Home » Archives for Jon Coleman » Page 3

Author: Jon Coleman

Blog

The Misguided Allure of Deep Tracks

21 Comments

Tuesdays With Coleman

Don’t get radio talent coach Steve Reynolds started on deep tracks. Wait, it’s too late. It all started June 2nd at 11:53am on his Facebook page, when he posted this:

“Dear Yacht Rock Radio on SiriusXM: welcome back, happy summer, missed you, but…you’re playing lots of unfamiliar music and songs that are stiffs. Please get back to the cheesy, known songs only.”

That initial post regarding the seasonal soft rock channel inspired 41 comments, including chime-ins from some pretty big name radio people.

But Steve was just getting started. An hour later he posted this:

Sirius XM Yacht Rock Radio

A few days later, he asked his followers to “report all non-yacht songs heard on Yacht Rock Radio,” a post that resulted in 80 comments.

To date, the topic has generated hundreds of comments. We were intrigued enough to cover the topic in this week’s blog.

Steve takes issue with two separate points in his posts. One is the playing of “stiffs”, or unfamiliar songs, and the other is songs that he feels don’t make sense on the station.

The Fit measurement we use in our FACT360 Strategic Music Tests can tell you when a song may not be in sync with your brand. I covered this topic in the blog, “Should I Play That Song On My Radio Station”.

When it comes to the former issue, whether or not to play deep tracks, here is an absolute truth—every radio program director or music director, at some point or another, has felt the allure of playing lesser-known songs or songs that weren’t hits on their station. It may be a caller on the request line, a salesperson or the programmer questioning himself. And when a PD has to make the decision on whether a deeper track makes sense, the first questions to ask are:

  • Who is your audience?
  • Why are they listening to you and what are their expectations?

SiriusXM, for example, has a deep tracks channel, where the perception Steve noted on the Yacht Rock channel would be reversed. If you hear a hit on the deep tracks channel, that would not be delivering to expectation.

This aligns with the very reason why Steve explains he was inspired to write the post in the first place.

“Yacht Rock brings me back to a happy, carefree time,” he says. “The role of the Yacht Rock channel for me is nostalgia. When a comfortable, familiar song like ‘Deacon Blues’ by Steely Dan comes on, for example, it makes me smile. I don’t want to have to use brainpower when I’m in this state. When a song comes on I’ve never heard of in this context, now I’m using parts of my brain to think about whether I know it and what I think of it. That’s not why I’m there.”

Sirius XM Yacht Rock Radio

Rupert Holmes has one hit with staying power. This isn’t it.

Context plays a crucial role. AAA stations often have perception of more depth that may allow them to go deeper than a Hot AC station, for example.

If listeners expect their favorite songs on your radio station, the only way to satisfy them is by playing something familiar. But with deep tracks you can’t do that because the very premise of a “deep track” is that you can’t find one that appeals to everyone.

Here’s another example:

Years ago, I drove across the country listening to Creedence Clearwater Revival. I love CCR. My deep is CCR, so I can listen to songs that are unfamiliar to most. For a Classic Rock fan, someone else’s deep may be The Eagles and another’s may be Aerosmith. For a hit music station, the expectation, of course, is hit music.

We are in the business of satisfying customers (listeners) that come to our stores (stations).

We know through research that you can’t find any song—even the biggest, most popular hit song—that appeals to all your listeners.

And you certainly can’t find a deep track that appeals to all of them. Why would you minimize the percentage of customers that are likely to be satisfied?

Steve Reynolds makes a living coaching radio personalities, and he sees a parallel between program directors deciding which music to play and air talent deciding which content to feature.

“As you’ve said many times, Jon, every song is a marketing decision. Is that the song you want representing your radio station? Not just some songs. Every song. I tell air talent, every second of time you have on the station is like beachfront property. You’re the developer. What will you erect on the property? Is it the 4-story home with panoramic views of the ocean and a pool or is it an apartment with no views? Are we selecting our very best, most appealing content every time? It’s the same thing with songs. Are we playing our best, most appealing songs every time? If not, why?”

This doesn’t mean that you never take chances and color outside the lines. As referenced in “Should I Play That Song On My Radio Station,” you can be entrepreneurial in your own lane. You can’t be entrepreneurial in your fringe lanes.

As Don Benson, the former CEO of Lincoln Financial Media puts it, your format lane gives you license to introduce your audience to songs and even sounds they haven’t heard. When you play outside your lane, you risk losing listeners and may encourage brand erosion.

So when it comes to deep tracks, determine:

  • Who is the audience?
  • Why are they listening to you?
  • What are their expectations?

If, in this framework, playing deep tracks makes sense, great.

If not (and it most cases it will be “not”), remember you’re in the customer service business. Providing the most appealing product is the key to success.

Blog

Can HBO and Radio Have it All?

1 Comment

Tuesdays With Coleman

As the series finale for Game of Thrones approaches, the buzz feels stronger than ever. While it’s always tough for a network to lose a signature show, HBO has managed to deliver one success after another for the past 20 years. The Sopranos. Six Feet Under. The Wire. Entourage. Sex and the City. True Blood. Game of Thrones.

