Author: Sense Admin

Have you noticed how every brand is trying to prove a point at the moment? How every product you pick up in the supermarket now boldly states its protein content? Or, how the shampoo you bought the other day is suddenly ‘gluten free’?

Perhaps awareness of even a simple form of marketing is heightened for us marketers, but in a society where everything is under scrutiny, and where consumerism is at its peak, it feels like brands are more self-aware than ever before.

In 2008, Heineken brought us the ‘Walk-in Fridge’, racking up millions of views on YouTube. The ad highlights the different values of men and women, as stereotyped in society a decade ago, as a couple show their friends around their new home. The woman shows her walk-in wardrobe to her female friends, while the man reveals a walk-in fridge full of beer to his mates. Both result in enthusiastic screams from their same-sex friends. The advert played on traditional stereotypes in a humorous way – presumably to appeal to what it thought was an all-male audience.

As society has changed, brands have had to adapt to a more nuanced view, which we can see in Heineken’s 2017 #OpenYourWorld ad. Heineken brought together people from different cultures, backgrounds, and sexual orientations in a ‘social experiment’, exploring the benefits of finding common ground – Heineken beer and reasonable discussion. The message was raw, empathetic, and forward-thinking, which, in the current climate of thriving equality and liberalism, was well-received.

Of course, we expect brands to evolve with the times – they need to stay relevant to the changing attitudes of their audience. But the way in which brands manage that change is critical. Heineken achieved a 180-degree pivot; from clumsy sexist stereotypes to jumping on the equality bandwagon – without irritating the public. Because it was a proactive effort, even though the principle isn’t exactly original, it comes across as relevant and authentic. We’re all entitled to change our minds once in a while (even if it takes the best part of a decade).

What’s more concerning is when real-world issues are side-lined, only to later be exploited by brands looking for a hot-topic-of-the-moment. For example, despite scientists sounding the alarm for years over the impact of plastic on the environment, it seems like brands have only recently started to take action, capitalising on the opportunity to be seen in a positive light. Do they feel a genuine corporate social responsibility or is it just another tactic to make headlines? It’s particularly galling when the brands in question are category leaders – surely major powers on the world stage should be leading from the front, rather than playing cautious catch up, or only acting when they’re caught out?

Greenpeace has made a number of protests shaming Coca-Cola for its contributions to plastic waste, although coverage of this has been all too scarce. However, when Coca-Cola ‘heroically’ announced that it will recall and recycle 100% of its packaging to help clean up our oceans, it made the news. Shouldn’t we really be celebrating Greenpeace for acting when it mattered over a huge corporation that showed up late to the plastic party?

Where Heineken has made a positive shift and potentially contributed to changing people’s perceptions, other brands have been less proactive and instead demonstrated a lazy approach to jumping on the bandwagon. A prime example of this is when McDonalds turned the trademark ‘M’ upside down to show support for International Women’s Day. They’re hardly a brand who you would expect to be active on such an occasion, but perhaps like Coca-Cola they were only responding to external pressures.

Brands should be careful about how they portray acts of ‘good’ and must try to avoid looking exploitative. Instead, they should be proactive; earning respect by taking action, instead of just nodding in agreement like McDonalds. What Heineken have done is much more believable and empowering – instead of caring about how they look to consumers, they have focussed on getting the consumer to think about the bigger picture themselves, and hopefully make their own contributions to change.

It’s easy to say “better late than never Coke” or “at least you’re doing something McDonalds”, but the reality is that if these brand leaders were more proactive in the first place, they wouldn’t need to jump on the good cause marketing brandwagon. They’d be driving it – and making a real difference along the way.

Ciara Garratt is Account Manager at global brand experience agency Sense.

The article first appeared in Promotional Marketing magazine

It’s 10 April 2018 and a nervous Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, stands before the US Congress. It’s the turn of 84-year-old US senator and Republican high-tech task force chair Orrin Hatch to ask the questions. Facebook is at the centre of a scandal after it was revealed that Cambridge Analytica, a British data firm hired by President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, improperly gathered detailed data on 87 million users using the platform. Zuckerberg has just told Congress that he always intends to offer a free version of Facebook to users.

“Well if so,” Hatch replies, “how do you sustain a business model in which users don’t pay for your service?”

Zuckerberg blinks and pauses for a moment.

“Senator, we run ads.”

