Admittedly, I was only watching the Super Bowl to see Madonna at halftime, Tom Brady (in spandex) at any time, and a good commercial or two along the way. Of all these things, I didn’t expect an insurance ad to stick in my head, but I can’t stop thinking about MetLife’s new campaign, “Everyone,” by CP+B.

The ad was entertaining and uncontrollably lured my attention with cartoons from my childhood. I usually associate MetLife with the Peanuts gang, but here were the greatest hits of cartoon characters from the late 70s and early 80s alongside Charlie Brown and friends. I liked how the ad resolved this uncanny assemblage of cartoon characters with a message that more or less went like this: “No matter who I am or how much I earn, I can secure a better financial future. I can do this.” A welcome, positive message for a rather tricky subject.

But why did MetLife feel the need to bring in other cartoons beyond the Peanuts gang? To a certain extent, the Peanuts characters with their myriad (and strong) personalities support the message of “Everyone,” but that’s a bit of a stretch. And it probably wasn’t Charles Schultz’s intention to represent every type of American; he more likely used the comics as vehicles for humor and social commentary. Moreover, not “everyone” reads Peanuts, which most often appears in print; I would hazard a majority of people get their cartoons on television. 

MetLife didn’t look for a cartoon with more plurality of representation for its “Everyone” campaign. Instead, it turned to a plurality of cartoon character sets, among which everyone has a favorite, but who collectively represent a shared past. Whether you were watching the Jetsons or reading Peanuts, you still wax nostalgic. And since you can’t take in all the characters in just one viewing, the campaign invites you to interact with it on other channels. 

I’ve been on Facebook all week, watching “out-takes” and meeting the “cast.” Yosemite Sam, Waldo, Fat Albert, Marvin the Martian! But what really got my “like” button going was the video of Voltron doing the robot. Good for the person at CP+B who thought of this! I’ll do the robot for you any day. Clearly, they have their target down pat, as I’ve been sharing this video internally at work, with friends on Facebook, and on my Twitter feed. Good God, have I become an insurance sales person? A well done social media blitz for an insurance company! 

My only gripe is that after such a masterful experience from TV to Facebook, the linkage to the actual MetLife site from its Facebook page was a letdown. Say I’m actually interested in learning more about MetLife’s products, and click on the link provided in the “About Us” section. It directs me to a lifeless page with contact numbers on MetLife’s corporate site. Without He-Man, Judy Jetson, or even MetLife’s trademark Snoopy, the party is grimly over, and I am suddenly no longer interested in learning more. To be fair, MetLife’s homepage does a better job of connecting with the campaign and engaging with the actual products. It might be better to lead potential clients there instead.

Will this campaign get people to buy more insurance from MetLife? Who’s to say? But it certainly gives MetLife’s sales force a fair chance to break through, especially if they’re offering Voltron action figures. And if their salesperson can do the robot, all the better.

Graphis's Logo Design 8 selects the best work in logo design across industries. With our submission of the logo we created for CQ Roll Call (in the Corporate category), we made Graphis's Gold list.

We're thrilled, and we couldn't be prouder of our team.

[This post originally appeared on the iMediaConnection Blog on Jan. 26, 2012.]

1.    Many channels; one adaptable brand presence.

We see too many brands stretching or splintering their messages as they extend them to more and more channels. This often happens because a brand message wasn’t originally designed for digital and social distribution, or because the brand engagement is managed by separate and disconnected groups. Companies need to craft campaigns that are elastic and adaptable before they activate.

Technology is responding to the need for adaptability. Responsive design, for example, is all the buzz among digital designers. Websites programmed for responsive design adapt to the medium (computer or mobile device), as well as the size of the display (large or small monitor; tablet or smart phone).

Responsive design is just one tactic helping marketers ensure a unified brand expression while maintaining differentiation. It’s as simple as e pluribus unum, but just as hard to achieve.

2.    Every voice matters. And they’ll be louder in 2012.

Speaking of our national motto, we’re noticing significantly more democracy in brand endorsements. Interactive, social platforms such as Yelp, Facebook and even open forums on company websites, are empowering the end consumer like never before. In 2012, the strength of a brand will be measured as much by its number of “likes” on Facebook as by the quality and cleverness of its Super Bowl commercial.

