Marketing guru Seth Godin’s Purple Cow is written for marketing professionals, and anyone who wants to expand their horizons with a unique perspective. He explores marketing strategies and uses case studies to help explain his point of view.
Godin begins by explaining that marketing doesn’t have enough “P’s,” referring to the famous “Four P’s of Marketing”:
- and promotion.
Godin suggests that we need to account for more “P’s,” such as positioning, publicity, pass-along, permission, and Purple Cows.
What are Purple Cows?
Purple Cows are standout experiences (like literally seeing a “Purple Cow”) that create more than just the typical desired outcome such as a purchase, a reaction, a click, etc. Purple Cows are a promotion technique that works best when the goal is to spread more than just awareness. The goal of a Purple Cow is to generate something deeper and more lasting: loyalty, a relationship, a creative spark, even an obsession.
Purple Cows are important in your business because people are too busy and will ignore your messages if you don’t break through the noise with something exceptional.
I know firsthand that consumers are frustrated with the clutter of advertisements and traditional marketing, so much that their disdain for ads has led them to ad blockers.
So, what should marketers do? Create Purple Cow experiences for consumers with otaku.
Otaku is a Japanese term for people with obsessive interests. According to Godin, otaku describes something that’s more than a hobby, but a little less than an obsession.
Godin says, “Otaku is the overwhelming desire that gets someone to drive across town to try a new ramen-noodle shop that got a great review.”
As a marketer, I believe that otaku is an essential quality we are looking for in consumers. The more consumers have otaku towards your product, the more chances a Purple Cow phenomenon will occur.
A prime example of otaku in the United States is hot sauce. Boatloads of people are lining up to taste the hottest hot sauce and will compete in the most outrageous challenges. This obsession has led to a real business, therefore showing the impact of otaku.
Moving forward, we as marketers need to understand otaku-driven consumers to implement more successful products.
Purple Cow is a great book to gain inspiration for marketing professionals. Godin provides case studies that provide ideas on how to create remarkable experiences for our consumers.
My favorite case study was “How Dutch Boy Stirred Up the Paint Business.” Dutch Boy, a paint manufacturing company, created an entirely new product based on a key insight: people hated paint cans because they were heavy, hard to carry, hard to close, hard to pour from, and no fun. So, the marketing team changed the product, creating an easier to carry, easier to pour from, easier to close paint jug.
We need to take a design thinking approach towards marketing, and understand that sometimes you need to stop selling the product and think instead about how the consumers are engaging with it. If you exercise a little empathy, you can gain consumer insights that will increase purchasing decisions and sales.
That leads me to end with a question. How can you redefine what you sell and make it better?
Welcome Emma Sluiter, our new digital marketing specialist at Elexicon! We are thrilled to have her as a part of our team. To help you get to know Emma better, we asked her to answer a few questions about herself.
What is your educational background?
I recently graduated from Grand Valley State University in December 2018 with a Bachelor of Science (B.S.) in Health Communications, Advertising, and Public Relations.
Your degree was a big part of the mutual interest between us!
This is true on so many levels. Personally, I first gained interest in Elexicon because their team helped create and supports Health Beat, Spectrum Health’s brand journalism site. I was a Health Beat reader in college, so the opportunity to work alongside them in an agency setting was ideal for me. Since one of my passions is communicating about healthcare, I believe working at Elexicon is the perfect first-step for me after college. I get to explore the impact of the communications we create for healthcare clients and their patients while learning more about web development from my team. It’s a win-win.
What were some collegiate activities/clubs you were involved in?
To start, I had my own one-hour radio show in college called Emma’s Dilemmas. I would talk about my personal dilemmas while covering local health news — I was pretty funny if I do say so myself! My radio show later led me to become GVSU’s student radio news director, where I was able to inform listeners about local health news on a regular basis.
