I am not a big fan of “old vs. new”. As a matter of fact, I am not a big fan of black vs. white or left vs. right or traditional vs. progressive.
Come to think of it, unless I am playing a video game or some kind of sport, I’m not a big fan of the concept of vs.
Aside from the topic of honesty vs. dishonesty, I tend to cringe at the thought of a rift being created in the marketing community when it comes to old vs. new or traditional vs. progressive. Here’s what’s really going on: Over the last few years, the Marketing industry has been going through an evolutionary leap. One that was sorely needed. One that came as the direct result of a communications revolution that gave consumers a true voice and the power to control the very message of the brands they were once spoon-fed through “traditional” media.
This isn’t about philosophy or schools of thought. It’s about following the evolution of a medium as it adapts to changes in the economic, scientific, social and cultural fabrics of our society (feel free to call them markets if you must). This isn’t an academic debate. It is reality.
Things like online communities and social media, WOM, open-source marketing, blogging, micro-blogging, mobile customer service and online reputation management aren’t replacements for traditional forms of marketing. They aren’t the enemy. They are simply the newest chapters of a book that is being written every day out here in the real world of customers, shoppers, clients, product design and 24-hour free shipping. To think that Marketing (or any field for that matter) is static is ridiculous. Advances are made in biology, political thought, film-making, athletics, warfare, foodservice, and the arts. Is it so difficult to accept that the same is true of Marketing?
We’re all supposed to be creative people. Contextual interpreters. Trend spotters. Is it so difficult for some of us to accept so simple a concept? Do some of us fear change that much? I am always amazed by the number of folks in the marketing, PR and Advertising industries who still insist on a) clinging to twenty-year old methodologies and b) not learning how to incorporate new tools and strategies into their bag of tricks.
Fact: Fear is irrelevant.
Fact: Change is a given. It’s a constant in our world. An absolute and cyclical certainty, like the seasons and the rise and fall of political dynasties and the ebb and flow of the tides.
Fact: Ignoring change or being fearful of it are not adequate strategies for anyone looking to still be in business once our economy recovers. Hear me when I say this. This is not my opinion. It is a cold, hard, palpable fact.
People were once afraid of the notion that the Earth might not be flat. They firmly believed that if ships sailed far enough, they would fall off the edge of the Earth. There was a time when the very notion of the world being round was vehemently opposed by traditionalists. And then one day, traditionalists were proven wrong.
Progress happens with or without us. Either we adapt to change, or we get left behind. End of story. Those of us who refuse to accept new marketing methods as additional tools of the trade are missing the boat and will get left behind. Likewise, those of us who proclaim that old models like advertising and mass media are dead are completely missing the point. We need it all, old and new, to make it work.
So I will say it again: It isn’t a question of old vs. new. The issue isn’t which between the two is better or smarter or more effective. The question is this: Given traditional methods and so-called “new” methods, which ones will benefit your specific client, company, or product line the most? Better yet, which one(s) will benefit their (your) customers the most?
The question isn’t about vs. It’s about specificity.
The more we know about every marketing tool available to us, the more likely we are to make the best possible decisions for your clients – and make ourselves relevant again.
If you are an ad agency, PR firm or marketing-related business still holding back because you don’t understand the value of these new tools and strategies, find someone* who can help you incorporate them into your business model before your competitors beat you to it. Likewise, if you are holding back because you haven’t figured out how to monetize these new tools, talk with someone** who can guide you through the process. Most importantly though: Stop thinking in terms of old vs. new and start asking yourself “how can we best serve our clients”. New, old… the terms should be irrelevant at this point.
Have a great Wednesday, everyone. 
*/** If you are having trouble finding someone who can help you with this in your area, I will be glad to point you in the right direction.
Great post, Oliver…
I’m working with a client right now who will seriously benefit from reading this, so rest assured that I’m passing you post along marked as ‘urgent’…
You use the word evolution in your title here, which is actually a perfect topic for expressing the elusive mystery of ideological ignorance. Those who flat-out refuse to acknowledge evolution as a viable basis tend to uphold their beliefs despite the mass of compelling, hard-evidence that surrounds them. It’s behind this same sort of veil that the ‘suits of yesterday’ seem to seek comfort when confidently dismissing everything that you’ve clearly and correctly expressed above.
