Ill-defined, confusing brands don’t last.  Cause marketing is no different.  By the turn of the decade, Cause marketing will be gone. It will evolve out of its confusing branded state and will simply fall under the umbrella of marketing.  It is so.

Cause marketing came on the scene in the late 1970’s   and was always the nerd in marketing.  Long time players like direct and paid media  afforded Cause a polite tolerance but didn’t really understand what it was about or even why it was present.  Public relations had a better grasp of Cause, but then PR never garnered much respect from marketing either.

When social media stormed in and rocked the traditional marketing model, it began wreaking chaos and infighting that hasn’t been seen among marketing disciplines since the days of the three-martini-lunch. Marketing stalwarts went to the armory time and time again looking for something to contain the social beast.  Unable to make social conform, marketers took a deep breath and began looking for ways to leverage its organic qualities.  Social does not tolerate one-way, controllable messages.  It demands interaction.  It demands truth.  It demands honesty.

Cause suddenly started to make sense to the marketing elite who now need to really bond with their consumers, both online and off.  Marketers watched as their consuming audiences started to care about how the company acts – not just whether the logo is attractive and the advertising entertaining.

Marketing’s new appreciation of Cause’s strategic benefits will have a significant impact on Cause.   Marketers will not tolerate the milquetoast Cause brand.  There will be no rebranding.  Marketing will simply consume that-which-was-known-as-Cause into their strategy deck.

There will be baby steps and mistakes will be made.  Witness recent missteps where Cause has been used as a sales promotion strategy or a packaging design element.  Trial and error will drive hard-earned knowledge that will then be forged into mainstream social marketing strategy.   Like a start-up engulfed by a corporate behemoth, rough edges will be smoothed and structured order will be king.

The marketingification of Cause will bring a sharp increase in the number of corporate-community bonding programs.  Corporate reputations will gain strength and popular community initiatives will find heretofore only dreamed about support and funding.  The scale of initiatives will rise in the competition for attention and there will be integration within the powerful channels of marketing reach.

The nerd of marketing will be transformed into a respected country club hero comfortable in the company of business and social elite.  It will be secure under the protective marketing umbrella, now standing shoulder to shoulder with direct and paid media. The elders in the marketing tribe will reminisce about the heyday early years, but their voices will be the lone echo of “Cause”.  It is so.

The post When Cause Marketing Goes Away appeared first on BonnerIMPR.

Gil Amelio, the Apple CEO who would be succeeded by a returning Steve Jobs in 1997, cited Apple’s “undisciplined corporate culture” as a key problem.  Steve Jobs said, “You have to be run by ideas, not hierarchy. The best ideas have to win.”  Who do you think was guided by “no” and who was guided by “yes”?

“Yes” is so powerful that businesses put multiple safeguards in place to keep it in check. Almost every decision has to go through an approval process. Have you ever ordered lunch for a meeting and been reprimanded for not having approval to do so?  ”Yes” is corporate nitroglycerin.  ”No” is the corporate after-dinner mint.

To be fair, effective organizations have to align key functions around a “yes”. If funds aren’t available, if there are legal ramifications, if production isn’t available – any of these or a multitude of other factors can cripple an idea and thrust a company into trouble.

The problem is that business tries very hard to push most decisions to “no”.  Search “saying yes” on the Harvard Business Review website.  Three articles – all centered around the theme of saying “yes” to saying “no”.  Not really a “yes” at all.  http://hbr.org/search/saying%252520%252520yes/

Saying “yes” to new ideas requires Informed Optimism.  If your outlook isn’t positive, no idea will resonate or take shape.  Dr. Richard C Senelick says, “Optimism is the inclination toward hope, and it determines how we come to terms with our present, future and past events.”  In other words, an optimist is more willing to envision the success and rewards of a new idea than to focus on the potential of failure.

Blind optimism is a road to disaster because it lacks grounding.  You must understand  your environment and the factors that create success.  Practical experience reduces evaluation time and provides greater confidence in decisions.  Add healthy optimism to that mix and you have a recipe for innovation and success.

Think of proposals or other new ideas you’re been asked to review.   Did you reject most outright?  Did you approve some only after significant revision?  Did you accept any outright?   What was your “no/yes” ratio?

Practice saying “yes”.  Listen to proposals with informed optimism.  Consider the good that can come of a “yes”.  Step towards risk within your information comfort zone.  Keep moving towards the edge with your “yes” decisions.  Find that perfect balance of informed optimism and you will begin to enjoy more notable success and greater personal satisfaction.

The post Why You Should Practice Saying “Yes” appeared first on BonnerIMPR.