- Image by Buou via Flickr
Is anybody here old enough to remember Hugh Beaumont, the actor who played the father on the 1950s-1960s classic TV show Leave It to Beaver? That Hugh was a cultural icon, the perfect father.
Nowadays, a new Hugh, Hugh Laurie, has become something of a cultural icon in his role as Dr. Gregory House on the hit TV drama House M.D. My, how things have changed. These two Hughs couldn’t be further apart.
From perfect to flawed. Beaumont was the perfect Dad. If there were any chinks in the armor, we never saw them. Laurie is damaged – a description he applies to himself frequently. He’s a drug addict, a boor, and a bully. (I’m talking about the characters, not the men.)
From handsome to homely. Beaumont had looks and a suave demeanor. Laurie looks awkward and hung over.
From certainty to doubt. Beaumont oozes confidence and a feeling that he is one with the world. (In real life, Beaumont was a Methodist Minister.) Laurie is an atheist, a doubter, certain only that nothing is certain. (In real life, Laurie seems to much the same.)
From all the right answers to all the right questions. Whenever Wally or The Beave had a personal crisis, Beaumont was there with the perfect soothing words, the right solution. When a colleague or patient comes to him in despair, Laurie shoots necessary but profoundly unsettling questions directly into their psyche.
Marketing Implications of the Hugh Shift
With all this doubt and questioning, people crave answers and certainty. Products that offer magic bullet solutions attract interest.
BUT.
With all this skepticism, product claims won’t be taken on faith. In terms of content strategy, people want to look under the hood, examine the facts. Infomercials, long copy direct mail, and business blogs, while seemingly contradictory media, all play to our hunger to seek, explore, and find peace. Products that offer peace and wholeness to mind, body, and spirit speak to the deepest needs we have.
On the other hand … Could a company play to modern skepticism differently and win? Since we feel damaged or broken, might we identify with a company that presented itself as flawed or even confused? Companies go to extremes to present an impeccable image. Maybe that’s a gross error. Maybe people need to see the warts. Maybe the House mindset is what’s behind business blogs, the market’s desire to see negative comments addressed and flaws admitted.
What do you think? Would social media have attracted any interest in the 1950s? Is it possible to market today without social media?
Related articles by Zemanta
- Actor Laurie’s book ‘tops French sales’ (news.bbc.co.uk)
- Laurie Regrets Candid Depression Talk (cinemablend.com)
- Is TV’s House good medicine? (sciam.com)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=f4be3e66-26ff-479d-91ca-cda5baba1bc9)
Brad,
Obviously, I am not sufficiently senior to remember Mr. Beaumont. But judging on your short film clip, it appears as though he must have been a class act.
I see your point with respect to the case for companies attempting to abandon their ‘perfect’ image. It would certainly help in terms of any endeavor to become more relatable in the eyes of consumers.
That said, lighthearted admissions about imperfections need to be made very carefully, and companies should be extremely careful about how any efforts to appear more vulnerable may be misconstrued or taken out of context, particularly with regards to issues of product quality or safety.
Also, any attempt from a company to admit prior flaws should only be undertaken after very careful consultation with their lawyers. You never know just how plaintiff lawyers could attempt to exploit such admissions and use them to the advantage of their clients.
Andrew, You bring an excellent perspective to a discussion of exposing corporate warts. Indeed, one thing that deters companies from open communication is fear of lawsuits. I imagine this consideration is one reason financial institutions have been so reluctant to initiate “transparency”. At the same time, companies may use legal considerations as an excuse to say no to a form of communication they simply don’t like. In those cases, they may be making a costly mistake.
Terrific insight, Brad. I do know that leadership best practices have shifted from “all knowing” to “inquiry.” Today’s markets and organizations are too complex for certainty. The two-way communication with customers, so critical in today’s markets, is also consistent with the shifts that you note. Nevertheless, B2B customers seek suppliers that are confident without being cocky, as the customer wants to trust there is a long-term relationship to be had before they invest in a strategic-vendor relationship. People put up with Hugh Laurie character’s flaws as he is uniquely gifted and confident about his core skills. Have a great day, Kay
PS: How do you get your photo posted with a blog comment?
Hi Kay, Thanks for stopping by and commenting! You bring up a great point about the company-supplier relationship, where expectations may be a bit different than in the company-customer relationship. In either case, it’s a fine line between showing warts and conveying the idea you’re all warts.
