Construction Professionals Conference Marketplace: Fill & Download for Free

Thank you at the outset for the A2A.It has been described by many of the question’s observers here on Quora in their individually rich manners as to how alone and isolating pursuing a Ph.D. program can, at times, most assuredly be. In a word, loneliness. Writing a dissertation can feel like a highly solitary experience.That blank piece of paper before you will remain blank until you will it otherwise. I could be seen carrying around long yellow legal pads, writing everywhere. I would find myself writing on buses, trains, trams, in the university snack bar, while having breakfast or lunch in the local cafes and restaurants on the Franco-Swiss frontier. Once my legal pad pages had sufficient scribble on them, then and only then, would I take to my premier home computer, the dinosaur Apple IIca purchased in France in 1986, and begin typing in our floor to ceiling glass windowed apartment, there erect in the virtual shadow of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’s Mount Saleve, which she had viewed as a young woman in her teens from the Geneva, Switzerland, side of the border while writing the definitive horror story which, in part, she set on Mount Saleve (Frankenstein, Cf. Chapter 7). Rinse and repeat process, as the Ph.D. student is seen writing draft chapter after draft chapter.In studying the literature, I would repeatedly find myself coming across various expert quotations on my subject matter of interest and somehow instinctively knowing, which chapter of the dissertation would open with that quotation referenced, or otherwise, be precisely applied therein. Again and again, this forming of connections, of patterns occurring, would manifest themselves, triggering the Ph.D. student into action. I maintained an extensive ongoing bibliography as my research advanced, adding to it all along the research referencing process.The interlibrary loan system throughout all of Western Europe and the prowess of university librarians, earned my appreciation as resources continued arriving throughout. I would find myself adding prose to the Foreword section, to the Acknowledgements section, to the Notes section, to this chapter or that one. Questions, always seeking out the types of questions that reasonable people would reasonably ask and be seeking answers to vis-a-vis a particular subject matter. I went about writing seemingly countless snail mail letters to officials in a wide range of departments and agencies and organizations worldwide possessing information appertaining to my research, and sometimes with surprisingly favorable results, which resulted in improving the overall quality of the undertaking and its focal seriousness.On occasion, I likened my Ph.D. student experience to being a tightrope walker a la the noted Philippe Petit, yet, without a rope! Many years before applying to a doctoral program, I feel much blessed to have run across a book which I’d then purchased titled How To Complete And Survive A Doctoral Dissertation by David Sternberg (Macmillan, 2014). In this seminal work, Sternberg lays out a practical methodology consisting of various strategies and tactics for pursuing a doctorate, including how to go about constructing the necessary conditions favorable to one’s ultimate success and avoiding the quicksand, not becoming an ABD [All-But-Dissertation] attrition casualty statistic, or worse. He also discusses various doable ways of successfully navigating, avoiding, and perhaps mitigating too, if necessary, the various pitfalls that a candidate can likely expect to encounter along what can, at times, be a thorny path toward successfully completing the PhD dissertation and program.Many years thereafter, while living on the Franco-Swiss frontier in the Haute Savoie region of France for several years, I made sure to apply much of Sternberg’s advice and guidance during my doctoral program undertaken at The Graduate Institute of International Studies, Institut Universitaire de Hautes Etudes Internationales, The University of Geneva, Switzerland, what is today now called The Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, during the period 1986–1989.In recent years, I happily was able to locate Sternberg and we corresponded back and forth, thus finally allowing me to personally thank him for the gift which his book bestowed upon me, and how I credited his work with contributing to my successful journey toward the Ph.D. degree. Moreover, I took great pleasure in earnestly thanking him for all he has given to so many through his magnum opus, including the writer. I strongly recommend his book to you without reservation, for any person considering pursuing a Ph.D. degree program to read Dr. Sternberg’s book, taking on board all of its invaluable, specific, highly practical strategies and tactics aiming toward defying the odds and achieving that successful end: the Ph.D.Today, the academic literature is now replete with studies regarding the high casualty rate of