While we expect celebrity endorsements to continue, we know marketers will put greater stock in testimonials from the other 99 percent. One challenge for marketers in 2012 will be how to leverage the endless threads of testimonial content generated online and integrate it into their brand marketing. Listening and responding to consumers, and maintaining an interactive, two-way brand will be another.

3.    Print isn’t going away.

Digital technology has given us—and continues to produce—more channels and mediums of communication. Many of them represent improvements—or, at the very least, efficiencies—here to save us from the slow and cumbersome world of print.

But, in business communications and beyond, can digital replace print? We at Sullivan highly doubt it. We approach communications holistically. Where others see a separation between digital and print, we see a spectrum. The message carries through as the experience changes.

Ironically, the more digital mediums multiply, the more print can let you stand out. A well executed direct mailing can have greater impact nowadays than an email blast. Its arrival is more dramatic, it’s tactile and it has a more permanent presence than an archived message.

When we talk about interface design, we don’t forget that print has an interface, too. Pen-to-paper annotation forges a personal connection to the printed document. Handwriting defines an identity in a way an email signature can’t. Handwritten notes in business communications may be impractical, but printed letters and invitations remain highly effective.

4.    The challenge for sales: be at once tech-forward and personal.

Marketers’ efforts to accelerate their brand further into the digital and social spaces often haven’t translated this momentum to their sales process—especially in B2B. Sales teams are slower, even resistant, to change their approaches, but they are increasingly under pressure to update and digitalize. The technology and collateral salespeople use, after all, speak volumes about their companies, and no business wants to appear behind the times.

The danger in too much technology, though, is in compromising the personal interactions that are essential to making a sale. Your iPad can’t give your presentation for you, and no matter how aesthetic your PowerPoint is, it can’t force a conversation. Sales strategies should consider technological tools and designed materials as subordinate to live, human experiences and the relationships that come of them. In 2012 and beyond, relationships will remain the bottom line in business.

All told, this year poses its fair share of challenges to marketers. But, in the right hands, those challenges become opportunities. Our prediction? The brands that can adapt quickly, build a broad and flexible strategy, listen to their customers and create engaging sales experiences will come out on top.

Anyone who knows me well will tell you I spend time reading, thinking and talking about design and movies in almost equal measure. So I hope that explains why I might share this seemingly incongruous link to an essay about the controversial '70s film, Caligula.

Caligula is not the sort of movie people discuss at work, and by extension they probably shouldn’t blog about it either. But this essay’s larger theme is the real reason I read it and am sharing it now: It’s about the importance of taking risks and failing. And one line in particular really sums it up: “Caligula failed. But that epic failure was braver, and more significant, than a thousand mediocre successes.”

That got me thinking about big failures in branding that have happened in the last few years. Tropicana’s attempt at rebranding and packaging comes readily to mind. As does Gap's disastrous new logo, which they quickly rescinded. And looking further back, New Coke remains a classic case. Most designers would quickly lump in the rebranding of AT&T, Xerox and UPS (among others), but none of these reached the same level of public outcry and arguably can’t be counted as flops in the same way.

Regardless, none of those failures can be compared to Caligula’s, because that film had something they did not: ambition. Granted, its ambition strikes most folks as unwholesome, but its intent was to challenge convention and that is commendable. Caligula was crippled by the hubris of its creators, but they courageously chose to zig where others zagged. By contrast, the new Gap logo was a product of meekness and mediocrity, crippled not by zigging, but by zagging harder.

And so I’m left to wonder when the world of branding will see its own Caligula. A failure that is brave, unapologetic and truly challenges expectations not only about the expression of a brand but about what constitutes effective—and yes, beautiful—communication. I have at least one candidate in mind.

Next year London hosts the 2012 Olympics, for which Wolff Olins designed the graphics. It has been a widely derided campaign, a failure by most industry (and civilian) accounts, but they have marched ahead with it nonetheless. And so it may be that the only way we can deem the London 2012 graphics a worthwhile failure is if, at the end of it all, they win everyone over, thereby making them a success. The promise of such a paradox may prove to be the most entertaining sport of the summer, as far as I’m concerned.