What’s one thing all those hugely successful shows have in common?

HBO aired them in prime time on Sunday nights. And now, it wants to make Monday night a showcase as well.

The network launched the new Monday night strategy last night by debuting its new mini-series, Chernobyl. The plan is to schedule two hours of original scripted programming each Monday night.

This begs the question: Is HBO’s Sunday night programming successful because the shows are great or are they successful because of HBO’s strong Sunday night benchmark?

If you think it’s the quality of the shows, consider the current television landscape.

How many lunch conversations have you been in where a coworker mentions a series on Netflix, Amazon Prime or Hulu that you haven’t seen?  It happens all the time at Coleman Insights. It’s not that they aren’t good shows—in most cases, they are arguably great shows— but when a show is available on-demand amongst a never-ending plethora of strong content, it’s just more challenging to create critical mass and buzz via a shared experience.

Clearly, HBO’s Sunday night benchmark—which they’ve now spent decades promoting heavily—matters. Will HBO now undermine Sunday with Monday?

Yes.

Anytime you add more reasons to use a product you invariably undermine the initial reasons people have for using you.  That’s not necessarily bad as it can make you more broadly appealing, but it does make you less special.

Maybe Monday is ok, meaning you can broaden your appeal and be special, but what about when Tuesday is added and it continues to dilute the importance of Sunday?  Plus, as you add more programming it becomes impossible for them all to be as “good” or special as the original Sunday night shows.

Radio programmers inevitably find themselves in similar situations. Whether it is a station feature, morning bit or music, adding to the current recipe can be great, but it can also undermine the current focus of the station. To add or not to add?

One scenario is addition by music.

Radio stations are known for playing certain styles of music. Broadening into other music styles may be critical to stay in sync with everchanging music tastes. Adding music genres your station isn’t known for may work in the short-term, especially if the genre is currently very popular. But, stations can only extend that success and logic so far. When a station adds too many styles, particularly ones it is not really known for, it may no longer be unique. Product fit is diminished and the brand is diluted. Short term success can turn into unforeseen long-term problems. Ideally, your radio station should play songs that test well (High Acceptance) and fit your station’s brand (High Fit,) as illustrated in the Acceptance-Fit Matrix below:

Acceptance Fit Matrix

Another scenario is addition by features.

Can a radio station add too many features? Absolutely, especially if it takes away from the promotion of the big, popular feature (i.e., “Phone Taps”) that is proven to draw listeners into the station. Music stations also fall into the trap of adding too much non-music content during the day, which gets in the way of the other content and dilutes the product. We often think we need to add more, when we simply need to market the best things more.

Your success is oftentimes driven by what makes you unique. Broadening your radio station may sound great in theory, but it can dilute your uniqueness and damage your long-term position. This is the risk for HBO.

When considering what to add to your radio station to make it more mass appeal, always consider whether the risk of losing uniqueness and diluting your brand is outweighed by the number of listeners you’ll bring to the station.

Usually you’ll find it is not.

Blog

Winning by Thinking Backwards

Comment

Eliminate to innovate.

Sounds like a ridiculous notion, right?

The concept of inversion is counter-intuitive to the way our brains work when we think strategically. Inversion is thinking backwards. Rather than thinking about what you need to do, or add, to achieve your goals, you think about what you don’t want to have happen—the worst-case scenarios—to create solutions.

Let’s say you have a meeting at your radio station because you want to create more innovation. You break out the whiteboard and start thinking about all the ways the station can innovate. This inevitably leads to innovation by addition—whether it’s new programming features, a new style of music or hiring a new jock.

But what if, in the meeting, you spend your time thinking only about what obstacles are getting in the way of innovation?

It seems we always try to add the new layer positively rather than thinking about all the layers we created that are actually negative.

How do we increase our midday numbers? Let’s add more features! But if we think of this in terms of inversion, or in reverse, we should consider whether or not the existing features are truly adding value and brand depth. Or, are they just creating clutter and an obstacle? We need to also consider the ripple effect of the additions we make. An additional feature means additional promos.

If the feature does add value and brand depth, it should stay. But it should always be considered through that filter. And maybe in this case, perhaps removing the existing feature(s) is the better move.

Business magnate Warren Buffett is a big fan of the inversion technique. Rather than saying “How can I make money,” Buffett would say “How do I never lose money?”

Buffett flips the mindset. Instead of thinking about what he needs to do to make money, he thinks about the obstacles in the way of making money.

Seems to work well for him.

Inversion can be tricky, because it’s not how our brains have been trained to think. But when you use it to think about the opposite of what you want and then use that to create solutions, it’s powerful stuff.

Think about some of your biggest challenges and how you would approach them. Then flip the approach.

Buffett’s business partner, Charlie Munger, makes the case for inversion this way:

“Invert, always invert: Turn a situation or problem upside down. Look at it backward. What happens if all our plans go wrong? Where don’t we want to go, and how do you get there? Instead of looking for success, make a list of how to fail instead–through sloth, envy, resentment, self-pity, entitlement, all the mental habits of self-defeat. Avoid these qualities and you will succeed. Tell me where I’m going to die so I don’t go there.”

