Comments on: Shooting Ourselves in the “Engagment” Face http://madebyfight.com/2010/01/shooting-ourselves-in-the-engagment-face/ Digital Strategy Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:38:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Wilson Zorn http://madebyfight.com/2010/01/shooting-ourselves-in-the-engagment-face/comment-page-1/#comment-206 Wilson Zorn Sat, 13 Feb 2010 02:13:35 +0000 http://madebyfight.com/?p=308#comment-206 I think this hits it dead-on, though I'd like to add what I would call a sort of parallel point. But first, to add a bit to the point you've made, this disregard or resignation regarding ROI also becomes an easy path towards neglecting appropriate CRM efforts and other corollary needs, which, in turns, then becomes a self-reinforcing argument to "this is not measurable." What I mean is that if we start by saying we "cannot" measure ROI (or care not to), then it follows it is less urgent to determine even exactly who is showing up on our digital platforms...which in turn of course makes it darn hard to measure! So this argument is a sort of Escher trap or Morpheus loop in my view. <br><br>But there's something I would call parallel to this whole ROI discussion, which is the importance of brand goals and vision, which must be tied to ROI in order to make sense of the picture at all. It's not merely that we measure the ROI (which can and should be done in its own right) but that we understand the relationship to larger brand goals, and furthermore, even, we should not be so fetishistic about ROI and measurability that we do not abandon those brand values and core communication styles that express the purpose of the brand and in turn (should) engage the appropriate audience. I think this is why some people have reacted against ROI, as the ROI discussion sometimes neglects to say such as (for example) "well, we are the type of company that simply must express itself via the public stream because that reflects our core values and relates to our brand's inherent audience" [e.g., Twitter, but I don't want to digress into a mere tools or even specific technology promotion, speaking here more in mode of engagement]. The real necessity is of course to marry these two aspects, brand values and return metrics, holistically, not to either get mired in numbers for their own sake (what good is profit if it brings us into a dead end avenue?) or brand communication for its own sake (what good is communication if it yields no measurable benefit?).<br><br>Incidentally, Justin, I am not saying that you have stated anything otherwise, in fact I perceive Fight to be wholly engaged in this way of thinking, but I am elaborating as I think too often the ROI discussions have neglected the values/goals discussion and in turn this has, I believe, created the fuel for too many people to say "the hell with ROI" (in effect). I think this hits it dead-on, though I'd like to add what I would call a sort of parallel point. But first, to add a bit to the point you've made, this disregard or resignation regarding ROI also becomes an easy path towards neglecting appropriate CRM efforts and other corollary needs, which, in turns, then becomes a self-reinforcing argument to “this is not measurable.” What I mean is that if we start by saying we “cannot” measure ROI (or care not to), then it follows it is less urgent to determine even exactly who is showing up on our digital platforms…which in turn of course makes it darn hard to measure! So this argument is a sort of Escher trap or Morpheus loop in my view.

But there's something I would call parallel to this whole ROI discussion, which is the importance of brand goals and vision, which must be tied to ROI in order to make sense of the picture at all. It's not merely that we measure the ROI (which can and should be done in its own right) but that we understand the relationship to larger brand goals, and furthermore, even, we should not be so fetishistic about ROI and measurability that we do not abandon those brand values and core communication styles that express the purpose of the brand and in turn (should) engage the appropriate audience. I think this is why some people have reacted against ROI, as the ROI discussion sometimes neglects to say such as (for example) “well, we are the type of company that simply must express itself via the public stream because that reflects our core values and relates to our brand's inherent audience” [e.g., Twitter, but I don't want to digress into a mere tools or even specific technology promotion, speaking here more in mode of engagement]. The real necessity is of course to marry these two aspects, brand values and return metrics, holistically, not to either get mired in numbers for their own sake (what good is profit if it brings us into a dead end avenue?) or brand communication for its own sake (what good is communication if it yields no measurable benefit?).

Incidentally, Justin, I am not saying that you have stated anything otherwise, in fact I perceive Fight to be wholly engaged in this way of thinking, but I am elaborating as I think too often the ROI discussions have neglected the values/goals discussion and in turn this has, I believe, created the fuel for too many people to say “the hell with ROI” (in effect).