For all intents and purposes, paper is a commoditized product. Buyers usually base their decision on price, because little else differentiates one manufacturer from another.

Staples-owned Quill.com is changing all that. Quill bought the licensing rights to the fictional Dunder Mifflin brand featured in NBC's hit comedy, The Office. The idea is that the Dunder Mifflin label would bring a hitherto missing element of fun and humor to the process of purchasing paper. It also brings an additional cost: Michael Scott's precious reams are priced slightly higher than private-level copy paper.

The success of Quill.com's strategy will depend on the priorities of paper buyers--consumers, as well as large and small businesses. Check out my analysis of the decision-makers' varying motivations in a recent AMA Marketing News Exclusive.

1. Will a user ever come back to your app?

The trenches of the iTunes App store are a bit like the Island of Lost Toys. "Play once and delete" is the name of the game. An app should provide a service that users couldn't perform without the phone in their hands. Just delivering copy and images isn't going to cut it; the common web browser has that covered. If your app doesn't entertain, inform and provide some type of utility on a daily basis, it will be added to the towering heap of the forgotten.

2. Will the app use any built-in iPhone features?

The most successful apps utilize a combination of features built inside and outside the iPhone in unique and surprising ways. iPhone users are intimately familiar with how these features work, so why take advantage of them? Instagram, the top-selling camera app, allows you to apply cool, retro filters and flash settings to photos taken with your iPhone. It also integrates with email, Facebook, Twitter, Flickr and Tumblr so you can easily share and order prints. To do a quick check, go to "Settings" on your iPhone and run through the list of native iPhone features and think about which services you can use.

3. How will this app use motion- or touch-based interactions?

The finger swipe is the most common interaction, but there are many more motion- and touch-based gestures to consider. The physical act of touching, shaking or tilting an iPhone to perform a task is the number one reason why it's the most popular phone on the market. Physical interaction is at the core of how humans discover and learn. It's also a lot of fun.

It’s the rare app that keeps its place on the “front page” of your iPhone home screen. Figure out how to make something useful entertaining, use the phone’s features to the fullest and optimize physical interactivity…and you’ll be three big steps closer to a permanent position next to Messages, Calendar and of course, Angry Birds.

Last month I got a late fee for paying my credit card bill two days late. D’oh! I pay all my bills online now, but between three credit cards, an electricity bill and a phone bill I have five usernames and passwords to keep track of. Not to mention my investment accounts, bank accounts and health insurance logins. It’s a lot to remember. Usually, I write a checklist every month to make sure I pay all my bills, but sometimes, I just drop the ball (psst—don’t tell Equifax).

I may be in luck though. A new solution called digital mail is promising to solve the problem of managing multiple proprietary online services channels (e.g., bofa.com or att.com) by consolidating them into an easy-to-use, one-stop-shop solution. Digital mail has already taken off in parts of Europe. And with the U.S. Postal Service on the brink of bankruptcy, the time may have come for services like Volly by Pitney Bowes and Zumbox in the U.S.

You’re probably wondering how digital mail works, and how it’s different from email. Well, in theory you would log into your digital mailbox with a single password, and from there access all the mail you would normally find in your roadside mailbox—in digital form. With just the one initial-entry password, you could pay bills quickly and easily without leaving the digital mailbox environment. Your mail might have the look of print documents, but also feature interactive components (think clickable catalogues).

None of this represents new technology. All the same, it's an innovative application of existing technologies that aims to create a more compelling user experience—which may be the difference between wide market adoption and failure (currently, e-delivery for many financial services companies hovers around 10%). Take Apple’s iTunes and iPhone, for example. MP3 players and mobile phone technology already existed when Apple debuted its industry-disrupting products, but Apple stood out because of its superior user experience and the strategic partnerships with record labels that enabled it to centralize content delivery.

Will digital mail create a similar revolution? Hard to tell. But digital mail services seem to be taking the Apple approach. They observe that physical mail works because it all comes to the same place. And they recognize that partnerships with mailers are essential to a consolidated experience. By joining with mailers, like banks or utilities companies or retail outlets, digital mail developers can offer users access to services they already use—on a single digital platform (like iTunes). And that’s why people may want to sign up. I know I do (if only so Equifax will be my friend again).

