When terms get used and abused to the extent they lose some meaning, it forces me to reevaluate how I define the word. For example, SUSTAINABLE. Over the last couple months I’ve seen marketers throw around this word in ways I don’t feel are appropriate.
To think sustainable, I think you have to start with a point of view, a goal that is not related to the transaction, but to conversation. Rage Against the Haze was successful during unfunded times due to empowered, educated teens who really believed in their voice. We knew that RAGE funding was not guaranteed; we would be lucky to have funds for two years in a row. We used to say our goal was that if Brains on Fire got hit by a bus, RAGE would continue on tomorrow.
IMO many marketers shout sustainability but they really are still talking tactics. The beauty about true, deep insight is it begins relationships internally and externally. These conversations lead to conversations out of the original circle, which is a nice side effect. Compare this to the problems we see happening out there right now. People are using influencer models¹ that continue no conversation online or offline. It’s just people clicking buttons on a survey.
Continue reading " Thinking About Sustainable WOM — Revisited! "
