From Carl Turner, VP, Research and Analytics Director, Palio

Public schools all over the country are facing budgets cuts. When school budgets are cut, arts programs are usually the first to feel the cut. Some perceive the arts as merely supplemental programs and not a vital part of a standard curriculum. Arts programs help children to develop creative skills. Creative ability has been linked to problem solving, conflict resolution, and even the ability to understand abstract scientific and mathematical principles. Additionally, many fail to recognize the importance of creativity to the US economy. In fact, the United States ranks higher than any country in the link between creative industries and GDP, and US exports of creative services rose from $38.2 billion in 1996 to $89 billion in 2005. (To learn more about the emerging class of creative workers in the US, check out http://bigthink.com/richardflorida.)

Not only is our workforce becoming more creative, it’s becoming more diverse. The US workforce is in the midst of a sweeping demographic transformation, and the minority portion of the workforce is projected to double by 2020. These data highlight the importance of an arts education. The arts must remain a fundamental part of early childhood education to help children to develop creatively and appreciate cultural differences.

Although most would consider research among the least creative of jobs at an advertising agency, I often rely on my musical background in my role as a researcher. Devising novel research solutions is made easier by my background in improvisation. Improvisation teaches you that there are infinite ways to rearrange a limited set of parameters. I find that a deep understanding of personality and the ability to recognize others’ motives help tremendously when attempting to unite perspectives over a new research approach.

Research has shown that more artists, musicians, and other creative types are generally more empathetic. Lastly, there is something extremely inspiring about witnessing others in the creative process. Whether it’s watching creative concepts develop into full-blown campaign executions or watching my 4-year-old daughter expressing herself through drawings, witnessing the creative spirit often renews our enjoyment of everyday tasks and reinvigorates us to approach our work with fresh thinking.

To do my part in promoting creativity, I volunteer on the board of the World Awareness Children’s Museum, an educational institution that fosters knowledge and appreciation of world cultures through exhibitions, interactive programming, the International Youth Art Exchange, and educator-led tours. Created in 1995 and located in Glens Falls, New York, the Museum has collected over 6000 pieces of children’s art from more than 65 countries. They expect to open to the public in their new location sometime this year. And, when they open, they will feature interactive exhibits that tell the stories of other cultures through children’s art, allow children to try on clothing and play instruments from other cultures, and may even allow children to speak with children in other countries via Skype.

On Thursday, March 4, the Museum will host a Mardi Gras Party (which will include wine and dessert tasting) at the Queensbury Hotel in Glens Falls, New York. If you share beliefs about the importance of creativity and are concerned about the lack of arts in education, please join with me and Palio in support of the World Awareness Children’s Museum. To learn more about the museum or the upcoming event, contact Jacquiline Touba, Ph.D., Executive Director, World Awareness Children’s Museum, 518-793-2773, jtouba@yahoo.com.

From Todd LaRoche, EVP, Managing Director of Creative, Palio

This post is a follow up to an earlier post titled Brand Reinforcement In The Digital Age. Previously, we referred to nine digital contexts that are now activating people around the world in incredibly powerful, quick and convenient ways: information, participation, conversation, application, transaction, location, diversion, aggregation/distribution, and visualization. Of course, the lines between these contexts are often rough when referenced in everyday application; there is often overlap between them and, as developers bring new thinking to market, there is often the intentional goal of fusing the contexts to make things even easier or more powerful for users.

As an example, Google has been continually ‘upgrading’ their map/location services with more and more information overlays, so that now users often go to Google maps for a lot more than just a location fix or driving directions; they will go there to find businesses like restaurants, which then links to reviews, etc. — location and information contexts merge. Twitter, which originally was a purely ‘conversation context’ based service, through the use of other applications, can now also avail you of a breakdown of other tweeters based on their proximity to you — conversation and location contexts merge.

So now, with digital contexts engaging more people every day and – as those contexts are fused and morphed – in more dimensional ways, there is a huge opportunity for marketers to find their brands’ presence right in the thick of their target’s psyche… but not as interruptive hawker; rather, as a service provider that offers what it is their target is interested in. In this way, not only is the line between promotion and content blurred, the lines between advertising and application, and product and service, are blurred as well.