The exchange, along with others involving various elderly Senators, has become symbolic of the technological knowledge gap that exists in Western society. A video titled “Mark Zuckerberg explains the internet to old people” went viral in the days following Zuckerberg’s visit to Congress as members of the Millennial and Gen Z demographics revelled in the ignorance of their elders.

The attitudes of Gen Z towards technology and advertising are particularly fascinating. Also known as the iGen, Gen Z is the generation born from the late 1990s onwards which has never known a world without the internet. Its oldest members have just turned 21 and have grown up alongside dominant tech companies like Facebook. They are used to a world where platforms are cheaper than ever before. Their favourite brands – Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat – offer their services for free. Where we used to buy a single CD for £9.99, they can now listen to any song ever recorded for nothing on Spotify. Only Netflix draws the line, offering an array of TV and film for as little as £7.49 a month. For the free services, Gen Z knows the price it has to pay: ads. Just as Mark Zuckerberg said.

What gets really interesting is the attitude of Gen Z towards advertising in general, with 61% agreeing that posters and billboards help them become aware of new products and services1. Gen Z is also 37% more likely to notice adverts on public transport2 and 15% more likely to stop and interact at a promotional stand or event3. It seems as if the recent wave of cynicism towards brands has not been driven by the young, but by the generations that preceded them.

What does this mean for brands? Only time will tell. It remains to be seen whether this more accepting attitude to advertising is driven by youth or by a genuinely different outlook. However, it appears highly likely that Gen Z will take two traits from its youth into adulthood which could be highly significant for brands:

Shortening Attention Spans

According to most research, the attention span of Gen Z is lower than any other generation in history. In our digital age this makes perfect sense. There is so much vying for our attention and, in terms of things to occupy us, we are spoilt for choice. For brands, this has important implications. Firstly, to attract Gen Z, your marketing has to be interesting. Better still, if you really want to get this generation’s attention, your marketing should be useful. Gen Z is bombarded by hundreds of promotional messages every day. If a brand can offer something that is genuinely valuable it is far more likely to give you a precious piece of its attention.

Increased Levels of Activism

Gen Z is serious. Its members are driven to succeed, being 71% more likely to be willing to sacrifice free time to get ahead in their future careers4. They are also serious about social change with 76% of them happy to volunteer their time for good causes5. Gen Z members are activists. They strive to improve their own lives and the lives of people around them.

The last few years has seen the rise of purpose as a marketing tool, the mechanic brands use to demonstrate that they also care about improving people’s lives. Given the attitudes of Gen Z, it seems it is here to stay. To succeed with brand purpose, and to win the hearts of Millennials and Gen Z alike, the key is action. Brands must not just talk about their purpose, they must demonstrate their purpose through action in the real world. If they can make their purpose tangible, they will be able to win the hearts of Gen Z.

The world has changed a great deal in the lifetime of 84-year-old Senator Orrin Hatch. When Mark Zuckerberg was born, Hatch was in his early 50s and by the time Facebook had its millionth user he was 70. However, for the members of Gen Z, the world has been slightly more stable. They are digital natives, born and raised in the age of the internet. They are used to brands keeping their favourite digital past times free at the cost of adverts. Gen Z is quick thinking and serious. It has a different outlook to those who came before them and as its members mature into adulthood, brands will have a fantastic opportunity to become meaningful parts of their lives.

Sources: 1,2,3,4,5 YouGov (29 April 2018)

Vaughan Edmonds is Planner at global brand experience agency Sense.

This article appeared in Promotional Marketing.

It seems that rarely a week goes by without a new statistic showing just how low consumer confidence has dropped thanks to Brexit. This isn’t great for brands, but this issue seems fleetingly short term compared to the almost equally prevalent statistics about the fragility of young people. The latest report from the annual UK Youth Index calls 16 to 25-year-olds the unhappiest generation for a decade, revealing that almost two-thirds (61%) regularly feel stressed, and more than a quarter (27%) “hopeless”, while around half (47%) have experienced a mental health problem – symptoms of depression and anxiety are way up among this generation, as are reports of self-harm.

Rather than panicking about how to boost post-Brexit sales among quite understandably thrifty consumers, it would seem to make more sense to come up with a strategy to support the next generation of customers who potentially face a much longer term crisis of confidence.

By addressing the stress and anxiety prevalent among young people in the right way, brands will make a valuable contribution to society (purpose box ticked!), while also gaining the trust of the next ‘power generation’. The two possible approaches involve launching a wellbeing product or service, or weaving wellbeing authentically into your brand.   

