Mindful Marketing
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Mindful Meter & Matrix
    • Leadership
  • Mindful Matters Blog
  • Engage Your Mind
    • Mindful Ads? Vote Your Mind!
  • Expand Your Mind
  • Contact

Dos and Don'ts of Personal Branding with AI

11/18/2023

22 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

AI’s meteoric rise has encouraged companies to quickly embrace the transformative technology while countries have raced to erect guardrails on the all-powerful algorithms.  These strategies are critical, yet such collective actions are often a function of individuals’ attitudes, which prompts the question:  What's a personal approach for ethical use of AI?
 
If your newsfeed is like mine, it overflows with articles describing organizations’ creative and sometimes controversial use of artificial intelligence; for instance, recent news stories have included:
  • A Beatles song made with AI
  • Results showing that ChatGTP makes up things 3% of the time
  • Tom Hanks disavowing a deepfake dental ad video
  • Empathetic AI helping to heal broken office relationships

By now, AI has touched most industries in more ways than one, which is part of the reason the U.S. government and those of several other nations are taking more active and deliberate approaches to support AI development.  By doing so countries can gain competitive advantage, enhance national security, and reduce negative impacts on their citizens.
 
On a personal level, parallel goals should motivate individuals’ use of AI.  I’m not a tech expert or an authority on artificial intelligence, but several years ago I suggested a simple model for personal branding that might also serve as a useful guide for individual AI use.  The 3Cs of personal branding – competencies, character, and communication can help frame how individuals should and shouldn’t use AI.
 
1. Competencies:  What a person can do well; their skills, talents, and aptitudes.
 
The ability to use AI is already a competency that many employers want and that many more will demand over the coming months and years.  However, experience alone with AI won't suffice.  Competent users of AI should be able to:
  • Choose the right AI tool – since the rapid ascension of ChatGPT, a variety of other chatbots and AI tools have emerged, some of which are tailored to particular types of information, e.g., Jasper for business and marketers and Chatsonic for news content creators.
  • Ask AI the right questions – ones that effectively and efficiently enable the chosen chatbot to locate the right information and offer truly helpful responses
  • Identify errors – those that use AI often mention times when the technology makes mistakes, sometimes retrieving the wrong information and other times even fabricating facts.
 
2. Character:  The kind of person someone is – Are they decent, fair, and honest?  Do they show others respect and demonstrate social responsibility?
 
Picture

While personal branding for AI competency primarily involves what people should do, AI-related character largely describes things that individuals shouldn’t do, such as:
  • Suggest that work is one’s own when it was created largely or entirely by AI
  • Fail to give proper attribution, or credit, to others whose work AI appropriated
  • Forward AI results not checked for accuracy or that contain known mistakes
  • Share indecent content such as profane language, crude pictures, or other offensive subject matter generated by AI
 
3. Communication:  How a person informs, persuades, or reminds others about their brand
 
There’s a growing number of AI products that can help users communicate more effectively.  In a recent LinkedIn article,  James Lusk highlighted several of the tools.  The ones that seem best suited for positive personal branding are:
  • Grammarly – to improve one’s writing mechanics.  But users shouldn't use it to write substantial content then claim authorship.
  • Zoom.ai – to manage communication tasks, including scheduling meetings and sending reminders.  The tool also can be used to draft emails, so again, users should be careful to not give the impression they’ve written something they haven’t
  • Chorus.ai – to improve communication skills by analyzing one’s communication style, including  interruptions, tone, and speaking pace
 
AI users also should be careful not to give others a false impression of what they’re like physically or otherwise, which can happen when using apps such as  AI face enhancers.
 
Like other technology, AI is tool that can be used in good ways and in bad ways.  As its rapid evolution continues, there’s no guarantee that AI will hold itself to any compelling moral standards.  More likely, it will be individuals who accept personal ethical accountability and model it for others, thereby guiding AI's “Mindful Marketing.”


Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
22 Comments

No Shorts, No Sunglasses, No Service

10/4/2023

1 Comment

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

We’ve all heard that our nonverbal communication conveys more than the words we speak.  That saying is easy to embrace in principle, but it can become harder to accept when senators and sports legends seem to suggest otherwise.  How might marketing, the banner carrier for image-building, inform the current debate of what people wear at work?  
 
In his first year of service from Pennsylvania, U.S. Senator John Fetterman’s casual attire (sweatshirt, shorts, sneakers) was the apparent impetus for Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s decision to relax the chamber’s formal dress code.  However, that choice was negated a week later when the Senate passed a resolution that formalized the requirement for business attire on the chamber floor.
 
Meanwhile, Deion Sanders, former MLB player, NFL Hall of Famer, and head football coach of the University of Colorado, has grabbed headlines with his trademark attire, specifically his shades.  His propensity to continually wear sunglasses, even during interviews caused Colorado State football coach Jay Norvell to comment, “When I talk to grown-ups, I take my hat and my glasses off. That's what my mother taught me.”
 
At first glance, Fetterman spurring the Senate to button up its dress code and Sanders sporting sunglasses during interviews have little to do with each other.  However, both headlines are case studies in nonverbal communication – People’s clothes and how they wear them often portend their personalities and purposes; similarly, individuals’ eyes often signal what they’re thinking and feeling.
 
Still, what do a couple of guys wearing shorts and sunglasses to work have to do with marketing?  They’re relevant to the field in at least two ways:
  • Internal marketing:  Organizations market to their employees by trying to meet their needs, which can involve the policies they set and the procedures they follow, including ones related to work attire.
  • Personal branding: Each person has a unique brand, or identity, which is based on their character and competencies and is communicated to others through their words and actions, including what they wear.
 
Although I feel like I know something about nonverbal communication from my business, teaching, and life experiences, I wanted to talk to someone who is truly an expert, so I reached out to Mike True, a former coworker of mine who is an internationally renowned authority on career development and an in-demand speaker on many related topics, including professional etiquette.
 
When I asked for his thoughts on the U.S. Senate’s dress code decision, the main word that came to his mind was “decorum,” or setting high standards in specific settings.  He continued that in the senate setting, professional business attire “speaks of order, neatness, and structure,” while very casual dress “speaks of a breakdown in respect for order, neatness, and structure – It speaks of lower standards.”
 
Knowing the high standards True sets for himself and encourages for others, his response about Senate attire was not unexpected.  However, his analysis of Sanders’ sunglasses surprised me:
 
“Sunglasses are part of Deion’s persona and have been for many years. He has an eyewear deal with Blenders Eyewear, so it's a ‘product placement’ gig for which he is paid. The non-verbal here seems to be practical (protecting his eyes from the sun in outdoor practices and games, and from camera flashes and bright lights in interviews) and a brand of sorts. He is Coach Prime, and as such he seeks to project ‘coolness’ for himself, his players, and the whole Colorado football program. It's working!”
 
I wasn’t surprised that True knows marketing and recognized successful branding and product placement.  He’s a student of business and surely read of how within one day of announcing its collaboration with Sanders, Benders “received $1.2 million in pre-orders.”
 
I thought, though, that he might take exception with the eye contact that Sanders’ dark sunglasses eliminate.  As the saying goes, the eyes are the window to the soul. When our eyes widen and our pupils dilate, we communicate interest and excitement, whereas a furrowed brow can suggest worry or concern.
 