Ph.D. students. For example, according to research presented by Leonard Cassuto in his Quora response (“% of ABD How many fail to get their PhD?,”July 01, 2013) there exists a disturbing 50 percent of doctoral students leaving graduate school without finishing. Indubitably, such heavy attrition carries with it the taint of failure, loss, and despair. See, too, a pioneering in-depth report on graduate school attrition authored by someone who came extremely close to becoming an attrition statistic herself, Barbara E. Lovitts’ Leaving The Ivory Tower: The Causes and Consequences of Departure From Doctoral Study (Rowan & Littlefield, 2001) depicting her winding journey through graduate school.In spite of these odds of half attrition fail rates, why would one even consider entering the bloody arena to begin with? The reasons are many, but it seems to me that certain other factors aside, it pays significant dividends for the individual aspiring Ph.D. student to be proactive and highly disciplined in aggressively, yet diplomatically, advancing your program. Can you take a day off? Certainly. Will anyone care more than you, if you successfully complete your coursework, pass your quals, have your dissertation topic approved by the university and the designating of your supervisor and co-supervisor?Who is it that will drive this process, should you, the PhD student, not be seen as doing so? The internal satisfaction with the passage of time is not one which I would describe as generally externally presented by others, rather it must come from within oneself. The ongoing internal dialogue the student encounters, hopefully goes about convincing “the self” of all of the useful and worthwhile reasons why you decided to undertake this adventure initially, and advancing the process in practical day-to-day ways, however small they may be incrementally on a temporal basis, to where you can begin see one’s progressive ascent up the mountaintop.A Ph.D. is not an end in life, but rather a means. A good program can assist in making one an excellent researcher with skills bases relevant to employment in the public, private, or non-profit sectors, with a dissertation powerfully evidencing that its author, indeed, knows how to think. Creating new knowledge and answering significant questions can add value to the marketplace of ideas and, in the end, make a mature contribution as a product of one’s hard work and toil over an extended period of time. It can, and should, become a labor of love it seems to me, although granted it need not necessarily be, although for many it rightly remains a source of pride in their lives. Another use for such, is the ability to spin off individual chapters from one’s dissertation into published professional journal articles, or perhaps as material for delivering public addresses at various professional conferences where presenting your research and findings.Moreover, in my experience, it certainly pays to be proactive, highly self-motivated, and consistent in your disciplined actions as your dissertation and Ph.D program advances. As the late great Lena Horne used to sing, as no other could: “Believe in yourself, as I believe in you!” Once the writing of the dissertation is underway, the burden largely, exclusively rests on the student seeing to it that the dissertation supervisor, co-supervisor, and when the time is deemed proper, for the external observer(s) to be weighing in with his/her comments on your various chapters which you periodically will have distributed onto them.Considering those comments, once received back given your stipulated comments deadline date for that phase on the draft chapters, discussing them with your dissertation supervisor, and incorporating those particular comments or proposed changes deemed worthy of such, into one’s draft manuscript, again, rests within the student’s domain of good faith responsibilities. Each university has specific requirements and the related fees, of course, associated with the copying and binding of the dissertation as a final degree requirement for the doctorate.Finally, this process can be accomplished 2–3 chapters at a time, depending of course, yet the Ph.D. student’s role in driving this process throughout, and to its successful completion, can result over time in increasing the trust level across these various relationships. These developing trusting relationships can greatly aid the doctoral student thus tilting the windmills almost inexorably toward acceptance, as buy-in hopefully becomes the natural byproduct of this sharing exchange among these participating members, who will likely be forming the heart of your University Jury, during the formal public defense of the doctoral thesis. These are likely the same people who, following their behind closed doors deliberations following one’s defense, will upon re-entering the Jury room, proceed in awarding separate grades to the doctoral student for the Thesis and for the Defense. This is no small treasure, Doctor. What more could one possibly ask for?