Or, if you’d prefer, just follow the inversion wisdom of George Costanza, made famous in the 1994 Seinfeld episode “The Opposite”:

George: “My life is the complete opposite of everything I want it to be. Every instinct I have in every aspect of life, be it something to wear, something to eat… It’s often wrong.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y_6fZGSOQI

Jerry:  “If every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right.”

Blog

10 PPM Tips for Program Directors: 10 Years Later

Comment

Tuesdays With Coleman

This Fall marks 10 years since Arbitron rolled out the Portable People Meter™ (PPM™) to the top 10 markets in the United States, following initial tests in Houston and Philadelphia (markets 11-50 rolled out in 2009 and 2010.)

A year after the rollout was complete, I wrote “Top Ten Things to Do as a New PD in a PPM Market,” a list of strategic guidelines for new radio programmers in North American markets measured by the Portable People Meter™.

Now that much of the radio industry has lived with PPM for a decade, let’s look back on the advice through a 2018 lens. New commentary is italicized.

1. Root all of your thinking first and foremost in the strategy of the station. Don’t go in with a PPM mindset; go in with the mindset of developing a brand by exploiting an available market position. Your goal should be to develop a strong brand and to make the station entertaining and focused. Once you know “who you are” and what your brand message is and how you want to communicate that to the audience, then start thinking PPM.

Especially in the first few years of the methodology, programmers focused a significant amount of time on PPM manipulation. Maybe, just maybe, we can squeeze an extra quarter hour here and there by playing the PPM game.

10 years later, I think radio strategy has generally reverted back to where it was, with brand focus as the most important component. The PPM panel is just as difficult to manipulate. Big brands are long lasting. Manipulation tactics are not.

2. Do a complete brand and content audit of the station. Don’t go to the office for the first two days or meet with staff. Stay at home or in your hotel and listen to and quantify all the verbal and non-verbal content. How much music do you play? How much do your DJ’s and personalities talk? What do they talk about? What are the features? Promotions? How does the station stage and image its music? What is the station’s positioning and how often do you communicate it?

What we learned in our 2008 study “Real PPM Panelists Tell All” was that every interruption had some detrimental impact on the ratings. The instinctive reaction of many programmers was to wipe the station clean – 30 second promos became 10 seconds, IDs were five seconds, jocks talked less.

What’s important to understand is that interruptions, while detrimental in the moment, can be additive to the brand. So, make sure every interruption has brand value. If it builds the brand, it’s worth it.

3. Rate all the content on the station on a 1-10 brand scale and a 1-10 execution scale. The brand scale means how each element on the station fits or resonates with the brand essence of the station. Does it fit with the images you want to project? Do the same with the in the moment execution. Is it entertaining? Tight? Would a listener stay tuned in that moment? Rate everything on a 1-10 scale. Anything that is low on both “brand values” and “in the moment entertainment” should be eliminated or tightened. Possible culprits might be DJ chatter that is not compelling. Sales promos. Worry less about content that supports the brand identity. Music features, entertaining DJ content from personalities who are well known and liked.

It’s always been challenging for PDs to subjectively evaluate content. In the moment, we overthink and overreact. By doing regular monitors on your stations, writing down each break and piece of content and rating it on a simple scale, it’s easy to quickly determine what’s brand additive and what isn’t.

4. Do an abbreviated analysis of your main competitors. What are they doing in music, talk, features, positioning, and spot placement? React to their programming tactics where it is smart. Know their pure programming advantages so you can cover them where it makes sense. One thing for sure is that you don’t want them to be tighter or better programmed for PPM than your station since small advantages can sometimes mean a lot when it comes to PPM performance.

Studying your competition as well as your own station is always a good idea. Prepare for your opponents like a head coach.

5. Don’t be afraid to put on content that will impact the audience emotionally even if in the moment you cause some tune-out. There are two ways to build ratings and one is more important than the other. First, you can put on content that causes people to like your station. Content that causes an emotional reaction and a desire to be associated with your station. Second you can reduce “tune-outs”, those things that cause people to tune away for a minute or an hour. Both are important, but you should recognize that you can impact the ratings positively even if in the moment some people tune-out. Some things that cause a little short term tune-out will actually stick in the head of your P1’s and create a long term bond. Keep the things that are a 10 on the brand evaluation scale, even if a few people tune away when you do them.

As in #2, build the brand and accept in-the-moment loss. While even the strongest content may cause tune-out, it will grow your brand and ultimately grow the audience over time.

6. Understand the ins and outs of PPM ratings, including the fact that PPM, like diary, is research and not immune to statistical wobble. Really understand margin of error and then learn how to aggregate ratings for programming elements of the station. Know the numbers behind each number you look at like the difference between looking at a daypart with 20 meters and one with 100 meters.

The difficulties reaching potential panelists, and certainly the erosion of the landline over the past 10 years, has compounded this problem. By utilizing perceptual research, like our Plan Developer, you can track essential measurements like Cume and P1 with larger sample sizes than may be available with ratings. An added benefit of perceptual research is the ability to monitor your perceptual position in the market, including your strengths, weaknesses and opportunities.

