Loyalty programs have long used aspiration as a driver to spur member action. Points programs promise magnificent rewards for taking action today and staying true to one brand. Digital channels have been created to make earning and redemption easier. Distribution costs have been driven down leading to richer offers. The practice has become so widespread, even the fictional Shoe Circus! has a platinum elite tier. Anticipation has largely been relegated to future rewards. But is there another type of anticipation better aligned with digital strategies currently being overlooked?

The Web 2.0 movement has created a new means of communicating with customers. The magical recipe, repeated ad nauseum, is create conversation and drive engagement. While there exist a wealth of solutions (social networking, micro/blogging, widgets, bookmarking, video, syndication), there have been few answers. The simple fact that a tool exists provides no guarantee of its effectiveness. Truly, the struggle for most marketing departments today has been execution. Creating a Facebook account or Blog is relatively simple. Getting members there (a necessity if the goal is to create conversation and engagement) remains largely a mystery.

Ogilvy's Jan Leth has created one process - Dada, Data, Alpha, Beta.

• Dada - Reinvent, mashup, collaborate, and think laterally.
• Data - Create value through relevance.
• Alpha - Engage the alpha dogs and those that will act as evangelists.
• Beta - Listen, learn, and respond for the duration of the campaign.
  

These are all great points and provide an effective and understandable roadmap to solid execution. Yet, it still does not point to any means to create conversation and create engagement.

Helge Tenno points to new research in the field of Neuroscience. This research indicates that anticipation may be more critical than previously thought. Combined with Jan's digital strategy, a focus on creating anticipation through Dada, Data, Alpha, Beta may begin to bridge the gap between execution and action.

Google, one of the most successful digital companies to date, is a master of anticipation. The constant addition of services and applications through Google creates loyalty without rich incentives. The incentive is innovation. Anticipation of what's next keeps users engaged and communicating. Google has painted itself as a company that consistently pushes the envelope. As a reward, they have attracted the alpha dogs and evangelists that help them build their services even further.

Perhaps a beta platform that delivers small bits of innovation over time can build loyalty as effective as incentives that promise aspiration. While incentives offer large payoffs after years of service, innovation offers small payoffs on a regular basis.

Regardless of whether users are being offered incentives or innovation, anticipation can be seen to drive loyalty. When SPG rolled out its new redemption opportunity for flights, one FlyerTalk member pointed out:

I applaud SPG on the new flights program. It's yet another option which is always good. Kudos to them for engaging FlyerTalkers too. I'm guessing the average FlyerTalker is too savvy to use their Starpoints on SPG Flights when better value can be had on free nights, but SPG made the program for everyone not just us.

I'm guessing this is just the start of more innovations at SPG...

Google unveils Chrome,a new web browser, available for download today. Chrome is the latest addition to an already competitive landscape with Microsoft’s Internet Explorer and Mozilla’s Firefox. Whether Chrome can take market share from Microsoft or Mozilla remains to be seen. Regardless, the release points to a changing and blurring landscape for computing, entertainment, and marketing.

The Chrome release is highlighted by information presented in a comic book format (image at right from page 37). The information presented in this release highlights exactly why marketers need to be concerned about this new browser. A couple points that stand out in particular:

• The Web is moving from an information resource to an application resource:  users are performing tasks and not searches.
• Browsers are selected by users based on total cost of ownership (easiest to maintain):  those who maintain personal computers install browsers based on what causes the least damage to the system by unwitting users resulting in less maintenance over time.
• The Chrome browser is built on the same technology that will be powering the Android browser on mobile devices: potential for seamless integration that is not only manufacturer independent, OS independent, but also device independent.
• Privacy mode (also included in upcoming IE 8) will limit cookies, histories, and tracking: not just created for browsing of “those” sites, but prevents user profiles from being created for users frustrated with targeted push marketing (even beyond pop up ads).
• Integration with Google Gears provides a platform for better applications to be built by developers: users will come to expect more from all digital interactions at all touchpoints so long as it provides value.

Google’s success thus far is due in no small part to their continuous innovation. They are well regarded for listening to users and responding with impactful technology. While today’s marketers are still grasping at how the brand message is driven by users, the launch of Chrome introduces a new challenge to marketers– responding to what users want to do, not just hear.

There already exists a blurring of the boundaries between real and virtual worlds. Add fiction to the mix and it gets very confusing, very quick.