This question is extremely timely as my team and I were having a massive internal conversation regarding how we were going to price a product that we were launching into the market. Hopefully, you will find the discourse helpful in understanding how we employ psychology, brand strategy, and experience into position this new brand into the marketplaceNames have been changed to illustrate the point of the psychology rather than the company, product, or other identifying information.[NOTE: I probably should have told you readers what the bloody product is]Product:- The product that we were analyzing the pricing strategy for was a high-end women's heel cover (specially designed for Louboutin, Manolo, Jimmy Choo, etc)- The Product utilizes a waterproof fabric with a rubber sole for traction- The Product slips over a premium pair of heels and enables the young lady to brilliantly traverse inclement weather (Rain & Snow).- The Product is unzipped and slipped off when she arrives at her destination ready to shine.Problem:GCD has secured two materials that have very different price points. The original theory is that GCD should employ two price points (High Price & Low Price) within the GCD launch collection to gain market insight about the best fit for the positioning of the product in the marketplace. The problem is that we need to understand if this is the best approach for defining the corporate strategy.Goal:Define a logic framework that supports a rationale behind a pricing strategy.Summary:The nature of the cover shoe is a utility good, whose goal is to protect the wearer & deliver her to the destination ready to shine. The product performs a service out of necessity that enables a larger goal of wearing stunning heels while social peers are forced into less-desirable secondary options like Boots. Therefore, neither of the factors serve to address a rationale for differentiated pricing as neither products aids / augments either the product goal or the consumption goal any better than the other.In addition, when you get into Quality / Price comparison between highly congruent products (ie Black Covers in 2 prices) , the value proposition of the high quality is undermined by the pricing considerations of the low price. The buyer creates an intrinsic expectation that is unable to be fulfilled by GCD - I want the High Quality in the Low price.Finally, we see that the psychology of the purchasing consumer will be largely driven by aspirational consumers. Thus the brand of the heel is what the consumer is looking to showcase for social presence and serves as the driving factor for the purchase. Thus if the consumer is already reaching then a two tier pricing structure will drive the consumer to focus solely on cost when evaluating the use of this good - Thereby undermining the High Price for the Low Price.There are three main points that I would like to address the pricing considerations for a dual priced line:1. Utility Goods Inherent Quality WeaknessA) Use Case for Tiered Pricing & Why This is Not Applicable for GCDB) GCD is a Supporting Player2. Reactionary Strategy Inhibits Leadership & Long Term ValueA) Conflicting Goals of the Main LeadershipB) Risks of Dual Prices as a Means of Experimentation3. Quality/Price Dissonance Dichotomy4. Luxury Consumer Psychology5. Market Comparables to Drive Pricing Logic1. Utility Goods Inherent Pricing WeaknessThe product is a utility good that serves a functional purpose. This is not like a Burberry Scarf that aesthetically & functionally accessorizes a Burberry trench coat - this is a product that has a necessary function or utility to the consumer. When differentiating pricing for utility goods - there needs to be a driving factor in the performance to differentiate the price. For example, some questions the consumer maybe asking:Will paying for the higher priced item offer an additional benefits?Will paying more serve to augment the social cues for my status (i.e. the Burberry Scarf & Coat example)?Use Case for Tiered Pricing & Why This is Not Applicable for GCD:When employing a tiered pricing structure, you need to establish clear factors that communicate to the customer WHY this tier warrants greater pricing. Let’s take a look at a traditional pricing tier.SilverFeature 1Feature 2Feature 3GoldAll of Silver Package PLUSFeature 4Feature 5Feature 6PlatinumAll of Gold PLUSFeature 7Feature 8In this example, you can clearly see how much better Silver is from Gold & Platinum from Gold. We have definable metrics that serve to sell the consumer as to why one should cost more and the value of what you will get. In contrast, when it comes to this product, there are no clearly definable differentiating factors for Price 1 versus Price 2 - the product performs the same regardless of the price. For Example,Purpose (Utility): Protect Expensive Heels from Rain / Snow / Puddles / etcPrice 1: $80.00Price 2: $125.00How does the additional $45.00 drive more value to the consumer in achieving the goal of protecting the heel of the wearer? The answer is that it does not protect against any additional items that will inform a rationale to pay more.The Quality argument is inherently weak as the quality of the item does NOTHING to support the goal of the product’s utilization.GCD Role is to Alley-oop the Main StarThe vast majority of luxury consumption is done for the perceived social status inferred by the wearer. Women maybe purchasing for the fit, but it is probably more likely that they are competing with the female peers for dominance of the social group. Some of these heels are extremely expensive and uncomfortable, but