From the moment you realized YouTube wasn’t a do-it-yourself plumbing store, it’s been apparent that video on the web is here to stay. And despite the wasted hours you spent that day watching cats chase laser pointers, it didn’t take long to realize that online video wasn’t just for entertainment. Businesses have latched onto video as a way to engage online customers and sell products and services. In fact, it’s probably safe to say your own company utilizes online video in one form or another.

But what’s the intended purpose of your company’s video? Are you trying to drive awareness? Establish credibility? Close a sale? Have you ever actually taken the time to figure it out?

A 2010 study by Forbes Insights and Google confirms that executives are increasingly viewing business-related online videos, and it offers insight into what actions they take after viewing: Remarkably, 66% of executives over the age of 50 will visit a vendor’s website after viewing their video. Only 25% of the same group, however, has ever made a buying decision after watching a video.

So what are we to learn from this? The good news is that people are watching your videos, and in a majority of the cases, they’re taking a next step—visiting your website. If that’s what you were hoping to accomplish, congratulations. But if you were hoping your video would close the sale, you may want to rethink your content strategy.

This study reinforces Sullivan’s philosophy about video content and decision-making: People who are watching business-related videos aren’t looking for the nitty-gritty details. They’re looking for broad, general information to help them get a feel for the types of products or services they want to evaluate more seriously. In other words, they’re at the beginning of their decision process.

So, as with any medium, it’s important to produce content that works with the tendencies of the people who consume it. Create video that will wow them, pique their curiosity and inspire them to learn more. Save the selling for the sales team.

In the world of Branding, the work of graphic design is heavily couched in marketing, strategy, and positioning. Such things often serve as reminders of logistical limitations, but frequently give us a framework for more abstract rationales. We consider things like the “voice” of the client, or what their “essence” is. We give each client a story that speaks to loftier, more intangible ideas or feelings, rather than focusing on what it is the client does or makes. And that’s how it should be.

But sometimes, in the Branding environment, the practical concerns of graphic design are easy to forget. Balance, contrast, legibility. How will the audience read it?. What vernacular should it speak? What will distinguish it visually and make it memorable (i.e., what’s the hook?)? The task of clear communication is sometimes difficult to focus on through the lens of Branding. Instead, we usually let our instincts take over. Design principles have a way of getting into your muscle memory, and are therefore too often at the backs of our minds, rather than driving the decision-making process.

So, it’s always nice to have a reminder that design is a system, a discipline founded in logic and an understanding of the simple ways people view, absorb, and react to words and pictures. And what better source for that reminder than design legend Paul Rand?

Upon Steve Jobs’s passing, the prolific design-writer Steven Heller generously posted the following pages of Rand’s work on Print Magazine’s blog, “imprint". These pages are from Rand’s presentation to Jobs, showing the design—not just the finished product, but the logical systematic choices behind it—for Jobs’s late 80's venture Next Computer, Inc. I urge you to take the time to read through the full presentation. It’s nothing short of a master class.

A very gracious nod to Steven Heller for his post, to Paul Rand for his uncomplicated wisdom, and to Steve Jobs for his unwavering faith in the power of design.

I don’t like the expression, “recession-proof.” Several factors can affect a company’s durability in economic downturns, but volume goes down across the board. Weathering a recession is more about preserving customer relationships and brand loyalty. Certain “necessary” or “staple” products, especially the low-priced ones, may have more staying power, but it’s not that simple. A company’s reaction to a recession—or lack thereof—also determines the brand’s viability long after the recession is over, not just during a depressed market.

In a recent article, The Street asked me to comment on the brands that have dealt most effectively with the economic slowdown and subsequent decrease in consumer spending. In my discussions of such varied brands as Apple, Amazon, and Tiffany, I emphasized the delicate balance between price and perceived value. Especially in slow economies, customers need to feel they are making smart and economical purchases, and that they are getting the most value for their money. Lowering prices in a recession isn’t necessarily the best tactic. Often, a brand can react more effectively by changing the way it talks about its products and the needs they satisfy—whether those needs are for food, or an engagement ring. The most “bulletproof” brands, though, are the ones that don’t need to change at all. To read more about their built-in resilience, check out the full article.