• between the behavior of the female consumer and that of men in the 21st Century (it’s less dissimilar than you’d think), and;
• between what we know about these more right-brain directed folks overall (no gender about it) and the expectations of the currently most critical consumer - the sustainability-minded one.

That’s why I made the effort to attend yesterday’s meeting of the Women’s Network for a Sustainable Future, and why I got so much out of hearing what representatives from Ogilvy Earth, Herman Miller, Campbell’s Soup and Hunton & Williams had to say.  What filtered out for me, among many other things:

• The pursuit of green (1.0) has become the pursuit of a more sustainable life (and yes, that can be defined so many ways).  The words we use to frame the discussion about consumers on this front matter. “Green” is over.  Sustainable is more fitting (for now).
• Consumers expect and appreciate brands that are authentic and transparent about the journey toward more sustainable practices.  They mistrust any pronouncements like: “We are the greenest brand out there!  We’ve resolved ALL our issues forevermore.”  (When you hear or read that, feel free to insert an eyeroll, because that’s what consumers are doing.)
• Leadership has to be fully committed to the pursuit, or any random “green initiative” or marketing-type test case will be mistrusted.  Consumers are putting all green claims under very intense scrutiny starting…. yesterday.
• In terms of sharing the word on your efforts, think in terms of consumer education rather than marketing.  (That word choice/framing issue creeps up again…) Today’s consumers expect brands to talk about what they are up to on the sustainability front.. as long as its about that journey (see above) and not how incredibly accomplished you already are.  Keep a humble perspective and tone, because it is more accessible and inviting to the consumer’s learning mind.
• The FTC’s “green guide” guidelines for environmental claims are very dated and not-so enforced (big surprise) but things are changing.  The cool thing, according to the Herman Miller and Campbell’s Soup representatives on the WNSF panel is that brands are self-policing and calling one another on trumped up or false green claims.  Consumers will surely be calling brands on these things as well - as they get more and more sustainable-savvy.

What became clear to me as I listened and learned yesterday was that consumers are all starting to more holistically (right with left brain) evaluate and make purchasing decisions, and that includes how they are digesting (or not) any sustainability claims from brands new and old, big and small.  Marketing or “educating” them in traditionally left brain ways (”We are the biggest and best in green!  Chest thump!”) is beyond silly.  In order to reach women and reach the tough sustainability-minded consumer right now, you need to take a whole mind, holistic thinking, and integrated systems approach (see more on Herman Miller’s approach to this).  Get on it or be recycled!

Something is very different in designing and marketing gadgets and “apps” in today’s world.  Performance, while important, is no longer king, and consumers demand that the darned things fit into or ease their lifestyles.  Interestingly to me, that often means a re-think of a concept or product from its masculine beginnings toward the feminine sensibilities.  Mind you, that means this is no simple “marketing to women” change.

Instead, the thing to note is that lots of great products designed in years past came from minds mainly focused on performance, status, and making a super cool gee-gaw better than the competition’s.  If you were able to review research that drove so many product developments back then, it would likely be clear that not a lot of end consumers were involved in the process.  The designer/engineer knew better than some silly user, after all.  The result?  Gadgets and technology that have all the necessary specs and functions, but don’t easily fit the various ways people want to integrate them into their lives.

Remember those first PDAs, way back when?  Talk about shiny new object-phenomenon.  The manufacturers didn’t really start to “get” how consumers used them for several years - but they sure looked good as described in marketing material bullet points!

Anyway - 21st Century consumers are now calling manufacturers and designers on the carpet for this disconnect.

I came across one such story in the July/Aug issue of Fast Company.  It’s about the designers of the Fitbit Tracker - a pedometer times 10.  This activity monitor calculates steps taken, as well as calories burned and sleep patterns - all in a discrete package.  Gadi Amit (designer) and James Park (co-founder of Fitbit) were interviewed by FC about how they came up with this clever product.  As Amit and Park put it:

“Most pedometers are quite male-oriented.  They’re focused on numeric achievement and look like electronic gear.”