7. Understand panel dynamics so that you don’t react to ratings increases or decreases that are a function of normal panel change or evolution. Sometimes ratings will increase a little just because you have a few more P1’s in the sample as a result of panel turnover. Sometime you will lose listeners. This is normal and you need to know when it is happening to your station. Don’t over-believe the good numbers and temper your reaction to the weak ones. They will more often than not be in a statistically valid range.

This has improved over time as Nielsen has provided and added tools to better understand and get a granular look at the panel.

8. Learn how to manage weekly ratings and expectations. All ratings have wobble and fluctuations. In diary markets, most GMs and PDs know not to overreact to monthlies or even whole books. But, in a PPM world there is often a belief that weeklies and monthlies have more credence than similar ratings spans in a diary world. However, with PPM, just like any research, there is random and normal fluctuation. So, you need to be able to set the table on how to react to weeklies, monthlies and ratings in general. Tell your new GM that you don’t want to look at weeklies or discuss them each week. Don’t download them at 11am each Tuesday and make it a big event. Look at them every three or four weeks.

Fortunately, the weekly obsession does not appear to be pervasive in 2018. But there is more focus now on meter count, and there’s still the danger of focusing on too much of this at the expense of brand focus and taking your eye off the ball.

9. Understand causation vs. simple correlation. Realize that every time your ratings go up or down it is not necessarily related to that hours, days or weeks programming. Often there will be a random correlation between a programming event and ratings. More often than not, it will be just a correlation and the two events will not be causally related.

Remember that listeners are not paying close attention to your radio station. They remember events selectively and select radio stations based on habit, needs, perceptions, language and lifestyle. More often than not, a correlation from event to ratings will be by chance, not because you caused it.

10. Experiment. If you don’t know for sure what causes your ratings to go up or down, experiment to find out. For example, if your hot rotation on currents is 3 hours, go to 2.5 every other week for 20 weeks. Divide your ratings in to two 10 week periods. See if the 10 2.5 hour rotation weeks show any ratings difference from the 10 3 hour rotation weeks. Do tighter rotations work or not? Aggregate enough weeks to have a statistically valid comparison. Also, if you do this, look at other variables that might be impacted. For example, does the burn on songs change with tighter rotations? Are there fewer or more highly popular songs?

A/B testing is all the marketing buzz, though testing of messaging has been around for decades! Just as Google and Amazon test the delivery of their product, there’s no reason why radio stations shouldn’t test theirs as well. Perhaps you try variations of clocks every other day. Maybe you play 200 songs one day and 300 songs every other day. Run stopsets differently every other day. Compile a year of ratings data and compare. If you really want to get granular with Nielsen data, do it over a long enough period of time to formulate actionable plans based on that data.

10 years after the debut of PPM in the top 10 markets and seven years after writing these tips, the general principles of successful programming haven’t changed. If you’re:

  • Always thinking strategically
  • Staying true to your brand
  • Maintaining focus and discipline
  • Not overreacting
  • Testing and tracking results over time

…you’re positioned for PPM success in 2018 and beyond.

Blog

Should I Play That Song On My Radio Station?

4 Comments

Tuesdays With Coleman

For radio program directors, the question of which songs to play and which to leave out is as old as the medium itself.  If it was only about playing popular songs, radio stations would be broader than they are.  Why is that?  Well, just like restaurants don’t all serve the same popular foods and generally must choose what to serve, radio stations also focus on types, styles and eras of music.

Pizza Hut doesn’t sell hamburgers. CHR stations don’t play country.

Outback Steakhouse doesn’t sell Chinese food. Rock stations don’t play pop music.

Chipotle doesn’t sell pancakes. Hip Hop stations don’t play Taylor Swift.

These choices seem obvious, but are they always?  How can a program director think about what to play when consumers listen to popular music and music that seems right for the format?  How can they know when to stretch beyond the narrowest definition of their format?  When can they take chances and when should they play it safe?

Just as they choose restaurants and most brands based on simplistic image perceptions, consumers also select radio stations based on an image they have of that station.

As we’ve illustrated in our explanations of Outside Thinking, that image may be formulated based on Type (like Rock, Country or Hip Hop); Era (like 80s, 90s or 00s); or Texture (like Hard, Soft or Upbeat).

But in the real world, not every song a station plays will meet the pure definition of the brand it represents to its audience.

Sometimes, a program director will want to throw in a song just to “freshen things up.”

Other times a song will reach such a high level of popularity in the zeitgeist, a program director may feel compelled to play it even if it is outside the format lane.

Program directors will fill their music tests with “fishing expeditions” to see what happens.

Every program director and music director is faced with the decision of whether or not to play songs on their stations and is left questioning if it was the right choice because of Fit.

So, when to play and when not to play?

Don Benson, the former President and CEO of Lincoln Financial Media, put it something like this:

You can be entrepreneurial in your own lane. You can’t be entrepreneurial in your fringe lanes.

What Don means by that is your format lane gives you license to introduce your audience to songs and even sounds they haven’t heard. When you play outside your lane, you risk losing listeners and may encourage brand erosion.