Dealing with the second point first, a survey by Edelman showed it would be very much in the interest of brands to address consumers’ wellbeing. Some 85% of respondents indicated they would be likely to buy products and services from brands that they felt supported their wellbeing, with 84% saying they’d also recommend those brands that did.

As for launching a wellbeing product, well this market is currently exploding. Growing consumer fears over health, coupled with increasing interest in nutrition and sustainability has resulted in the launch of a host of new FMCG categories, including low-GI, Paleo, high-protein, gluten-free and other ‘free-from’ foods, beauty and household products, according to a recent report by Nielsen. It has also driven new products like avocado oil, kale crisps, protein snacks and paraben-free skincare.

The key here, though, is how brands approach young people. To make a positive difference to any group, you need to engage with them. The aim should be to encourage people to re-evaluate their lives and achieve long-term change. Sport England has shown with its ‘This Girl Can’ campaign that using advertising and marketing to push the right emotional triggers can actually drive a change in behaviour. It identified that the fear of being judged was stopping women from doing exercise. It went on to liberate women by celebrating the barriers, such as sweating, jiggling and falling over, making heroines out of those prepared to really go for it.

Although the brand has lost its way a little recently, Dove did a similarly great job by building female body confidence, inspiring people to have positive relationships with their own appearance through thought leadership, research and the representation of diverse beauty.

For those FMCG brands striving to build new ‘long term change’ health categories, authentic frontline connections will be paramount. Understanding the mindset of young people and the barriers they envisage is therefore key. Growing up during the recession, closely followed by Trump in the White House and Brexit, Gen Z feel the world they inhabit is one of constant struggle, where inequality reigns. Only 6% trust corporations to do the right thing, so authenticity and transparency is key when marketing to this group. As a result, while green issues inspired Millennials, social equality is the driving force behind Gen Z. So brands need to recognise this and reflect it in their values and messaging.

The good news is that young people are open to relationships with brands, but through experiences they can control, that surprise and delight, according to Kantar Millward Brown’s AdReaction – Engaging Gen X,Y and Z study. Brands also need to inspire their confidence, be relevant, honest and real. After all, they have grown up on the unfiltered, reality of YouTube.

They respond to emotional narratives. They are also used to two-way communications thanks to the interactivity of social media, so they want to take part and be hands on. Consequently, brands need to allow for co-creation. They need to give young people an opportunity not just to try things, but re-create them. They need to be invited to participate in new, fresh experiences to earn trust. A lack of community lies at the heart of their unhappiness, so brands that help them make social connections, both online and especially face to face, will be rewarded with their loyalty. And it’s vital that any experiences are built on equality, inclusion and acceptance.

Gen Z is still drawn to labels and influenced by brand messages – in fact, just like Millennials, they too suffer from FOMO – the fear of missing out. They love bucket lists, secret cinema, immersive dining, making memories – experiences that linger. They are very in touch with reality, but it’s a harsh one, so helping them escape once in a while and creating a sense of adventure will also resonate. A brand that supports them emotionally in the right way will connect deeply – and welcome on board a new generation of advocates. 

Sally O’Brien is a Director at Sense.

This article appeared in Marcomms News.

The growth in marketing spend in the UK continued to increase in the first quarter (Q1) of 2018, according to the latest IPA Bellwether figures, but the rate of 5% was the slowest in two years and down from 8.6% in Q4 2017.

Experiential, however, blazed a trail being the only discipline to show increased investment with experiential marketing budgets growing 7.8% up 5.5% from the previous quarter.

This rise closed the gap on the strongest performing category of internet marketing, in which investment grew by 8.7%. This was down from the Q4 2017 figure and the lowest since the end of 2015.

Main media advertising, meanwhile, slipped into negative territory, falling from +1.7% in Q4 2017 to -2.1% in Q1 2018, the first time since Q3 2016 the net balance has been below zero.

Despite the muted expectations, The Bellwether Report noted the apparent resilience of the market and revised upwards its forecasts of adspend growth for the year just gone from 1.4% to 1.7%. It expects the rate of growth to drop sharply in 2018 (0.8%) and 2019 (0.4%), thanks to a combination of Brexit-related uncertainties and ongoing pressure on household finances which will restrain consumption.

Dr Paul Smith, Director at IHS Markit and author of the Bellwether Report, noted that despite the uncertainties and a loss of momentum since last summer “growth is being sustained meaning the longest bull-run in the survey history continues” – although he also observed that “the degree of optimism is the lowest in five years”.