they make the wearer look great - thus are worn to be seen by the social network as the leader for whatever reason. Therefore, the cover shoe is not the main attraction, it is the means to deliver enable the wearer to arrive at a function to be ready to shine (i.e. in great heels that make the wear look and feel sexy - while her social peers are in boots or something drab).GCD needs to be assisting in this mission of delivering the wearer ready to shine by having a great product that protects the consumer. In addition, this yields a basis for saying that the cover shoe is not the main attraction, it’s job is to alley-oop the showcasing of the heel. Therefore, the product should be easy to use and we should be cognizant that the wearer will want to take them off as soon as the utility of the product is performed to deliver the real goal of wearing a bad ass pair of heels.Thus if the goal is to use them and get out of them quickly, there is nothing about that mission that paying a higher price will support. Therefore we should eliminate the two positions all together.2. Reactionary Strategy Inhibits Leadership & Long Term ValueOne main arguments for employing a dual pricing strategy during the initial launch is that this will enable GCD to have feedback from the marketplace based on the product’s performance with buyers. The nature of the sales cycle for GCD involves selling GCD products at fashion trade shows to buyers, whose job is to purchase product from vendors (eg GCD) for retail in the retail environments that they represent. Let’s illustrate the sales cycle in more detail to establish an even footing for purposes of further investigation:1. GCD Exhibits Product at Trade Shows2. Buyers Attend the Trade Shows to Purchase Inventory for Sale3. GCD Totals Orders and Goals into Production4. Production Finished & Shipped to Retail5. Retail Consumers Start PurchasingOverall Timeline to Market Feedback: 7 - 8 MonthsThe general theory is that a buyer (the agent of the retailer) has the performance information regarding existing product purchases and experience to select the products that will compromise the strongest performance for the retailer. The retailer is financially liable for the purchasing decisions of the buyer and therefore the purchasing decisions of the buyer has considerable risks to the retailer.By virtue of the buyer serving as a representative of the future customers (i.e. the buyer has product performance information that informs how products perform with their clients), a dual pricing strategy is relying on the representative (of the consumers) to make decisions about the future of GCD. The buyers can have good insight, but it should be a factor that is incorporated into the overall positioning within the marketplace. However, we must always take into account that there are three factors that can serve to degrade the quality of this a strategic medium:1. The allegiance of the buyer is to maximize profit for the retailer (not GCD)2. The buyer is binding the retailer to the financial risks of their purchasing decisions3. The buyer devotes the time to understanding how a new company in an entirely new product category manifests in terms of market performance.1. Allegiance of the Buyer to the Best Interest of the Retailer:The buyer is employed by the retailer (ie responsible for the buyer’s financial well-being) and the buyer has a significant vested interest in the ultimate success of the retailer. By vested interest, I am referring to the fact that the buyer has made significant time investments in becoming a purchasing agent of the firm & emotional investments in terms of the social & professional clout that this trusted position confers. Therefore, basing our strategic market position decisions based on the feedback of the individual is means that they are actively seeking2. Financial Obligations of the Purchasing Decisions:It is in the buyer’s best interest in limiting the downside risk of bad decisions. Therefore, it is really in their best interest to purchase lower price (i.e. small financial constraints) in lower volumes to ensure that if the product doesn’t sell well, the retailer will not be negatively burdened with the financial obligations of the purchase. After all, GCD will be one very small portion of the aggregate financial performance of the retailer.New products in new categories represents a very risky proposition for the retailer. Uncertainty is a scary things and causes people to limit the negative future implications of adverse events. The buyer should push to the downside to help alleviate fears from uncertainty regarding product performance. If the product performs well, the buyer can try to place additional orders in season or push purchases off until next season.By virtue of GCD being such a small player in terms of the overall composition of the buyer’s purchasing portfolio, we should be careful to understand this as we define the pricing strategy.3. Investments in the GCD Market OpportunityBy virtue of relying on the buyer’s purchasing patters to define a dual pricing system as a means to define the best pricing strategy, we are saying that the buyer has devoted the time to truly evaluating the opportunity for this product. GCD is the company that has been spending all of our time thinking about the product - GCD posses the vision for where it is performing. The buyer is making very little time investments (maybe one hour between tradeshow and writing the order) - how is that really enough time to understand the true value of this product in the marketplace.If we rely solely on the feedback from buyer’s