I’ve said it before – it’s not the tool’s fault, it’s the people. So there, I’ve said it: it’s not analytics fault. Now then…

Why I think analytics is making us dumb:

1. Bad marketing can still have “good” numbers.
2. We’re mentally boxed in by what it can measure.
3. We have no idea what the numbers mean, but we insist on their importance.
4. We measure stupid numbers.

Bad marketing can still have “good” numbers.

What analytics has done is enabled bad marketing to be justified. Whether the failure is the result of an idea that just didn’t work, or a severe lack of preparation; there is always data to justify failed marketing. And let me be clear, I don’t just mean that people will stuff square numbers into a round hole (people covering their ass). I also mean that while traffic may be up (a “good” number), the brand may be taking a beating. Sure you’re getting a lot of traffic, but have fun in a year when your competitors have built something long lasting and you’re still talking about traffic volumes.

Bad marketers can still create decent campaigns, with decent traffic, and decent conversions. And everyone is wow-ed by the measurement factor. What did they do before they could measure this stuff?

We’re mentally boxed in by what it can measure.

Analytics can’t measure emotions. It can’t measure a human connection. It’s out job to interpret the data, but some things just can’t be measured (yet). So what happens? We work our butt off to achieve marketing climax: a lame sign up form. We can measure a sign up form, so that must be the end goal.

We have no idea what the numbers mean, but we insist on their importance.

Just because we have the data doesn’t mean it’s important. We’re overwhelmed by data and forgetting what matters. Instead, we ask for another report. We’re scared to not track that data, because “what if we need it?” We’re not sure what we’re looking at, but it’s strangely comforting to have a lot of it. We’re moved to paralysis due to data fatigue.

We measure stupid numbers.

You tell me: Do you even know what unique visitors means? Do you honestly need to measure it daily? Do you really care about which OS someone is running? What’s a bounce rate? Sure, they spent two minutes on that page; but are they talking about it with their friends? Are they sharing it? Are they returning to it? Did it actually make a mental impact on a visitor? Did it connect with them? Two minutes could be good, or it could mean people are completely confused and took two minutes to get fed up and leave.

The point is, by measuring stupid numbers we lose focus on the things that really matter.

The cure.

That’s a huge question. However, how about this for a start: What if you plan your next big idea assuming you can’t measure anything? Once you’ve got goals in place, work backwards to use some of the thousands of analytics tools to measure something that actually matters. And when you’re reporting results stop creating 10 page automated reports, stop reporting numbers just because you can, listen to that little voice inside that asks, “Is this really important?”

I had this draft written, and I actually just saw Avinash Kaushik give a great presentation on what’s next in Analytics. This quote pushed me over the edge in wrapping this post up. Thanks Avinash!

In other words, while a bigger idea should be driving all of your marketing tactics, simply playing around with as many tools as you can will help shape your thinking. Look at the iPhone + Augmented Reality, that’s expanding our brains daily. Unless you actually understand the tools at your disposal and the ethos in which they reside, you’re still in trouble — even with a big idea (I’ll be writing a post on that later as well).

That being said, I fear those tools are replacing creativity for many marketers and strategists, not expanding creativity (not the tools fault, the user). In today’s marketplace you’re “creative” if you aggregate tweets, or you’re “creative” because you have an iPhone version of your site. In an effort to stay up-to-date and use the latest and greatest, the tools can eventually take the drivers seat. We begin to box our brains in based on the newest tools vs. expanding our thinking to become better at problem solving.

I can’t tell you how many times conversations start out with “How should we use Twitter?” On rare occasion that is, perhaps, the best way to start. But I believe that’s the minority. Instead, conversations should start with,

“What will truly involve the user? How do we connect them with our brand? How do we connect with them? How do we improve their lives? How do we surprise them? How can we help them overcome their problem?”

If Twitter becomes one of the tactics used to answer those questions (and most of the time it should be IMHO), that’s great. If not, leave it alone for now.

I’d like to think Nike+ didn’t start with asking “How can we use iPods?” I’d like to think it started with “How can we help runners improve their training and enjoy it more?”

It is a two way street, but creative ideas will always win because new tools can be built to match them, and they are being built every day.

Above is my latest slide deck entitled “Branded Utility – The (already happening) future of marketing.” I first gave it at my work’s weekly “Lab Share” and I thought I’d post it here as well.

What’s a “Lab Share” you ask? Each week at my company, Viget Labs, someone has an opportunity to present on just about anything (including hockey fighting), but mostly it’s on industry trends. I gave this presentation in an effort to shape my department, and my company – both of whom I love. I omitted a few company specific slides (how this applies type stuff) and there’s obviously a bit lost without the audio, but it should make sense.

The concept of “Branded Utility” certainly isn’t new, but I would say it’s new-er and I would also say that by no means has it been widely accepted, or widely disseminated. It prompted some great discussion internally, hopefully it does the same for you.

Let me know what you think!

The sites have a nice skin, they’re moderately entertaining for about 10 seconds, and then…boorrrrring. Why would I as the user ever come back to that site? Cool, you’re aggregating tweets about hardwood flooring, nice. I’ll be sure to make that my homepage. If aggregating tweets is accompanied by a larger concept, I think it can be rad.

Take for example Twistori or We Feel Fine. Both aggregate tweets; however both do it in a visually compelling way, and both sites make me stop and think. They’re worth going back to, they’re worth telling friends about. They inspire me. I still remember their name a year+ later.

Those sites aggregate tweets within a larger concept…a bigger idea, and that’s what makes them work. Of course, these aren’t brand websites, and that’s where I see these experiments popping up, so perhaps that’s an unfair comparison. And I realize some sites make it work, after all, you could argue skittles.com is doing well if you’re simply measuring buzz.

All I’m saying is that merely pulling in keywords from search.twitter.com without something that inspires or provokes thought seems like marketing driven by tools, rather than tools driven by marketing.

Paul Isakson just posted an exceptionally well done and thought provoking video by Continuum entitled Resonance. The video is worth the ~11 minutes, and while I’d rather have you spend your time watching it than reading this post, I do want to make some short comments and pull out a few key quotes.

“[Ideas win when they achieve] a resonance between what’s meaningful for people, and what’s profitable for companies.”

This (among other things) is one reason why marketers and companies are having a hard time these days. Either a) they’re marketing something that’s genuinely not useful/hopeless (it happens to the best of us), or b) they’re not thinking creatively about how to market in a way that really is meaningful (lame banners vs. genuine interactions).

“Sometimes there needs are to be surprised and delighted.”

“Surprised and delighted” are two words that seem to be quite popular. There was an excellent article on The Next Wave about Crispin Porter’s work in which the author states, “They know that advertising is supposed to surprise and delight.” Perhaps this is another reason why marketers are having a hard time, companies aren’t ready to step outside their comfort zone to market in a way that surprises and delights — especially in this economy which has unfortunately all-but demanded short term thinking (“just stay alive”).

Last comment: Isakson rightly points out that

“…it’s really about putting people at the center of the approach, rather than profit or your own desires as a company. Not only is this relevant to design, but it is also paramount to creating great advertising.”

That is the one thing perhaps this video is missing. While people are definitely at the center of this video, there is much reference to discovering what people need and designing things that meet those needs. I love this concept with one caveat: people need relationships and you can’t create relationships. You can, however, build things that help foster those relationships.

Enjoy the watch.