To get the picture (gravatar) going … visit http://en.gravatar.com/ and set up an account. It takes about 5 minutes to do – you just upload a photo – quite easy!
Note to Word Sell readers – Kay is a client and brand new blogger. She’s also sharp as nails. Please check out her blog.
Brad,
Great post! (especially for those of us who saw ‘Beaver’ first time around)
Kay’s earlier comment hit the nail on the head. We will gladly put up with (leader’s) quirks if the net is positive. Dr. House would simply be another PITA if he didn’t save lives (on TV, that is). People see the quirks whether or not the leader wants them seen. May as well be honest and stop trying to hide what can’t be hidden. Bill
Brad, excellent discussion. I watched Leave it to Beaver (still do in fact) and while many now mock that time period there is value in examining the presentation of the culture through media compared to present day. It’s interesting that we live in an age where you can become a “reality star” yet the antics are far from reality; we demand authenticity and transparency yet fire people and flog companies when mistakes are made. We want “real” people but not too real. I believe we are at another great turning point and yes, social medial plays an essential role.
Hi Bill, “Stop trying to hide what can’t be hidden.” You’ve put your finger on the crux of the problem. Corporate cultures with a command-and-control communication strategy are in direct conflict with the internet, where information is free and easy. There just isn’t any place to hide. So besides revealing their quirks, companies need to do a top flight job of explaining their value. (This is where Hugh Beaumont can help us out.) If they don’t make a compelling case for themselves, their message will get lost in the ocean of blog posts and web pages. Going through the motions with perfunctory information dumps and company-centric marketing materials just won’t cut it anymore.
Hi Karen, It does seem like we are at a turning point. My question for you is – which way are we turning? How do you see social media righting the wrongs you bring up so eloquently here … or do you see these wrongs being righted?
Brad Shorrs last blog post..News and Thank You’s
Great post! “From all the right answers to all the right questions.” Perfect.
The internet has really made it difficult for any organization to pretend perfection. This will actually strengthen most organizations, because it does not allow for stonewalling – it requires meaningful action when things go wrong. Even insurance companies have figured out that a heartfelt apology can do more to avoid a malpractice lawsuit than practically any other tactic.
But I agree with Andrew – there is a right way and wrong way to go about admitting you are not perfect. House is a bowl full of problems – but we love him ’cause he solves the case. For organizations I think it’s not that customers want perfection, they want best effort and shy that, they want answers and fixes. For the most part you can create more loyalty by fixing a mistake well than by being perfect in the first place.
Fred H Schlegels last blog post..Physics and Ideation: Creativity and Mismatched Socks
I like what Karen wrote:
“we demand authenticity and transparency yet fire people and flog companies when mistakes are made. We want “real” people but not too real.”
and that’s why hype and carefully-groomed “reality” shows will always bring in the sales.
Data points, Barbara
Barbara Ling, Virtual Coachs last blog post..I now have 18 free-flying parakeets – Empathy, please!
Hi Fred, You’re right about stonewalling being nearly impossible. Attempts to do so have backfired badly, including on savvy companies like Dell. I guess you just have to assume everything that is done or said will become public knowledge.
Hi Barbara, Not sure I agree with you about “reality” shows always bringing in sales. Sometimes, yes, but always … I think there’s a good chance for a backlash if the public thinks its being manipulated. That’s why it’s so difficult for companies to orchestrate a “viral” campaign.
Brad Shorrs last blog post..News and Thank You’s
Hi Brad – I recognise the guys picture but I don’t recall the TV program, as I wasn’t born then.
I think it’s often easier to trust someone if we can see their flaws. Sometimes, when a person or a business appears to be too perfect, it’s easy to wonder what they’re hiding.
Hi Cath, One reason a business blog is helpful is that it provides a medium from which to convey and discuss the flaws. Easier to do there than anywhere else on a corporate site.
Brad Shorrs last blog post..Get to Page 1 on Google with Content Optimization
I hope they never stop showing House reruns
Hi Nomad, If they do, I’m going to have a lot of time on my hands.
Hi Cath, They still show “Leave It to Beaver” reruns on TV here in the States. If you ever have a chance to watch an episode, I’d love to know what you think. You’ll see characters with flaws, just not Hugh.