Additionally, my time in college was spent in student government. I was a part of GVSU’s Student Senate where I worked on a committee to oversee internal relations and student funding. I helped appropriate $1.2 million to student organizations and learned more about team building and about my university’s resources. I also planned leadership programs and conferences — including the Leadership Summit, Transitions: New Student Orientation, and the First Year Leadership Program.
Not only was I involved at my university, but I was also involved in my local community. I volunteered my time at animal shelters, Well House and 20 Liters. Lastly, I was involved in a collegiate ad agency called The Bloom Group, where my colleagues and I worked on real-life marketing campaigns with Open Systems Technologies (OST) and GVSU.
What are your Top 5 skills?
Perseverance would be one of my top skills, because I never give up on a task or goal until it is completed—and completed well. Next, I would say organization because I am able to work on multiple tasks at the same time with a clear perspective on what needs to be done. Public speaking is another top skill of mine, mainly because of my outgoing personality and my desire to communicate with others about what I’ve learned. Teamwork is another skill I have obtained over the years from playing sports and working on team projects in college. Lastly, I would say I am an active listener because I find it important to learn from others and their experiences.
What do you like to do outside of work?
Watch new TV shows on Netflix, play my Nintendo DS, and hang out with my orange kitty.
You’re burning the midnight oil on a deadline. What’s your go-to snack?
Ben & Jerry’s Toffee Bar Crunch… and if that’s not in my freezer, I just make popcorn.
Music, podcasts or no headphones while working?
I tend to have headphones on while working. I can always jam out to music by 5 Seconds of Summer, and listen to podcasts. I have been finding myself listening to health and wellness podcasts lately, and I am enjoying the new perspective I am getting about nutrition. I like to listen to something at work because it keeps me motivated.
What book(s) are you reading?
I like to read books that help me escape the real world, and allow me to have a creative mind. For “escape” these days, I am reading the Witch & Wizard series by James Patterson. For my professional development, I have just read White Hat UX by Trine Falbe, Kim Andersen, and Martin Michael Frederiksen, Purple Cow by Seth Godin, and Contagious by Jonah Berger.
…and other dilemmas on the Autonomous-Vehicle horizon. Let’s explore the next three phases of our driverless future.
The arrival of self-driving, driverless, and (or is it “and/or”?) autonomous vehicles is beginning to form a fuzzy shape on the horizon. Press releases and tech pundits alike are setting their sights on 2020. Or the 2020’s. Or 2025 … or by the end of that decade. To be certain, the technology is developing at a rapid pace, looking and sounding truly amazing. But there is also a great deal of uncertainty surrounding exactly how and to what extent all of these paradigm-shifting advancements will change our lives. There are layers upon layers of controversies and questions, and the top layers all involve ethical dilemmas before you even get down deeper into the vast challenges around logistics, infrastructure, and automation.
The number one F.A.Q.
The University of Michigan’s Mobility Transformation Center is a test facility (a simulated village called “M City”) and proving ground for connected and automated vehicle technology. Their web site http://www.mtc.umich.edu has a helpful F.A.Q. page, where one of the questions and its answer really stands out to me (emphasis mine):
Q: What are the barriers to progress?
A host of advances in such areas as connected and automated vehicle systems, multi-modal transportation, traffic performance management, fractional vehicle use, as well as in new fuels, novel engine design, alternative energy sources, and advanced materials, offer great promise to address the challenges and, in the process, to truly revolutionize mobility in societies worldwide. Individually, none of these advances will have the impact needed; we must look at our mobility system as a whole. To date, there has been little work on how to integrate the technical, economic, social, and policy considerations to create a viable mobility “system” that meets the dynamic needs of a changing society.
While the technology is compelling, this new “mobility package” needs to be highly attractive to users throughout society and needs to be commercially successful, creating many new business partnerships and opportunities.