They went on to say that their perspective switch in designing Fitbit was to go from pure performance to a wellness-centered one.  Their product suits a more urban lifestyle, not just  a “fitness” situation.  Fitbit is made to disappear into a person’s clothing, “whether that’s an evening gown or a running shoe, effortlessly carried 24/7 by either gender.”

As brilliant as it should have been obvious to earlier pedometer designers, don’t you think?

In this one little product and case study, I see evidence of a wise, wise shift.  Simply marketing a fancier but same-old pedometer to women might have attracted initial attention from female consumers (while alienating men), BUT applying feminine sensibilities - which everyone has - in your re-design is the more effective way to gain trust and sales.  By doing so, your product will very strongly resonate with women, as well as the men who like the numeric/performance aspects (and who actually respond to the more lifestyle-y stuff too).

Slapping on a “pink-wash” would have been beyond short-sighted for the Fitbit.  But, doing the work to revisit the entire concept and truly understand how people will most use it in their lives gave their product the elusive women’s market approval… and so much more.

Here’s one excerpt from the interview:

C.B.: What 5 suggestions do you have for companies to implement so they can more effectively bridge old media with new media and connect with end users?

Andrea:

1- Don’t make it a bigger deal than it is, or you’ll never get started. Get onto the various platforms and follow a few people you already know you respect and see how they do things.

2 - Don’t assume “social media” as next big thing is truly a good fit for your brand. It may not be - just depends who you are trying to reach.

3 - Do share, share and share… links and helpful information you’d pass along to your best buddy in your work-world. Then, when you have a blog post of your own or announcement to make, more people will see it as authentic and helpful rather than self-promoting.

4 - Don’t be afraid to engage a bit with those who seem to question or take issue with your perspective. Interesting conversations and connections usually emerge.

5 - Select 3-5 (tops) key topics you want to be known for sharing about and those parameters will help you decide when to send a tweet or post something on FB. Make 1-2 of those topics the ones that are personal to you. For me, I don’t have any significant work in socially responsible business, but I am personally passionate about it (and would love to someday work within that realm). I also have a thing for fitness/health so occasionally those Tweets will squeak out of me too.

***

Thanks for interviewing me, Christine!  For any of you who’d like to join me in my assimilation process, my Twitter handle is: @AndreaLearned.

A few examples of what bubbled up:

- Sometimes you need to seriously consider firing 20% of your workforce (especially those in sales).  Even if they are incredibly experienced, they can’t be reached about changing culture because they don’t believe they need to learn about it.  These folks, men or women, will literally be the ones in the room who lean back and cross their arms as they listen to new ideas.  Bring up gender discussions in your next marketing or executive gathering and take a look around.

- A person’s gender perspective may be very influenced by their generation.  Within those few days in San Francisco, I talked with people from Gen Y,  X and the Baby Boom, and noticed very evident differences in opinion.  The Baby Boomers I spoke with seemed interested in the discussion, but said a lot of “yeah, but…”  To them, gender issues are evolving, but there is still a little bit of resentment that may cloud their judgment or keep them from seeing they need to get up to speed.  The Gen X and Y folks I talked with said gender roles/stereotypes had never been a big issue in their lives.  That being the case, many men vs women conflicts can seem irrelevant to them and thus, be a lower priority consideration for either product or marketing efforts, whatever the industry.  So, be aware of who your end consumer really is.  If you are going to “market to women,” be clear on whether you need to be visible or transparent.  Especially for younger generations, if you can’t commit to your own research, the default should be “transparent.” (See my book, Don’t Think Pink, for more on that.)

-  What a person says isn’t always what they feel.  When selling to a couple, engage with both parties, but pay perhaps a bit more attention to the questions/comments and tone of the female (whether she is being assertive with her input or not), as well as her body language.  The same goes for focus or conversation groups.  Even with women-only studies, a few participants will be more physically and emotionally engaged. These women will share the real scoop in most cases, because they are passionate about it - while the others may just be following the “leader.”