Think about it… If you’re selling surfboards, don’t just spray your target with interruptive online/offline messages. Provide them with an experience – maybe an app that allows them to access real-time views of wave break at surfing sites… or that locates surfing equipment shops… or that allows surfers in local areas to communicate with each other about conditions… or that aggregates surfing videos, books etc. In doing so, you’ll be gaining the favor of your target by helping them do, and enjoy more, what it is they need your product for. And right there you have blurred the line between advertising and content or service. Selling your product is about giving your target a more involving way to appreciate your product.

So get out of the mind-set of talking about yourself (your product) and into the digital contexts that will draw your target to you because you’ve given him a deeper appreciation of, and a deeper involvement in, the activity for which your product was created.

Get this hat at Stetson Hats. Click the image...

From Mike Myers, President, Palio (@mmyerspalio)

As a continuation of the theme brought forth in my recent post “Healthcare costs and pharmaceuticals – who’s the bad guy?,” I wanted to share an example of the positives that exist and continue in the pharmaceutical industry. In light of recent information that has come to light about GSK and Avandia, this may seem like “small potatoes.” In reality, this is one example of the countless number of “good” activities conducted by an industry that is all too often seen as the “bad guy.”

At a time when everyone seems to increasingly want to jump on the anti-pharma bandwagon, I was happy to see that the media is trumpeting the recent research collaboration between Eli Lilly, Pfizer and Merck. A not-for-profit, the company “will help speed up research on new medicines to treat gastric and lung cancers. The company, which will be called the Asian Cancer Research Group, is one of the first examples of a collaboration among major drug companies to combine resources and expertise to rapidly increase the knowledge of a disease and the disease process.”

“Over the next two years, the three companies will work on creating an extensive pharmacogenomic cancer database. The database will consist of information taken from about 2,000 tissue samples from patients with lung and gastric cancer and will be made available to researchers around the world.”

“Through its work and the subsequent sharing of information, the ACRG hopes to empower researchers, foster innovation and improve the prognosis and treatment of patients with cancer,” said Gary Gilliland, M.D., Ph.D., senior vice president and franchise head, Oncology, Merck Research Laboratories.

On all fronts, I think that this is an outstanding move. In what other industries do we see not-for-profits being set up by competitors?

As I’ve said previously, take a closer look. The guy wearing the black hat may not be the one you thought. Anyone out there want to shoot back?

From Philip Reynolds, ACD, Copy, Palio

The Mayans foretold it. Doomsday: December 21, 2012, the date Lipitor comes off patent.

Actually, the Lipitor patent is due to expire earlier than that, on November 30, 2011. But I figure some smart guys at Pfizer will find a way to keep the money coming in for 13 months beyond that. Regardless, by the time the Mayan calendar runs out and the world ends, Lipitor, Plavix, Seroquel, Singulair, Actos, Lexapro, and Zyprexa will all have gone generic, along with over $20 billion in sales.

Soon after the world ends, Nexium will go generic too, so any surviving cockroaches will have an affordable option for managing acid reflux.

The world may not be coming to an end, but it is definitely losing a bunch of big drugs over the next few years, and no one knows what will take their place.

At Merck they’re developing a weight-loss pill that targets cannabis receptors in the brain. Basically, it gives you anti-munchies. This could be big, and, as a creative, I like it because it seems like it could set up some pretty original concepting.

It’s challenging to do differentiating creative for a me-too drug, and I worry we’re going to be getting a lot of me-too drugs over the next few years.

Assuming that… you know… we’re still around.

From Todd LaRoche, EVP, Managing Director of Creative, Palio

Do you remember how, when you were a lot younger than today, you were allowed to roam from home on your bicycle in the afternoon, and your mother didn’t stress out over it?

Times have changed. Today, kids growing up can’t go anywhere very far without an adult escort. Is it that our environment is more dangerous today than it used to be… or is it that we know more about it and, therefore, are more anxious about what could happen? Either way, it seems that children today are being raised in a much more guarded environment; one that may not allow for the independent exploration of places and things as in the past. And yet, when I look around at the youngsters of today, I see more creative thinking and action than ever coming out of their heads and hands.