then we are saying that we believe in their abilities to asses strategic opportunities. How do we know if they are any good? How long they have been on the job? This is a very risky proposition for a company to be basing strategic decisions on the buyers ability to asses business opportunities.Bottom Line: It is risky to rely on the uncertain quality & conflicting allegiances of buyers to be defining the position of this product in the marketplace.Risks of Dual Prices as a Means of ExperimentationThe value of having dual prices is that we can experiment with the feedback from the representative marketplace about what the consumer feels is the best fit. When you conduct an experiment, you should test for one variable to serve as a means to compare the results. In the dual pricing scenario, we have 2 variables - Quality & Price.In the case of GCD, there is a tangible difference in Quality of the two different prices. If the goal is experiment with the appropriate pricing position of the goods then it would make sense to control the Price variable to see if the ultimate customer perceives the value of the product at a given level. To experiment, let’s position both quality variables (eg Cosmo-stretch material & Bear-stretch material) in the same price category.It is important to present a clear product offering to the consumer so that the message we are selling is the product and not confusion on the price. However, testing new prices is important to help gauge our value. We can employ tools like Amazon Mechanical Turks. This is a service that allows you to have an on demand labor force for real people to perform tasks with low investments. There is a survey option that will allow us to select certain demographic information such as women with household incomes $250k and have them fill out a survey for $.50/answer.Conducting market research has historically been extremely expensive. However, with new technology applications, these costs are dropping dramatically. There are numerous other tools that we can employ to gain market research while still presenting a strong, unified brand to the consumer.3. The Quality & Price Dissonance DichotomyEarly on at VÆL, we made a strategic decision to split certain looks from the premium VÆL Project into a more price-conscious line called Black Labs. Black Labs was going to “get” the more athletic, “popular” designs from VÆL, but at the price point that would drive revenue growth. As we evaluate pricing decisions, there was an example from one model in particular that comes to mind that can serve as a model.When you put the Borg Mid and the Taxi next to one another, there is a clear quality difference. The VÆL Borg Mid had supple leather that just looked more refined and higher quality. However, by virtue of putting the two shoes next to one another, we implicitly began guiding the buyer that these are “comparable products”. During the selling season, retailers were constantly providing feedback that they love the quality of VÆL, but the price of Black Labs. Everyone wants what they cannot have and we established the strengths of each product independently (i.e. Quality of VÆL & the Price of Black labs). Therefore, the Quality value proposition of the high end model was inherently undermined by the ready comparison to the lower priced option.When you get into Quality / Price comparison between highly congruent products (ie Black Covers in 2 prices) , the value proposition of the high quality is undermined by the pricing considerations of the low price. The buyer says I want the most value so I want the Quality of this product and the Price of this one - thereby establishing an intrinsic expectation that is unable to be fulfilled by GCD. We are inherently shooting ourselves in the foot by setting the concept of comparable entities with conflicting expectations.By virtue of offering ONE price, we are setting the discussion on the level playing field. The buyer will not know that there is the ability to get a lower priced good. Therefore, the discussion is centralized around the product (a strong negotiating position for GCD) versus pricing (a weak negotiating position for GCD).Strategic Brand Segmentation:From the beginning, we have discussed the values of ultimately building three product tiers (eg premium, mid-line, & commodity). Therefore, we can’t introduce a secondary price point at launch when we are planning on introducing a comparable price level in the future. We will be sacrificing future strategic vertical opportunities in the evolution of GCD as an organization.4. Luxury Consumer PsychologyThe majority of luxury consumption is made up of aspirational luxury - or consumers looking to purchase high end products because they want to be ascribed with the successful qualities inherent in achieving the means to purchase such brand. This endemic factor is a considerable driver to the US economy and serves as the impetus for the wildly successful rise of private sales sites like Gilt Groupe. The point is that consumers want the image, but they don’t really don’t care about what they product is that they are purchasing.In order to dive into this logic a little more we have to define our target consumer & understand that the majority of revenue will be driven by consumers aspiring to our target. Who is our target consumer:Age: 30+Career: Finance (Women in Finance Conference in NYC, Louboutin is standard issue), Fashion, High-Level Corp (CEO, marketing, operations, etc), NGO/Non-profitActivities: Yoga / Runner, probably in good shape, and shops at Whole FoodsThere are some fairly well documented luxury fashion