Rule #3: Have sex.

"The speaker wore his usual uniform of a faded black Timberland sweatshirt and jeans; his London audience was all tailored suits and double-cuffed shirts. But as James Montier finished explaining why money shouldn't be equated with happiness, the equity and bond traders rose to their feet in applause. "I don't think they heard much beyond rule 3," Montier quipped afterward. Rule 3 of his 10 for achieving sustainable happiness is, 'Have sex.'"

An article in this month's Fast Company details maverick financial analyst James Montier's rules for investing. I liked these so much I'm listing several here with my corollaries regarding how they address transformational marketing and change management as well.

1. Leaving the trees could have been our first mistake. Our minds are suited to solving problems related to our survival rather than being optimized for investment decisions. My corollary: Buying decisions - even those regarding matching specifications to features as in fulfilling design specs - are made in the self-interest, not the objective fact. Market to the emotion, not the intellect.

2. Why does meeting companies hold such an important place in the investment process of many fund managers? Because we need to fill our time with something that makes us look busy. My corollary: As with investment decisions, many buying decisions are made before we ever review, or complete reviewing, the sponsor's 'factual' message. The access to information is so pervasive today, it must be consistently presented across all communication outlets from mass media to watercooler conversations.

3. Our minds are not supercomputers and not even good filing cabinets. They bear more resemblance to Post-it Notes that have been thrown into a bin and covered in coffee. The ease with which we can recall information is likely to be influenced by the impact that information made when it went in. My corollary: Brevity is good.

4. Don't equate happiness with money. Materialistic pursuits are not a path to sustainable happiness. My corollary: In life as in business, make the process the pursuit. Because until you are 'there', you'll never be satisfied, and if you do get 'there', you've often nowhere to go but back again.

5. People adapt to income shifts relatively quickly; the long-lasting benefits are essentially zero... One of my recommendations is to stop, take note, and give thanks--not necessarily to God but just to reflect on what you've achieved and what you've got. You need to stop and think, "Actually, I'm damn fortunate." My collorary: Really, I can't top that one. (Damn, I'm fortunate.)

Big Search v Big Brand

According to a Harvest Digital study highlighted in a recent article in IT Week, a brand's influence on directing internet traffic pales in comparison to the influence of search engines. 43% of users are likely to click on links simply because they are on the first page of results, now culled not from one or two words but from three or four word search terms. The same UK study indicated a coming fracture in Google's dominance of search. As marketers, the time has passed when we could manage SEO activities with static metatags and homespun tracking tools. Search Engine Optimization is very much front and center of the marketing mix.

Recommended Reading

I just finished reading Bossidy and Charan's latest, Confronting Reality.

Like their last book, Execution, I found the content to be straightforward, intuitive for most. Yet perhaps the authors were told after the success of Execution that leadership was still more about PowerPoint and politics than actual execution - after all, if you don't know where to start you tend to be hamstrung. The message is to start with (get this) a business plan; one consisting of a hard look at internal, external and financial realities. Using many case studies from Allied Signal to Home Depot, the authors illustatrate how an unbiased view of these forces can shape a workable strategy and a thriving - I would say surthriving - organization. The book gets a bit repetitive but perhaps if I confront my own reality - that today's leadership requires this sort of basic business refresher - then it will have an impact on the leaders for whom it is directed who will take the time to read it.

"Some Exec Must've Read An Article..."

A recent article in the New York Times revealed the all too predictable and (if you aren't a GM exec) humorous outcome of a Chevrolet Tahoe viral marketing campaign that allowed consumers to write their own advertisements:

"At first glance, the video looks like a typical 30-second car commercial: a shiny sport utility vehicle careers down a country road lined with sunflower fields, jaunty music playing in the background. Then, white lettering appears on the screen: "$70 to fill up the tank, which will last less than 400 miles. Chevy Tahoe."

The commercial is the product of one of the advertising industry's latest trends: user-generated advertising. On March 13, Chevrolet introduced a Web site allowing visitors to take existing video clips and music, insert their own words and create a customized 30-second commercial for the 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe."

'Shockingly', we find that pranksters and environmental activists are the most likely users of this viral marketing campaign. It sounds suspiciously like a virus alright. Where I've worked, it is usually transmitted to executives on transcontinental or international flights, who, having been bumped to coach and low on laptop power, have no choice but to catch up on their reading. The result is a widespread contagion - a distribution of a photocopied article and a new directive to employ an emerging media, approach, or program without regard as to whether it is appropriate to the marketplace.

From the article, emphasis mine: "Drew Neisser, the president and chief executive at Renegade Marketing, a New Yor (sic) agency specializing in nontraditional marketing that is part of Dentsu, said companies had such a strong desire for user-generated advertising that they were willing to accept the risks. 'There's this gold rush fever about consumer-generated content,' he said. 'Everybody wants to have consumer-generated content, and Chevy Tahoe doesn't want to be left behind.' A spokeswoman for Chevrolet, Melisa Tezanos, said the company did not plan to shut down the anti-S.U.V. ads. 'We anticipated that there would be critical submissions,' Ms. Tezanos said. 'You do turn over your brand to the public, and we knew that we were going to get some bad with the good. But it's part of playing in this space.'"

Ms. Tezanos, one does not 'turn over' a brand to the consuming public. The brand was never yours to give. It is always your public's brand. However, what you do not do is pay for and provide a platform for your brand's critics.

To play Advertising Agency Creative Director yourself, here's the link: http://chevyapprentice.com/

For Every Action There Is An Equal and... Identical Action?

I’ve been in more situations than I can count where a company does far too little in the way of proactive marketing and far too much reactive marketing. The difference between the two is fundamental.

Proactive marketing is marketing where the outgoing message is controlled by your own company. “But aren’t all outgoing marketing messages controlled by the company?” you might ask.

No.

Unfortunately in most business-to-business environments, marketing strategies and their inter-related advertising messages are actually driven by their competition, making for reactive marketing, which necessarily guarantees a marketing message that is both late to market and no longer relevant to the conversation.

I once had a software client who, upon looking at a creative presentation that involved bees and a beehive, commented that her competitors were sure to joke that the product had ‘bugs’. She was more concerned about possible sarcastic comments from competitors than articulating a clear message in her ads – as if the campaign – even a ‘killer campaign’ – would stop competitors from saying things that were, well, competitive. In Marcom, this is also seen in the rationale to participate in industry events, where companies continue to invest money with declining returns just to ‘be present’, or ‘support the industry’. Often this is further complicated by ever-increasing investments in clever and complex booth themes, as if the Griswolds from the movie Christmas Vacation were event planners.

Yet while marcom is most obvious, sometimes the reactive approach encroaches in ways far less obvious. Strategically, it happens when companies look at a competitor’s recent success in product, promotion, or distribution and attempt to copy it outright, opting for guaranteed also-ran status instead of taking chances to find niche differentiation.

The reactive element is often even more insidious than marcom or strategy. Often it is organizational. Many companies do little to discourage employees from entering into a habit of self-effacing navel-gazing, lamenting their opinion that the company is the least among competitors; and yet, whenever a hire is made from another company, it is surprisingly discovered that the other firm deals with the same issues. Proper leadership stems the natural tendency toward corporate self-flagellation and encourages morale and confidence – in employees, customers, and investors.

Competitive actions are part of the environment in which your marketing must operate, not the sole driver for its strategic direction. Other considerations, including, importantly, customer needs, are the real drivers. Anticipating these needs, then marketing to them proactively and confidently will always make you the lead dog. And as the bumper sticker slogan says, “If you aren’t the lead dog, the view never changes.”