For most listeners, this isn’t a conscious thought process. In the moment, if they really like it, a listener may sit through a song that feels out of sync with the brand and wait for the radio station to return to expectation. If they don’t really like it, and it’s out of sync, the listener is less likely to stay.

The real danger here is, if a station plays out-of-sync songs too often—songs that aren’t consistent with its brand perception—the listener will lose confidence in the station’s ability to deliver what the listener wants.

The Coleman Insights Brand-Content MatrixSM dictates that the success of great radio stations is the result of two dimensions. First, the station’s brand strength—its top of mind awareness and perception. Second, its in-the-moment content strength—a function of how compelling the content is. The Brand-Content Matrix shows the most successful radio stations marry high-quality content with a well-established brand.

Brand Content Matrix

In many ways, the decision-making process on whether or not to play a song on your radio station can be handled in much the same way…using an Acceptance-Fit Matrix.

Acceptance Fit Matrix

Ideally, your radio station will play a high percentage of songs that test well (High Acceptance) and fit your station’s brand (High Fit).

But, there always will be moments of questioning.

In the late 80s and very early 90s, for example, pop music took a milder, less edgy turn. During this period, artists like Richard Marx, Mike and the Mechanics, Wilson Phillips and Michael Bolton topped the charts.

Michael Bolton Soul Provider

How was CHR supposed to live without Michael Bolton?

For CHR stations, playing too much of this fringe ACish sound risked undermining their brand expectation. The expectations were edgier and had more tempo. The center-lane pop was from artists like Michael Jackson, Prince and Madonna.

Stations had to be careful how quickly and deeply to move into the fringe sound—not just for fear of brand erosion, but also the risk of making themselves vulnerable to attack by more focused formats like Hot AC or edgier stations like Hip Hop.

As the Acceptance-Fit Matrix indicates, if a song is outside your own lane, it had better be exceptionally popular to play it.  A song that is exceptionally popular but not in the center lane is in the lower right quadrant. You may be able to get away with that. But, if it is only moderately popular it will be a tune out and will hurt your image.

Our recommendation is to evaluate every song in your library in terms of both Acceptance and Fit.

Aim for highly popular songs that are a great fit with your brand.

The less it fits your brand, the more selective you should be.

So when it’s time to ask “should I play that song on my radio station?”

Be smart.

Be thoughtful.

Be strategic.

And, be entrepreneurial.

Just do it in your own lane.

Blog

HBO and the Mass Appeal Trap

Comment

Tuesdays With Coleman

Why do listeners choose your radio station?

Why do listeners choose your podcast?

Why do viewers choose your TV show?

Why do diners choose your restaurant?

No matter what business you’re in, it’s important to be clear about why your customers choose to do business with you.

Today, we’ll focus on HBO, which was just taken over by AT&T as part of its acquisition of Time Warner.

According to the New York Times, John Stankey, the AT&T executive who now oversees HBO, envisions changes coming to the network. He suggested HBO will have to increase its subscriber base and the number of viewing hours. To do that, HBO will have to broaden its scope, past signature Sunday night shows like Game of Thrones.

So, why do viewers choose HBO?

The short answer is for high quality, compelling shows. There aren’t many signature HBO shows, but when they get a big one it’s really big. The Sopranos. Game of Thrones. The Wire. Six Feet Under. Entourage. Curb Your Enthusiasm. True Blood…and the list goes on.

Incredibly, HBO has traditionally focused on one night a week for its original programming – Sundays. So on the one hand, HBO is not top-of-mind Monday-Saturday. But it’s really top-of-mind on Sunday nights.

They’ve been able to get away with it (and charge a premium) for a long time as a result of the premium quality of its programming.

Now the game is changing. Competing pay channels, like Showtime and Starz, have upped their original programming games. Netflix is a binge factory. HBO was the destination for high production value and strong writing. Now, there’s more choice than ever – and just about every choice is less expensive than HBO.

While HBO should rightfully look to increase interest in the channel in this sea of choice, it risks the “mass appeal trap.” In the effort to broaden its appeal, it waters down its point of differentiation. The very reason(s) why consumers chose the brand in the first place.

The Tuesdays With Coleman blog “Don’t Change Your Radio Station” covered the value of not changing for the sake of change. Radio stations sometimes get the inclination to change things when they shouldn’t be changed. Clearly defined brand images are extremely desirable, and take a great deal of time to build. Any changes radio stations make should be carefully considered through the lens of their desirable images and whether those changes will be at the expense of their base position.

Alternative radio stations in the early 90s faced the challenge of broadening appeal while maintaining their credibility with an audience that liked the stations because they sounded and felt different. While playlists were broader in scope, programmers had to make sure that the new sounds were compatible and that the stations maintained their left-of-center images. If the alternative station loses the perception of being – well, the “alternative” – it can spell trouble for the brand.

Adult Album Alternative (AAA) radio stations have faced a similar challenge. Stations that previously played a large number of deep tracks, for example, found they needed to become more hit-driven to broaden appeal. The challenge was, and remains, how to do so while maintaining the often eccentric, cooler-than-the-room images that draw many listeners to the format.

HBO has the Sunday night image and the quality image and it should defend those images. So, when it considers changes to increase its audience, their leadership, too, must ensure those changes enhance, not water down, those images.