marketing concepts that illustrate that the majority of women purchasing premium heels are those aspiring to that image. In addition, we know that the qualitative factors detailed above in conjunction with the income needed to support $700+ discretionary purchase defines small fraction of the US female population. Therefore, we can assume that the majority of the purchases will be occurring on consumers reaching the purchase of the heel via credit cards.Because of how debt has developed in modern society (read Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morality) - we have an cultivated a sense of guilt in our moral constructs when taking on liability to fulfill the obligations of a debt purchase. We feel badly about not paying on our debts (aside from the rat-bastard evil bankers that propagated the housing boom), because if someone owed us money, we would want it paid.We have defined two very important aspects of the consumer’s psychology:1. Majority of purchases will be driven by aspirational luxury2. Guilt-influenced shopping experienceIf these are the constructs that will characterize the purchase of the prime product (eg the Louboutin heels) then the accessory needs to recognize this state of being. Thus the brand of the heel is what the consumer is looking to showcase for social presence and serves as the driving factor for the purchase. Thus if the consumer is already reaching then a two tier pricing structure will drive the consumer to focus solely on cost when evaluating the use of this good - Thereby undermining the High Price for the Low Price.Focusing on Price:Basing decisions on price is always, always, always a losing battle that degrades the nature of the brand. Great brands exists beyond price because the value of the product is driven by market perception (i.e. intangible things that the consumer cannot control). Pricing is a weak position because the only place to go is down - you cannot raise prices. Therefore setting the stage for the discussion surrounding price inherently positions the brand for decline in the long run.There are a couple of additional reasons to not tier the pricing:Confusing the Buyers: Never underestimate how dumb your customer is. If there is a misspelling or things are not laid out perfectly, the buyer will freak out and send emails looking for resolution / clarification. This is bad as it opens the door for a customer service screw up. Also, the may order the low price thinking that it’s a substitute good & when they get it, they don’t like it. This possibility opens the organization to return risks.Confusing the Consumer: After making several sketches, think about how this will be merchandised at the store level. How will you put two black units in different prices on a special shelf that will make sense as to why one black is $80.00 and another is $125.00. With limited shelf space this is a difficult proposition5. Market Comparables to Drive Pricing LogicAfter doing a fair amount of research, here are some comparable pricing considerations to take into account:Women's Gloves at accessories are all listed at $80s for Private Label & $130s for good comparable lines.Women's Wallets sell at 17-20% of comparable Handbags - Thus, avg price of $750 for shoes = $130 - $150 @ 17%Women's Burberry Scarves sell @ 13-15% of Trench Coats - Thus, supporting the $130 figure on $750 shoesBy setting the price at $99 - we just lost $30/unit. This was a problem that we had a VAEL - we priced based on startup costing versus what the market was telling us. There is plenty of market information to offer some guides for our fit rather than simply "Cost +" - shouldn't there be a lot more effort placed into pricing?

Influencer marketing disrupts some of the most sacred practices of advertising.Agencies who make well-produced, precious ads will be priced out by teenagers with smartphone cameras. Well-honed brand identity will be replaced with the notion that your influencers define your brand.Agency FrictionTwenty years ago, we called it “Hollywood actors and supermodels getting paid to make ads” instead of influencer marketing. The way it worked was that an agent would broker a deal between a brand and the movie star, the movie star would make the ad, and the agent would take an egregious cut in exchange for negotiating.This is also how it works with influencers.Many influencer marketing platforms recreate the agency model.Brands and influencers meet, they make a deal for thousands of dollars, and the agency takes a cut.If an influencer marketing platform thinks of itself as an agency, it makes sense to take a cut. But an influencer marketing platform can also be modeled like a marketplace business, and marketplaces have different economics.Agencies have a cost structure that scales linearly with the number of clients—similarly to other services businesses like consultancies. Marketplace businesses have high up-front fixed costs, but they scale more comfortably.The marketplace businesses that people love always take a super low margin (Amazon), or a zero margin that they use to build up volume for a secondary business (Facebook).They can do this because they have paid the high up-front cost of building a marketplace. Influencer marketing needs a marketplace, not an agency.Creative vs. DistributionThere are two parts to influencer marketing: creative and distribution.The lonely YouTube star who makes great animations but has no followers gets you only creativity. Random swimsuit models get you only distribution. Kim Kardashian gets you both creative and distribution.Here’s how it works today with the influencer