So, too, is our pharma marketing environment becoming ever more restrictive and watched over… surely for all the right reasons. Now, exploring new ground has increasingly large risks associated with it. So what do you think — is the more scrutinized environment a plus or a negative with regard to creative thinking? Does it tend to restrain creative thinking or, ironically, turbocharge it? In some respects, having to work out of a smaller box requires one to be even more creative.

As a Creative Director for the last 20 years or so, I can honestly say that, as the marketing environment I work in has become more restrictive, the work I see coming out of those I work with is not less creative but more creative. Maybe there’s an equation at work here: something about how the more one is restricted, the more creative one becomes to break free.

So to that I say, bring on the rules and regulations. We’re busting out with ever-more creative thinking and having fun doing it. What do you think about that?!

From Nanette Foster, VP, Brand Planning Director, Palio

A few days ago I was driving home from work and I happened to catch a radio show discussing the sandwich generation. Then, while in my local Borders, I saw an AARP kiosk with brochures targeting the sandwich generation.

According to the Pew Research Center, about 1 in every 8 Americans aged 40 to 60 is caring for a parent who might be ill, disabled, or in need of financial support while also tending to children who require financial, physical, and emotional support.  They’re being “sandwiched” between giving care to children and adults all at once.

There is a big opportunity to connect here. Surely, the sandwich generation woman will be more motivated to open up and connect with brands that share her mission mind-set.  The sandwich generation woman is wellness-focused and proactively seeking products and services that help her stay on top of family and personal wellness. She is not waiting for her physician to guide her. She is out there finding the healthy solutions she needs. She believes wellness is up to her. Brands that share the goal of wellness and provide information and connections that help her attain it will have the best opportunity to build loyalty with this group.

The sandwich generation woman wants an authentic partner, one who understands the challenges she faces and communicates to her in a way that empowers and equips her to provide the level of care that her family needs. She is looking to have a dialogue with brand partners who talk with her, not at her or down to her, and who truly see her as the “healthcare professional” she is.

The sandwich generation woman can benefit greatly from support networks made up of women going through the same issues. While there are a few points of group connection online, the real need seems to be a personal one. Having a person available face-to-face to connect with fits her needs better. In addition, brands that treat the ailments most often experienced by the sandwich generation need to consciously talk with her in a way that shows they understand her situation and earn a place in her life. The brands need to prove that they are not only selling the woman a product but are truly investing in helping her effectively manage her health long term.

So, what is your brand doing to help feed the sandwich generation?

From Mike Myers, President, Palio (@mmyerspalio)

Last year, I had a breakfast meeting with James Chase (Editor in Chief of Medical Marketing & Media) and Scott Dattoli (Publisher). Over coffee and pastries, we discussed a range of topics with a broad objective of getting to know each other at some level.

Near the end of our time together, I started bemoaning an issue that’s bothered me for years in the agency/client relationship dynamic. Like many things that cause problems in business and personal life, it involved and still involves money.

As a result of my enthusiasm on the topic, the kind folks at MM&M asked me to write an article on the subject. Entitled “Cash for Ideas” and published in their June issue of last year, the article focused on the fact that most agency compensation models seem to be counterintuitive to motivating an agency to be inspirational.

I likened the current compensation dynamic to a situation where people don’t want to admit or don’t recognize that something is amiss like the classic story “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” I won’t repeat all the points of my article here as the link embedded in the article name above can provide you with some thinking on this subject in broader detail. I will, however, share with you a few key points:

• The multimillion dollar idea for a client is really worth no more to an agency than the 15 minutes of coded time that it took to come up with, the pride associated with its creation, and any associated recognition that might come too
• This approach to compensation sends the wrong message and has the potential to motivate the wrong type of behavior
• This system has enabled many to lose sight of what’s really important in this business—ideas
• There are a lot of agencies that would be happy tossing the current system out the window and having clients pay for the value of their ideas instead of the time it took to create them

If you’re reading this and open to a new approach to agency compensation which is already being implemented by the likes of Coca Cola, P&G and others, give us a call. If you have an opinion on the subject, please share it. We’re willing to try something “new” or at least discuss alternatives. Are you?

