It is very understandable for such a change of attitude. The simple fact is a business needs sales. Whatever marketing you run, the end results should be increase (or at least sustain) of sales. The results are ever more urgent these days, measurable and tangible results.

However, it is still amazing to see how much companies used to spend (almost without thinking) in offline marketing compared to digital marketing. Maybe it is just a human nature that when you live in good time, you tend to live extravagantly. And when bad time hits you, you get your feet back down to earth. It is time to change.

My take on this is that in the “old days” the people who submitted articles were better writers, and the over all quality was higher. Now, there is a plethora of badly written sales pitches pretending to be actual content. The result is that fewer people are reading, and the articles with real content are lost in the throng.

You can also start to combine hybrid marketing in cost-effective ways. For example, targeted PR can generate stories both offline and online, but also improve SEO rankings – making it a cost-effective marketing tool. Especially if you use a pay-per-placement service (like Publicity Guaranteed for example), then you get the best of all worlds: offline and online publicity and improved Google rankings.

Doing things like that is smart marketing, and a way to phase offline into online marketing.

“If you don’t have a digital marketing budget, we generally recommend that you take your current marketing budget and divvy it up. Start
by looking at your audience and understanding what they do and more importantly why they do it. Also look at when and why they
consume particular media/content.
Second, understand what has been working for you in all media and the current changes that are affecting what you have done in the past.
Third, I would suggest that you look at competitive activity and spend. Can you establish a marketing mix allocation that not only taps into
which media will deliver the results you need today, but one where you can use channels where you do not have to spend simply to
counter the competition? Are there options to establish a clear advantage via a unique approach?
Fourth, and last, be aggressive and innovative. Take bold steps and don’t just define digital marketing as the internet. Understand where
digital creates new opportunities across all types of media that are being re-invented, made more “human”, addressable and interactive.
This is where the future of digital marketing is.”

Apologies for a bit of commercial, The ARF’s 1/27 event on listening to the consumer, (through the use of social networks, etc) will help demonstrate how powerful digital media can be to marketers. see: http://www.thearf.org/assets/forum-09

I feel this with clients everyday, and for the most part education of digital ROI and segmented demos are a big help that discussion.

The tricky part is as technology and uses for new applications continue to change/improve/become more or less effective, we as marketers have to continually be validating.

I think for small and large clients (and budgets)alike the marketing mix we see in 2009 will be very different from traditional media we’ve seen up until this point…imagine what we will be thinking about in 2010!

At first glance there seems to be a lot of great information. But, then you start to notice that all that advice is coming from people with affiliate links. They’re not giving advice; they’re giving sales pitches.

Immediately, the information is compromised. And that single dynamic is one of the failures in cyber business.

Our work focuses largely on the psychology of credibility. It is our opinion that cyber marketers need to start injecting themselves with more honesty and objectivity. We’ve all recently seen what happens when honesty and objectivity are overlooked. Can you say “Bernie Madoff?”

– Michael Lovas

As was stated in an earlier post here, “In time, we all will all be forced to make the change overto cyber or face certain failure.

I am going to be writing an ebook due to be released this spring, speaking about how intrapreneurs like me will be the leaders of tomorrow’s companies.

I agree, digital media is slightly different to traditional media. Sure, it might be a whole lot less cluttered right now, but at the end of the day it depends on what works for you as a marketer.

I’ve seen many companies try interesting ways, like paying research firms such Claritas to crunch demo data, in an attempt to come up with an effective marketing mix – albeit fairly unsuccessfully.

The truth is that companies should be testing their way into the ideal mix based on their own brand’s positioning. Too often we see marketers relying on 3rd party data and saying things like “so and so spent 10% in digital in Q3 so we should look at something around that level as well if possible.”

But due to factors like consideration and awareness, every company is going to need to first determine where they are positioned in the minds of potential customers, if at all, and then go from there. Only testing will tell where your brand sits.

You’ll never get to the point of establishing credibility, delivering proof points, deep-dive Q&A, or earning “trusted partner” status without first creating awareness. I think a holistic approach combining traditional and digital is the only way to get to that point.

My own firm has been working deeply in the financial industry for many years. That’s an industry that suffers terribly from marketing restrictions. Thus, the people and firms inside it do not keep up with digital marketing that the rest of the world is experiencing.

To financial people, brochures and post cards continue to be important marketing. It’s a brick-n-mortar mentality in a digial world.

That’s smart marketing, lemmings be dammed.