Blog

Friday, 27 April 2012
Sandra Bullen

This is my second blog on the motivation for giving. My first post concluded that human nature requires that we get something back from all of our relationships, including our relationship with the charities we give to.

I am fascinated by what makes people respond. I want to understand the psychology behind our motivation to give (of our time or our money). This second post explores something different.

The day Fabrice Muamba had a heart attack in front of us on our screens, the nation responded (prayed). What was the driver? I have given a great deal of thought to this, and an event this week has clarified my thinking. At the end of the 2012 London Marathon, Claire Squires collapsed and died. And since then her Just Giving page has gone up from approximately £500 to £820,000 (at the time of writing) all going to The Samaritans. I have found myself looking at her Just Giving page and what you see is a narrative, a tragic story in time. The front pages are mostly anonymous gifts, or named gifts with no message. Sometimes with RIP messages. The messages are relatively cold, as there is no relationship with the donor and the recipient. But dig deeper and the the tragedy unfolds. Go to the initial pages and there before your eyes are messages from friends and family, affectionate, intimate and loving messages. You can not look at that page and not be moved.

Why have over 71,000 (at the time of writing) people given since last Sunday? I am trying to look beyond the obvious answers; the power of the media, social media and the ease of the giving web page. The answer isn't because they all love the Samaritan's and want to give to them. It isn't because they know the family and want to help them. The answer I have come to is simple. We are moved to give when we see something with their own eyes and we have a vehicle to become involved in the story (Just Giving). It doesn't make logical sense. To give to someone we've not met and to a cause we don't feel passionate about. The irrational creatures that we are overrides our rational, logical selves. The desire to want to be part of the narrative is so strong that we give.

This example is extreme, but sometimes it takes observing the extreme to see a more universal fact. What is the universal fact? We respond to things we see (and experience) with our own eyes, and we want to be part of the narrative, part of the solution. If we don't see it - we're not moved and we don't want to be part of the solution. Simple as. Nobody can bring Claire back, but by donating, we are becoming part of the story, and some how that makes us feel better.

I feel immeasurably sad for the Squires family.

I feel pleased for the Samaritan's that they are the involuntary benefactors of such an outpouring of national generosity.

I feel more determined than ever to help my charity clients to find campaigns and messaging that helps people see causes with their own eyes and want to be part of the narrative.

Friday, 13 April 2012
Sandra Bullen

I remember about 4 years ago one of my digital account managers came back from a seminar on digital trends, and she announced, “The next two things to watch out for are Twitter and Spotify”. By then Twitter was already 2 years old, but it was the first I had heard about it. Within weeks it suddenly hit the press, and we were all talking about it.

Since that time we have worked with clients on integrated campaigns that have Twitter as a route-to-market, as well as developing Twitter as part of an on-going marketing engagement process. My experience is not theoretical; it is deeply practical, working with a handful of clients on their social media implementation.

But here’s the thing. I am a marketing director. I am a CEO. Should I Tweet? It has been dawning on me over the last few months that to have credibility with clients, I have to Tweet. It doesn’t come naturally to me; I am a behind the scenes kind of person. But if I believe in it as a communications medium and I advise clients on how to use it, then I have to use it myself.

I realised that to Tweet well, you have to have a strong sense of self, and so I decided to apply some branding principles to explore what my online persona should be. Who knows, other CEO's might find this helpful.

1) Who am I? What is my online persona?

Before I even begin to Tweet, I need to establish what I want my online persona to be.
If I follow a brand, I expect to understand who they are and what they stand for. It should be the same if I follow an individual.

So, as a personal brand, What is my proposition? Or perhaps put another way, What am I passionate about? What are my drivers? Am I a lobbyist? Am I a thought leader in a subject? Am I a technical leader in an area?

I have 20 years of marketing and brand experience, and this is what I will speak out about. Breaking this down further, my specific interests are innovation and entrepreneurship – both social and commercial. I am interested in what makes people respond to a message? What makes anything compelling? What makes donors give? What makes consumers buy? What makes businesses thrive? I am interested in marketing systems that deliver emotional connections. I scour the market for great examples of best practice.

This is what I have decided to speak about. This is what I want to be followed for. My proposition is that I want to have a voice on branding and marketing that is innovative and that delivers results. I want people to follow me because I might add something to their business lives.

What about the fact that, as well as being a CEO, I am a mum, a daughter, a wife, a consumer, someone with an active faith, involved in local community, etc? I have chosen to have a business Twitter account. It doesn’t mean those other areas of my life are any less important than my business life, but it means that I have chosen not to Tweet on these matters. I am managing my online persona. Not everyone makes such a distinction between private and business, but it works for me.

So now I have decided what my online persona is, let’s move on to thinking why it matters.

2) Why would I want to Tweet?