However, having enjoyed True’s etiquette dinners and other events in which he detailed appropriate professional behavior from handshakes to table conversation, I know he would never advocate wearing sunglasses to a job interview or networking event.  So, why the apparent double standard?  Similarly, why doesn’t he cut some slack for Fetterman or other senators who might feel more comfortable in more casual attire?


Picture
 
First, True did identify practical reasons why Sanders might want to wear glasses to shield his eyes from bright light, while also suggesting they’re not the only reasons.  In short, as True alludes, Sanders’ personal brand, even for a coach at a major college football program, is a very unique one that dates back 35+ years when he first earned the nickname “Prime Time” for his exciting play and exuberant personality at Florida State University.
 
As I'm sure True would never advise emerging or seasoned business professionals to emulate Sanders’ dark shades in their interpersonal dealings, the standards for Sanders’ nonverbal communication are in many ways are a category of one.
 
Then, why doesn’t Fetterman, who probably has a more compelling reason for wearing sweats and sneakers, get a similar pass?  After all, his battle with clinical depression led him to seek treatment at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.  There may be a few reasons for a different standard:
 
  • No slight on college football, but the business of the U.S. Senate is more important: nation- if not world-shaping policies vs. recreation or entertainment.
  • Attire often reflects expectations for the level of quality of work.  Even in a football game, if players wear worn-out or mismatched uniforms, fans will take them less seriously, and the players may start to feel the same way about themselves.
  • Clothing needs to fit the setting and related cultural norms.  People wear bathing suits on beaches not in boardrooms.  People who work in and around football, like many sports, are accustomed to very casual attire.   
  • Dress that’s deemed inappropriate in a given situation can become a distraction.  It also could be offensive if the attire reveals body parts that others don’t care to see but can’t avoid looking at when interacting with the person.
 
So, the U.S. Senate does have reasons for maintaining a dress code that aren’t easily transferrable to football.  However, that doesn’t mean that the policies must stay the same forever:  Almost two-and-a-half centuries ago, powered wigs and ruffled shirts were the style.  Any organization’s dress code needs to evolve with the times.
 
Having a dress code also doesn’t mean that special accommodations can’t be made for specific individuals who warrant them.  Those individuals and the policy also might meet somewhere in the middle, e.g., instead of shorts, full-length open-leg sweatpants, and instead of sneakers, very comfortable, sneaker-like shoes.
 
As has happened for me many times in writing this blog, the assumptions I had at the outset of this piece are not the same ones I have at the end, which leads me to two key takeaways that extend beyond best practices in nonverbal communication:
  1. Although there are certainly generalizations that can be made for personal branding, everyone’s brand is unique and there can be special circumstances that warrant some people acting differently than others.
  2. Make your brand a malleable one, or more specifically, allow knowledgeable others to inform your beliefs such that when fitting, you are willing to adapt judgments.
 
Understanding and employing effective nonverbal communication is important whether you’re calling plays or proposing national policy.  Just as important is the ability to understand others’ perspectives and learn from them.  Both life skills are critical inputs for “Mindful Marketing.”
​
Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
1 Comment

All Play:  How Companies Can Make More Inclusive Toys

9/13/2023

7 Comments

 
A collection of play balls, some containing icons for sound, touch, and smell

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

Toss-Across, Evel Knievel, Simon, Big Wheel – the most popular toys of the 1970s offer a trip down memory lane for many of us who were kids during that unique era.  We probably didn’t think then that some children weren’t able to enjoy these common playthings because of certain physical limitations.  Over the past 50 years, the world has become more welcoming in many ways, but have toy makers kept pace with the inclusivity trend?
 
Legos have been fixtures in family rooms for at least a few decades.  The tiny bumpy bricks provide appropriate challenge and fun for children from four to 14 and beyond.  Kids who can’t see also can snap together the blocks to build shapes and structures, but they haven’t been able to appreciate the variety of colors or visualize their finished work in all the ways that sighted children can.
 
In 2019, the Lego Group conceived a creative way to bridge the participation gap by using the bricks’ raised knobs to represented braille letters.  For the last few years, the company distributed its Braille Bricks selectively – mainly to individuals and organizations teaching children with visual impairments.  Recently, the firm made the 287-piece set widely available for purchase, so blind and sighted members of any family can enjoy playing with and learning from the uniquely inclusive toys.
 
Mattel also has done a good in making its iconic Barbie doll more inclusive.  For decades, the company has added dolls of different races and ethnicities to the collection, and in more recent years, it’s introduced dolls with disabilities and different body types.
 
Product inclusivity is a great thing.  It’s hard to imagine products being ‘too inclusive,’ especially one’s targeted toward children.
 
As I’ve spoken with college students about product inclusivity, some have said they didn’t care whether their Barbies looked like them or not, but others really appreciated having dolls whose skin colors and other physical attributes mirrored their own.
 

A line of Hawaiian Barbie dolls

Jason Polansky, one of my former advisees who is totally blind, has worked in employee recruitment roles for Microsoft and Whole Foods and now has a position as an unemployment claims interviewer with the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry.  We had many good conversations when he was a student and more since he graduated several years ago, but I never thought much about his childhood – what it was like to grow up blind – and I certainly didn’t think of the toys he played with, so I recently asked him about them.
 
Polansky said he mainly liked playing with tactile toys such as Legos, Duplos, and Geomags, as well as a braille/tactile Battleship game, a Connect 4 game with holes in the black checkers, and braille Uno cards.  He also enjoyed audible toys like a talking trivia globe, a puzzle map of the United States, a talking clock, and "two buckets full of dinosaurs and reptiles."
 
Sound was a mixed blessing for Polansky.  Although he enjoyed listening to cassette tapes and AM/FM/shortwave radio, the same sounds sometimes created a problem when they kept him from hearing other noises in his environment that he needed to hear.  In fact, when he was about six, he went through a stage in which many extraneous sounds scared him for that reason.
 
Sadie McFarland is one of my current advisees.  Because of optic nerve hypoplasia, she has no vision in her right eye and limited functional vision in her left one, which means she is legally blind.  Although McFarland reflects fondly on playing with Barbies and a variety of other toys and games when she was a child, her attention now as a college marketing major is drawn to the lack of playthings designed for children with disabilities, especially those with vision impairments.
 
Even as she credits brands like Barbie and American Girl for making dolls that “give beautiful nods” to individuals who have prosthetic devices, use wheelchairs, and have diverse skin tones, she laments that companies in the toy industry have done relatively little to represent blindness.
 
McFarland recommends making dolls whose eyes move sporadically, mimicking nystagmus, placing a white cane in the doll’s hand, and equipping it with a guide dog in harness. She adds that blindness also can be identified with certain types of glasses.
 
As an adult, McFarland still loves to play games but often finds them challenging because  “at least 75% contain items with text that is nearly microscopic, even to the working human eye.”  Some of her suggested fixes are to provide braille instructions and scorecards and to create tactile boards and differently shaped pieces.  She also recommends reaching out to organizations like the National Federation of the Blind and American Printing House for the Blind, which can provide useful insights into meeting the needs of blind consumers.
 
It's nice to imagine a world in which more companies heed such advice and genuinely attempt to make products, especially toys, accessible to a broader range of people; however, the reality is that companies need to pay vendors, make payroll, and provide ROI to shareholders, all of which may appear to preclude satisfying some niche markets.
 