Read the full IPA Bellwether Report summary

I was delighted to see Ivan Entchevitch’s thoughtful article for Campaign US last week, banging the drum not only for the enormous value of experiential strategy to brands, but also for the critical importance (and massive challenge) of properly quantifying success.

To misuse our own film reference (this time from Field of Dreams), we’re a long way from the marketing glory days of “if you build it, they will come.”

Marketers are no longer satisfied simply by a great idea, and a track record of success. And rightly so. Competition for hearts and minds has never been fiercer, especially in experiential – with spend on the discipline continuing to rise each quarter in the UK (IPA Bellwether Report Q4 2017). What’s more, brands across the globe are planning to invest increasingly amounts on experiences (Freeman Global Brand Experience Study 2017) – and of course they want to know that they’re spending their money wisely.

I agree wholeheartedly with Ivan when he challenges the pre-eminence of social media shares, likes and click-throughs for measuring the supposed impact of real world activity. Sure, those simple digital metrics are a useful indication, but of course they only tell part of the story.

Not least, because while they often involve big numbers that sound impactful (1.5m likes, 120k email sign-ups), impact itself is actually far from present in these metrics – they are just not analytical tools; rather they’re measures of one aspect of reach. It’s the same in the physical world too, though – 50k interactions, 200k samples distributed. These are measures of volume, not value.

Set SMART goals

Too many people mistake a review for an evaluation. Evaluation means understanding whether you achieved your business goals or not, and in order to know that, you need to know what your goals were in the first place.

The best goals hit that cute little SMART mnemonic (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timebound) but at the very least they need to be quantifiable. Getting those objectives right is a whole separate conversation by the way, but the key point is that campaign measurement is not an isolated process; in fact it’s a process that begins long before pen is put to paper, before the campaign is designed. Experiential is a discipline with such a wide variety of potential approaches and solutions that it is simply impossible to define a universal measurement technique for all campaigns.

This is why it’s so important for client/agency collaboration right from the start. To work together to unravel the business challenge from the creative brief; the objective from the solution. Because, in the same way that each campaign has its own distinctive shape and characteristics, so each campaign has its own set of success criteria, and effective measurement lies in understanding them clearly.

Isolate the variables

So far, I’ve agreed with Ivan, but here comes the inevitable point of departure. I like his idea of a full attribution funnel (akin to the model currently used in digital advertising). It sounds amazing. And like he says, challenging and expensive, although not impossible.

Or is it? Sure, no doubt some yet-to-be-invented clever smart device / AR tool will be able to pull out the many different touchpoints that an individual, well, touches on their “winding and cross-channel customer journey.”  But will it ever be able to tease apart what each interaction attributes to the larger whole? Perhaps. But it does seem a long way off.

In the meantime, I think the value comes not from an increasingly complicated web of connections and interdependencies, but from the long established (and disconcertingly simple) technique of the good old scientific method: isolate the variables. It’s as easy as that.

We might not be able to build a perfect econometric model of the value flow of the experiential intervention. But who needs that when you can look at the relative impact of the action that you’re taking? And see if the specific activity that you’re delivering is delivering against the objectives that you’ve defined. Define what you’re hoping to achieve (easier said than done, but if you’ve got a clear strategy and a killer brief, then you’re probably already there) and then do the thing that achieves it.

Test the impact

But here’s the clever bit – you test its impact on the recipients (using robust research methodology of course – chat to the MRS if you need guidance) and compare that with a control group who are identical in every way, but just didn’t enjoy the same experience. You might find that, for instance, there was a 21% strengthening of the broadcaster’s offering of “cutting edge programming” among those who did the experiential activity.

Of course, you can start to extrapolate impact more broadly, taking into account the difference and relative impact of direct and indirect reach, but the only thing you can be really certain of is the change that you’ve elicited in your sample group. And taking it a step further, by going back to respondents a few weeks later, once the dust has settled, means that you can get a true read on the longer term impact of the activity. 

Ultimately, whether people enjoy your experience is far less important than their relationship with the brand weeks later, when the activity may be a distant memory.  This is the true influence and impact of the work. And if we can already understand the relative impact of each component of a brand’s overall consumer experience, maybe soon we can start to join the pieces together to Ivan’s extremely useful sounding full attribution funnel.