Many are already aware of the AMC show 'Mad Men.' It has been heavily followed by many in the advertising world. Imagined characters in an imagined agency with relatively realistic parallels to today's world. Everything that makes compelling fiction.

So much so in fact, advertising individuals have begun to adopt 'Mad Men' personas to carry on conversations. The first appearance was the 'Mad Men' character names appearing on Twitter in. The conversations were real people (not the actors) that had adopted the character names and personas to both expand the show from television to the internet and add a little entertainment to everyday marketing conversations.

How? Here's a sample of the conversation. It all started with a new online marketing tool aimed at comparing websites or press releases against competitors.

A representative from the company (grader) writes: My super-secret project, Twitter Grader is now in alpha. Follow @grader if you're curious -- but please, not all at once. Be gentle.

ellieeille writes: Can we @grader with suggestions?

grader responds: @ellieeille Yes, please send any feedback to @grader. That works fine. Will add a feedback form on the app tonight.

jstorerj joins the conversation: there might be a bit too much recency built into the @grader model. i went from an 89 to 92 over one particularly active night.

BryanPerson responds: @jstorerj Maybe you were just paying a little more attention in class than you usually do? Ha!

ScottMonty observes: @BryanPerson That's a good score on TwitterGrader - I got the same one.

So far so good. At this point, the conversation moves to other sources (websites, forums) and takes a turn.

David_Ogilvy joins in: @ScottMonty: http://tinyurl.com/39fbkq Here's your answer.

David_Ogilvy adds another thought: Job offers should really be direct messages... @don_draper is already considering replacing me with younger talent

Don_Draper responds: @David_Ogilvy - It's an honor. I'm quite happy at Sterling Cooper, but would be willing to grab lunch and hear what you have to say.

From here, the conversation blends between talk about real world agency work, fictional clients on the show 'Mad Men' and hypothetical planning around fictional products. All from a simple post about a new marketing research tool.

Clearly, engaged members are loyal members of any brand. The trouble in the digital world is what drives engagement. This example presents an interesting case where individuals not only want to interact with a brand but immerse themselves in the brand. The same is being seen in the music industry where the largest sales have not come from listening to music but playing or singing along through rhythm based games. Rock Band 2 will be released with a slate of full albums extending both the game experience and the music experience.

These are not isolated instances but becoming the norm. Today's customers want more than products and services. They are looking for experiences. Loyalty is driven not by tangible goods but by the entire experience.

AMC, like many companies today, were concerned over their ownership of the product - 'Mad Men' in this case. AMC sent takedown notices for the accounts as it infringed on copyright.

After receiving many complaints, the accounts and pages were reinstated. The site WeAreSterlingCooper presents the case as well as I have seen thus far:

Fan fiction. Brand hijacking. Copyright misuse. Sheer devotion. Call it what you will, but we call it the blurred line between content creators and content consumers, and it's not going away. We're your biggest fans, your die-hard proponents, and when your show gets cancelled we'll be among the first to pass around the petition. Talk to us. Befriend us. Engage us. But please, don't treat us like criminals.

This site exists to catalogue the conversation around AMC's Mad Men and its fanbase across the social web. But it's just the beginning

We have reached a point where little doubt remains. The marketplace is changing. Digital is growing.

Yet, there are no signs of an imminent transition. There are few success stories and endless promise. Strategists point to early adoption of digital solutions as a major brand differentiator. Competitive advantage is there for the taking.

For all the talk about changing consumer habits, evolving markets, and the death of mass media (or at least stagnation), it remains more difficult than 10 years ago to implement digital solutions. Most conversations seem to boil down to similar themes.

• Social Networking. Why should I care?
• Email is fine. We can just make it more relevant.
• Twitter … What?
• Widgets … Huh?
• I’ve heard about [technology here]. How does it work? or Why would I use that?

Thinking back to the days of radio (imagined and not experienced), I can picture the same conversation being held.

Radio?

It’s like the phonograph but you don’t have to own the recordings. It just plays music or sounds.

How?

A central location sends out frequency waves. Owners of a radio select a frequency on the dial and listen to what is being transmitted. We can talk about your product on the transmission and everybody listening will hear what we have to say.

Who’s using it?

People.

What kinds of people?

All sorts.

Are our competitors using it?

Not yet, but you can be sure they will, and once they do, they will have a considerable advantage over us.

