Cristóbal Colón, marketer.
Columbus failed early and often. He failed when he joined in the attempt to conqure the Kingdom of Naples. Later, he was captured by Portuguese ships as he escorted an armed convoy. He was wounded. And he never did get to India. The fact that he didn’t give up and become a shopkeeper after this rough start was critical to his success.
Columbus was a thief. He didn’t invent the idea that the world was round. In fact, Ertosthenes, Aristotle and Ptolemy pretty much made it an established fact among educated people long before Columbus was born. Just because he didn’t invent the idea doesn’t mean he couldn’t use it.
Columbus didn’t do his research carefully, reinforcing his optimism. He thought that calculations of the size of the Earth were in Italian miles, not in the longer Arabic miles. The correct calculations would have ‘proven’ he should never have left.
Columbus took advantage of human nature. The rulers of Spain were desperate to find an edge and Columbus offered them a quest that could address their state of emergency.
Columbus was persistent. It took him seven years at court in order to get funding.
No one really believed that Columbus would change everything. His contract with the king included huge bonuses for success, largely because they were pretty sure that he would fail.
Columbus didn’t consider side affects until it was too late. In order to help repay his investors, Columbus took slaves (the first person to do so in the New World) and in one notorious case, arranged to cut the hands off of each Haitian adult male who failed to bring a minimum amount of gold to his ships.
Ultimately, in death, Columbus became a brand, a story bigger than his own facts. Buried in Spain, moved to Santo Domingo, then to Havana and then back to Spain. Namesake of the Knights of Columbus. Honored by statues and streets and even cities. In many ways considered the "first American," demonstrating vision, persistence, insight, brilliance, bravery and world changing paradigm shifting… almost none of it true, of course.
I think the lesson of Columbus Day is a marketing lesson. Successful marketers allow people to tell themselves a story they want to hear. Columbus did that his entire life, and especially in death. Great marketers then do work that they’re proud of, using their leverage to create things that people might not want in the short run, but are delighted in later on. I think Columbus was certainly successful. I wonder what would have happened if he had been great.
October 8, 2006
This is a great post about risk and anxiety and what happens when you ignore the second and take the first: User Conferences Worth the Risk.
October 7, 2006
Every month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks “mass layoffs.” That’s the term for more than 50 people losing their jobs at once. In August of this year, the total number of people hit by a mass layoff was 127,944. The number has been more than 100,000 every month except for one in the last decade.
And that doesn’t count small companies, smaller lay offs, non-profits and other ventures that don’t show up on the radar. The actual number has to be at least ten times as big–at least a million a month is my guess .
Compare that to the tiny number of people who get fired for attempting to do something great.
Sure, the CEO got fired. But thousands at the company got laid off. She lost her job for challenging the status quo. They got canned for embracing it.
Sure, that crazy copywriter on the 11th floor got fired for attempting a viral blog-based campaign that backfired, but it’s nothing compared to the entire department that lost their jobs because there just wasn’t enough business.
At least once a day, I get mail from people worrying that if they are too remarkable, too edgy, too willing to cause change and growth… they’re risking getting fired. I almost never get mail from people who figure that if they keep doing the same boring thing day in and day out at their fading company that they’re going to lose their jobs in a layoff.
50 ad agencies lose accounts for being boring, static and unprofitable for every one that gets fired for being remarkable.
50 churchgoers switch to a new congregation because of a boring or uncaring leader for every one that leaves because she was offended by a new way of thinking.
50 employees lose their jobs because the business just faded away for every one who is singled out and fired for violating a silly policy and taking care of a customer first.
50 readers stop visiting your blog (or your site or your magazine or your TV show) because you’re stuck in a rut and scared for every one who leaves because you have the guts to change the format or challenge the conventional wisdom.
50:1.
October 6, 2006
Alin points us to the DVD Rewinder.
Think of the time you’ll save. I bet the guys at YouTube need a bunch of these, so they can rewind all those clips people watch online.
October 5, 2006
Political activist Paul Weyrich on NPR yesterday:
It has been known for many years that Congressman Foley
was a homosexual. Homosexuals tend to be preoccupied with sex – the
idea that he should be continued, or should have been continued as
chairman on the Committee for Missing and Exploited Children, given their knowledge of that is just outrageous.
What’s the point of such outrageous homophobia? Even if he believes what he’s saying, why say it? Why go out of your way to demonize 10% of the population?
Not just in politics but in other forms of marketing, there’s a frequent need to identify and demonize the outsider. If there are outsiders, after all, then you’re an insider. Apple Computer worked hard to make IBM PC users into outsiders.
At the same time, there’s a similar but opposite impulse: to do what everyone else is doing. That’s part of the reason the iPod is so successful… because it’s so successful. The Times reported on Wednesday about teenagers who are buying other, lesser MP3 players just so they can avoid being part of the masses.
Playing insider/outsider games is dangerous indeed. But it’s been part of marketing for thousands of years–tribes and religions have used it forever. The game of inclusion is, in fact, more effective, more powerful and more profitable. It’s just harder. The challenge is to define your niche so that you actually have a chance to be everyone’s brand…
It’s easy to riff and agitate and brainstorm about the marketing message, about authenticity, about treating people the way you want to be treated… but if your building burns down, it doesn’t really matter so much.
Amazon’s shopping cart has been broken, off and on, for days now. I can’t find a status blog for them, so it might just be me and a few colleagues, or it might be everyone in the world.
That’s like every single Walmart in the country unable to open their doors because the locks are jammed. Suddenly, having good locksmiths on staff is really important.
As the bar keeps getting raised for what people expect from an online experience, the collection of things that you MUST get right keeps going up. It’s expensive, but so is rent. It’s part of the deal.
Last week, I was running from one meeting to another in the city when I passed an old friend on the street. "No time to talk, sorry!" I said as I hustled off.
When we connected by email a bit later, he said he hoped I had a good meeting, and that it was worth the hustle.
I couldn’t remember where I had been headed.
It seemed important at the time.
I’ve got two takeaways for you:
- the first is that a lot of our day is spent doing stuff that seems urgent but really isn’t.
- and the second is that most people buy most things in a state of urgency, not relaxation. We pay what we pay when we buy what we buy because right then, in that moment, it’s not just important, it’s vital.
October 4, 2006
Dean Johnson shares this riff:
The most under-utilized word in the English language is ‘so’. It’s liberal use would signal tolerance and the grasping of opposing ideas. While I don’t have to agree with it, I should understand it. As in "Dean, I think you are the dumbest sumbitch on the planet!". One proper response is "so?". It’s not as if the person’s opinion is likely to matter to any great extent. I’m pretty sure that I am not the dumbest person on the planet, as those people were driving on the street in front of me this afternoon…
Bill Seaver points out that the idea of everybody being famous for fifteen minutes is no longer. With multiple, infinite channels, now everyone has 15 megs of fame instead.
Nathan points out that Volvo’s much-promoted campaign ("Who would you give a Volvo to?") has a surprising flaw.
The brilliant part of the campaign is that by challenging people to think about a car as a generous act (as opposed to a selfish one), they subconsciously get us thinking about safety at the same time we associate being selfless with their brand of car.
The surprising part? They’re not actually giving away a car.
Is that selfless?
You can go to their site and enter your story, etc., all very web2-ish, but at the end, that’s it.
No one actually gets a car.
It can’t be that they can’t afford it. It must be on purpose. I just don’t see it…
October 3, 2006