Of course, companies can gain goodwill be serving underrepresented people groups, but is it right to expect companies to lose money doing so?  As a corollary, the law requires organizations to make reasonable accommodations for employees with special needs, unless doing so represents an undue hardship.
 
Fortunately, it doesn’t have an either-or decision.  Several years ago, Polansky and I coauthored an article titled,  “How Serving Blind Consumers Creates Competitive Advantage.”  We summarized a main takeaway in this statement:  “The same services that meet the unique needs of blind consumers often ‘delight’ other customers, thereby differentiating a brand and even offering competitive advantage.”
 
Since blind people lack at least some degree of sight, marketers must appeal to other senses like touch, smell, and taste.  Of course, most sighted people also have these senses, and they similarly appreciate things that feel good, smell nice, and taste good.  So, by integrating more senses for the benefit of blind people, marketers also increase their appeal to other consumers and differentiate themselves from competitors who don’t do the same.
 
McFarland maintains, “Play is a universal language that must be kept fully accessible for every child and child at heart.”  Hopefully, increasingly creative toy design will see the introduction of more toys that tap into multiple senses for both inclusivity and profitability, which can be considered a playful approach to “Mindful Marketing.”


Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
7 Comments

A 3D Approach to Corporate Social Media Responsibility

6/6/2023

5 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

Most of us receive warnings during our lives whether they’re about talking in class, highway speeding, or forgetting to pay a bill.  When the U.S. surgeon general issues a warning, it’s a serious admonition for everyone, usually about some potential physical harm.  So, when the physician in chief warns about the dangers of social media, what should the organizations that use it do?
 
The New York Times has called U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy’s most recent warning “an extraordinary public advisory,” which is saying something since warnings from the nation’s top doctor are uncommon and have included some grave concerns like AIDS, drunk-driving, obesity, video game violence, gun violence, and, of course, cigarettes.
 
How could social media possibly warrant the same level of concern?
 
Gen Z uses Instagram to share fun videos, parents turn to Facebook to celebrate family milestones, and professionals leverage LinkedIn to post and find job opportunities, all of which seem like positive and productive things.  Unfortunately, though, most of us also have read about, if not experienced, social media’s negative impact.
 
I teach about sociological and psychological influences on behavior, but I don’t use social media much, so I’d like to believe I’m above its affirmation-seeking lure.  However, I have to admit, there are times I’m disappointed that my posts don’t receive the numbers of likes and shares that those of others do.
 
Putting too much weight on other people’s reactions can be problematic, but it’s just one of social media’s potential pitfalls.  As the following two lists suggest, misuse of social media can impact individuals’ well-being mentally (M), physically (P), and socially (S) in many different ways.
 
First, Entrepreneur identifies four other pitfalls in its list of five social media dangers:
  1. Real-life interaction is replaced if you allow it (M, P, S)
  2. Feelings of envy emerge based on fabricated lives (M, S)
  3. Moments are missed and memorable experiences are diluted (M)
  4. Addiction (M, P, S)
  5. It can ruin your sleep, impacting your physical health (P)
 
Picture
 
Still, others suggest many more potential perils.  For instance, McMillen Health identifies 15 social media dangers:
  1. Sedentary behavior (P)
  2. Less sleep (P)
  3. Social Media addiction (M, P, S)
  4. Cyberbullying (M, S)
  5. Missing out on face-to-face relationships (S)
  6. Less time for other activities (M, P, S)
  7. Social comparisons (M, S)
  8. Affecting self-image (M)
  9. Damaging online reputation (M, S)
  10. Harmful to mental well-being (M)
  11. Misleading information (M, S)
  12. Scams (M, P)
  13. Normalizing risk-taking behaviors (P)
  14. Misleading marketing (M, P)
  15. Inappropriate content (M, P, S)
 
Although anyone can be negatively impacted in these ways, children and adolescents tend to feel social media’s impacts most acutely, partly because they’re heavy users of the platforms but mainly because individuals’ formative years are ones in which they often look to others for validation, and they more easily feel ostracized from their peers.
 
Mayo Clinic cites many studies that found evidence of adverse effects of social media on teens, including the following:
  • 12- to 15-year-olds in the U.S. who used social media for more than three hours a day were at greater risk of mental health problems.
  • For 13- to 16-year-olds in the U.K., using social media more than three times a day was associated with poor mental health and well-being.
  • Various studies have found links between social media use and symptoms of depression and anxiety.
 
Even with this evidence, it’s important to note that social media is not inherently bad.  As suggested at the onset of this piece, platforms like Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and others provide very worthwhile services that range from connecting people, to offering entertainment, to delivering education.
 
It also bears emphasizing that ultimately people are responsible for their own social media use.  Even in the case of so-called ‘addictive’ apps, like TikTok, people have the ability to stop using them without experiencing physical withdrawal symptoms associated with trying to stop smoking or doing drugs like cocaine and heroin.
 
One qualification, however, is that parents share some responsibility for the social media use of their children, especially younger ones.  Unlike adults, children can’t necessarily comprehend the potential risks because they lack life experience and knowledge of social  and psychological phenomenon.  It’s up to parents to help moderate their children’s social media use.
 
Notwithstanding the preceding points, if companies care about their own consumers and people in general, they should want to contribute to their well-being and help them avoid harm.

Here are three “Ds” every organization should do to make their social media use more responsible.
 
1. Discourage divisive content:  This is understandably a difficult phenomenon to police, but companies from the largest social media platforms to the smallest should work to eliminate content that unnecessarily pits people against each other.
 
While social media platforms shouldn’t be in the business of monetizing such content, all businesses should model civil dialogue and discourage polarizing posts.
 
2. Don’t allow abusive behavior:  The social media communication that likely weighs heaviest on young people’s mental health is the communication that involves bullying and/or shaming.  Yes, freedom of speech is important, but it shouldn’t mean that anything goes, particularly when that anything involves demeaning dialogue and personal attacks.
 
Smaller companies also can monitor their social media pages for abusive posts, removing them as they see them and banning users who make them.
 
3. Decrease overuse:  Bars stop serving patrons who have had too much to drink.  Social media platforms can at a minimum notify users of their time on the platform, similar to Apple’s screentime notifications.  Beyond that, platforms could also ask people to set their own time limits, before they start using the app, when they’re still thinking about their use rationally and objectively.
 
Of course, most business that use social media aren’t platforms or major apps.  Still, even small businesses can discourage social media overuse by limiting their posts to reasonable numbers, e.g., one or two a day versus four or five, which communicates to followers that they can and should have lives outside of their interactions with a single business.
 
Companies don’t need to stop using social media because of the U.S. surgeon general’s warning, but they should reassess how their use may be impacting people.  The three Ds described above don’t represent a comprehensive plan for responsible social media use, but they are important steps toward more “Mindful Marketing.”


Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
5 Comments

Is it a Sin to Advertise Religion?

5/21/2023

2 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

In casual interpersonal conversation, two topics have long been taboo: politics and religion.  By contrast, in advertising, politics are usually fair game, but religion has largely remained off-limits, until now.   So, have two widely broadcast religion-related campaigns changed an age-old mass communication commandment? 
 