Tech giants like Tesla, Google, Uber and Apple have all been connected to driverless car projects, as well as the major traditional car manufacturers. Each claims to have a plan, a strategy, and a time horizon. There have been many separate discussions, articles and essays by futurists and pundits about different technologies and moral dilemmas. States like California are beginning to prepare legislation to pave the way for … wait a minute. For what? As the U of M F.A.Q. articulates, very little of all of this technology has begun to collectively form a road map toward any sort of unified architecture. I’m a Stephen Covey “begin with the end in mind” guy and I believe the time has come to begin thinking about the need for total integration, for the “system,” the “mobility package.” And, as part of that planning, the industry also needs to find the best platforms for clearly communicating the path forward to the commuter and traveler marketplace so that they begin to buy into the excitement and opportunity. Right now, the future market of buyers who would need to hand over the keys and total control of their minivans, SUVs and sports cars view the driverless future with a lot of trepidation and confusion, and a little bit of fear.
Here are a couple articles, in case you need a further primer on the potential technologies and moral dilemmas. Then, let’s keep going by breaking down that F.A.Q. with a few more of my own.
In the BMW museum at the company’s solidly futuristic headquarters, next to the old Olympic stadium site in Munich, you…www.theguardian.com
How many people could self-driving cars kill before we would no longer tolerate them? This once-hypothetical question…www.washingtonpost.com
Phase 1: Keep your eyes on the road and your hands on (or off) the wheel
What if we simply roll with the current trend of making today’s cars smarter and safer?
New car models are already equipped with amazing technology that is being derived from autonomous vehicle research and development. In fact, these are practically the only features car companies are advertising today: Parallel parking assist, back-up cameras, lane change sensors, automatic braking. These advancements are focused on safety but will continue to help manage fuel economy as well.
Because these “smart” technologies are becoming so pervasive, more and more of these types of cars are taking over the roadways. Within the next decade, a very high percentage of all cars on the road will be assisting drivers avoid their own common mistakes and defend against others. In the early 2020’s we may find that highway fatalities and injuries have decrease significantly, and are trending down rapidly.
Then what? Does the industry continue to aggressively pursue taking the human driver completely out of the equation to even further bolster safety and efficiency? Or do manufacturers and developers invest in other aspects of the vehicle technology such as electric/battery power and more charging stations? Consumers may find themselves comfortable living in this world, where they are still in control of their commute, can drive a sports car or SUV, and not be forced into riding in a Rolling iPhone or Android-On-Wheels. These enhanced-yet-still-human-controlled products would also help make the ride-sharing market safer and more efficient as well. Overall, this path keeps paid drivers — from long-haul to UPS to Uber — employed, as well.
Phase 2: We all need to share the road
More automation gradually but unrelentingly works its way onto the road.
Let’s assume the above scenario continues to come to fruition into the early 2020’s, but the big manufacturers have their driverless cars and related “connected infrastructure” technologies ready to do as well: They’re tested, municipalities think they’re prepared, some early-adopters hit the road without a steering wheel. What does that world look like?
This phase (let’s guess it at 2025–2035) will present an interesting rubicon: If consumers aren’t totally bought into the many paradigm shifts and involuntary life hacks that occur, or if the level of traffic safety and/or energy efficiency does not reach predicted targets … what then? Driverless adoption will continue to advance but it may slow, and impact the overall health of an industry that has probably invested billions multiple times over. Does advancement eventually “hold” and driverless vehicles find their nichés in certain ride-sharing, delivery and transit services, while the consumer marketplace dictates that they want to literally keep their hands on the wheel?
Of course, the opposite could happen as well. In 2030 driverless adoption could be moving full speed ahead, with consumers climbing in their back seat living rooms and offices and enjoying their productive commutes. One of the best sales pitches I’ve heard describes your driverless car dropping you off at work and going to park in a massive industrial ramp nearby but out of eyeshot of otherwise luscious, parking-structureless environs. When you’re ready to leave work, you summon your GoogleCar to first go pick up your children from band practice before coming to fetch you. Everyone shares the thoroughfare in their roving family rooms, waving to each other and to the poor suckers still forced to keep their eyes on the road in their merely driver-assisted vehicle.