agencies:brand goes to an agency looking for both creative and distributionagency goes to super-expensive influencer with creative + distributionbrand pays $$$, agency gets $, influencer gets $$The problem is that creative and distribution do not need to be conflated. A very good creative gets natural distribution with even a minimum of source distribution.A bad creative pushed by a popular influencer will get an artificial spike of distribution for a little while, then it will fall flat. The agency will call this a success. The brand marketing manager will call this is a success.It’s not a success. It’s an expensive, unfalsifiable brand statement.The untapped value in influencer marketing is in the massive population of creators without a large distribution channel.Brands should be spending more money directly across more creative people, whether or not those creative people have distribution.Let’s talk about the Pepsi ad for a sec.Was it successful?Nobody knows. Not even Pepsi. There’s simply no way to prove it! No, Pepsi does not have access to some secret source of information that validates their decision to pay millions of dollars for a controversial Pepsi ad.Brands are obsessed with the big bang, high production, high cost creative. This is insane! It’s a 2–5 minute ad. Take the $6 million you would spend on your Kendall Jenner ad, divvy it across a bunch of hungry creative people with iMovie, and watch the virality bloom.Brands should take the Y-Combinator approach to marketing:find a simple way of vetting a large pool of talentspray and pray your ad budget across the best of that talentIf an ad is good, social media will take care of distribution with minor effort. Don’t overpay for Kendall Jenner—underpay for an unproven, super creative teenager with a Macbook and a hunger to prove herself.Obsession with Brand GuidelinesInfluencer marketing is not taking off faster because every big brand has a gatekeeper department that is responsible for enforcing the brand guidelines.This is the second-most annoying part of being an influencer, right after “not getting paid enough”.Take a look at this biblical-length brief on Tongal, a site where influencers can make ads for brands:When you think “GMC. We Are Professional Grade,” what pops into your head? Glimpses of pickup trucks hauling boulders up a perilous mountain pass? Lumber being loaded into the flatbed and a firm handshake between two guys wearing hardhats on the construction lot? What we’re aiming at with this project is advancing (and tweaking) GMC’s bedrock positioning to memorably introduce the all new 2017 GMC Acadia -- a crossover SUV that shares the same precision engineering and professional grade DNA as it’s brawnier brethren, and adds a meticulous attention to premium materials and design-detail. It’s the perfect intersection of form and function, capability and styling. It’s the SUV that doesn’t overdo it but, rather, does it just right. This is where you come in. GMC needs your help to evolve the way people think about this vehicle, and their brand. Right now, too many people in the SUV market think “GMC doesn’t make a model for me.” You’re going to help us change that forever, by creating a TV commercial that will showcase GMC’s commitment to professional-grade design, show the relevance of that meticulousness to the SUV space -- and most importantly, make the Acadia the new favorite in the race. For a little inspiration, we have chosen two possible taglines and directions this TV spot could go:“Fits your Life, Precisely,” based on the insight that most people use their cars for a lot of different things in life and want a car that can be the perfect balance of form and function, whether you’re pulling into the valet with your spouse, or bringing the whole family on a ski trip. The 2017 Acadia is versatile and capable, and just the right size to fit your lifestyle, however distinct and different it may be.“Premium Is Our Standard,” based on the insight that… <It goes on and on like this.>It’s a car, we get it! You want an ad for a car.To reiterate the previous point—the untapped value is in the creators. And creators don’t like to be put in a tiny, over-constrained box.Branding teams hate giving up control because control is their entire job. But in the case of influencer marketing, less control is better. You want the creators to throw lots of stuff against the wall so you can see what sticks.Let’s be clear: a branding team is important for certain tasks.For example, when Satya Nadella took over Microsoft, he had to steer the ship 180 degrees towards open source, cloud computing, and building on top of foreign ecosystems.Such a concerted effort requires a marketing shift internally and externally. You need dogmas like “mobile first cloud first”. You need billboards and display advertising and conference sponsorships and TV commercials.The same might be true of Exxon and its new marketing around algae. If Exxon is actually making a strategic move into the algae space, it will require a huge shift in marketing to go along with it.But most of today’s successful brands provide a clear value proposition. They aren’t making a multi-billion dollar pivot into cloud computing.Squarespace is the place to start a website. Dollar Shave Club gives you cheap razors. Casper makes a good mattress. Pop Chips are chips that have some air injected into them. GMC makes sport utility vehicles.Brands don’t need to give influencers a complex set of guidelines.Just give the creators a simple prompt and watch them run wild. That is what we do on Adforprize, and the results have been fantastic.