If HBO is losing subscribers and needs to compete for more viewing hours, it has to do it in a way that protects its quality franchise, but at the same time has more programs that rival that of Netflix and other competition. The way HBO does that is the key. This includes how and how often it promotes and markets the images.

Stankey claims HBO has to find a way to “move beyond 35 to 40 percent penetration to have (HBO) become a more common product”.

Desiring more usage is one thing. But as leaders of some of the most successful radio stations and brands will tell you, “common” is quite another.

There’s the propensity to think becoming more mass appeal = more audience = more revenue.

Beware of this trap.

If becoming more mass appeal compromises your brand and decreases focus, it can (and often does) result in less audience and less revenue.

Perhaps HBO can build its base while maintaining its brand position. If, after the changes, it is still perceived as special and a little “uncommon”, that wouldn’t be a bad thing.

Blog

Radio Needs Second-Order Thinking

Comment

Tuesdays With Coleman

First-order thinking is considering the immediate impact of the decisions we make.

Second-order thinking is considering all the potential consequences of the decisions we make.

The radio industry often uses first-order thinking, but not second-order thinking.

When we think we’re solving a problem, we unintentionally create another.

More than once in my career, and certainly in the last few years, a station has changed format and lived to regret it.

Not because they didn’t get reasonable ratings. It was because their flip caused a reaction in the marketplace that ultimately screwed them.

They didn’t think of the second order.

Example #1:

You’ve got a Hot Adult Contemporary (Hot AC) station in a market that is underperforming, while there is only one Country station. So, you flip your Hot AC station to Country.

First-order thinking: The competition’s Country station leads the market in revenue. If our group flips the Hot AC to Country, and take even a third of their ratings and revenue, we’ll be doing better than we are now as a Hot AC.

Second-order thinking: If we change the format and attack the competition, they may adjust one or two of their stations to attack a station in our cluster. Perhaps the station that accounts for most of our ratings and revenue.

It’s applicable to more than format flips.

Example #2:

You’re responsible for a Classic Rock station with no direct competitor. Since you have no direct competitor, you can broaden the scope to appeal to more people—so you start adding sounds, like Classic Hits.

First-order thinking:  If we add Classic Hits to the Classic Rock recipe, we’ll add more fans to our rock station.

Second-order thinking: If we add Classic Hits to our Classic Rock recipe, we may alienate some of our Classic Rock fans and lessen passion with both camps. Plus, the competition may notice we now sound a bit softer and wimpier and see an opportunity to attack us with a straight-ahead, focused rock station.

See the dangers of only thinking in the first-order? It really is like a chess match, thinking steps ahead.

We’re fortunate to have many clients who invest in research and advertising. Those radio stations that don’t have a complete map of their market may fall victim to first-order thinking.

Example #3:

You oversee an Urban station and your group has the format all to yourselves in the market.

First-order thinking: We’re all alone in this format. We don’t need to advertise.

Second-order thinking: If we don’t invest in our product and advertise, the station’s brand images will wither away. The decline in ratings and revenue will outweigh the cost savings of not investing in the product.

As author Howard Marks explains in his book, The Most Important Thing, “First-level thinking is simplistic and superficial, and just about everyone can do it. Second-level thinking is deep, complex and convoluted.”

Although it takes a lot of work, second-order thinking (and third, fourth and so on) is well worth the time.

Second-order thinking now means avoiding problems later.

And you won’t have to call them “unforeseen problems.”

Blog

Why Radio Needs To Trust The Process

Comment

Tuesdays With Coleman

On February 23, 2015, ESPN released “The Great Analytics Rankings”. This study ranked all 122 professional sports franchises in Major League Baseball, the National Football League, the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League.

The ranking criteria were “the strength of each franchise’s analytics staff, its buy-in from execs and coaches, its investment in biometric data and how much its approach is predicated on analytics”.

The team that ESPN determined embraced data the most was the Philadelphia 76ers.

The Sixers were in Miami to play the Heat the night the report was released.

Their record at the time was 12-44.

Two years prior, the Sixers hired Sam Hinkie as their general manager. Hinkie used the word “process” at his very first press conference. “We talk a lot about process—not outcome—and trying to consistently take all the best information you can and consistently make good decisions. Sometimes they work and sometimes they don’t, but you reevaluate them all.”

In the two years between his hiring and the release of the ESPN report, Hinkie made a number of controversial moves. He traded away player after player, including the team’s only All-Star, Jrue Holiday.

Sam Hinkie says there’s a difference between having data and how you use the data. For instance, coaches can use statistics to know which plays put their players in the best situations to succeed. They know which players do better posting up, in isolation, in the pick and roll and so on. By digging deeper into the data, Hinkie can determine exactly how much better his players will do in each scenario.

While “Trust the Process” became a rallying call for the Sixers and their fans, impatience got the best of upper management. Sam Hinkie “resigned” as general manager of the Philadelphia 76ers on April 6, 2016. On that day, the team’s record was 10-68—even worse than a year earlier, when ESPN ranked the Philadelphia 76ers number one in its “Great Analytics Rankings”.

