Marketing Communications: Beware Buzzword "Gen AI"

 Dumb phones are making a comeback in the US. Counterpoint Research estimates sales will reach 2.8 million by the end of 2024. In Canada they already account for 25% of phone purchases. More folks are weary of all the gee-whiz attributes and benefits of smart phones.  

The same kind of resistence to so-smart is showing up when businesses leverage Gen AI in their marketing communications. A Washington State University stunner of a study found that using the buzzword or the concept of AI in promotions can be counterproductive in sales. Fast Company puts it plainly: Mentioning AI in features and benefits can actually hurt sales:

" ... [The Study] which surveyed more than 1,000 Americans to develop a deeper understanding of the relationship between AI disclosure and consumer behavior, found that when companies mentioned AI in product descriptions, sales fell."

The reasons range from skepticism about the value of AI by consumers to the lowering of emtional trust. About the latter: Emotionally, do we welcome additional complexity in technology? For example, LinkedIn has a prompt to add AI in posting. I don't choose that option.

Sure, in thought leadership introducing information and insight about Gen AI can create value and enhance the brand. A recent example is the launch of law firm Paul, Weiss' podcast "Waking Up with AI." In a conversational format it unpacks a lot, including provocative questions. That approach could develop new business for Paul, Weiss. 

But relatively fast the love affair with Gen AI, beginning with the release of ChatGPT by OpenAI in November 2022, is encountering realities, ranging from low adoption rates to investor questioning. This buzzword can find itself out of fashion, just like "ESG." The hit to ESG talk gathered momentum when investors pulled away from "virtue" claims of benefits to the Environment, Society and Corporate Governance. Financial Times presents a video detailing the demise of once-everywhere ESG. 

CampaignLive reports that about one-third of businesses will ditch their Gen AI projects by 2026. Part of the current stock market agita is investors demanding answers about the value of Gen AI. Will the technology really pay off for businesses? 

No, there doesn't have to be projecting that Gen AI is just anothe bubble. However, Gartner puts it this way: It's probably not a bubble but the topic is over-inflated. Post trying it out some business will stop the experiment, states Gartner:

" ... after reaching proof of concept by the end of 2025 due to poor data quality, suboptimal risk controls and, most importantly, hazy business value coupled with high costs."

Currently those of us who are content-creators do save time by using the ChatGPT and Google Gemini prompts for getting our heads around a topic and initial research. However, a lot of work still remains. In addition, as a coach I don't sense I will be put out of businesss. The prompting for guidance lacks the kind of human connection which builds the needed trust in order to motivate changes in behavior.

Meanwhile, some professions such as graphic arts, film production and video editing are already getting hit hard by Gen AI technologies such as Sora and DALL-E.

Returning now to the possible counterproductive effect of using Gen AI in marketing communications. There is a fundamental in business: simplification. Don't increase even the "idea" of using a product or service by adding complexity - that is, Gen AI. That can be a turn off from potential buyers even moving along in the sales pitch. Why should consumers invest the time to even find out why Gen AI might matter.

In business and life you usually have only one shot at whatever. Up the odds of success with Jane Genova. I am an intuitive coach, tarot reader and content-creator. Complimentary consultation (please text/phone 203-468-8579 or email janegenova374@gmail.com)


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Harvard/Columbia Law Students Made Their Point, Davis Polk Rescinds Their Jobs

Image
"Davis Polk & Wardwell rescinded job offers to three law students at Harvard and Columbia universities after organizations they were part of made controversial statements about the Hamas attack on Israel ... they were leaders of groups that signed on to the Joint Statement from Palestine Solidarity Groups at Columbia University and the Joint Statement by Harvard Palestine Solidarity Groups on the Situation in Palestine."   Bloomberg Law , October 17, 2023 Davis Polk did not provide the names of the students. Could privilege be part of the reason the students who made the statements might have been unaware of the potential for severe consequences? In the hood as well as lower middle class neighborhoods we were totally aware of the correlation of what came out of mouths and employment and even survival. I got down cold not to mouth off. Legendary were tales of what happened to those who did shoot off their mouths.  The clients of law firms could be among those who are creat
Read more

The Two Letters - Being from Ethiopia Doesn't Get Melat Kiros Off the Hook from Understanding the Implicit Employer-Employee Contract in America

  That first letter.  It had been sent from a number of law firms - ranging from Sidley Austin to Sullivan & Cromwell to Paul,Weiss - to a number of law school deans. As many interpreted that communication it seemed to contain a veiled threat that if perceived antisemitism wasn't stopped recruitment at those law schools could be. I experienced the tone and content as, well, heavy-handed. And I have said just that in public venues. But I no longer do contract communications assignments for law firms. No residual looping remains since I have changed careers.  When I did do law firm assignments, such as for Paul,Weiss, you bet, I avoided any tone or content even in non-related material which could throw shade on the clients. That's the way it goes.  Since before doing assignments for law firms I had worked full-time for the Fortune 50, from the get-go I got the "it" - no open disagreement with those who sign the check. In fact, the "approval channel" is
Read more

From Watergate Glam to Offering Buyouts to Reduce Manpower By 240: The Washington Post

It's another sad day in what had been glam.  The Washington Post announced its plan to downsize manpower throughout the organization by 240. That will start with buyouts.  CNN admitted it's not ready for the future. The Wall Street Journal has gone part pop culture to attract a younger audience. The average age of its reader is 59. We already know ABC probably will be up for sale. Establishment media is making its point: Its existence is uncertain. What could replace it could be digital apps on phones. Public relations folks will pitch their clients' stories to the apps. Or maybe PR also will go poof. Everyone will be an influencer. Data or the gut for your careers and communications? Both of course. Complimentary consultation with intuitive coach, content-creator, and Tarot reader Jane Genova (text 202-468-8579, janegenova374@gmail.com ).
Read more