The 3 U's: A Model for "Advertising" in the App Economy

BusinessWeek's Bruce Nussbaum recently wrote a terrific post in which he dissects the effects of social media in the business world.  In part of his write up, he analyzes the My Vegas effort.  While of course I think that's great—what he says here really stuck with me:

"In a world of social networking and conversations among bloggers, consumers and everyone else, you don't advertise to them, you advertise with them. So companies have to design spaces--or politically ask to join existing networks--where people have a purpose to pursue (if only fun). Las Vegas is a prototype where people can network before, during and after an experience--going to Vegas baby!

Think of creating these kinds of event social networks around weddings, graduations, bat mitzvahs, grandpas 90th and mom and dad's 50 wedding anniversary--any ceremonial event. And put it on iPhones, please--mobility is pretty critical.

This little discussion moved from blogs and social networking to utility and usefulness. I'll say more on this soon because I think the entire advertising/marketing and /media/journalism industries are being reshaped by digital tools empowering individuals around the world."

And this of course inspired me to talk about what I like to call the "3 U's".  Here's how it breaks down:

Usefulness
Any experience is useful when it's meaningful and serves a purpose.  Currently much of marketing still breaks down into self-serving gimmicks and interruptions that offer little value.  Much of what's offered in digital is no exception.  While the majority of criticism is of traditional advertising, the fact of the matter is that interruptive based traditional digital advertising is not much better.  These are the digital gimmicks that work to get your attention but are usually done so poorly that they offer no value whatsoever.  Usefulness is the exact opposite.

Utility
Utility = interaction that delights us in some way.  But hold the iPhone.  The industry has hijacked the word delight and brainwashed us to think that only companies like Apple and Disney are capable of serving it up.  Let me tell you a story about the "no-frills" Craigslist, which just happened this morning.  My wife took pictures of a large playset we wanted to sell.  She uploaded them at 10:00 A.M.  By noon, she had several people interested and she sold the set in time for a late lunch.  We had the set dismantled, picked up and were $100.00 richer that evening.  That's delight in the application economy.

Unity
The promise of social features being designed into experiences is that it somehow brings us together in a fragmented world.  Even though we are all interacting through multiple social channels—we can now find people like ourselves who we trust and see what they like and dislike.  This influences our decisions from the stuff we buy to the things we recommend.  The best marketing in the world tries to simulate this, but usually ends up coming off as contrived.  We unite when we act in ways that were informed by groups of people who we trust.

So it's an easy way to look at a complex subject.  The subject of how technology continues to influence our behavior.  I don't know about you—but I use the Web very differently than I did 5 years ago.  See that little guy in the middle of the visual?  That's the evolving customer/consumer/user/participant.  Digital marketers who are using the same tactics that have worked in the past really need to think about that.

Comments

[Tom]

Hello sir. Agree with the post. Advertising was once about catchy lines and how loud you sang them. Now it is about how much you respect the consumer - by giving them positive interactions with your brand that they will derive value from.

I imagine most of us agree. But how is this new news?

Here's an article from 2003 with all the same info: http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/1156.asp

As I see it, the only new idea here is the onset of iSocial and how it affects our opportunity to create value, usefulness, utility, etc.

This is exactly my frustration - whether you use the internet the same or differently since 2003, the value the space has offered has been consistent. It is the useless content brands continue to generate that holds the entire system back.

Rock on...

/ t

[David Armano]

Hey Tom,

Of course this is nothing new. I started on the site side for most of my career and have tried to infuse that thinking into the marketing side as well (remember the Craigslist functional banner prototype I mocked up before leaving ACOM?)

Still, much of what I see online—especially from agencies falls into the "not a lot of substance" category. So who cares if it's been talked about since 2003. How much has changed? ;-)

But to your point, my online behavior has changed dramatically. In addition to participating in many forms of social media including networks—I now look for authentic recommendations vs. the fake reviews we used to see on the Web. They are still their by the way. And don't get me started on Search Marketing. :-)

Thanks for the comment. Keep up the blogging!

[DA]

PS Tom,

Next time you are in a brainstorm or client meeting track make mental notes between these two phrases:

"Needs to be viral"
"Needs to be useful"

Much of marketing starts with the first as opposed to the second—which Ironically if done right leads to the first.

[David Berkowitz]

David, this is a great post. Still, however many times I read it, I have trouble distinguishing linguistically between unity and usefulness. I wonder if there's another U that can help keep it all straight. I still really like the way this is structured. David