Meh.

The medium eventually discovered sponsored broadcasts, branded programs, product placement, and targeted buys. The key was separating the technology from the execution. Technology offers nothing but a platform for executing the creative.

Creating successful digital campaigns requires both. But what comes first? Are you creating an execution to support the latest buzz or craze in technology, or are you using technology to support execution? Marketing itself has not fundamentally changed – there’s just more options today. Now tell me of an age that wasn’t true.

Seth Godin was recently asked why people are generally unhappy even though most have a better standard of living today than Louis XIV did in his day. His response – brands are spending less time reminding loyal customers how happy they are.

DMNews is reporting the same with Sprint Nextel. They are pinning hopes for loyal customers on happiness.

There has long been a gap between brands with loyal customers and brands with fanatics or evangelists. Does happiness bridge this gap?

Just a couple quick examples:

• Google Code of Conduct “Don’t Be Evil."
• Apple “Digital Lifestyle” as a subsection of “Business Strategy” for all annual SEC filings.
• Disney “The Happiest Place on Earth.”
• Harley Davidson “Live to Ride! Ride to Live!”
• BMW Mini Cooper New York Times Review “Whatever one may think of the Mini Cooper’s dynamic attributes, which range from very good to marginal, it is fair to say that almost no new vehicle in recent memory has provoked more smiles.”

The NYT review goes on to point out the adoration of the new VW Beatle design that preceded it by a couple of years. While quite a time has gone by, it’s easy to remember the inclusion of a flower vase holder as a standard and appreciated feature.

Is the ability to report and track metrics acting as a blinder to a greater potential to build loyalty through reminding members how happy programs are making them, or should happiness be restricted to print and online delivery vehicles?

Marketers have understood the importance of the interactive space in integrated campaigns for years. However, there have been diverse viewpoints as to how to successfully approach and measure this new space. Ogilvy has presented two new concepts that are becoming familiar to marketers around the world. These concepts (“Dada, Data, Alpha, Beta” and “From the 4 P’s to the 4 E’s”) highlight engagement and experience as brand differentiators.

An example highlighting these new ideas surfaced this week. Yahoo Answers, a social site devoted to learning saw the posting of a question that generated a considerable amount of interest (shown in image).

The question and subsequent responses showcased a concept marketers struggle with in this new space – How does an item move from awareness to engagement?

Most notable in this example is the variety of motivations site members had in engaging with this question. The original response was to insult the original question and user that posted it on merits of education. It was generally assumed that the member posting the question was poorly educated as evidenced by spelling and grammar errors combined with the misunderstanding over the existence of a country called Georgia.

Shortly after the original responses came cynics claiming the post to be nothing more than trolling. Online trolling is an effort to generate confrontational conversations. Most efforts are tasteless, lewd, and tread on delicate subject matter. Individuals that troll claim “they do it for lulz” (derived from LOL or laugh out loud).

Following the cynics were the proponents of trolling. A number of responses credited the user that posted the question with having done a good job of inciting dissension.

Thereafter was a balanced mix of responses questioning the intelligence of the original user and discussion around whether it was a real question or not.

So why is this noteworthy and how does it relate to marketing? This question showcases an important principle of the interactive world today. There are nearly as many motivations for engagement as there are users. In this case, 195 responses to the question were posted before Yahoo took down the question. The Yahoo Answers forum is generally considered to be a success in terms of generating user engagement and driving loyalty to the entire suite of services Yahoo provides. As a whole, the forum provided a venue for a diverse base of users to engage, interact, and serve their own selfish interests in one location. Some users got to feel superior, others got to take control, and yet more felt they were able to help, while a portion were just doing it for the lulz.

While currently not available on the Yahoo Answers site, this question is far from gone. It has been linked and posted to Digg and BuzzFeed in addition to nearly a hundred copycat questions on Yahoo Answers. Each of these new locations has generated further discussion among new users with an even more diverse set of goals.

The one commonality among all locations has been the ability of the original effort to drive past awareness into engagement. While this question has spread past its original location, the amount of comments and media it has since generated is astounding. The original question has now spawned mashups that include maps, video, and images.

What we take away from this is yet another example of objectives and context being set by users. Flexibility is key in both delivering messages and in the messages themselves. Whatever the main objectives for an interactive project may be, they must be capable of evolving as users in an interactive space make content their own.