Here’s the top 2 reasons I have concluded to Tweet:
A) To connect with people.
Twitter is a genuine online networking tool. It has the capacity to win business, just as off-line networking has the capacity to do. But this has to be active on my part, not passive. I need to send direct messages to people. People I’d love to work for, authors of inspirational books, journalists I’d like to influence, and so on. If I find information that is specifically interesting to them – I should send it to them directly. Engage with them.
B) Be a voice of expertise.
Using my defined online persona, I can build a community of common interest. I can bring inspiration in my area of excellence. Business is becoming more personal, and Twitter is a great way to respond to this trend. Home made PR is now much easier. Twitter is the tool of journalists. You can be your own PR agent.

Ok, so now I’ve decided it’s worth Tweeting, how do I go about it?

3) Understand the anatomy of a Tweet

Next, I need to understand how I can speak directly with people (@), and how I can get involved in trending subjects (#), or even create my own trends. The best way I found to do this was to read Twitter’s very own document on the subject, which if you Tweet me @Sandrabullen I'll organise to get it to you. It’s excellent and I can’t add anything to it.

What about Tweeting for my company?

4) Differentiate between my corporate brand and my personal brand

I bring leadership to my organisation, which means that there must be a piece of me in my organisation’s persona. But my organisation also has other personality traits that need to come through in my corporate brand. I shouldn’t be the only person that Tweets for @ABAdesigners and, conversely, I shouldn’t disengage from Tweeting for them either.

In summary, if you follow me what will you get?

Well you’ll get some of my brand knowledge. You’ll get some of my marketing knowledge. I will share some of the latest information on both of these subjects, and I may from time to time share thoughts & opinions on other areas of personal business interest, that all fit in with my defined online persona.

There. I know I have been slow off the mark, but now there’s no stopping me…

follow me on @sandrabullen

Tuesday, 27 March 2012
Sandra Bullen

All over the press yesterday was the ‘cash for access’ row. Peter Cruddas resigned over the undercover footage of being able to offer access to the Prime Minister and possibly the chance to influence government policy. Where did this cross the line, and switch to being an entirely inappropriate promise? Whatever we feel about buying access, it was the influencing policy promise that definitely crossed the line of acceptability.

Not many articles you will read on this matter will look at this scenario from the donor’s perspective. When we work with charities we spend a lot of time thinking about what will captivate the imagination of the target market. Good fundraising understands human nature, and looks to develop fascinating messages and products that deliver a 1-2-1 connection with the audience. Expecting something in return is at the heart of human nature.

Our relationships are never one way. We need interaction. We need reciprocity. We ultimately expect something in return from even the seemingly most selfless of relationships. As we get older we even expect our children to look after us in some way, shape or form. Maybe it’s a kind of reward for those sleepless nights and sacrificed (lost) lazy Sunday afternoons. If all of this is true in our private relationships, it is also true in our public, formal relationships. We expect a return.

Let’s just think about this further in the context of giving.

1. When we buy a raffle ticket, we don’t just donate £5. We donate £5 with the expectation that we might end up with something of much greater worth than the original £5 we gave.
2. When we bid in an ‘auction of promises’ we might opt for a behind the scenes tour of a Premier Football club or maybe even a film set. Often there are things on offer that normally money can't buy. We give, but we get back as well.
3. Why is child sponsorship one of the most genius fundraising products of the last few years? It is because it creates a 1-2-1 connection. You get something back from your ongoing gift. We know of many charities that are trying to create new products that create that same 1-2-1 connection.

And then there is the prestige that you gain when you sponsor a prestigious awards ceremony, and get to mix with celebrities and royalty, and so it goes on and on.

If we all expect something in return for our relationships, be they private, or the charities we support, why should the donors to the Conservative Party be any different? I think it is totally unreasonable of the press to expect organisations (or individuals) that donate £250,000 to the Conservative Party not to get anything in return for the money they donate. It seems to me that perhaps we should be debating the fact that our political parties rely on the private sector for funding rather than focussing on private suppers at no. 10.

Monday, 23 January 2012
Sandra Bullen

Over the last few days I have followed with interest the blogosphere discussions and arguments around Apple’s latest education announcement (New York, 19th January 2012), and it has got me thinking…

…But before I begin, what was announced?

In a nutshell Apple launched 3 things that they believe will revolutionalise education:

iBooks 2 (featuring iBooks textbooks). This is the free app that enables iPad users to view stunning text books in full multi media interactivity.

iBooks Author – This is also a free app that enable Mac users to create beautiful iBooks textbooks.

iTunes U – This is another free app that I will leave someone else to write about.

Anyone can create ibook textbooks, and anyone can distribute them for free (via iBookstore). However if you want to start charging for the books through the iBookstore you can do so, and Apple will take 30% of the profits as their cut. You can’t distribute the iBooks via any other means.

