OF FENG SHUI AND FORECASTS

With any new year, East or West, almost everyone succumbs to the temptation to predict.

This time, it’s the Lunar celebration, with more than a billion of our Asian neighbors at home with family.

Some of the media’s annual visions are way too easy … and snore-able.  Like Canadian pop star and “we’re so over him” Justin Bieber will get into more trouble again.  Setting records in temperature and natural disasters, unfortunately, seems to prevail, given climate change.  Fighting looms over local conflicts – in the Middle East in particular.

Other forecasts depend on a wide application of common sense:  The economy’s slated to be up in the West, subdued in the East, with scaled-down spending on luxury items.  The Affordable Care Act will still be in the hospital, holding a diagnosis of “wait and see.”  Cost-cutting continues in the business arena, with corporate chiefs still uncertain about full-speed-ahead profitability.

This Year of the Horse, though, doesn’t address the trends in our profession.  Again, instinct and experience say that change is our constant.  What will matter is how well we accept change, indeed, how smartly we anticipate it.  It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to recognize that digital dominance is here and now.  Or that employees will continue to seek meaning in work.  Or that consumers need to be segmented into even more and smaller cohort groups.  Or that advertising is forever searching for the magic metric.

Our task is to figure out how to best use these trends, these changes – to our advantage and to our employer’s.  Why wait for the next best disruptor?  We could, using what we’ve learned, develop our own crystal ball – and what’s more, activate it.  Master the realm of the new and newer and yet-to-be media.  Emphasize individual contributors, holistically.  Network with and review group formations on different e-platforms.  Apply New Age measures to campaigns. 

No crystal ball needed.  Just wisdom, a shot of courage, and the ability to take change in hand. 

THE PRICE IS SO NOT RIGHT

There’s something in each of us that likes to play a game or two.

Call it competitiveness, achievement, even self-expression.  The notion of winning at something can lure us into arcades as well as casinos, seduce us with smartphone apps or a family Scrabble feud.

When it comes to work, though, gamification – the millennial word for infusing game mechanics in the Web – smacks of management control, and of automatons doing a higher-up’s bidding.

Hey, we’re being honest – and we know that the world just might be agin’ us:  August corporations use these kinds of software programs for various goals, from teaching about sustainability to exercising more effectively.  Many large salesforces thrill to using specialized game mechanics, such as badges, points, virtual gifts, and leaderboards, that help prompt higher performance.   Or so they say.  Gartner even predicted that this year more than 70 percent of global businesses would adopt at least one gamified app.

But is there truly safety in numbers?  For some routine jobs and tasks, such as onboarding and customer service, the games we play could well spark improvement.  Learning, too, deserves all the gamification we can absorb.  Yet the things that make us collaborate with our colleagues, enhance our interpersonal skills, and increase our productivity are not found in the Web-ified non-human prompts from our employers.  We want to figure out, ourselves, our own sources of motivation and good behaviors; understanding “me” from an online Chutes and Ladders-type exercise makes us want to, yes, game the system.

Besides, how would it make you feel to hear that Hezbollah uses gamification to market its philosophies to adolescents?

THE TRIPLE-HEADER TROIKA TRILOGY

Triangles.

The Three Stooges.

Snap, Crackle, and Pop.

Red, yellow, and blue.

For years, we – as marketers, advertisers, designers, and communicators – have almost blindly followed the rule of three … in visuals, in messages, in benefits, and more.  It’s been one of the unproven facts that informs our universe; somehow, three and no more seemed to cement our case.

Now, more than gut says we’re right:  Two UCLA behavioral science/marketing professors investigated a handful of scenarios with hundreds of undergrads, testing recall and reactions to anywhere from one to six reasons for each.  They deliberately explored the theory known as “set size effect,” or, in other words, the more descriptors, the better.  [Guess the “set size” creator never met Mies van der Rohe.]  The results were to be expected:  Students embraced the list of three, with four or more receiving a raised eyebrow or words of disdain.

Don’t stop there, though:  Three means more than a simple count.  It points to one of the issues we face now:  Way too many choices and way too little time to make effective decisions.  Though every day we face that challenge (especially in grocery stores), it’s just recently, when shopping for healthcare insurance, that we wished for an easier process.  We not only had to review the in- and out-of-network providers, but also go through, grid by grid by grid, comparisons of benefits, making sure we were matching apples to apples.   Multiply that by five providers.  And hear our frustration.

So “three” is now our golden rule. 

For us, that involves skirting aisles with too many similar products (how many different kinds of oatmeal do we need?), glossing over ads with more than three descriptors, ignoring multi-multi-imaged signs.  It also includes our stricter adherence to tri-anything in our work. 

Like our headline.

BIRDS DO IT MORE. THEY SHOULD

Call us the “reluctants.”

A few months ago, we were gently persuaded by colleagues to establish a Twitter handle.  [Facebook and Instagram, to us, are very personal spaces; we don’t use either for business.]

We did.  And promptly forgot about it.

Which is why, when more and more social media experts are shouting that, in this job-hungry market, seekers need to actively manage their personal brand via Web sites and postings and group contributions to drive personal visibility, we politely say “humbug.”

First, Google knows you … intimately.  As do the other search engines.  Chances are, whatever you say about yourself in an e-space will have already shown up.

Second, we truly get the need to social-media-ize.  For business, that is.  LinkedIn pages and postings, Twitter notes about events and ideas, Instagram visuals:  All good, if they’re done with care and without braggadocio.  Nothing annoys us more than egregious publicity for publicity’s sake.  [Many celebrities practice it; why should we?]

Third, it’s about value.  Got a clarifying comment for a discussion or a footnote about certain references?  Add it.  Want to talk about your expertise in a non-promotional fashion?  Those seven to ten critical steps or three to five “gotta dos” about a hot topic make for a great blog or mini-thought paper.

Finally, Mom always told us to speak only when we had something to say.  That’s awfully good advice today.