Not to pile on, but Heineken recently launched a new campaign entitled, Share the Good which asks consumers to visit the microsite and upload photos and opinions of the brand’s new premium light beer product. I’m not the first to post some thoughts on this new campaign – apparently the website wasn’t functioning at the time the media launched, which of course resulted in driving consumers to a dead end URL, and gave the blogoshpere something to shout about…

My observations are less about coordinating the logistics of a multi-channel, integrated campaign – which is no easy task – but rather about the strategy itself.

I am continually amazed by the number of brand-building campaigns that seem to rely on two severely overdone techniques: the microsite and consumer generated content. Enough already. Here’s the thing – and I’m certainly not the first to say this – but brands and advertisers have to understand that the days of building it and the consumer will come have long since passed. Fishing where the fish are is the key to consumer engagement – you can no longer expect to incite a movement (the site touts, ‘Join the Movement’) by creating a slick microsite, supported with considerable media dollars and expecting the average consumer to care enough to investigate, let alone participate. Heineken claims a ‘million new friends’ have shared their experiences – I find this number very difficult to believe.

So what’s the result? The site is littered with photos of people posing, drinking beer and random comments about the beverage…”notable, extraordinary, smooth, etc… Now that’s content!

The point is, marketers and advertisers alike must recognize that the Internet has effectively aggregated consumers into large, reachable groups who then segment themselves based on their interests and preferences. Why would consumers go to sharethegood.com to post their pictures when they’re already doing this at Flickr and Facebook? As the Internet matures, consumers are limiting where they spend their time – they may be spending more time online, but they’re doing so at fewer sites. Bring the brand experience to the consumer, don’t make the consumer find you.

The key is utility or entertainment, and hopefully they’re not mutually exclusive: give the consumer something useful or entertaining – and deliver these where they already are – and they will reward you with interest, engagement and participation.

Advertising Age ran an article today detailing a new P&G Oil of Olay program designed to “enhance real-world Wal-Mart shopping with web tools.” Based on the performance of the brand’s Olay for You online product recommendation program, P&G decided to pilot the interactive model in Wal-Mart stores. The site’s metrics are impressive: over one million unique visitors since January with an 80% survey completion rate and an average of 8 minutes per user, per visit.

The article goes onto to state:

“Wal-Mart Stores has begun testing an in-store version of Olay for You via kiosks in stores, marking the latest of several efforts in which offline retailers are looking to tap the convenience and functionality of online tools, such as search and recommendation engines, to improve the often-annoying offline shopping experience.”

Is this a watershed moment in digital marketing? I’m clearly overreacting to the statement above, but I was surprised to see offline shopping positioned as ‘often-annoying’ as I thought that reference was reserved for the online shopping experience… but are we now entering a new phase in commerce where the lessons, tools and interactivity honed from the best online experiences are now finding their way into our physical commerce experiences? It makes sense. Search and customer recommendations – physically inline – are much more likely to lead consumers to the products they need and want.

In-store kiosks are not a new idea of course, but as consumers become more and more comfortable – and reliant – on technologies that make decision-making easier, marketers will have to continue to blend virtual and physical experiences that seamlessly connects the brand to the consumer on her terms.

Although it was met with minimal fanfare or excitement from both analysts and the market in general, Blockbuster’s recent bid for consumer electronic giant Circuit City piqued my interest. The USA Today ran a short piece on the front page of their Money section today outlining the deal and the initial reaction to it which claims that Blockbuster has offered more than $1B for the struggling retail chain.

Whether or not this deal goes through is less interesting than the strategy itself. Companies are wrestling with how to create 360-degree experiences in an effort to keep up with growing consumer demand for integrated services and products that are unified under a single branded entity. It’s become all about immediate gratification, anticipating the needs of consumers and identifying synergistic relationships that enhance the overall experience with a brand. Given this context, I can imagine much stranger marriages.

On the surface, the potential union between Blockbuster and Circuit City may not appear intuitive, but when you examine the core competencies of each company – digital entertainment – you start to see the synergies and possibilities. Although clearly biased, Blockbuster’s CEO, Jim Keyes makes an interesting and accurate observation about the changing landscape and the requirement companies now have to deliver connected experiences to their customers: The magic in the Apple Store is bringing hardware, software and service all together…they make it easy for the consumer.”

Keyes reasoning underscores the direction the marketplace is moving towards – confluences, intersections and connected branded experiences that move seamlessly between rational, virtual and physical worlds. This merger may not go through, but you can expect deals like these in the future…the near future.

Form + Function:
Digital design goes well beyond Web sites