Data Is Mud

Data is a fancy word for information. But like so many fancy words, it has achieved a sacred position in the world of advertising and marketing jargon. It has joined the ranks of 'branding', 'engagement', 'content', ‘blockchain’, ‘metaverse’, ‘conversation’, ‘NFTs' and ‘purpose’ in the revolving lexicon of marketing obsessions.

However, just because data is an obnoxiously overworked platitude, doesn’t mean it’s not valuable. Information is useful, and data is information.

In order to make intelligent decisions information is clearly necessary. But the question for advertisers is, just how useful is it and is it worth all the time, effort, and money we spend on collecting, organizing and analyzing it?

An alarming amount of data is being collected by the marketing industry. How much of the data is actually being used productively?

According to the Harvard Business Review, “Only 3% of Companies’ Data Meets Basic Quality Standards”

According to The Audiencer, “Most experts agree that only about 5% of data is being used in a meaningful way.”

Also according to the Harvard Business Review, “Studies show that knowledge workers waste up to 50% of time hunting for data, identifying and correcting errors, and seeking confirmatory sources for data they do not trust.”

So right away we have problems. Based on the above, we have to question whether the compulsive blather about “data-driven advertising” is even real or just another trendy advertising talking point. But let’s give the data ninjas the full benefit of the doubt and stipulate that all the data they collect is accurate, easily accessible, and useful. Here’s the problem:

Does anyone really believe that Coke has data that Pepsi doesn’t have?

Does anyone believe that Coors has data that Budweiser doesn’t have?

Does anyone believe that Ford has data that Chevy doesn’t?

I’d bet large sums that they all have about the same data. And if they don’t, a few clicks or phone calls and they can order up any data they want (according to published reports, about 80% of data “owned” by marketers arrives via third parties.)

So in the real world, what exactly does data itself afford you? Largely, it affords you information parity with your competitors. And achieving parity has never been regarded as a terribly dynamic growth strategy.

But there is some true value in data. The real value comes from extraordinary people who can analyze and interpret it in brilliant ways. Give the same reservoir of data to two different groups of people and you will likely get two very different interpretations of what it means and two very different recommendations on what to do about it.

In my career I had the opportunity to review market research (data pretending to be science) on a frequent basis. It was a rare experience to have the designer of the research extract anything uniquely valuable. And it was even rarer to have that person present an astute course of action based on a singular interpretation of that data.

If the quality of contemporary advertising is to be attributed to being "data-driven," it's being "driven" right off a cliff.

But there are some unusual people who can make data live and breathe. They can look at data and see things that others can't. They can tell you what the data really means. They can synthesize a unique point of view on what to do about it. These people are very rare and they provide the true value that can be derived from data.

Of course, this is contrary to the current marketing obsession with accumulating as much data as possible, which provides the illusion of understanding things and lets you think you are generating "data-driven advertising." Regrettably, it's not that easy. It's not how much data you have that matters. It’s the intelligence, talent, and imagination of the people analyzing and strategizing from it that matters.

Data is mud. Most people just fling it around. But some people build the Taj Mahal. It ain’t the data that makes the difference. It’s the humans.

Data Is Mud is excerpted from Bob's forthcoming book, "The Three Word Brief."