In marketing we see this case repeatedly. One strategy or channel is suitable, and others are used just in case or simply for the sake of it, and are not worked on in the right way.
Better a little good than a lot of bad
I am talking about recurring themes that continue to appear no matter how much time passes. They are a reflection of human nature and as such are difficult habits to change.
One of these recurring themes is the uk telegram number obsession with volume: “the more, the better.” When, if we think about it, it is the other way around. But we get a kind of fear of emptiness and think: “the more impacts, the more possibilities I will have.” And it is partly true, but what we do not realize is:
Of the damage we do to our brand, and its future conversions to sales, by generating content, advertisements, etc. of lower quality in an attempt to generate traffic at all costs.
Of all the work it will take us to generate that volume that we are often unable to maintain, and
Of the opportunities that we are going to lose by working on achieving volume and not focusing on improving our business in other aspects.
It is a behavior inherent to human nature and therefore very difficult to change. The fear of failure makes us seek reinforcements for our strategy to try to ensure success.
We should have an internal alarm, a moment of pause every week in which we consider what things we are doing for the good of our project, and what things we are doing out of fear of failure.
Social networks for everything and everyone
One of the most striking cases is that of social networks. It is something that is repeated over and over again. I have seen it many times throughout my career and I continue to encounter it currently in my marketing mentoring for SMEs and entrepreneurs.
The two most flagrant cases I come across are two:
Facebook and Instagram for everything : there are agencies that, regardless of the client, the public they are targeting, what they are selling, etc., the only thing they offer for everyone are social ads campaigns on these two social networks. It seems that since they have so many users, any product or service is valid, and the most shocking thing is that it seems that the rest of the digital channels are secondary. I have come across cases of agencies that tried to sell spare parts for industrial agricultural machinery on Facebook! Have we gone crazy? I don’t doubt that some interesting interaction can take place in the medium term (because it is possible, although unlikely), but aren’t there better places to be present?
Companies present on all social networks : the other most common case is that of companies that have active profiles on four or five social networks by publishing exactly the same thing on all sites (same texts, photos, etc.). If this worked, I would understand. But the reality is that it doesn’t. If you have X social profiles with updated content and it costs you the same to maintain it as if it were one, so what? The important thing is to ask yourself if you are getting something in return for your activity and what you are contributing or harming the reputation of your company. It is always better to be present on one or two social networks and have a vibrant community with which you communicate, they have a real interest in your products or services (in fact, they buy and recommend them), etc. than to be present on X social networks with practically dead profiles.
There are other typical trends such as accumulating followers or measuring the success of your strategy by their number, but I think this one is so recurrent and well-known that it is not even worth mentioning!
They are born as social networks and end up becoming advertising platforms
The early days of social media are exciting. Users are jumping in at top speed, uploading content, interacting, trying things out… almost any content you put out there is visible and generates interactions. While this moment lasts, visiting these networks is something incredible. But social networks evolve and they all follow a similar pattern.