By now, most people have driven by billboards or viewed videos online for “He Gets Us,” the omnipresent ad campaign aimed at changing people’s perceptions of Jesus.  The campaign even aired ads during last February’s Super Bowl.
 
More recently, another campaign, which represents religion for some but with a very different objective, also has been broadcast in national media: #StandUpToJewishHate aims to stop antisemitism.  The need for such an initiative stems in part from the sobering statistic that the American Jewish community represents just 2.4% of the U.S. population, but Jews are victims in 55% of the country’s religious hate crimes.

Given my past and present advertising-related roles, people sometimes ask my opinion about ads, and because I teach at a Christian University, my views on marketing that involves religion has some extra appeal.
 
However, as much as I enjoy sharing my thoughts, I really appreciate hearing others’ perspectives, from which I always learn.  So, in the current case of these two high-profile campaigns, I reached out to a few wise friends and asked for their insights on the ads.
 
One person is a Christian church pastor; the others are Jewish – a software project manager and an executive coach.  For the sake of brevity but at the risk of some awkward acronyms, I’ll refer to these kind contributors anonymously as CCP, JSPM, and JEC, respectively.  Here are their reflections on the ads.
 
He Gets Us
 
In light of ongoing critiques of Christians and Christianity, CCP admitted having mixed feelings about the He Gets Us ads.  Still, he was grateful for the campaign’s positive portrayal of Jesus.
 
JSPM and JEC also appreciated the ads.  JSPM was particularly impressed by the campaign’s inclusivity, emphasized through third person plural language.  He reflected, “Our world could certainly use more ‘us’ than ‘them’ . . . When we allow people to dehumanize others, bad things happen.”
 
Picture

Likewise, JEC was very impressed by the He Gets Us ads, which he found to be “incredibly open-minded” as they presented an accurate picture of Jesus, who was not close-minded.
 
Notwithstanding these positive attributes, CCP posed an important bottom-line question about the ads:  Are they effective?  More specifically, he wondered:
 
“The ads’ portrayals of Jesus highlight his love and grace, but do they clearly communicate to their audience who He is?  Also, are those short dramatic snippets enough to cause someone to explore more about Jesus?”
 
Furthermore, knowing that purchasing national media isn’t cheap, and a 30-second Super Bowl spot can cost as much as $7 million, CCP asked the very reasonable question of whether taking practical actions would be more meaningful than words:
 
“While our Christian witness is important, do television ads or addressing the needs of people who are hurting provide a better representation to our world of who Jesus is and what He and his followers value?”
 
Still, CCP remained circumspect, “Maybe the fact we’re having this discussion is proof the ads are accomplishing their purpose.”  He’s right:  This kind of general image/brand-building is very difficult to quantify, and so much free press is likely helping, at least to some extent, to offset the costs.
 
#StandUpToJewishHate
 
As mentioned above, JSPM denounced dehumanizing actions and the acrimony that often underlies them.  He added, “The abundance of hate in our society is crowding out love and is dangerous on many levels.”  The hateful words and actions the #StandUp campaign seeks to discourage exemplify some of the more advanced forms of that abuse.
 
JSPM appreciated how each campaign, though very different in their focus, aimed to replace the prevailing narrative with a better one, i.e., Jesus was about loving others, and it’s wrong to radiate hate.

​
Picture
 
JEC supported the #StandUp ads’ goal of combatting hate and protecting people.  He also fittingly differentiated the two campaigns, pointing out that while He Gets Us focuses squarely on Jesus and highlights specific spiritual disciplines He demonstrated like self-control, unconditional love, and hospitableness, #StandUp makes no mention of a deity or reference to specific tenets of faith.
 
In addition, JEC raised two good questions:
  • How should the funding sources for both campaigns affect the ways their respective ads are interpreted?
  • Do the #StandUp spots really represent religious advertising?
                                                                                            
Admittedly, the second question surprised me as it challenged the fundamental framing of this piece and the logic:  ‘Because the #StandUp campaign encourages rejection of acrimony aimed at Jews, and because Judaism is a religion, the ads are religious advertising.’
 
However, JEC reminded me that not all Jews consider themselves as adherents to Judaism, i.e., Jewish religion.  For some, being Jewish is about cultural/and or ethnic identification, not necessarily religious beliefs and practice.  So, although antisemitism may involve religious bigotry, it’s more broadly discrimination against specific people who are identifiable outside of their theological beliefs.
 
JEC’s analyses of the campaigns were also a good reminder that people, including me, see ads through the lens of their own worldviews and experiences, which can lead to very different interpretations of the commercial content.  Those potential discrepancies are why it behooves those creating ads to step outside themselves and truly try to understand others’ perceptions.
 
The three interviewees provided some excellent analysis of the two specific campaigns, but what about the general idea of religion using paid-for mass communication?  Is it right for religious organizations to advertise?
 
Considering this question, JSPM and JEC both pointed to the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.  Outside of hate speech and a few specific requirements like truthfulness, individuals and organizations of all kinds do have great liberty to publicly disseminate information and to attempt to persuade people to believe and act in certain ways.
 
Still, the messages of religion-related ads cut deeper than most, which means religious organizations should strive to:
  • Promote in proper situations:  Ensure that ads appear at appropriate times and in appropriate places.
  • Be inclusive:  Use language that’s welcoming rather than exclusionary.
  • Seek common ground:  Emphasize points of agreement.
  • Avoid offending:  Don’t disparage others’ beliefs.
  • Be compassionate:  Understand the difficult challenges that many people face each day.
 
Not surprisingly, these are many of the same principles that the three contributors to this piece have identified and implied.  Furthermore, following these principles doesn’t mean abandoning the tenets of one’s faith; rather the principles suggest not leading with antagonism.
 
It’s also helpful to recognize that most religious organizations’ advertising does routinely uphold these principles.  These organizations are not necessarily using national television campaigns like the ones discussed above but rather promotional tactics like these:
  • A synagogue buys newspaper space to advertise an annual flea market fundraiser.
  • A church runs radio spots to promote its Christmas-themed musical.
  • A new mosque uses outdoor signage to announce its opening.
 
This kind of religious advertising commonly accomplishes the organizations’ objectives and upholds values that virtually everyone understands, like decency, fairness, honesty, respect, and responsibility.
 
There are examples of good and evil mass communication in every sector.  Religious advertising isn’t always pious, but when done in the right ways, it radiates “Mindful Marketing.”
​
Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
2 Comments

AI Ethics Need Time

4/8/2023

4 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

At the same time Major League Baseball (MLB) has made a revolutionary rule change to speed up America’s pastime, some renown business leaders have called a timeout to slow down the planet’s hottest new technology.  In a world that places a high priority on time, is it fair to ask organizations to hit pause on artificial intelligence (AI)?
 
With many believing that notoriously long baseball games have outlasted the attention spans of fans now conditioned for shorter bursts of entertainment, MLB made the game-changing addition of a pitch clock, which already seems to be serving its purpose of expediting play.
 
However, sports don’t always imitate life.  Concerned about the meteoric rise of AI and its potential abuses, over 18,000 people have signed the Future Life Institute’s open letter that asks all AI labs to “immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.”  Among the notable signatories are tech leaders Elon Musk and Steve Wozniak and 2020 presidential candidate Andrew Yang.
 
