Since the beginning of advertising, creatives have been focused on generating a ”big idea” that will capture the hearts and minds of consumers and inspire them to want and buy products.  With the advent of digital, we added the need to “interact” or “engage” with that advertising online and we measure this interaction as a gauge of how good the idea actually is.

To achieve this, we have to employ a much broader range of skills and considerations and this is at the heart of what makes “digital” different. 

It drives me nuts that so many clients still want to see creative in a pitch long before the agency has had time to really figure out what they need to build. 

Driving the right kind of engagement is as much about the technology and how you use it, the interface and how you arrange it (UI), the content and how you structure it (IA) and the way that your interface actually works to deliver against the needs and wants of a consumer (UX).  These aspects require us to gain insights into not only how the hearts and minds of consumers work but how their devices and their brains work too.

Sometimes technology creates barriers to the experience.  It might be that databases need to talk to each other to deliver personalised information, and they just don’t. It might be that the audience is living in a part of Australia that still can’t watch youtube because their connections are too slow.  It might be that you want to deliver the experience on a mobile phone and half the users will be looking at it on a screen that is tiny.

So how do you then balance the technological capabilities with the emotional requirements of the marketing campaign?

To do this in a vacuum is impossible.  Just as ads get tested on focus groups, digital executions should always be tested through usability analysis.  And even once you go live, the data on usage patterns will tell you a lot, not only about what content people are interested in but also, whether the site you have built is easy and intuitive or confusing and not worth the trouble.

2 or 3 years ago, many digital agencies gave strategy away with a pitch in order to win the production business. Now, the field is varied.  Some companies still consider their web presence a channel and relegate it to a project manager to … well, manage.  At the other end of the spectrum however, we are seeing more and more companies pitching strategy out separately and involving many people in their organisation who previously had no insight into marketing activities or their rational.

The question for this panel is, does a company need an overarching digital strategy or is the strategy digital?  Here are a few things to consider:
• Digital is like a retail location.  Even if customers are not wanting to buy right now, if they’re looking at your web presence, they are an opportunity.
• Customers’ expectations are to be able to transact online but delivering this often requires new products and services to be developed.
• Digital initiatives often interface and depend on large scale CRM systems and data warehouses.  Responsibility for these areas crosses many different departments and might require complex political negotiations to get working together.
• When companies start investing big budgets, they also expect ROI. 

Since this is what I do for a living, I have to say that yes, companies do need a digital strategy, but how far should we go? 

Some initiatives in digital marketing are no more complex that promoting something or gathering email addresses … over thinking a simple campaign microsite makes what used to be a cheap and effective use of the internet, prohibitively expensive.  It is interesting to debate just how necessary a digital strategy is.

Strategy also implies something fixed.  However, the ‘always live’, instantaneous digital experience affects how strategies need to evolve, like a living, breathing thing based on feedback and results. How many companies budget for and organise themselves around this kind of effort and how many are still revamping their website every few years and then leaving it alone?

So what makes a good strategy today?  One that the board can understand and ‘buy in’ to, or one that constantly evolves?  Can these be the same thing?  My view is that it is more dependent on organisational culture and less on the PowerPoint but there are times when I have wondered. 

This panel should be really interesting (Tuesday 16th March, 9.45am, Track 3).  Anthony Goldman, Citrus; Ben Dux, theirspace digital; Yvette Mayer, SMV Group Australia; and Mac Walker, Hyro would love to hear what you guys think and any other burning questions you think are worth debate on this topic.
What is the role of a strategist today?
    * What’s the right skill set for a strategist today?
    * Does digital have a role in strategic planning in 2010?