Finally, for one that has less to do with gender and more to do with expanding your general perspective:  Be open to overhearing and engaging in a bit of the conversations around you (where appropriate), especially in relaxed places like tea or coffee shops.  A friend who is a digital media expert and I had just gotten together to share an hour of catching up on Thursday.  In the middle of our discussing how cool it was that Susan Orlean, an author we followed, was talking about gender roles on Twitter (a conversation that was then covered by a Salon post), a young man from the group of three guys sitting next to us chimed in saying that that he loved her work, as well.  And, he hadn’t realized she was on Twitter.  Our two parties ended up talking animatedly for quite some time about our various work projects, and then swapping business cards etc.  The energy we created together and those ideas came out of nowhere.

Anyway -

At this point in history, saying or thinking “we’ve always done it this way,” means you’ll miss out on the powerful but subtle clues to better reaching today’s savviest consumers, male or female.  They don’t know what “always” is and aren’t interested in a history lesson.  How can you be right there, right now, with a message that fits their current life experience?

A fresh perspective is key to delivering relevance, so do what you can to train yourself to see the gender differences and similarities that truly matter.

It was from that question that Carolyn Hadlock of Young and Larramore and I began to develop the Op-Ed piece that published today in Adweek/Mediaweek, “Reaching Recession Dads.”  We had been noticing heavy coverage of the changing male consumer and family roles, and realized there must be significant insight within for brands that may be newly reaching the male parent, as opposed to the mom.  Interestingly, just yesterday, The Christian Science Monitor published a feature that focused on a few recession-driven, re-shaped American families and the surrounding, compelling cultural research.  Here’s a quote indicating the significance of this moment in time:

Researchers say it will be months, if not years, before they have any solid data on what these men are doing – whether they are going to school, staying home with children, or simply giving up. All they can say for sure is that the changes are huge.

“We’ve never seen a gender imbalance like the one we’re seeing now,” says Heather Boushey, a senior economist at the Center for American Progress.

So, why, you ask, am I writing about such things (as I have been already) in my “on women” blog? Because, this cultural shift in gender expectations is not driving women and men further apart, but drawing them closer together as consumers.  These guys are beginning to be more allowed by society, and thus feel more comfortable, using their more feminine sensibilities in nurturing and caregiving.  Men have been transitioning into stay-at-home or more involved fatherhood for some time.  That doesn’t mean they are becoming less manly, but that the definition of a man is taking on some of the best of what had previously been thought of as “woman” territory.

As Carolyn and I put it in our piece:

With so many more men joining the at-home ranks, marketers can’t afford to continue gender-based efforts focused solely on moms. A telling, and humorous, case of lost gender identity is represented by the online “RebelDad.” This particular stay-at-home father and blogger recently took a diaper brand to task for sending him its Mother’s Day e-mail, with the friendly and personalized greeting: “Happy Mother’s Day, Brian!”

Whoops.  Instead, if you’ve learned how to reach women more effectively, in their role as moms and otherwise, you will long since have been clued in on how to reach today’s man - especially in his parent role.  Be transparent - and guided/inspired by the consumers you serve - no gender about it.

In a recession, you just can’t beat two for the price of one.

While this marketing approach is an innovative way to try to engage men, and does seem to find success with the women’s market (submitting essays for prizes, I mean), will it translate for guys?  I wonder how many men will take the time to write even a 100-word essay (the first paragraph of this post is 93 words) and bother to take an essay-related photo.

As I was writing this post, I got into a Twitter conversation with Steve Harbour, a friend who is a dad and freelance copywriter (thus, he has an advertising-oriented mind), about this promotion.  His take was just as I’d suspect it might be for a lot of guys I know:

It sounds pretty good, but I wish the contest was more engaging. A 100-word essay seems a little ho-hum, a bit like homework for just $1000 of tools. Don’t get me wrong I’d love $1k worth of tools, but I’m not sure I’d take the time to compose an essay for it. Even making it a video contest where the kids had to lobby for their Dads would be more interesting to me. Sears could use them on their site and it promotes Dads spending time with their kids.

