The future of marketing – big data, creativity or AI?

STechnology has made it possible to collect giant amounts of data, which causes people to question the relevance of creativity in marketing. Some would rather rely on algorithm based results than vague creativity and point to the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) as a further asset. Thanks to big data, everything seems to be predictable. Does this spell the end for impulse based, hard to quantify creativity?

That our choice of communication options have increased dramatically is indisputable. Agencies are finding it harder than ever to correctly identify and reach their target audience. All manners of communication are of a highly dynamic nature – and the recipients of these messages react in an increasingly similar fashion, regardless of content. They too react dynamic.

We have turned into hybrids and are no longer members of a clearly definable target audience. We are one and the other. We are analogue and digital. Sometimes we buy something, sometimes renting seems like a better alternative. Algorithms seem to give this chaotic behavior a usable structure. If a consumer purchases item A, then they must also be interested in item B and would never consider item C. This is high level pigeon-holing. But people are not like that. We are individuals motivated by our emotions.

Don‘t write-off people just yet

An approach that focuses on numbers makes sense because it is much easier to work with quantifiable data. Communication is expensive. Entrepreneurs even before Henry Ford knew that fifty percent of all advertisements are wasted. The problem is that you don‘t know which fifty percent. How about the ROI of marketing? That is a question that has given countless controllers who are focused on optimizing the efficiency of a company pause. It is easy to calculate the production value of a machine. And it is in itself of value. But marketing? Before big data, market research had already developed testing methods that enabled them to make mathematical statements about the relationship between consumer and product.

Even back then, this led to heated discussions between number freaks and creatives. I am a market researcher by trade and decided only later to also train as a strategic planner, so I‘m more than a little familiar with discussions like these. They came up a lot in my agency. The creative faction would argue that market research kills creativity. This argument is not without merit. What exactly do percentages like the following tell us: “45% of those questioned like chocolate ice cream, 35% prefer vanilla, while 20% describe strawberry as their first choice.”? They describe a tendency. These statements don’t tell me how many of the 45% who prefer chocolate ice cream also like vanilla or strawberry. Without an analysis of the statements and the circumstances under which they were made, conclusions of an at least limited validity cannot be reached. But this requires more than a mathematical perspective. Consider this example:

Unexpected events influence our behavior

Back then, my team conducted an annual image survey for a utility company. Over a period of three years the values of the statements hardly changed. But suddenly the question “What do you value most in a utility company: security, transparency, cost, environmental concerns, distance or reliability?” received very different answers. Instead of cost, distance and reliability those questioned now focused on environmental concerns, security and transparency. Management asked me, if there had been a calculation error as they were unable to explain the differences. But it was true: outside influences cause consumers to change their priorities. A widely published incident at a nuclear power plant led to a public discussion about the dangers of nuclear energy. This directly influenced the results of our survey. Customer, market research and creatives now had to work together to effectively change their strategy and develop a new one.

Big data provides us with incredible amounts of data that we can use for even more precise results. Thanks to the corresponding software we can analyze and assess this data rather easily, but the fundamental debate has stayed the same. And one important factor is still being relegated to the sidelines: people! They still decide for themselves, if they want to have a specific information or not. And one of the major principles of communication also still applies: relationship before content. That means that we who work in marketing must understand how consumers feel, what engages them, what they think and, ultimately, how they act. The highly dynamic nature of communication makes this challenging.

It all comes down to relevance

Assessing the data is, of course, necessary in order to facilitate a strategy that will serve as a foundation for our content which will then come alive through storytelling. It is crucial that this message is relevant to the consumer as they are constantly bombarded by information. But relevant content needs good information – insights – and smart creative ideas. And finally, we have to choose the right communication channels to get our story across.

There is no wrong side or right side in the discussion of big data vs creativity, offline vs online. The right mix of ingredients is crucial and so is the art of communication. The key to all this is the person, the individual, and that is often forgotten, especially now that the implementation of AI has begun.

German version see: https://www.glocknergruppe.com/digitalisierung/big-data-oder-kreativitaet-oder-in-zukunft-ki/