From Carl Turner, VP, Research Analytics Director, Palio

Marketers are quant junkies, ad agencies love qual, and market researchers can’t get enough of both forms of research. The truth: there’s no such thing as one-size-fits-all research. There are no formulas that dictate when to use research, what type of research to use, or even if research is necessary.

Experience guides perception and it only takes one unproductive focus group, one bad segmentation study, or one terrible vendor to create negative perceptions about the value of research.

When comes to research, many marketers engage in a game of whisper-down-the-lane. They broadly communicate the objectives to the market researcher. The market researcher then conveys their loose understanding to the vendor. Is it any wonder that marketers aren’t happy with the insights they’re getting from research? By the time the vendor communicates the findings back to the marketer and the market researcher, something has been lost in translation.

How many times have you heard a variation of the following?

Quant kills good creative work

Qualitative research is worthless due to small sample sizes

The bigger the vendor the better the research

Quant is only for tracking and segmentation

It’s the job of market research to design the research and evaluate the vendor

It’s better to stick with the vendor we always work with than to search out a new vendor

Although these generalizations are based on bad research experiences, they threaten future insight. All forms of research have merit, but their potential is always dependent on the amount of time spent on the design and methodology. Poor research design is to blame for most bad research, so if you don’t like the results you’re getting maybe you should contribute more to the development of the research.

Marketers should actively question the design and methodology of any research related to their brands. Leaving all the thinking to market researchers disregards a marketer’s knowledge of the brand, its marketplace, and its consumers. When a marketer’s questioning, influence, or presence is absent, research is unlikely to be useful.

How do you make sure you get more bang for your research buck? Always ask your researchers and research vendors the following questions:

What is your understanding of the research objectives?

Are we trying to address too many objectives with this research?

What are the features of the marketplace, the product, competitors, or the target audience that are influencing the type of research you are recommending?

Why did you select the methodology or vendor you chose?

Why is the vendor we selected right for the research we are conducting?

Is it a good idea for us to conduct this research with the same vendor who conducts all of our research?

You might want to postpone your research until you like the answers you receive.

From Jeremy Lichtenberger, Senior Brand Planner, Palio

Are you familiar with the Web site psfk.com? No? Well, once you check it out, it’ll quickly be one of your favorites. PSFK describes itself as a “New York based trends research and innovation company.” They report daily on innovative products and services from existing and emerging artists and designers that challenge the very way we live our lives and, ultimately, make us think differently. In addition, they provide trends consulting and have worked with blockbuster companies like Apple, BMW, Target, and PepsiCo.

According to PSFK, they “aim to inspire our readers, our clients and our guests to make things better – whether that’s better products, better services, better lives or a better world.” Information comes from the fields of architecture, the environment, health and beauty, the Web, technology, you name it. The products and services they report on every day are surprising and sometimes mind blowing, and there is no doubt that some will be the future of our planet. So whether you are in communications or marketing or are a stay-at-home mom, this Web site has something that is sure to make you say “Wow, that is so cool!”

One of the best things about the site is that its articles and findings are nicely organized. Not too much copy is used to report on each idea, and this makes it easy to get to the point. If you want to know more, there are plenty of videos and links to additional information about the products they report on.

At the end of 2009, PSFK published a book called “Good Ideas for 2010” and I immediately  grabbed a copy. My first thought was that this book is going to be huge because of the enormous amount of cool information they report on in full year. I was surprised and excited to see that the book is actually really small and, in typical PSFK way, it is uniquely organized. It is divided into 5 sections and is intended to make you think differently and reconsider the way you may view ordinary things and lifestyles. This collection from artists, designers, and creative minds challenges the status quo and organizes their ideas into 5 “Good Ideas” that, hopefully, will help you make the world a better place in 2010. Pick up a copy at PSFK.com!

Most marketers and brands live with a beleif that FDA involvement = bad. Marketing communications that take full advantage of a brand’s label = good. So, what happens when the big “bad” FDA comes calling when an ad or other promotional effort crosses that grey line?