The name Man-A-Cure is pretty clever and I expected a contest that would follow suit.

So did I. Hmmm.

To avoid such a disconnect, Sears might have dug a little deeper.  If they’d done research to understand the group of men they were trying to reach, I bet those guys would have guided the brand toward a more relevant, and clever, contest.

One more thought: As far as focusing on tool-interested consumers, in particular, there’s also a physicality/experience involved that might be leveraged.  Craftsman could have developed an offline event involving labor or strength-testing.  They could take videos and use those clips as the entries or somesuch.  The events themselves could be held at Sears stores, or, better yet, in partnership with existing events where tool-fans might already be hanging out (kids baseball games? local car racing?).

Or, as Steve mentioned, emphasize the “father” as well as the “tools” and come up with something dads can do WITH their kids to participate.

Do you see what I’m getting at?  Whomever you are marketing to, the best idea is to be in their path and in context with the way they might buy or use your product.  Don’t make people go out of their way to participate in your promotion.  And, this goes for brands pitching man-a-cures or pedicures.

What came up as we talked was the fact that local scale, smaller businesses may well have an offline advantage in reaching women.  The things I mentioned to the writer began to sound suspiciously like the “social media” form we are all so hot on today.

Three of ways offline/local reminds me of online/”social”:

• Short, in passing, nuggets of information. No one REALLY says more than a few sentences to the people whose paths they cross on a daily basis anyway.  So, people often share quick bits of what’s important in their life right then.  Thus, everyone gets a feel and gets to know each other in little ways, over the course of time. (Sounds like Twitter.)
• Conversation of a few can influence many. As Malcolm Gladwell long-since explored for us in The Tipping Point, there really are a relative few very influential (i.e. respected and talkative) people in our respective midsts.  But, hit those folks at the right time with really relevant information, and watch the word spread.  (Again. Twitter, anyone?)
• Brand-planted seeds cause consumer conversations to grow around them. While a brand or small business can’t force the issue, a bit of goodwill via local cause sponsorship (with a long term commitment) does get noticed and filed away for future consumer reference.  If the fictitious Bob’s Garden Spot sponsored the garden-to-table program at the local grade school, for instance, women who are moms would very likely absorb that fact and give “Bob” a visit in the not-too distant future.  (On Twitter, that’d be like giving away lots of goodwill in great links over time, with no hard sell, and watching as more and more people signed up to follow you.)

I love the paradigm of looking in the opposite direction from what you are so focused on right now to see the similarities. Today, so many of us are enthralled with, and distracted by, the bright, shiny object: social media.  How interesting to note that what happens online can seem so akin to those successful mom & pop business marketing methods of yore.

Call it plain, old excellent marketing (which takes an investment and a long term commitment).

Is your logo “female” or “male?” If it’s got a little starburst-style element to it, and seems lighter and “happier,” feminine brain traits may have been involved.  And, right now, that could be an especially good thing.

A recent article in the New York Times covered a few big brand logo updates that have occurred in the past year or so.  As a passionate fan of most things design-related, it was fun for me to notice the softening of colors, and the lighter weight or more rounded-ness of fonts, for instance.  But, a follow-up letter to the editor in yesterday’s Times made me realize I’d missed something about how those decisions for change may have been made (and by whom).

In his letter, Rick Barrack, Chief Creative Officer of CBX Strategic Branding, pointed out that brand logos may well represent the personality of the chief executive who ultimately approves the new look.  He noticed the following about the such changes for Walmart, Kraft and SuperFresh, among others:

“The underlying theme with many of these new logos is that they came from companies with female chief executives.” He went on to say: “Female chief executives, with their cooperative, collaborative management styles, have brought a new point of view to their organizations and their logos.”