…Now, back to my thinking. Much of the press/blog discussions are around the cost of production and ownership of the book. There seems to be some that believe that the licensing means that Apple wants to own the book itself (ie the content). I don’t believe that this is the case. Then there is the normal stuff about the amount that Apple make from each sales transaction (30%). I do not sit in the camp of the whingers. Apple is a business, and as the inventors they are the rule setters. So we either ignore them or work with them. Our choice.

But I DO think that there is a whole line of argument that seems to be missing, and so I will lob it into the melting pot of thinking. As a marketer, I am very interested in who owns the customer. And although this is an education announcement – it is also a business announcement. And whilst children will be educated along the way, many business opportunities will arise from this announcement. There will not just be pupils – there will be customers. Creative ideas will emerge that will create many new market opportunities. I believe that these emerging ideas will go far beyond the boundaries of traditional education.

As a marketer I work on marketing systems that build a relationship with clients/customers.Just like iTunes, iBooks challenge this marketing model, as they operate a classic indirect sales model. It will be very difficult to build relationships with these customers, because we can’t talk to them, so we have to resort to indirect marketing methodologies. Again, this is not a point for whinging, but a point for understanding. We must understand what we are dealing with.

Apple may not own the book, but they definitley own the customer.

Ps/ If Apple are as successful as they want to be in the education sector, then the iPad will become to textbooks what iPod has become to MP3 players. The iPad will be as ubiquitous as the common old text book. Genius. Scary, but genius.

Pss/ I wonder if one day Apple will re-package our data and sell it back to us. I expect so. I am sure it is in their grand plan even as I write this.

Thursday, 24 November 2011
Sandra Bullen

I watched 'Made in Dagenham' the other evening. Loved it. It has everything. A bit of British social history, story of competitive women, nostalgic romance: you name it. Something in particular captured my imagination. The references to Berni Inns. My childhood memories came flooding back: Meals at the Maidenhead Berni. Birthdays, Sunday lunches, Mothers day. Even celebrating my Dad's win on Teasy Weasy's horse in the Grand National. What happened to this household brand? On researching, it appears that the brand was blissfully ignorant on how British culture was changing and in particular how British food tastes were changing. Not moving with the times appears to be its biggest downfall.

This thought process made me consider the question - what makes a successful brand stand the test of time? And this has endorsed my total belief that a brand and business are intimately connected. Brands only continue to be successful if all of the business factors of that brand are lined up and squared off.

I have had the privilege of working with some amazing brands that have lasted the test of time. From the London Stock Exchange to Spurgeons to Johnson and Johnson. I am currently working for a fantastic charity, which started in 1854 that is re-branding - as it recognises it must modernise to survive (more of that in a future blog). They all have something in common: Great leadership that can see trends and have the insight to bring corrective change to adapt and move with the times. Leadership that can see threats from all angles (have you done a PESTEL analysis on your own organisation recently?) and see how to overcome obstacles.

Only once all of those fundamental things are right can a brand then really take flight. When we at ABA work with brands, we are as passionate about the business behind the brands as much as we are about creating great stories for those brands. I would like to think that if we were working on the Berni Inn account now, we would have been working with them and challenging them about the ways they were doing things, and not just creating nice 'stuff' for them.

There's no reason on earth why old brands can't prosper. But they do need to watch their backs.

Sunday, 20 March 2011
Sandra Bullen

Our web clients fall into 2 camps; those that commission websites all the time and those that only commission a website once in a blue moon. This blog post rings true for projects for the latter group of clients not the former.

I was having lunch with a business owner client last week and he said to me with reference to a website we built for him 4 years ago,

"You gave me what I asked for, the problem was I didn't know what I wanted."

I am happy to publicly confess this because 4 years is an eternity in the web industry. Our whole web process and skill base has been overhauled and we are a completely different organisation from then. We have new team members, and been through a full professional development programme for the existing team. However the comment made me think, and I realised the universal truth behind it. Clients often do not know what to ask for, and they will even ask for the the wrong thing. It is the job of a good agency to uncover exactly what it is that the client does want, and also to show them the power that the digital world can offer them. It is the job of the agency, not the client, to ensure that their web offering is maximised.

A key way we ensure that we give clients fantastic solutions is to build in enough time into the project to uncover client requirements properly. We can do sites at break neck speeds if needs must, but increasingly we are unashamedly building extra time at the front end of the project specifically to go over and over and over the possibilities of the project. Viewing the project from different angles, understanding exactly what it is that users want from the site, and indeed how they typically might access the information we are offering them. Working with different stakeholders to get the whole picture. For big enough projects include research. The initial phase of a project defines its success. This approach leads for better results, happier clients and a more fulfilled team.

So if you're reading this and it is almost blue moon time again - give us a call, we'd love to help you.