Most of us have heard of at least some ethical infractions attributed to AI that range from the art tool Midjourney slyly outfitting Pope Francis in a longline white puffer coat to complaints that an uncensored chatbot continually offends human decency.
 
In light of such concerns, some marketing professionals have joined ranks with their tech colleagues and said that the proposed pause on AI development is, akin to Keebler cookies, “an uncommonly good idea.”  On an even larger scale, Italy recently became the first western nation to ban ChatGPT.
 
However, not everyone agrees that an AI pause is necessary.  While major brands like Coke, Duolingo, and Expedia are increasingly leveraging the power of ChatGPT for their digital marketing, Microsoft has gone much further, making multimillion dollar investments in Open AI, the app’s owner.
 
Also questioning the prudence of the open letter and proposed AI pause are “some prominent AI ethicists” and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, who has said, “I don’t really understand who they’re saying could stop, and would every country in the world agree to stop, and why to stop.”
 
Gates’ issue with the AI pause doesn’t seem to be so much that he believes it’s a bad idea in principle as he fears its unilateral implementation, i.e., many around the world won’t honor the halt.  As Microsoft’s largest single stockholder, Gates understandably doesn’t want the company to fall behind in the AI race. 
 
Gates elaborated on his AI perspective saying, “Clearly there’s huge benefits to these things… what we need to do is identify the tricky areas.”
 

Picture
 
Coming from someone who is a prolific reader and arguably one of humanity’s greatest intellects, “tricky” is a very interesting choice of words.
 
Gates probably didn’t mean “tricky” in the sense of sly or deceptive, but rather he chose the adjective to convey that AI issues are complex, delicate, and intricate.  Either way, the word is very informative for the approach to ethics that should be taken with AI.
 
When a bomb squad comes upon an unrecognized incendiary device that it needs to deactivate, and one of its members says, “This is going to be tricky,” it’s probably not code to pick up the pace and rush headlong into the defusing process.  Instead, “tricky” would likely signal to everyone on the team that they should slow down and think, “How exactly do we want to go about this?”
 
Based on the educated opinions of tech experts who know much more about the potential risks and rewards of AI than do most of us, the transcendent and ever-evolving technology is potentially explosive, or “uncommonly” “tricky.”  Some of the potential pitfalls include information accuracy, privacy, intellectual property, offensive content, attribution, and impact on humans' livelihoods.
 
When it comes to tricky ethical issues, it’s not only okay to pump the brakes, hit pause, and take a beat – it’s desirable.  Moral choices shouldn’t be rushed; rather, they often benefit from more time to allow for:
  • Consideration of other opinions: Any given person’s, organization’s, or industry’s perspective is naturally limited and usually biased to some extent.  It’s very helpful, therefore, to engage other stakeholders who can offer divergent views, or at least ask good questions.
  • Better projection of likely outcomes: A danger of rushing through a product trial is that some consequences only become known over time, after they happen.  Such a long-term delay of launching may not be practical, but additional conceptual testing is usually possible and is likely to identify other probable occurrences.
  • Deeper reflection on pertinent principles:  Identifying what specific moral issues are at play in a given situation requires very intentional analysis.  Determining what particular courses of action are decent, fair, honest, etc. requires even greater contemplation.
 
Unfortunately, a MLB pitcher facing a full count on a prolific home run hitter can no longer take extra time to gather himself before throwing the next pitch.  However, even though the game of high tech is moving at a very rapid pace, there is no pitch clock on AI ethics.
 
Gates is right that not everyone in the world will hit pause on AI development at the same time, which is concerning.  But why, then, not apply the same logic to an issue like greenhouse gases?  Certainly not every organization or nation is working to reduce their CO2 emissions; yet, Gates is, thankfully, a vocal advocate and large financial supporter of mitigation efforts.
 
In ethics, it’s not only tenuous to try to think too fast, it’s also ill-advised to reason: “Others won’t take a stand, so why should I?”  Pumping the brakes on new technology is not always needed, but given AI’s life-altering potential, some extra time to talk and reflect equals “Mindful Marketing.”


Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
4 Comments

Turning Trash into Treasure

1/1/2023

9 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

A few weeks ago, I walked into Lowe’s with an old piece of wood to have its dark green and ivory paints color matched.  After the paint department associate carefully inspected the top of the 6” x 12” sample to find the best matching areas, she flipped the piece and glanced at the unpainted side.  Her eyes widened as she read the bold stenciled text:  HIGH EXPLOSIVES – DANGEROUS.
 
I could tell she wanted an explanation, which I was happy to give:  The story behind the formidably labeled wood has personal meaning and is also a classic example of what has increasingly become a very positively impactful business model – upcycling.
 
Sometime around 1940, my grandparents gave my mother, their only child, a very special Christmas gift:  a Lionel locomotive, a tender car, and three pullman cars.  Barely beyond the Great Depression, the O-gauge model train was likely a very significant purchase for a coal miner and homemaker.  However, the gift involved much more than the train.
 
My grandfather, who had good carpentry skills, meticulously constructed a miniature neighborhood for the train that consisted of several small outbuildings and two larger houses.  He lettered one roof with “A Merry Christmas” and the other with “A Happy New Year.”
 
Each home had a front porch with posts, a door, and several windows, for which he made coverings from different colored tissue paper.  He placed a small light fixture inside the homes so that when plugged in, a warm glow shone through their windows.
 
He painted every building dark green and trimmed them with ivory, as he did the large 4’ x 8’ plywood base on which everything rested.  That’s the reason I was in Lowe’s – to buy paint to touch up the platform and some of the 80-year-old buildings that I was working to restore.
 
My grandparents were not people of means, and building materials were likely in short supply at the time, so my grandfather used materials that were available to make the holiday train display.  Inside one of the houses was cardboard from a very old sugar box (Franklin Sugar Refining Company, Philadelphia, PA) that he used to line the windows’ edges so the tissue paper wouldn’t easily tear.
 
The wood for the buildings came from crates that he carried home from his work in the coal mines.  The reason for the "DANGEROUS" labeling is that the cartons originally contained what was commonly used for coal mine blasting – dynamite – manufactured by the no longer-existent Hercules Powder Company.
 
​
Picture
 
It’s amazing to think how my grandfather repurposed the discarded packing from one of the world’s most destructive forces to create something beautiful that continues to bring others happiness 80 years later.
 
His labor of love, turning blasting powder crates into holiday buildings, is one of the best examples of upcycling I’ve seen.  In an age of cheap material inputs and mass production, the possibility of upcycling receives little thought from most.  Fortunately, though, some organizations are taking it seriously.
 
What exactly is upcycling and why does it matter?
 
Merriam Webster defines upcycling as recycling something “in such a way that the resulting product is of a higher value than the original item,” thereby creating “an object of greater value from a discarded object of lesser value.”
 
The main benefit of upcycling, or “creative reuse,” is intuitive: Items that may have otherwise ended up in a landfill, gain new useful life, thus both reducing waste and the need to expend the resources to produce as many new products.
 
Through its eco-friendly approach, upcycling can help mitigate sobering statistics like these:
  • “Americans generate an average of nearly five pounds of trash per person per day, totaling 292.4 million tons—half of which ends up in landfills.”
  • “Apparel was responsible for some 2.1 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2018—about as much as France, Germany, and the United Kingdom combined.”
  • “The average U.S. consumer throws away 81.5 lbs. of clothes a year.”
  • “In America alone, an estimated 11.3 million tons of textile waste – equivalent to 85% of all textiles – end up in landfills on a yearly basis.”
 