]]> By: Wilson Zorn http://madebyfight.com/2010/01/shooting-ourselves-in-the-engagment-face/comment-page-1/#comment-86 Wilson Zorn Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:13:35 +0000 http://madebyfight.com/?p=308#comment-86 I think this hits it dead-on, though I'd like to add what I would call a sort of parallel point. But first, to add a bit to the point you've made, this disregard or resignation regarding ROI also becomes an easy path towards neglecting appropriate CRM efforts and other corollary needs, which, in turns, then becomes a self-reinforcing argument to "this is not measurable." What I mean is that if we start by saying we "cannot" measure ROI (or care not to), then it follows it is less urgent to determine even exactly who is showing up on our digital platforms...which in turn of course makes it darn hard to measure! So this argument is a sort of Escher trap or Morpheus loop in my view. <br><br>But there's something I would call parallel to this whole ROI discussion, which is the importance of brand goals and vision, which must be tied to ROI in order to make sense of the picture at all. It's not merely that we measure the ROI (which can and should be done in its own right) but that we understand the relationship to larger brand goals, and furthermore, even, we should not be so fetishistic about ROI and measurability that we do not abandon those brand values and core communication styles that express the purpose of the brand and in turn (should) engage the appropriate audience. I think this is why some people have reacted against ROI, as the ROI discussion sometimes neglects to say such as (for example) "well, we are the type of company that simply must express itself via the public stream because that reflects our core values and relates to our brand's inherent audience" [e.g., Twitter, but I don't want to digress into a mere tools or even specific technology promotion, speaking here more in mode of engagement]. The real necessity is of course to marry these two aspects, brand values and return metrics, holistically, not to either get mired in numbers for their own sake (what good is profit if it brings us into a dead end avenue?) or brand communication for its own sake (what good is communication if it yields no measurable benefit?).<br><br>Incidentally, Justin, I am not saying that you have stated anything otherwise, in fact I perceive Fight to be wholly engaged in this way of thinking, but I am elaborating as I think too often the ROI discussions have neglected the values/goals discussion and in turn this has, I believe, created the fuel for too many people to say "the hell with ROI" (in effect). I think this hits it dead-on, though I'd like to add what I would call a sort of parallel point. But first, to add a bit to the point you've made, this disregard or resignation regarding ROI also becomes an easy path towards neglecting appropriate CRM efforts and other corollary needs, which, in turns, then becomes a self-reinforcing argument to “this is not measurable.” What I mean is that if we start by saying we “cannot” measure ROI (or care not to), then it follows it is less urgent to determine even exactly who is showing up on our digital platforms…which in turn of course makes it darn hard to measure! So this argument is a sort of Escher trap or Morpheus loop in my view.

But there's something I would call parallel to this whole ROI discussion, which is the importance of brand goals and vision, which must be tied to ROI in order to make sense of the picture at all. It's not merely that we measure the ROI (which can and should be done in its own right) but that we understand the relationship to larger brand goals, and furthermore, even, we should not be so fetishistic about ROI and measurability that we do not abandon those brand values and core communication styles that express the purpose of the brand and in turn (should) engage the appropriate audience. I think this is why some people have reacted against ROI, as the ROI discussion sometimes neglects to say such as (for example) “well, we are the type of company that simply must express itself via the public stream because that reflects our core values and relates to our brand's inherent audience” [e.g., Twitter, but I don't want to digress into a mere tools or even specific technology promotion, speaking here more in mode of engagement]. The real necessity is of course to marry these two aspects, brand values and return metrics, holistically, not to either get mired in numbers for their own sake (what good is profit if it brings us into a dead end avenue?) or brand communication for its own sake (what good is communication if it yields no measurable benefit?).

Incidentally, Justin, I am not saying that you have stated anything otherwise, in fact I perceive Fight to be wholly engaged in this way of thinking, but I am elaborating as I think too often the ROI discussions have neglected the values/goals discussion and in turn this has, I believe, created the fuel for too many people to say “the hell with ROI” (in effect).

]]>