It’s only when we understand things fully that we can measure their effectiveness, and make better decisions as a result. And it’s only by working closely together that brands and agencies can continue to further our collective understanding, working ever towards that truly connected and effective experience for customers.  And if that means incorporating insight driving measurement methodology into every activity we run, then we’re on board with that – any opportunity to understand more and make the work better, for brand and customers alike.

Dan Parkinson is Planning Director at London and New York-based experiential marketing agency Sense.

It’s a snowy December night in Milwaukee and a bus full of children pulls up in the parking lot of a shopping mall. “I can’t wait to see the look on those kids faces when they go through those doors,” says one onlooker. “That’s the most exciting part,” replies a beaming Casey Neistat, the Megastar YouTuber .

The audience watching his video, ABANDONED MALL TURNED INTO WINTER WONDERLAND, share the anticipation.

Inside, the mall has been transformed from a bleak retail space into a festive paradise complete with carol singers, snowboarders, an enormous Christmas tree lined with presents, a skating rink and a red-faced Santa Claus.

“You can eat the candy off the house!” one child screams as a smooth jazz version of Pure Imagination plays in the background.

It’s a wonderful, heart-warming piece of Christmas content. For the viewer, it’s easy to forget that the whole occasion has been orchestrated by Samsung.

In December 2017, two videos were uploaded to YouTube that received over 9 million views and 350,000 likes. The first was ABANDONED MALL TURNED INTO WINTER WONDERLAND by Casey Neistat. The second was From Dream to Reality by Max Joseph, which tells the story of his lifelong goal to turn highway dividers into a zoetrope-style animation as cars drive past them.

Like Neistat’s, Joseph’s work is another piece of Samsung-sponsored content, yet neither video features the word Samsung in either the title or description and both were uploaded to the personal channels of the influencers involved. In fact, the word Samsung is only spoken once over the course of the two videos. Even the brand name only appears fleetingly on screen a couple of times.

Big brands haven’t always had the easiest relationships with digital content. Over the past couple of years, McDonald’s and Coca Cola have both struggled to launch YouTube channels. Coca-Cola ditched its weekly UK YouTube shows in favour of a “more nimble” digital content strategy. With the impressive results achieved by Neistat’s and Joseph’s videos, Samsung might have just given us an indication of the future of sponsored content. 

The relationship of Samsung to these two videos is simple. The tech brand funded both projects and helped Neistat and Joseph turn their visions into reality. In return, Samsung asked that both videos were shot using its products. To quote Joseph in Dream to Reality: “I told Samsung about it and they said: ‘Yeah! As long as you shoot it on our phones, we’re cool.’”

Both videos are adverts, showcasing the impressive filming capabilities of the Samsung Galaxy Note 8. For those that give a damn about Neistat and Joseph, they effectively endorse the technology in their videos by successfully using it to create their content.

Apart from the filming request, Neistat and Joseph had complete autonomy over the projects. There’s even a point in ABANDONED MALL TURNED INTO WINTER WONDERLAND where the kids receive free Samsung products to vlog with while at the mall. Even in this act of extreme generosity, Samsung didn’t ruin the moment by insisting on any specific credit.

In not interfering and allowing Neistat and Joseph full control of the content, the results were better for everyone. The influencers were left to produce the best videos possible, which maximised the views and shares, and ultimately offered Samsung the best reach achievable. Most sponsored content is ruined by an overbearing brand. For taking a backseat this time, Samsung should be given credit.

The videos are the latest in an occasional ongoing series, so Samsung is clearly happy with the results. Commenting on the reasoning behind the YouTube video strategy at Dmexco 2017, Marc Mathieu, Chief Marketing Officer for Samsung Electronics America, said: “Working with innovators and having them at the centre of our content division is important, and having the product as a tool rather than an object of marketing. If you support and enable people they will stand for you. We want to become a brand that is authentic and interested in supporting creators.”

Ultimately, the success of both videos is that they are grounded in an experience. These experiences are spun expertly into stories, and like all the best stories, the viewer is kept in suspense. We follow the children to see what they discover behind the curtain and share in their joy. We follow Joseph to see if he can create his zoetrope animation against the odds. The lesson for other brands is that the best content is grounded in something real. It’s a simple formula: create something awesome and use social media to share it with the world.

That formula can be extrapolated out into something more general: do genuinely nice things and you will be rewarded. Neistat’s and Joseph’s videos show Samsung as their generous, visionary and humble partner in creativity, all the while advertising the capabilities of its products to a captive audience. It’s beautifully subtle – and the behaviour of a confident market leader.