Given its inordinate contribution to global waste, it’s fitting that many fashion industry firms have become leaders in upcycling, which British Vogue has called “the biggest trend in fashion.”  A few of the brands spearheading the movement are Outerknown, Re/Done, Zero Waste Daniel, Urban Outfitters, Beyond Retro, and Fanfare.
 
Support for upcycling’s effectiveness in reducing waste also comes from empirical research.  Experiments in one study found that between 50% and 80% of used garments could be upcycled into new ones.
 
While the fashion industry may be leading the charge, it’s far from the only sector driving the upcycling movement.  A few other company examples include:
  • Sword & Plough creates wallets, bags, and jewelry from surplus military materials.
  • Hipcycle designs jewelry and home décor, among other products, from upcycled items. 
  • Preserve makes kitchenware and toothbrushes from recycled goods.
  • Upp! UpCycling Plastic uses plastic waste to make new recyclable plastic products.
  • Looptworks creates limited edition travel-oriented apparel and bags from materials rescued from other vendors.
 
As people anticipate a new year, the saying, ‘Out with the old, in with the new’ is sometimes spoken.  Change is often good, but constant new products can come with high economic and environmental costs.
 
Companies that upcycle help control those costs for themselves and others.  Their good stewardship could coin a new saying: ‘Remake the old, relish the better.’
 
Picture
  
The term upcycling didn’t exist when my grandfather turned dynamite boxes into holiday houses for a model train set; however, companies today that follow his example can also create happiness for years to come as they practice “Mindful Marketing.”
​
Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
9 Comments

Ensuring Ethical Advertising

12/18/2022

3 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

We’ve all said things we later regretted.  Fortunately, a personal apology can often atone for such individual indiscretions.  Advertising gaffes, which may reach millions, are much more damaging and difficult to roll back, so why do some of the world’s most creative companies and brightest people continue to make promotional faux pas, and what can be done to avoid them?
 
When people think of advertising, they often envision iconic Super Bowl commercials like Budweiser’s Clydesdales playing football, model Cindy Crawford sipping a Pepsi, or basket legends Michael Jordan and Larry Bird competing at H-O-R-S-E for a McDonald’s meal.  They probably don’t picture “children holding teddy bears in bondage gear.” Unfortunately, that’s the image that many people now associate with the luxury brand Balenciaga.
 
The century-old Spanish fashion house recently made headlines for the wrong reasons when it released a series of ads that not only featured kids posed with adult-themed props but also included photos in which appeared “paperwork about child pornography laws.”
 
Severe backlash against the brand has included stinging social media posts and celebrity condemnations. Balenciaga, however, is no stranger to controversy.  Among its other contentious tactics have been “selling destroyed sneakers for $1,850” and “sending models who looked like refugees down the runway carrying trash bags made of expensive leather.”
 
The company has apologized for its latest gaffes, with representatives saying that they take “full accountability for our lack of oversight,” as well as that they are “closely revising our organisation and collective ways of working.”  Balenciaga’s creative director Demna also offered a mea culpa, saying that it was "inappropriate to have kids promote objects that had nothing to do with them."
 
It would be convenient if Balenciaga could be considered some kind of an advertising anomaly, but unfortunately, over the years, other companies have made their own promotional blunders, some arguably as bad or worse than that of the high fashion firm, for instance:
  • Dove created a campaign in which Black women pulled their t-shirts off over their heads, transforming into white women. 
  • Reebok put up posters that read “Cheat on your girlfriend, not on your workout.”
  • In a commercial called “Pipe Job,” Hyundai used a man’s failed suicide to show that its vehicle produced no harmful emissions 
  • A line-up of uniformly thin young female models served as the central visual for Victoria Secret’s “Perfect Body” ad.
 
It’s easy to scoff at these ads and think, “How could those companies be so rash to release such obviously offensive advertising?”  “Couldn’t anyone see the probable PR crises and pump the brakes?”
 
Of course, hindsight is 20/20, and it’s easier to criticize than it is to create.  It’s also hard to know the circumstances surrounding the decisions.  Still, here are two misguided motives that probably contribute to what seems like a never-ending series of advertising missteps:


1) Coveting Awards:  The goal of any advertising should be meaningful ROI for the client, e.g., brand building, website views, sales.  However, those practical objectives can fall prey to creative staffs’ desires to win advertising awards like Clios and Webbys.  

Picture

To achieve such recognition, some advertisers feel needs to test social norms and push moral envelopes.  Meanwhile, consumers sometimes see uber-creative ads but when asked what they’re for, they respond, “I have no idea.”

2) Creating Buzz: Relatively few advertisers compete for major industry awards, but millions would love their organization to be the focus of the next viral video.  Unfortunately, the very unique content that people love to share with friends on social media is often not what translates directly, or at all, to bottom-line advertising results.  

Worse, things like sexually explicit images may stimulate thousands of shares, but they also have negative impacts on social issues such as body image and gender stereotypes and ultimately backfire on the firms’ brand images.
 
Those are two of the most likely reasons why morally questionable advertising occurs, but what can be done to avoid it?  Here are four strategies that can help:
 
1. Create a culture of questioning:  People at all organizational levels need to feel they have the freedom to ask things like, “Could some people find  this offensive”? or “Is there approach that would be equally effective but less risky?”  If employees worry they’ll be shunned or punished for raising  a red flag, those kinds of questions will seldom arise.
 
Crafting such an open culture is much easier said than done, but a few necessary prerequisites are top management support, rewarding people for asking hard questions, and continually reminding associates of the desire for moral accountability.
 
2. Identify corporate values:  One of the best reminders of where a company stands ethically is a clearly articulated set of moral standards.  Some companies suggest such principles in their mission statements.  Other firms go a step further and outline a list of corporate values, such as these that form the foundation for Mindful Marketing:
  • Decency:  avoiding behavior that people tend to regard as crude, heartless, immodest, obscene, profane, or vulgar
  • Fairness:  treating others equally based on their personhood and equitably based on their individual contributions
  • Honesty: not lying or distorting truth
  • Respect: holding others in high regard
  • Responsibility: fulfilling duties to others, especially those that society tends to marginalize
 
3. Avoid time pressure:  Given that most of us don’t do our best work when rushed, a hastily created ad campaign will likely suffer the same results.  It’s helpful when there’s time to put new work aside and return to it several hours, days, or weeks later with fresh eyes that can then more clearly see any shortcomings.
 
Similarly, it’s much better to identify serious deficiencies, moral or other, early in the process.  People increasingly resist change as more effort and expense are invested.  It’s best to nib potential ethical offenses in the bud.
 
4. Ask for assistance: After we’ve been exposed to something for a period of time, it becomes harder to see it objectively.  In fact, we may even forget about the thing, like a painting on the wall of our home, until a visitor’s comment reminds us it's there.
 
For any significant work, it’s very helpful to ask others to review it.  Inevitably, they’ll see things we missed.  For an ad, that should mean at a minimum of others outside the department or division, and perhaps someone outside the organization.  Companies ask consultants to advise them on all kinds of business strategies.  Given the havoc that an ill-conceived ad campaign can wreak, they also should ask outside experts for ethical input.
 