Replacing a limiting and potentially disastrous set of beliefs is often not only a matter of being presented with the correct facts. It’s a matter of wanting to process these facts and act upon them. This often implies a bit of openness and flexibility, and perhaps most importantly – the ability of one to suspend and minimize their own self-importance.
Perhaps this is the bottleneck that alot of corporate decision makers are currently stuck behind. It’s a shining example of the paradox of ego, and I think that a bit of a Darwin-like shakedown will ultimately empower those who are ready while the rest remain dormant, still clinging to their ideological safety blankets.
Awesome, as usual…
…Dan
Olivier,
There are no questions that the brands and companies that will be prosperous will be those which tap into the social revolution much facilited by the digital world and its tools. A succesful brand will have a consistent, clear and emotional digital ‘persona’ across its touch-points. Period.
Important to say that it can’t be done quickly (as many would think). Actually, it takes time, patience, money, strong commitment and a lot of humility to learn and make mistakes. Well, we are talking about being social, aren’t we? This is all about brands and corporations being more social.
Great work as always,
Gabriel Rossi- Brazil
As the Greek philosopher Heraclitus said, “Nothing endures but change.”
Great post. The premise by some that there’s new and old, or even tools that are dead doesn’t address the overall communications paradigm shift taking place. Those in the creative industries -in marketing – should be the change agents and embrace the shift. Move forward and see the opportunity ahead.
Olivier – Thanks for all the great posts. This one, too, although I must admit that I’m a bit weary of the “you must accept change or die” drumbeat. Thousands upon thousands of postings to this effect has…well, let’s just say we’re way past the self-evident threshold on that one.
Your point on the divisiveness and tail-chasing nature of the “old vs. new” debate, however, is terrific. Yours is a vital POV and should be championed, as often and as loudly as possible.
I especially like Wyton Marsalis’ take on it, written for CNN ahead of the presidential inauguration. Here’s the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/16/marsalis.inauguration/index.html
Thanks again for the critical thinking and provocative ideas, Olivier. Valuable stuff for all of us out here….
John
Thanks John. I guess we’ll stop beating the drum when change-adverse dinosaurs either retire or learn to accept it. ;D
But yeah, I’m tired of it too.
I like to talk about change more in terms of evolution than… “change.”
Change is revolution. Revolutions are messy, expensive, dangerous and chaotic.
Evolution, on the other hand, is much smoother. It’s natural. Everyone comes out better.
No more beating of the change drum. I’m switching to the evolution drum instead.
Very smart post.
In the end, it’s about results. I will however say that large swaths of Old Media and their associated “traditional” marketing models are becoming obsolescent as we speak through their refusal to face new realities.
Some of the commentary I have heard/seen from some of their emissaries of late have bordered on wishful thinking, while many of their actions speak to a fear/scarcity-based model of thought that severely undercuts their efforts in this new environment (newspapers complaining about headline-scraping with linking, old media killing Redlasso, Viacom vs. YouTube instead of adopting YouTube for their own purposes, etc. etc. the list is long).
Wrote a foundational post on these issues at one point last year:
http://businessmindhacks.com/post/youtube-vs-viacom-should-youtube-be-torn-apart-by-piranha
Yeah. That most marketing peeps still don’t know how to measure ROI (sorry, but “return on social” or “return on influence” doesn’t cut it) is pretty wild.
If you cannot measure the impact of your activities on a company’s success (tie an ad, campaign or press release to an delta in sales or website visits or SOMETHING,) you’re basically a jester.
No one has ever really held old agency models accountable for real numbers, and as a result we have created an industry that is for the most part used to a complete lack of accountability to its clients.
And we wonder why the first budgets that get cut are Advertising and Marketing. Duh. As an industry, we really need to stop this nonsense and prove our value again.