Samsung’s example has taught us two key lessons:

– Leave YouTube to the YouTubers, but never underestimate the power of helping the people whose voice guides the next generation.

– The best online content is grounded in something real; an authentic journey, an actual experience or a true moment of generosity.

In other words: keep it real and trust the pros to share your story with the world.

Vaughan Edmonds is Junior Planner at Sense.

This article appeared in Campaign.

In marketing, as with everything, the spoils often go to those who adopt a contrarian approach – and an interesting one is starting to take shape. What if instead of identifying your target audience and attempting to appeal to them, you identified the group of people you know would never buy your product no matter what marketing approach you used, and attempted to repel them?

At first this might sound strange, but it has precedent. Thanks to the internet herding us into well-defined cultural tribes, we live in an age that is polarised like never before. In such an environment, we define ourselves not only by what we are, but what we aren’t, and we respond well to things that attack, invalidate or oppose the “other” point of view.

Want an example? Look at our President. Trump won the support of a large coalition of conservative voters despite being personally unpopular with them and taking policy positions that many opposed. His secret was not what he stood for however, but what he stood against – the media, globalism and political correctness; all of which he attacked vigorously. Rubio, Bush and Cruz might have been more conservative, but they were considerably kinder to these “enemies” than Trump was, and thus failed to capture the imagination as effectively.

Focusing on repelling your “anti-market” (rather than attracting your real one) naturally creates far more disarming campaigns, and in turn engenders much greater loyalty and passion amongst those you wish to influence.

There were occasional instances of brands using this approach in the past, most notably the infamous Benneton ads, such as those depicting Pope Benedict XVI making out with Imam Ahmed el-Tayeb. While they might argue that their message of “unhate” was a positive one, it’s clear that the creative was seeking primarily to provoke a reaction from traditional religious types who wouldn’t buy Benneton anyway, thus giving a chuckle to the urbane secularist who might. However, arguably, repulsion marketing didn’t really come of age until the Protein World scandal of 2015 in the UK.

Long story short, this saw a little-known exercise supplement brand release an ad that came under severe criticism from people who saw it as body-shaming. This was accidental on their part, but the company’s reaction on social media wasn’t. Rather than follow the standard brand playbook by immediately apologizing, Protein World doubled down, mocking their critics and thus delighting their core “gym bunny” audience, who of course thought the criticisms were unfounded.

The result was £2 million in sales in two weeks after what was initially a tiny campaign commissioned by an unfamiliar brand. It seemed that standing against “the enemy” was far more effective for Protein World than standing for themselves ever had been, resulting in one of the greatest marketing (if not necessarily moral) triumphs of the decade.

Since then, few brands have explicitly followed Protein World’s lead, but the current political climate has seen certain ones try to use Trump’s own techniques against him, such as the unflattering depiction of his supporters featured in Ben & Jerry’s “One Sweet World” spot, which has gathered an unusually balanced share of likes and dislikes on YouTube as a result. However, the important thing to note, despite the political tone of these examples, is that this strategy isn’t about politics. It is about simply identifying what you’re not, in order to excite other people who aren’t it either—and that could be on any topic.

An example of this “softer” approach came in 2011 when Patagonia famously implored people to “not buy this jacket” on Black Friday. Once again, few people storming the stores that day would have given this a second glance, but it wasn’t for them—it was for the Patagonia fans who would share the brand’s disdain for this unseemly display. This attack on an anti-market naturally gained great exposure and sales results.

As marketers, it’s worth trying to play this game, because when done elegantly the results can be creatively striking. Here are a few basic guidelines:

Know thyself
You must know precisely what you stand for in the world. It sounds obvious, but not many brands have this succinctly figured out. Be honest, be real and identify exactly who will buy into you. No “pen portraits.” Your true consumer. 

Be authentic
If you stand for something, or have a strong identity of any sort, you will by definition turn some people off. Don’t be afraid of this.  Play it to your advantage. Those who love you will love you even more. Those you are seeking will hear you loud and clear. Those turned off will be grateful for the clarity. It’s an efficient system!

Don’t invest in promiscuity
Die-hard fans = brand longevity. Appealing to these people with your campaigns should be your priority. Others may be easy to tempt, but a challenge to retain, because they’re not right for you. It’s like a relationship – invest in love not lust…it’ll be far more rewarding.