Balenciaga wasn’t the first and, unfortunately, won’t be the last advertiser to overstep moral boundaries.  However, steps like those above can guide firms around ethical infractions.  Making morality an advertising priority alongside creativity is “Mindful Marketing.”
​
Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
3 Comments

Financial Stardumb?  Celebrities Endorsing Investments

12/4/2022

24 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

Famous people have promoted products for centuries, encouraging others to buy everything from cereal to cigarettes.  Cryptocurrencies recently tapped celebrity associations with great success, but a notable bankruptcy and the industry’s slide have led to serious financial fallout for many investors.  Such unfortunate events beg the question:  Should celebrities ever play the roles of investment advisors?
 
Babe Ruth promoted tobacco products.  Doris Day endorsed a steamroller. George Foreman may be better known for his namesake grills than for his storied boxing career.  Over the past couple of years, many celebrities inked endorsement deals in the new and fast-growing realm of cryptocurrency.  Those who have attached their names to the digital dinero include:
  • UFC superstar Connor McGregor with Tiger.Trade
  • Tennis great Maria Sharapova with MoonPay
  • Rapper Snoop Dog with a variety of crypto exchanges
  • Actor Matt Damon with Crypto.com
 
However, probably the most infamous crypto partnerships have been between the now bankrupt Bahamas-based cryptocurrency exchange FTX and a lineup of all-star athletes and A-List celebrities, including: Tom Brady, Gisele Bündchen, Stephen Curry, Kevin O’Leary, and Naomi Osaka.
 
Even when products have little connection to celebrities’ specific talents, star-studded endorsements are often very effective for a few reasons: 
  • Celebrities grab attention.  If you’ve ever seen a celebrity in an airport or walking down a city street, you probably watched them for at least for a moment.
  • Individuals are very interested in the lives of famous people and those who know them.  That’s why there are crowds of royal watchers and television shows like Basketball Wives.
  • People often want to pattern their lives after those of celebrities.  Gatorade famously capitalized on that inclination a few decades ago with its “Be Like Mike” ad campaign, and most other celebrity-based promotion includes a similar inference – if you buy this product, you’ll be at least a little like the star who’s selling it.
 
Picture

While I know a little about advertising endorsements, investing and cryptocurrency are not my wheelhouse, which led me to reach out to two colleagues who have both that skill set and knowledge.  I asked each to share his thoughts about celebrities endorsing financial products.
 
Jansen Hein, is the chief financial officer and chief operating officer at Illinois State Board of Investment (ISBI) where he actively manages all portfolio operations, business operations, and finance/accounting related functions and processes for ISBI, a $24B+ state pension asset investment agency.  Before joining ISBI, he served as a certified public accountant and consultant for more than eight years with Ernst & Young.
 
Dwayne Safer is a finance professor at Messiah University where he teaches courses in Financial Management, Corporate Finance, Security Analysis and Evaluation, Financial Institutions Management, and Investments.  He holds the designations of CFA, CFP, and CAIA.  Before entering higher education, he was a senior vice president of corporate strategy & development for Citizen’s Financial Group and a director of investment banking at Stifel Financial Corp.
 
As their brief bios suggest, both men have extensive financial backgrounds that make them well-qualified to discuss what constitutes reliable investment advice, as well as who should offer it.  Given those credentials, I was somewhat surprised that in their initial responses, neither expressed absolute objection to celebrities endorsing financial products:
 
Hein:  “An ethically run business could see benefit from getting their message/product out through the use of celebrity endorsements, and I have no issue with that.”
 
Safer: “I don’t have a problem with celebrity endorsers of financial products and companies; however, the public oftentimes has difficulty separating the popularity and likability of the celebrity personality from their lack of expertise and knowledge in the company or product they’re endorsing.”
 
While both of these experts are open to the possibility of celebrities endorsing financial products, the preceding qualified responses foreshadow their more fully articulated beliefs, which detail significant criteria to meet in order for such sponsorships to be good for consumers.  Together they construct three main hurdles that effective and ethical financial product purveyors must clear:
 
1) Transparency
To illustrate what celebrity spokespeople shouldn’t do, Safer references the recent case in which the SEC fined Kim Kardashian $1.26 million for her failure to disclose that EthereumMax paid her $250,000 to promote EMAX tokens on her Instagram account.  He contrasts her incomplete communication with that of Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy, who was upfront that he received an ownership stake in the ETF BUZZ in return for promoting it in his tweets.
 
Safer similarly contends that organizations must be transparent in terms of whether they are investing individuals’ money, like mutual funds, ETF’s, and hedge funds do, versus simply serving as custodians of those funds, like brokerage firms and banks often do.  As an example, he points to FTX, whose clients thought the exchange was only acting as a custodian of their money, when in reality it was investing it in a crypto hedge fund of a sister company, Alameda.
 
2) Trust
That kind of transparency is key to earning investors’ trust, as Hein shares: “To me, decisions regarding financial services providers must come down to personal trust. Regardless of the product/provider.”  He adds that although he is not personally inclined to extend such trust for financial decisions to celebrities, he recognizes that some consumers are, in which case they must understand and accept the risks, while the celebrities and the businesses that employ them are culpable for any deception, intentional or not.
 
Hein believes that trust of service providers is especially important in the case of investing because laws often lag behind industry practices, legal enforcement is sometimes lax, and many organizations simply choose not to self-regulate.  He also emphasizes how the unique nature of investment risk necessitates more than typical trust:
 
“We are not talking about buying a $100 product, with limited downside, but about investing in ways that may materially impact a consumer's current and future stability. The scrutiny of consumers should be different for any financial services marketing than for other products.” 
 
Safer also underscores consumers’ responsibility for determining who to trust, referencing FTX and suggesting that the exchange’s use of a large number of high-profile “finfluencers,” e.g., Kevin O’Leary and Larry David, appeared to be “a ploy to engender the trust of the public so that they would invest in the growing crypto craze through FTX without doing basic diligence on the company.”
 
3) Technical Competence
Deciding who to trust is an age-old social challenge that extends far beyond investment relationships.  The character of the other person is certainly one of the main trust criteria.  Another is their competence, i.e., Are they able to do what their role in the relationship requires?
 
In the case of celebrities promoting investments, their financial competence is a very legitimate question.  It’s not surprising that both Hein and Safer, whose extensive experience and education have provided them with such expertise, wonder whether most celebrities know what’s needed to competently endorse financial products.  The two agree that, unfortunately, celebrities’ popularity often appears to be more persuasive to consumers than any financial proficiency they may possess:
 
Hein says, “Consumers must accept that their willingness to be persuaded to make financial transactions based on a celebrity endorsement may have little/no meaningful merit on the quality of the product or service. Is Steph Curry a financial professional? Is Kim Kardashian an investment professional? I am not saying that these two individuals are foolish or unwise (both are extremely successful at their crafts/professions).”
 
He continues, “What I am suggesting is that it is very possible that either (1) they are making these endorsement determinations themselves and we must acknowledge their limitations in doing so or (2) they themselves are relying on the advice of other financial professionals regarding the products/companies they choose to endorse — individuals we as general consumers do not know or necessarily trust.”
 
