How come women are such good Multi-Taskers?

March 20, 2012 Leave a Comment

March is Women’s History Month which leads us at Direct Choice to ponder the role women play not only in the world, but—closer to home—in advertising and marketing agencies.

Science has recently started to address the observation that women seem to be hard-wired for multi-tasking which,lets face it, is the life blood of many agencies. Think of it: the busy mom/account director, with clients on the phone, child on hold, staff awaiting instructions, grocery list in hand—the classic cliché.

This is what the world witnesses, but what is the science behind it? Biosocial researchers are taking a hard look at the neuroscientific implications to discover if, in fact, the female brain is particularly suited to accomplishing multiple tasks simultaneously. Is this how Mother Nature designed the mother/nurturer, to better cope with a myriad of demands in order to sustain life? A recent study sought to enhance the debate.  British scientists’ findings seemed to confirm the thesis. Women scored, and scored big. So it begs the question: Why?

Perhaps it’s evolutionary, suggested Dr. Sanjay Gupta of CNN:

“While ancient men were responsible primarily for hunting and gathering, women had to tend to the children, the house and all the other activities of daily living. Over the years, women may have retained this ability, translating into an improved ability to multi-task.”

As the French say, vive la différence.

For more on Women’s History Month, click HERE.

—-

Direct Choice Inc. is a full-service direct marketing agency that has worked with national and regional brands in a wide variety of vertical markets. In addition to this blog, you can also find us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn.

Filed under Case Studies Tagged with , , , , , ,

Does the Telecom Industry Equate “People” and “Viewers”?

January 24, 2012 Leave a Comment

Imagine living in the Keystone State’s capital of Harrisburg this past Saturday Night. It was a blistering 19 degrees, and while Steelers and Eagles fans were licking their wounds following a season that ended much too soon, they at least had an opportunity to see if the Tom Brady vs. Tim Tebow matchup would be at all competitive.

The pizza is ordered; the beer is ‘’fridged’ and the couch is awaiting its owner. All that needs to happen is to tune into CBS, when the unthinkable happens: There is nothing there.

This was the reality of the Verizon FiOS subscriber over this past weekend in Central Pennsylvania, and with DirectTV (although with different networks) in places like Miami and Boston. The reason was the ongoing fee negotiation between carriers and providers to broadcast.  And while we do have an opinion on how these negotiations have gone, that isn’t what this post is about.

This post is about what we are paid to think about: What the Public Wants.

Too often, a company’s Marketing Department (or agency) is required to confer with their legal department on a campaign or a message. Rarely is the shoe on the other foot, but in this case, it should have been. If an organization like ours were consulted, we would have made it clear that beyond the ratings juggernaut a game like that would be, the perception immediately becomes that neither side is willing to take a step back from the conflict in order to do right by its customers. Whether it was a 48-hour extension or an accelerated timeline to get the deal in order, the absolute last case scenario should have been a blackout.

Some make the argument that the public doesn’t have the inalienable right to expect to watch a football game, but the public has a funny way of determining what they expect (and an even funnier way of retribution against those that take away what they expect). Companies can take that moral and philosophical stance of “business is business” argument, but shouldn’t do so without considering the repercussions. Viewers aren’t inanimate objects. They’re people.

We conclude with this thought. A company like Verizon or DirectTV could explain its actions by discussing how it’s working to improve stock prices and, in turn, help the stockholder. That’s a great Monday morning answer, but on a cold, Pennsylvania Saturday night in January, the average stockholder just wants to watch the game.

—-

Direct Choice Inc. is a full-service direct marketing agency that has worked with national and regional brands in a wide variety of vertical markets. In addition to this blog, you can also find us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn.

Filed under Case Studies Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Can Social Media Replace Polling in Presidential Primaries?

January 3, 2012 Leave a Comment

Direct Choice, as a company, does not take political stances. Our opinion is similar to Michael Jordan’s view of taking sides politically. However, we also wouldn’t be doing our job as experts in communications if we didn’t recognize the presidential campaign season is now in full-swing, and that marketing a candidate as an entity is the ultimate example of a branding case study.

There are plenty of sides to examine as wall-to-wall news coverage has taken place for much of the year, but our focus today will be on the role of social media.

Barack Obama’s Presidential campaign of 2008 represented the premier example of  how to use social media to gain traction and momentum in creating a popular, robust, grassroots-without-the-grass-or-roots campaign online. However, it was the best example four years ago because it was almost the only example four years ago, and those in the social media industry believed that with nearly half a decade to develop and hone a social media strategy, today’s candidates would be fully ready to embrace the medium.

So who has done it best thus far?

In a recent study by consultancy Sociagility, the organization analyzed popularity, receptiveness, interaction, network and trust of candidates and their communications platforms, and determined that Texas Congressman Ron Paul is the apparent leader among the Republican candidates when it comes to effectively using social media channels (former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich finished in second place). This is not a surprise because Congressman Paul’s unique, against-the-grain messaging resonates with people (both positively and negatively), causing it to be easy to react to and comment on.

In their press release, Sociagility dubbed the Iowa Caucuses (and subsequent primaries) as the first ‘social’ Presidential primaries, insinuating a linkage between social media chatter and its ability to be used to conduct straw polling.

As a marketing organization, we believe social media is an amazing equalizer for some candidates, especially those that have less money in their war chest,  Through these channels – FREE channels – candidates can easily communicate to their base and swing voters on events and messages without the need for an ad-buy or editorial board meeting. However, using it as an accurate polling mechanism is a bit beyond the medium’s means thus far. Where social media’s weak point lies is its ability to judge true engagement beyond the computer screen. Is the person writing, responding, reacting, etc. on social media actually going to visit their voting precinct?

Social media will continue to be a huge influencer in this and future campaigns, but to put unproven reliance on it and labeling it as anything other than a powerful tool to use in the full body of campaign outreach is dangerous at this point.

—-

Direct Choice Inc. is a full-service direct marketing agency that has worked with national and regional brands in a wide variety of vertical markets. In addition to this blog, you can also find us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn.

Filed under Case Studies Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

← Older posts