers will quickly take notice. In essence, the artificial buzz campaign, whether ethical or not, will have minimal effect on a product that doesn’t live up to expectation. However, if the buzz–whether real or not–creates awareness around a product that is truly great, the buzz campaign has done its job and has proven its worth.
So, in essence, this form of product whoring can work if you can create a believable buzz campaign for a product that is truly fit for the marketplace. I agree that artificial buzz is not sustainable, but if an initial artificial push leads to genuine buzz, it was well worth it.
@ Thomas – I understand how you’re coming at this, and I realize there are shades of ‘grey’ when it comes to how buzz is built.
One example is a company called BzzAgent, which claims to build buzz via a network of non-paid Buzz Agents. Here’s how they describe their agents:
http://www.bzzagent.com/pages/Page.do?page=Our_Agents
I’m a bit skeptical, but I’m trying to be open minded.
Back to paid buzz agents … I’m thinking more holistically about the brand when I talk about why I think paid buzz building is a bad route.
It’s not so much that paid buzz agents hurt today; they may initially help a company, but it’s the impact to the brand down the road that I’m worried about. This can come about in two ways: (1.) a vacuum being created when the buzz campaign is withdrawn and the ‘artificial’ influence network that was built then collapsing or (2.) the brand reputation being damaged if customers find out that paid buzz agents were used to get them excited in the first place.
That’s why I like the sustainability perspective on all of this as a touchstone. Sustainability is about doing the right thing today but also preserving the opportunity for tomorrow. And that’s why I think buzz agents hurt Internet marketing sustainability for brands.
Good dialogue!
One additional item to add.
Ran across a great Q&A with Ford’s head of social media.
His quote really speaks to the heart of the ‘authenticity’ issue we’ve been discussing with paid buzz agents …
“… [F]or any business that’s serious about [social media], get out there and be part of these social networks as individual people. Are you customers on Facebook? Get on Facebook! Are they experimenting with Twitter? Get a Twitter account and start by actively listening. You need to understand the rules of engagement before you take part.”
Check out his full Q&A at:
http://altitudebranding.com/archives/275
Adam, yesterday you were talking about gathering and organizing web conversations on different brands. A nice resource is search.twitter.com. You can do keyword searches on all twitter posts, ordered by time of post, updated in real time.
@ Thomas – Thanks for this.
For others not privvy to this conversation, we were having a dialogue last night on the topic of how marketing research is moving in a more ’sustainable’ fashion as people focus on observational research and abandon contrived surveys.
I had said to Tom that I’d be interested in tools that enable brand managers to monitor brand-related dialogue and insights both in real time and in aggregate via Twitter. This was made particularly relevant by some comments by my wife, Christine, who noted that at a recent conference her company had produced you could literally get people’s reactions in real time to keynotes and press conferences by reading their Twitter streams.
I know this is an emerging area that third parties are also spending time on. In fact, I think this may deserve its own post. More to come …
So many companies (most companies, if not all) have launched their websites either of the company or of its specific product or program. But when we review the traffic, the number will look so sad. It is a headache for marketers to build “an ongoing catalyst for the customer relationship and for longer-term brand community” as you said.
When we look at the contents of these websites, they are still one-way broadcasting. Though there are some little games and forums, they are far away from the desired “engagement and interactivity”. How to leverage the today internet technology and to be creative are so crucial but we usually forget that or have no clue.
Very valuable advices on 3U, engagement and interactivity, and advocates. Appreciate your insightful discussion on a important and urgent marketing challenge.
Jeffrey
@ Jeffrey – I really ‘get’ the frustration in your comments that all marketers feel when it comes to Internet marketing. You note it is a headache — it is.
That’s why I believe that starting off with the goal of making it two-way and sustainable — rather than worrying about it or trying to architect it after the fact — is so critical. We’re creating a substrate for brand community interaction. let’s keep this in mind. And that’s why I think the key questions, the 3Us framework and the concepts of engagement and ownership are powerful way to vet our approaches.
Thanks for sharing your insights and experiences.
[...] I talked about the challenges of so-called ‘buzz campaigns’ and Web micro sites in a recent blog post on Internet marketing sustainability. Let me sum up the challenge that has surfaced in all of those conversations: Many marketing [...]
[...] short-term ‘buzz’ and instead focusing on building long-term community and brand advocates (an issue I’ve written about on this site in the past). CMOs must focus their companies on investing in and building marketing organizations that do [...]