Phase 3: We live inside a computer
Like a circuit board on silicon, our highways transport us around like bits and bytes to our destinations.
I feel like I’m skipping WAY ahead here, but the logical sequence of this technology is to first assist drivers, then augment drivers and driving, and then eventually replace it all, and replace it completely. Otherwise, we might as well remain in Phase 1 … Phase 2 could offer a world full of uncomfortable juxtapositions and moral dilemmas, with human drivers getting fed up with confused, cautious Roomba-mobiles. But if we can get to Phase 3, this is where everything speeds up like never before. If there are no human-controlled cars on the road and all robotic, connected vehicles are communicating with each other in a grand symphony orchestra of traffic flow, then the possibilities and benefits are pretty remarkable: More safety, more time savings, less fuel usage, less parking real estate. Lanes can be narrower, we may not need garages, or even our own cars or car insurance. That expense can be put to other uses in our lives. Utopia and Nirvana rolled into one.
But … Many jobs will be replaced. Will this Utopian Nirvana be only for elites, while the less fortunate actually become less mobile than they are now? Also, we’d be at the mercy of a giant, potentially hackable, SkyNet-like “system” as the M City web site alluded to.
And how do we get “there” from “here”?
Does the U.S. Government set a “Zero Day” in 2030 or 2040 when all traditional or assisted cars must be off the road, and driverless vehicles take to all the new infrastructure in one simultaneous, world-changing swoop? And speaking of “world-changing:” Is this a global event? Will the “haves and have nots” who can afford and participate in this revolution also apply to rich vs. poor nations?
Something this far-reaching and earth-shifting is going to need to be communicated. Clearly, in simple terms, without bias and with a focus on the common good of everyone.
It’s a huge leap, that’s for sure. One that skeptical consumers may not be ready for any time soon, especially in today’s political climate. Now may not be a good era to espouse a technology revolution that is perceived as being based in elitist Silicon Valley and replacing yet more jobs with automation. Something this far-reaching and earth-shifting is going to need to be communicated. Clearly, in simple terms, without bias and with a focus on the common good of everyone. And that, again, is unfortunately not something that we’re seeing or hearing a lot of in today’s political climate.
If Ford, Volvo, GM and Uber are to be believed, self-driving cars will soon dominate our roads and car ownership will…www.latimes.com
Back from the future
In the present day, it’s now time to communicate the vision (begin with the end in mind)
With the “Big Three” tech companies Apple (probably), Google and Elon Musk’s Tesla firmly behind autonomous vehicles, alongside Detroit’s traditional Big Three, a driverless future is happening … someday. Their research and development has brought the technology to the brink of being ready to break through, and now is the time to begin communicating their progress and clarifying both the barriers and the benefits. A vision needs to begin taking shape, including an articulation of the “phases” that I outline above. These communications need to address not only the “wow” factor but also the societal and safety concerns. They’ll need to prove that the benefits far out-weight concerns, and that millions of professional drivers will not lose their livelihood. Demonstrating a predicted surge in jobs needed for manufacturing and infrastructure related to driverless technology rollout would, of course, but useful as well.
So far, communicating this vision has been fragmented among the aforementioned companies and institutions. Tech blogs and futurist essays are making best-guesses as to what the next decades will bring. Online resources like this Germany-based http://www.driverless-future.com/ are a good aggregation of what’s happening, everything that’s been done and said, but it’s more industry-focused than geared toward getting consumers excited.
I’m raising my hand in the air as someone who’s interested in helping with this communication effort, even if at first it’s continuing to participate in the conversation.
I’ve been a heavy Photoshop user for over 15 years, using it for anything from general graphic design and photo editing to web layouts and UI to digital illustrations and concept art for video games. To say the least, it’s versatile and has been around seemingly forever, at least in my lifetime.