As writer Bill Marsh laid out in the original NYT article: the newer logos all have toned-down type, friendly flourishes and happier colors.  His particular point, which I think is as worthy as the CEO gender consideration, was that those details may have something to do with wanting to counter the gravity of the recession.  As in: No more harsh dark blue, let’s lively that up! (I’m so there.)

To me, this discussion represents a larger cultural shift I’ve been seeing lately, which reflects a different level of gender integration (for lack of a better way to put it at the moment).  Big, traditional, linearly (i.e. male) corporate brands are getting an infusion of fresh perspective.  The typically “feminine” style of thinking in cooperative and collaborative ways is now more heavily influencing corporate culture, leadership training, HR policies… on down to brand logo re-designs.

Whether it is due to the recession, or due to a few more women serving as executive decision-makers, this change has been a long time coming.   But, to me it can’t be just women alone who ponder logos and manage with more collaborative and cooperative viewpoints.  Rather, the more we spread the word about how companies are making such wise moves based on those “feminine” brain traits, the better for everyone.

It’s a whole new, extra-tough business climate these days, and brands and consumers alike deserve the extra friendly flourish a little feminine thinking might bring to their day - shopping or otherwise.

With that in mind, I took note of a full page Target ad in last Sunday’s New York Times. The simple message?  “Tell us what more we can do for you.”  That was followed by a decently legible email address (not a teeny one at the bottom) and the words, “we’ll get back to you shortly.”

If, one day soon, we read of new causes or different ways of business that Target will pursue, due to this “more” feedback, THAT’s the gold!  You see - every marketer knows from their 101 textbook that customer feedback is key, but not a lot of brands actually a) take it in in any logical/organized/productive way, and then b) never talk about what was learned from that feedback or acknowledge those folks who contributed it.  Oops - that means they don’t close a loop and are missing a huge opportunity for customer interaction.

The thing is that, all the white space and open-ended feedback invitations in the world won’t do a bit of good if your brand isn’t prepared to commit to taking it in, sorting through, using what helps and thanking those that gave it.  Taking out a full-page ad is a first and visible step, but there needs to be follow-up.  Does Target have the patience to allow their customers to fill that scary white space? Given what I’ve seen from the brand in the past, they just might!

(If you took Target up on the offer, let me know how they follow up!)

This “follower split” suggests that women are driven less by followers than men, or have more stringent thresholds for reciprocating relationships. This is intriguing, especially given that females hold a slight majority on Twitter: we found that men comprise 45% of Twitter users, while women represent 55%.

Men are more likely to enter into a communication via status/positioning, according to Tannen’s research (so this is not a judgment, guys).  In the case of Twitter, that would mean that men tend to be interested in “the numbers,” and the higher the better. Whether or not any of the people they are following, or who follow them, are people they might like to get to know better is not the point.  Having an astounding “followers” count is.

Women, on the other hand, are perhaps more likely to be looking for connection based on common ground (as per Tannen, again).  For women on Twitter, that may mean actually taking the time to look at the profiles of each person who is newly following them to see if there’s enough reason to follow said person back.  Women have ways of connecting lots of information into one cohesive “it all matters” picture, and so more readily give themselves a reality check of how much time they might have for Twitter and how they’d best use it for their own purposes (and no one else’s).  It’s not the numbers, it’s the relationships that may potentially result for them.

Now, I’m not saying that this holds true for everyone, but Tannen is pretty smart and her insight gives us, as Twitter users (I’m @AndreaLearned) and marketers a lot to think about.  If we admit it, the Twitter phenomenon pointed out by these HBR folks does demonstrate an intriguing gender difference in human behavior, and in the whys and wherefores of interpersonal communication.

The insights therein may help you or your brand decide: 1)if a woman or man should do the Tweeting, 2) what to include in your account profile to inspire more people to want to connect with you, and 3) what sorts of things you should be pollng your followers about in order to do a better job connecting with everyone!

If there is a gendered pattern to human behavior in social media, don’t fight it and don’t judge it.  Men like to follow and be followed, and women need more than that to establish a real relationship.   Twitter is just a microcosm of humanity, after all.