The cover story in this month’s issue of Training & Development magazine is “Metrics and Measurement: Do They Matter?”

The article argues in favor of measuring success in sales training and performance … vs. (I would guess) NOT measuring it.

The fact that the headline is phrased as a question implies that there are people who are AGAINST measuring the results generated through sales training.

Sounds unbelievable, doesn’t it?

Yet, there are people who don’t measure the results generated from their marketing programs.

And there are those who never test marketing ideas against each other in a simple A/B split.

They argue passionately about whether concept A or B … or headline A or B … is better, when they could quicky and easily test the two concepts or headlines online at minimal cost.

Marketers give lip service to testing, but except for the bigger direct marketers, most companies do little measurement and even less split testing.

I think the top reasons for lack of testing and measurement are:

A. Lack of knowledge of how to conduct a test.
B. View testing as too much work and hassle.
C. Not sure what they would do with the results.

Any other reasons you can think of why so many marketers measure their results minimally if at all?

The hidden danger in political advertising centered on a candidate’s ideology is that voters will misinterpret it, disagree with it, or both.

A case in point: a local political candidate ran a radio spot today.

In it, he asserted that every American has these inalienable rights:

1. A good job at a living wage.
2. Decent, affordable housing.
3. A good education.
4. Quality health care.

At first glance, this seems both admirable and hard to argue with.

But let’s go through them one at a time:

1. A good job at a decent wage — sounds good in theory. But are you going to force business owners to employ undesirable candidates at wages their skills and experience don’t justify just to make good on this promise.

2. Decent, affordable housing — does this mean the government provides free housing to those who can’t buy their own? If so, what’s my incentive to work and earn rent money?

3. A good education — I can’t argue here. I’m all for getting rid of the tenure system and holding teachers more accountable.

4. Quality health care — should we have socialized medicine that puts a cap on what doctors can earn? Being a medical doctor is so difficult and demanding, won’t more would-be doctors select a different profession if they can’t earn what they’re worth in medicine?

The candidate who paid for this radio spot is running as a liberal Democrat.

Does his 4-point ideology fit the bill of a liberal Democrat?

Or is it nothing more than a Socialist agenda?

Would you vote for him?

Or at the very least, rewrite his commercial?

Are you sick and tired of getting hype-filled e-mail marketing messages from the publishers of all those free e-zines you read?

Here’s an easy way to stop them: don’t accept free e-zine subscriptions.

“I write my own free e-newsletter and have to desensitive myself to comments from negative readers who think all of us are writing for their benefit with no underlying profit motive,” says DE. “I love what I do, but I do it for the money.”

“Perhaps some day the complainers will understand that the purpose of a business is to create a profit. But until then,” advises DE, “they should unsubscribe from all the free e-newsletters to eliminate their frustration.”

DE’s position is clear: the “price” for getting his “free” e-newsletter is not money — he doesn’t ask for a credit card number — but permission.

Specifically, permission to send you e-mail messages about products and services he thinks would be useful to you.

Do you think this permission is a reasonable “subscription fee” for the publisher of a free e-zine to charge you?

Or do you think DE and others should offer you the option of just getting the e-zine but not the e-mail marketing messages?

According to an article in Training & Development magazine (7/07, p. 20), senior executives attend fewer training classes than other corporate employees.

I can only think of 3 reasons for this:

1. Senior executives are smarter than ordinary workers and know more, so they do not require training or improvement.

2. Senior executives are busier and their work more important than ordinary workers, so they do not have time to attend training classes.

3. Training and development is universally perceived by corporate employees as a waste of time, but only senior executives have the authority to excuse themselves, while the rest of us don’t.

Which of the above do you think is the reason for senior management’s exemption from training?

Or is there another reason senior executives avoid training that I don’t know about?

My colleagues Michael Stelzner and David Scott Meerman are, like me, advocates of marketing with content.

But a recent article suggests that our approach is all wrong.

The author said that branding is more effective than ever today.

Reason: prospects are suffering from information overload. They don’t have time to process product information. And so they make purchase decisions based on brand reputation rather than product facts.

Well, hey, if that’s true, then prospects don’t want — or have time to read — more content, right?

So which should a marketer concentrate on?

Becoming a thought leader by publishing valuable content?

Or branding?

The voice-over in a recent KFC commercial for their thighs and drumstick bucket says the chicken now contains “less” transfat.

Less than what? Less doesn’t mean anything unless you say what it has less fat than.

While we hear the voice-over, the words “0% transfat” appear on the screen.

Hey, that’s not less transfat. That’s NO transfat. Shouldn’t the script say “no transfat”?

This may seem a small nitpik, but words matter, especially when you consider the price KFC paid to create and run that spot.

Isn’t “zero transfat” the big health selling point here? “Less” communicates that it still has some transfat, just not as much as before.

But since we don’t know how much transfat KFC’s chicken had before (they don’t tell us), or how much they reduced transfat, the phrase “less transfat” is virtually meaningless.

Right?

The Economist recently sent me a promotion that flies in the face of conventional wisdom for what works in direct mail selling magazine subscriptions:

1. It’s a self-mailer.

2. The whole thing is white type on red paper stock.

3. Even though it’s an oversize mailer, it’s mainly blank space with just a headline and one short paragraph of copy.

4. It’s a pun. The headline says “Passionately Red” — and remember, the whole mailer is bright red.

Yet, I suspect it may be working, since I THINK I got this — or something close to it — once before from The Economist.

Anyone out there get the Economist’s “red” mailing and have any thoughts on whether and why it works?

Anyone out there associated with the Economist who can tell us the results on this piece?

Blogs are the “in” thing today, with 8 million Americans adults saying they have started blogs

Newspapers, meanwhile, are in decline: only 23 percent of adults under 30 today read newspapers regularly.

To combat their sagging circulation, newspapers are now jumping on the blogging bandwagon.

According to an article in Circulation Management (6/07, p. 14), 75% of the nation’s 50 largest newspapers have a blog, with these blogs averaging 3 posts per week.

Is this a compelling case for convergence — all digital and offline media coming together in an integrated stream of news and information?

Or is it just a last desperate attempt by newspapers to stay relevant in the Internet age?