Using Photoshop as long as I have means I’ve gotten used to how things work, and when those things change, sometimes it feels disruptive. I’m going to discuss two of these recently updated features here, and tell you how you can revert them back to how it originally worked if you so choose.
FEATURE 1: New Document Workspace
Let me start off by saying that if you’re new to Photoshop, I can see how this particular update that was recently made in CC 2017 might be useful to you. There’s a huge variety of templates to choose from now—anything from photo templates, to mobile, film and more. It also gives you the option to use a recent size item you’d created. But, for a more seasoned Photoshop user, using the software for a particular purpose, it’s a bit much. Here’s why it was for me:
- Additional load time. Granted, it’s not significant, and likely varies from machine to machine (I’m running a Mid-2014 Macbook Pro, w/ a Solid State hard drive, 16GB of RAM and an i7 Processor), but the time it takes from launching Photoshop to getting to the New Document Workspace adds nearly 2 seconds of wait time for me. That may not sound like much, but as someone who spends a huge portion of their work day in the software opening, closing, and creating many Photoshop documents each day, it is noticeable, and gets annoying.
- Too many upfront features. So many options! Too many, I feel upfront, at least for me, which I think adds to that additional upfront loading time. Packing in so many features makes it a little confusing with the way the new document inputs are laid out. If you’re tabbing through each input field (i.e. width, height, resolution, etc), in the legacy New Document workspace, you went from top to bottom, like a standard input form. In the new input form, you jump from top, down, to the right, then left to right, and down again. It seems unnecessarily confusing.
Thankfully, PS CC 2017 allows you to set your New Document workspace back to the legacy version if you’d prefer—here’s how:
Reverting Photoshop’s New Document Workspace:
First, you need to get to Photoshop Preferences. On a PC, go up to the Edit menu in the Menu Bar along the top of the screen. Choose Preferences, and then choose General. On a Mac, go to the Photoshop CC menu, choose Preferences, then choose General. This can also be reached by hitting the shortcut Command + K.
This opens the General Preferences dialog box. Within this, look for the option that says “Use Legacy “New Document” Interface, and click this option.
You’ll need to quit and relaunch Photoshop for the change to take effect.
FEATURE 2: Last Filter Shortcut
Doing web design, and UI layout and design often means repeating a similar style or filter to multiple elements. In the past, on a Mac, this was easily done by applying the most recent filter to multiple layers quickly by hitting Command + F. But in the latest iteration of CC 2017, they’ve replaced this long-standing keyboard shortcut from Command + F, to Control + Command + F, and giving the existing Command + F keyboard shortcut command to a new feature, the extended Photoshop Search functionality.
Like the New Document screen, it’s ultimately not a big deal, but I’d argue that it’s not good user experience to introduce a new feature, and replace an existing keyboard shortcut that users are accustomed to.
If you too find this annoying, you can reset your keyboard shortcut command to repeat a filter like it had before:
- Open Photoshop and navigate to your Keyboard Shortcuts. You can do so by doing one of the following:
One you have arrived at Keyboard Shortcuts,
- Click on the Filter option from the list of available current keyboard shortcuts, and select Last Filter
- Click into the shortcut area that currently reads Control + Command + F, and add your desired keyboard shortcut. NOTE: you add the new desired shortcut by actually performing the shortcut, in this case, hitting the keys Command + F, as opposed to spelling it out within the input field.
- You’ll get a warning noting that by adding this keyboard command you’ll be overriding the Edit > Search functionality, which is what we wanted to do along along.
- Click OK
Overall, I’ve been pretty happy with the most updates that I’ve experienced in Photoshop over the years, with the exception of some rather minor annoyances such as these. Hopefully these tricks benefit other Photoshop users experiencing similar frustrations.
Is there such a thing as “too simple?”
One of Albert Einstein’s most memorable quotes was “Make everything as simple as possible … but no simpler.” When Apple’s new AirPods were announced, I at first believed that we‘d found a good example of he was meant by “no simpler.”