Despite Hinkie’s departure, the 76ers doubled down on its use of analytics. In October, 2016, the team hired Alex Rucker as the team’s vice president of analytics and strategy. The team’s subsequent hires in the department led to the Sixers having the largest analytics staff in the NBA. Meanwhile, more and more data became available.

Thanks to player-tracking camera systems used in every NBA arena, every NBA team has access to roughly 800,000 lines of data per game. This includes everything from the number of passes made by a player to the distance that player leaves between himself and an opponent when he closes out on a shooter and how effective he is depending on the speed at which he does so.

Everything is trackable, and the data can be overwhelming. How do they deal with it?

According to Rucker, “The amount of information has grown so much that it needs translators. The people who work with me, their job is to translate that mass of data into something that looks like basketball and then use that to inform our decisions.”

Looks like ESPN was on to something in their report three years ago, as was Sam Hinkie. “Trusting the Process” has led the 76ers to a 50-30 record and a current 14-game winning streak at the time of this writing. The team will head to the playoffs for the first time since 2012.

So, how has ESPN’s ranking of teams that embrace analytics three years ago correlated with success since?

The Top 10 was the Philadelphia 76ers, Houston Astros, Houston Rockets, Tampa Bay Rays, Boston Red Sox, New York Yankees, San Antonio Spurs, Dallas Mavericks, Oakland Athletics and Chicago Blackhawks.

The combined record of those teams in their most recent season* is 606-510, a 54% winning percentage. The 76ers are about to make the playoffs for the first time in six years. The Houston Astros, with a 70-92 record in the season before the report was released, won their first World Series in 2017. The Houston Rockets currently hold the best record in the NBA. The Boston Red Sox won the AL East in 2017 and the New York Yankees’ 2017 record was their best since 2012.

Only three of the top 10 had a losing record in their most recent season—the Rays, Mavericks and A’s.

As for the teams that ranked at the bottom for embracing analytics?

That illustrious honor goes to the Los Angeles Lakers, New York Jets, Miami Marlins, Tennessee Titans, Colorado Avalanche, Brooklyn Nets, San Diego Chargers, Washington Redskins, New York Knicks and Philadelphia Phillies.

The combined record of those teams in their most recent seasons is 275-428, a 39% winning percentage. Only two of the bottom 10 had a winning record in their most recent season—the Titans and Chargers, each at 9-7.

While sports franchises are ultimately judged by wins and losses, radio stations are judged by ratings. What we’ve found over the years is stations that invest in their brands, develop their brands, and then—yes, trust the process—are the ones that are successful in the long haul.

Anyone involved in programming or sales at a radio station has felt the butterflies and flat-out nausea of a “ratings day”. It takes just one bad ratings month for even the most seasoned, brilliant programming minds to question themselves.

You’ve done the research study. You’ve seen the recommendations. You’re on board with “The Plan”. You’ve been executing it perfectly.

And then ratings point in the wrong direction for a few months and the questioning begins, like in these hypothetical examples:

“Maybe the morning show should stop doing that benchmark. You know I did see some complaints on Facebook.”

“Maybe we should be playing one more 90’s song an hour. I mean, the songs have tested well.”

“We’re not seeing the bump we expected from ‘Commercial-Free Mondays’. Let’s get rid of it.”

We even do this in the face of completely fact-based data that may show, for example, the morning show benchmark indicates impressive growth, the current music doesn’t correlate with the 90’s music and your positive “fewer commercials than other stations” image is growing while exposing your competitor’s negative “more commercials than other stations” image.

My colleague John Boyne likes to say images are like icebergs. Slow to develop, slow to erode.

Trust the process.

Building images take time, then the ratings follow. It is, unfortunately, not instant gratification.

When you don’t trust the process, you make poor “in the moment” decisions.

Remember what Hinkie said in his first press conference. “We talk a lot about process, not outcome”. Are you focused on the outcome or the process?

When you focus on the outcome, you make the mistake of tying ratings success to specific things too quickly.

For example, if you add an 80s feature to improve your 80s image, you expect that feature to immediately impact ratings. The feature is meant to build the image, then the ratings.

Trust the process.

Like the 76ers, our team knows a little something about translating mass amounts of data into clear, actionable strategy.

Just like professional sports franchises have proven a correlation between embracing data and success, many of our clients have had the same experience.

The real key is once you get the data, once we interpret the data and once you implement “The Plan”….

Trust the process!

*Most recent season is: NFL (2017); MLB (2017); NHL (2017-2018); and NBA (2017-2018)

 

 

 

 

 

Blog

What if Bill Belichick Programmed Your Radio Station?

Comment

Tuesdays With Coleman

Let’s imagine, this Super Bowl week, what it would be like if New England head coach Bill Belichick wasn’t the leader of the Patriots.

In fact, let’s imagine him out of football completely.

What if Bill Belichick was the program director of a radio station?

What would those aircheck sessions look like?

Belichick would dissect each break into pieces like game film. Do you think Belichick would rely on the same few clichés PDs have used for decades, like “One thought per break” or “Stop puking”?

Or would Belichick explain to you not just what you did right or wrong, but why? Do you think he’d just tell you how you forgot to sell station benefits or would he get you to buy in to the strategic vision?