As shared above, Safer says he has no problem with celebrities endorsing investments, but he is concerned that “the public oftentimes has difficulty separating the popularity and likability of the celebrity personality from their lack of expertise and knowledge in the company or product they’re endorsing.”
 
He expands that belief with a more specific example: “I may think Tom Brady is the best QB of all time, but I’m pretty sure he knows very little about crypto and how crypto assets should have been custodied at FTX.  In fact, he’s likely just collecting a big check from FTX and not caring about the details.” 
 
Should celebrities endorse financial products?  Neither Hein nor Safer offer an unequivocal, “No,” but together they use the tools of transparency, trust, and technical skills to paint an exacting picture of investment advice done right that’s undoubtedly very challenging for most famous spokespeople and their firms to replicate.
 
However, in the rare cases in which such a portrait can be perfected, celebrity investment endorsers can play a supporting role to “Mindful Marketing.”
​
Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
24 Comments

When Organizations Give Thanks

11/20/2022

17 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch - professor of marketing at Messiah University -
​author of 
Honorable Influence - founder of Mindful Marketing 

At Thanksgiving, individuals often express gratitude for what they’re personally appreciative, e.g., family, friends, health.  It’s less common to hear of organizations’ gratitude, but if they were to count their blessings, what would they be?  Answers to that question could provide each of us with valuable perspective and perhaps help recalibrate our own thoughts of thankfulness.
 
These have been tough times for organizations in most industries.  Factors such as inflation, natural disasters, health/safety concerns, and supply chain setbacks have made it very difficult to succeed, and in some cases to survive, let alone to give thanks, for instance:
  • A chip shortage has plagued tech firms and many other manufacturers. 
  • Shipping companies have had to navigate record-high fuel prices.  
  • In the first half of 2022, natural disasters led to insurance losses of $39 billion – 18% higher than average. 
  • The slowdown in the housing market, an industry that impacts many others, shows no signs of subsiding.
 
This isn’t the kind of news most companies care to celebrate, nor should they.  Yet, even under dark clouds, strong organizations see silver linings and reasons to be thankful.  Although organizations can’t speak, their leaders have unique vantage points from which they can identify and express genuine collective gratitude.
 
I recently reached out to colleagues/friends in several industries who lead for-profit and nonprofit organizations, asking each to share something for which their organization is thankful.  Their following five responses have enlightened and encouraged this marketer and hopefully will do the same for anyone who looks to see the good in business and other enterprise.
 
1) Messiah University: I begin with my own organization and employer whose president, Dr. Kim Phipps, reflects, “At Messiah University, we are grateful for increased enrollment, financial stability and a cohort of new innovative partnerships that broaden our institutional scope and impact.”
 
Picture

No organization exists without demand for its products and services.  For more than a decade, demand for higher education has declined throughout much of the nation, mainly because of demographic trends.  I know many at Messiah echo President Phipps’ deep appreciation for our students as well as other institutional partners who embrace the University’s mission and invite opportunities to extend it.

2) West Shore Chamber of Commerce: The leader of the second organization, another nonprofit, expresses similar gratitude for continued demand for its services.  As the president of West Shore Chamber of Commerce (WSCC), based near Harrisburg, PA, George Book, Jr. articulates his organization’s appreciation:
 
“At the West Shore Chamber of Commerce, we are thankful for our members, first and foremost.  We are also thankful for the communities we serve.  We have the privilege of being located in South Central PA, which is a very diverse economic region that allows us to reach and help many different types of businesses.  I am thankful for the grit and determination of our business leaders to keep our region strong and work together to positively impact our businesses and communities.”
 
Picture
 
Few organizations were hit as hard by the pandemic as WSCC since the services of most chambers of commerce rely heavily on in person events, which COVID 19 largely cancelled.  So, when Book speaks of the dedication and resilience of his Chamber’s members and their communities, he speaks from heartfelt experience and is understandably eager for opportunities that lie ahead.
 
3) Pierson Computing Connection, Inc.: The first for-profit company of the set is thankful for a different but equally important stakeholder group.  Deb Pierson serves as president and CEO of Pierson Computing Connection, which she founded in 1993.  She says, “We are primarily grateful for our people.  We have a great team that values deep relationships and embraces our core values.  Without our people, Pierson wouldn’t be growing and thriving.”
 
Picture
  
Some may find it ironic that the leader of a company that supplies technological solutions places greatest importance on its people.  However, Pierson rightly recognizes that it takes dedicated and gifted people to manage software, install hardware, and train others who will use them.  Great technology doesn’t matter much without great employees who are highly skilled in its use.
 
4) LINKBANK: When people of a certain age think of banks, they likely envision people – tellers, loan officers, etc.  When Brent Smith, president of LINKBANK, considers his bank’s people, he sees much more than the roles they fill:
 
“We are grateful at LINKBANK to have deeply committed staff members who are passionate about our clients, communities, and each other.  We are also very appreciative of all the employees’ families and the ongoing support they give, allowing each of us to pursue our passions in the workplace.”
 
Picture
 
Good leaders know that their staff members are also spouses, mothers, fathers, daughters, etc., with responsibilities outside the workplace.  Leaders like Smith also are very grateful for the support that these family members graciously give and, in that way, also help to fulfill their firms’ purposes.
 
5) Ten Thousand Villages:  Finding people who will work for pay and effectively support a nonprofit organization’s mission can be difficult.  Identifying dedicated volunteers who will do so can be extremely challenging.  The realization of both of these goals has led Dan Alonso, the CEO of Ten Thousand Villages to share:
 
“We are thankful for the passionate people who are part of the greater Ten Thousand Villages family/network and who go above and beyond to support our mission, often with no direct connection to the organization itself.  We also have a core of devoted staff members who want to make a difference and who continue to do so on a daily basis, despite the challenges of being the rare combination of a mission-based nonprofit and a successful retail organization.”
 
Picture
 
As is the case for many nonprofit organizations aiming to fulfill their unique missions, creating fair trade market opportunities for artisans around the world requires a special combination of devoted staff members and faithful volunteers.
 
A university, a chamber of commerce, an IT company, a bank, and a fair-trade retailer:  One might guess that they would be thankful for very different things, but ultimately the gratitude of each reflects the same priority – people.
 
Although it should happen each day of the year, in this season of Thanksgiving it is particularly fitting for every marketer and other organizational member to renew their appreciation for the individuals who purchase their products, provide their services, and in other ways partner to help fulfill their missions.
 
Thankfulness can be a recalibrating factor and a grounding force for each of us.  It’s also an important prerequisite for “Mindful Marketing.”
Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
17 Comments
<<Previous
    Subscribe to receive this blog by email

    Editor

    David Hagenbuch,
    founder of
    Mindful Marketing    & author of Honorable Influence

    Archives

    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014

    Categories

    All
    + Decency
    + Fairness
    Honesty7883a9b09e
    * Mindful
    Mindless33703c5669
    > Place
    Price5d70aa2269
    > Product
    Promotion37eb4ea826
    Respect170bbeec51
    Simple Minded
    Single Minded2c3169a786
    + Stewardship

    RSS Feed

    Share this blog:

    Subscribe to
    Mindful Matters
    blog by email


    Illuminating
    ​Marketing Ethics ​

    Encouraging
    ​Ethical Marketing  ​


    Copyright 2020
    David Hagenbuch

Proudly powered by Weebly