I’m not a technology editor or blogger at a major publication so I have not received a preview set of Apple’s new wireless, Bluetooth-driven AirPods (made more necessary now by Apple’s headphone jack-less iPhone 7’s). My “review” here will be based on my first impressions of the product roll-out, how I feel about the unconnected, separate-earbud format; and my level of desire to drop $159 to obtain them.
In doing a bit of research, I came across Conan O’Brien’s ad spoof video that I believe will save me several many keystrokes and words to describe that “first impression” in my head when I first saw the introductory Apple keynote. This is pretty funny and spot on…
Now, actual reviews have noted that the AirPods fit as well as the previous ear-bud-pod version, so the comedic theme of the ad is a little off-base. What I find interesting about the spoof is how odd and sort of dumb the buds look without the cord. The iconic original ads made the swaying, flopping cord a fun part of the kinetic images and footage.
Without the cord, the white wireless earbuds have been compared unfavorably to … well, any sort of white thingy sticking out of your ears or face …
This is where I had my first thoughts of over-simplification. Did they take away too much? They should have kept the wire, just connect the two buds together directly. I like the way my PowerBeats™ fit and work, with the cord draped behind my neck and the ear “clips” holding the earpieces firmly in place. I’ve got volume and mute controls on the cord. Bluetooth pairing is relatively straightforward. The occasional charging process is fine. The sound is good. The tethering cord and the earclips make them easy to find and dig out of a gym bag.
The “connected” AirPods would end up looking something like this product from Spigen creates … except you would still presumably have the play/pause and volume controls available on the cord.
Looking at this promo image, I envisioned new Apple ads in the iconic “dancing silhouette” style, with the strap flapping behind the dancer’s neck but allowing them to flip and twist and perform other Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo moves without fear of getting tangled in the cord between their ears and iPod.
And then … Wires and jacks happened
When I started this post, I intended to end it there … to conclude that Apple had out-thought itself and over-simplified a product. They look silly, seem easy to lose and difficult to control when, for instance, someone approaches you and you’d like to pause or control the volume.
But as I often do, I saved a draft until I had time to wrap it up. During that time, I used my PowerBeats … my iPhone 6 … my traditional, current-generation EarPods. Now knowing that AirPods are “out there,” suddenly …
- Every device with a headphone jack seemed outdated and obsolete. Even though … just sayin’.
- The tethering cord on my PowerBeats started to rub on my neck a bit more while running.
- My PowerBeats earclips kind of started to pinch a little.
- Plugging in my PowerBeats to charge alongside my electric shaver seemed weird.
- The frustrating process of un-tangling an EarPod cord became slightly more blood pressure-inducing.
- I remembered how many times I’ve scrambled to find a set of headphones, even with the “findable” cord.
- The dental-floss charging case seems like something I could keep close to my keys and wallet (and … of course … my iPhone) to grab each morning before heading out. As opposed to stuffing a wad of headphone cord into my pocket.
Maybe a world without any wires won’t be so bad. Perhaps in an effort to create a design that is as simple as possible, Apple has found a safe threshold of “no simpler.”
The $159 verdict
Alright … I will probably get a pair of these, with my ($199) PowerBeats as a backup for situations where I may need better sound and/or better in-ear security. Or I may have a pair of one of these to sell you on eBay someday. That’s over $350 in wireless freedom, so I had better make the most of it. Time to step up the workout routine, load up on podcasts and audiobooks, become a Siri-driven android (apologies for the reference) and join the masses of white-ear-thingy-wearers.
I remain concerned about sound quality, lose-ability (or at best, forget-ability) paired with the expense of having a backup pair, and lack of controls. I’m sure once I have these in my hands, some of those concerns will go away.
Kudos to Apple for keeping things simple. I thought I gotcha this time, proving that maybe this time you went beyond Einstein’s “no simpler.”