If Bill Belichick designed clocks in Selector or Music Master, do you think he would know the exact layout of every clock of his competition? Of course he would.

If Bill Belichick showed up to a station remote, what would he think of a station banner hastily hung behind a bored jock eating a cheeseburger?

I’m betting the display would be perfect, the jock would never sit down, and feedback about the radio station would have been solicited from every employee and listener that stopped by.

I’m also certain the jock showing up to the remote on Belichick’s watch would have known almost as much if not more about the business than the manager on duty.

Belichick says the only sign the Patriots have in their locker room is a quote from The Art of War: ‘Every battle is won before it is fought’”.

Many radio station personnel have long held the viewpoint that a certain amount of spontaneity is good, that perhaps too much preparation takes away from that “anything can happen” feel of a live show.

Nonsense.

Sure, true spontaneity happens and can be great. But great programmers and personalities can give the illusion of spontaneity because they planned so effectively.  Spontaneity on the radio would be like Tom Brady rolling out of the pocket on a busted pass play.  He and the receiver would spontaneously find a new way to connect, but even that would be within defined boundaries of when and how to be spontaneous.

Preparation is always the key.

Patriots wide receiver Julian Edelman explains it this way: “You never go into a week thinking you’re not prepared. Even if it’s the one play that the (opposing) defensive coordinator had when he was a graduate assistant at Louisiana Tech, you’re going to see that play and you’re going to be ready for it.”

Think about that for a minute. He’s implying the Patriots studied a play that an opposing coach ran once when he was a graduate assistant in college.

That’s preparation.

I have a feeling few things would ever surprise employees at a Bill Belichick-run radio station.

Morning shows would diligently plan the next day’s show, but they would also be prepared to adapt to any situation. They would have a strategy in place for hypotheticals ranging from how they would handle a tornado touching down during the show to what they would do if a celebrity like Bruno Mars called the hotline.

New England Patriots players talk about how Belichick will quiz them on strategy in the hallways and how nervous they get when he approaches with a question out-of-the-blue. Over time, players became less nervous. Because they were more prepared.

If Belichick programmed a Hot AC station and the competition added 20 percent more 80s, he’d have a plan for that.

If he programmed a CHR and the competition just launched a big new morning show, he’d have a plan for that, too.

Sports talk hosts would be able to anticipate every question from every caller on just about any topic before they called.

Do you work at a radio station where the answer to why something is done a certain way is, “Because we’ve always done it that way”?

One of the most important characteristics Belichick would bring to a radio station is always looking toward the future.

Belichick was asked in April 2017 if he was still celebrating the team’s Super Bowl win two months earlier (incidentally, that reporter would never work for Belichick).

“We’re on to 2017. No one cares about 2016 anymore. We talk about today, and we talk about the next game. That’s all we can really control.”

Great radio stations are prepared radio stations. Great personalities are prepared personalities. Great program directors are prepared program directors.

You don’t have to like the Patriots or be a fan of Bill Belichick, but you can adopt the most important tenet of his success – be prepared.

Blog

What Made Mike & Mike Successful?

Comment

On Friday, November 17th, Mike & Mike aired their final broadcast on ESPN Radio. The show’s anchor, Mike Greenberg, will move on to host his own morning TV show in the spring. His co-host for the past 18 years, Mike Golic, will remain in place with a new partner, longtime ESPN staple Trey Wingo.

A run as long and remarkable as this deserves some reflection as to what made the show work.

Mike and the Mad Dog are rightfully credited with influencing the launch of sports talk radio stations and a generation of sports talk hosts during their time at WFAN/New York; however, both Mike Francesa and Chris “Mad Dog” Russo were career broadcasters when they were paired with each other.

While Mike and the Mad Dog could also be described as an “Odd Couple”, the debut of Mike & Mike on January 3, 2000 presented sports talk fans with an odd couple that offered completely different perspectives – a career broadcaster paired with a career athlete.

In fact, the show’s original tag line was “What makes them different makes them great”.

Greenberg and Golic understood their roles extremely well and always presented their points of view from their respective lenses. The plot of the show clearly highlighted these two points of view. They used these roles to create comedic and dramatic tension.

It’s important to consider how good Mike & Mike was considering the challenges it faced as a national show. While there is plenty of passion for sports around the country, sports fandom is almost always hyper local. If there was news about your team that wasn’t noteworthy on a national level, you wouldn’t hear about it on Mike & Mike. On the other hand, a local sports talk show could cover the story in great detail. Many of these local shows that focus on important local content about their local teams beat Mike & Mike in the ratings, but Mike & Mike did very well considering their national perspective.

The principles that guided Mike & Mike are ones that can be applied to any local or national show. These include:

  • Define a clear role for each character on the show
  • Clearly communicate these roles to every member of the show
  • Ensure differing viewpoints are presented in show discussions
  • Encourage the talent to focus on personal relationships, not just the news topics
  • Have the show look for interesting angles on stories that will appeal to casual listeners
  • Make diligent show planning a consistent habit
  • Always aim for high production value

Mike & Mike’s influence will be felt for some time to come. The lessons of what made it work will last forever.