Evolve, just don’t change
Innovation is essential – so long as your loyalists aren’t alienated. Don’t be tempted to change to suit the latest trend. Evolve, but stay true to your core brand values.

Create your dream panel
Build a panel (real or imaginary!) of your loyal supporters and ultimate customers. Run your big brand decisions past them. They are your toughest critics and your best advisors. Make the most of them.

The future of experiential lies in focusing on what your consumer is not, compared to what they are. As marketers, if we can utilize this untraditional method of experiential by repelling the masses and in turn rallying those who are passionate about (and connected to) your approach, vision and values, the disarming results will speak for themselves. Large scale positioning is a thing of the past. The true secret to modern marketing is the ability to operate in a much more narrow, strategic and targeted way.

Sarah Priestman is President and Alex Smith is Planning Director at Sense New York.

This article appeared in Campaign USA

Currently, there’s a lot so celebrate if you’re an experiential marketer. During a period rife with predictions of falling ad spend, brands are considering growing their experiential budgets.  

According to a 2017 report from Rakuten Marketing, 80 percent of global audiences say that online advertising hasn’t got any better with time, on any device or platform, which only highlights further why brands are choosing to take the route of experiential.

And it’s the same picture of growth around the world, with U.K. spend increasing by 22 percent, according to the country’s advertising body, Institute Practitioners in Advertising, and similarly buoyant statistics are coming out of Europe and APAC regions.

So, everything’s just great, right? The experience economy is booming, brands are seeking real-world impact, the creative industries are putting dollars behind new capabilities—really, what more do we need to do but let the good times roll?

Well, lots actually.

Sustaining growth beyond being the “bright shiny new object,” relies on the global experiential industry really stepping up its approach to accountability and results. I would say experiential is one of the most misunderstood techniques, and if we’re going to continue to build confidence from marketers, we need to address a few burning issues.

So, let’s explore what I believe are the three top priorities for experiential marketers:

1. Recognise that experiential isn’t a channel

Unlike advertising, experiential can’t be broken down into formatted executions—print, outdoor, radio etc. Unfortunately, experiential is a little more complex. For lack of a better definition, experiential is the art of “expressing a brand’s purpose and proposition through a form of real world consumer interaction.”

“Experiential” is an adjective, not a noun, right? It describes a way of marketing that can be limitless in form, idea and environment. Because of this, I’d caution against the labeling of campaigns, which applies to the use of “events,” too. Events are a type of experience, but this shouldn’t be the generic descriptor for a multitude of different live creative activations.

2. Embrace brand planning

Experiential planning can’t simply mean finding the best venue or maximizing attendees. It requires traditional brand planning. What’s the up-stream business challenge? What perception do we want to reinforce or change? What’s the core consumer insight at the heart of the creative concept?

For impact to last beyond interaction, our “thinking” capabilities and processes should be no different to those found down the corridors of traditional ad land. Think of a live experience as a piece of sophisticated brand messaging, no different than a 60-second TV ad. Every experiential agency needs a brand strategist, someone who is as important as your senior producer.

3. Measure, measure, measure

NFL player and coach Vince Lombardi once said, “If you’re not keeping score, you’re just practicing.”

Experiential marketing has baggage, and bad baggage at that. Experiential agencies are often obsessed with anecdotal consumer feedback, time-lapse films showing the ‘event in action,’ surveys reporting that 99 percent of attendees said ‘it was great, we loved taking part.’ All these elements can be important to a rounded piece of evaluation, but are really not a clear indication of the attitudinal shift, the change in consumer behavior or the incremental profit generated from the experiential campaign.

So, let’s attack the myth. Experiential marketing should be evaluated to ensure campaigns are not only justifiable to the finance director, but also so that a “learn and evolve” mentality can be applied to continually improve next year’s campaign.

Unfortunately, there’s no “one size fits all” methodology that can be applied in order to achieve this. However, in general terms, using qualitative research techniques is a worthwhile starting point. For instance, understanding consumer’s perceptions and behavior before, during and after an experience and comparing these to a control group of consumers not exposed to the experience can tell you a lot about the effectiveness of a creative idea in communicating the right message, to solicit the right reaction.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg. It’s fantastic news that experiential marketing is in such good health globally, but in order to sustain, grow and reaffirm its status as one of the most influential marketing techniques, both now and in the future, we need to get our house in order.

Sarah Priestman is President of Sense New York.

This article first appeared in Ad Week.