The Making - Episode 2

The consumer in your brief is not a real person. They are a clean funnel on a slide. Awareness, consideration, preference, purchase. But that is not how anyone in Accra actually buys anything.

In Episode 2 of The Making, Abeiku takes on Parts Two and Three of Rules for the Marketing Communication Executive by Prof. Robert Ebo Hinson and Joel Nettey: Markets, Consumers and Segmentation.

If you build briefs, plan media, or read dashboards for a living, this one will make you pause.

📖Get the book: Rules for the Marketing Communications Executive by Prof. Robert Ebo Hinson & Joel Nettey - 0591343421

Watch Episode 1 on Part One, The Campaign Mindset, first if you missed it.

Subscribe for the rest of the series.

MAD Conversations - Marketing. Advertising. Digital. Design. 
Ghana’s commercial creativity - documented.

Enjoyed this episode? 
Leave a review on Spotify - it helps more people find the show.

Connect with Abeiku:
LinkedIn: /samuel-ad  

Follow MAD Conversations:
Instagram: /mad.conversations_
Facebook: /14zri1aebdd
TikTok: /mad.conversations 
X: https://x.com/MADConversation 

Listen on:
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/gh/podcast 
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1M5ojvM 
Website: https://adverbemedia.com/shows/mad-co

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:00

You know, the first time that I read this book, a feeling of gratitude hit me. And in the same breath, some kind of frustration because I kept thinking to myself, this should have come earlier to me when 10 years ago when I first got my agency job at um Ogilvie. So the book should have come earlier for me, not for the industry, but for me specifically, because it could have saved me so much. So much. You know, so much of what's in this book could have saved me some errors, time, embarrassments, and which is why I am passionate about people coming to the knowledge of this book because not everyone has to learn the hard way. Even if you're already a senior in the industry, you still need this. Well, welcome to The Making here on Mart Conversations, where I sit with this book. Rules of the Marketing Communications Executive by Joel and Professor Henson, where they have shared 150 rules that are deeply rooted in experiences, real conversations, real consequences about the African markets as marketing communications experts. One is a scholar, the other is a high-ranking practitioner. So I'm sitting with the rules right here. If you haven't seen episode one, you should go back and find it. And we do get the book. Right? We do get the book because we are not discussing all of the rules in the book. We take some of the hard-hitting ones, we try to make some connections. I think through it because that's what the book suggests. Actually, um, the book recommends that we it guides our thinking, not a framework for success specifically, but to guide your thinking on how you do things. Because as marketing professionals, that's what we do. We think, we manufacture ideas, so we are not some decorators. I most of the things I'll I'll say now, I've already said in episode one. So maybe go back, watch episode one, and then come and meet me here. Let's let's discuss the part two of this book. So in this episode, we are discussing part two, which is market, consumers, and decision behavior. And part three is segmentation, targeting, and audience intelligence. We're covering rules 11, 13, and 17 in part one, and then rule 19 and 27 in part three. I'm putting these two parts together in this episode because they belong together. What part two does is ask you how do people actually make decisions? And part three asks the follow-up question: How do I find the right people to design for? You can't do the second without the first. So here's what we're going to get into today. Rule 11 says your model of the consumer is wrong. Rule 13, the real channels are not your media plan, they are inside the consumer's head. And rule 17, you cannot talk to everyone. Now, rule 19 and 27, data is insight, and even good data needs inspiration. So we are going to discuss consumers, channels, segments, audience intelligence all together. So you see how it's connected, right? So let's get into it. Rule 11 of part two: learn how consumers actually decide, not how you assume they do. Most professionals in marketing communications carry a working model of consumer decision making that they developed early in their careers, reinforced through the campaigns they worked on, and have not seriously examined since. When you read some parts, some passages in this book, you you'd laugh to yourself because some of them are so true. The model tends to be rational and linear. The consumer becomes aware of the need, searches for information, evaluates alternatives, and make the choice. This model is useful as a framework for organizing the campaign structure: awareness, consideration, preference, purchase. But it is a significant misrepresentation of how people actually decide. And campaigns built on it as if it were literally true will consistently adapt. Real decision making is not linear, not rational, and not primarily driven by information. It is shaped by heuristics, which is the mental shortcuts that allow the brain to reach adequate decisions quickly without the cognitive cost of full deliberation. It is shaped by emotion, not as a corruption of the rational process, but as an integral part of how alternatives are evaluated and choices are made. It is shaped by context, by what is happening in the environment at the moment of decision, by what other people are doing, by what the choice situation makes salient and what it obscures. It is shaped by prior experience, by the associative networks that have been built up through previous encounters with the category, the brand, and the communication. Study how consumers actually decide, not the model you were taught, not the model that makes the brief easiest to write. The real model is messy, emotional, contextual, heuristic, and ultimately human. Campaign design that understands this produces outcomes. Campaign design that ignores it produces activity. The consumer does not follow your campaign architecture. They follow their own decision logic, learn it or design for an audience that does not exist. Think about the last item that you bought. Not the big purchase, right? Something small, like a drink, a snack, or a toiletry item. Now ask yourself honestly, did you evaluate the alternatives? Did you compare prices? Did you weigh the features of one toothpaste against the other? Or did you just pick one you always pick because it's one that your mother used to buy, or because the color caught your eye? Or you know, think about it, be honest, because the answer really matters. The book just told you that the most professionals in marketing communications carry a model of consumer that that is a rational and linear awareness, consideration, the either model. We know it's a logical sequence and it makes for a nice PowerPoint presentation, but it's it's it's a significant misrepresentation of how human beings actually decide. You and I, we are human beings before we are marketing professionals. And the key word here is human beings, not consumers, human beings, not target audiences, not segments, human beings, real people who are tired, who are emotional, who are stressed out, who are excited, who are influenced by their friends, shaped by their upbringing, and making most of their decisions on autopilots. Now, let me show you how deep this goes. In one of our episodes, Carnell, you should go back to my conversations to watch it. Uh, he says something that connects directly with what this book is saying. And he said he says something about somatic engineering, the idea uh rooted deeply in Antonio Damasio's neuroscience research that the body stores emotional experiences and those stored-up experiences influence decisions before the conscious mind even gets involved. You don't think your way to a choice, you feel your way to it, and then your brain constructs a rational explanation after the facts to make you feel like you made a smart choice about um what was actually an emotional response. That's not a marketing theory, that's how the brain works. And if that's true, and the science says it is, then a campaign built entirely on rational persuasion is speaking a language that the brain processes second, not first, right? But here's where it gets really practical. Let me give you one person: same demographics, same income, same neighborhood, same age, same everything your brief would capture, but two completely different moments. The World Cup is coming up, Ghana is playing US. Black stars calls, Black Stars wins, the streets erupt, everyone is happy, everyone is in a jubilation mode, everyone is outside, music is playing, strangers are hugging. That night, the same person in your brief is buying drinks for people they don't even know. They are trying the new beer they've never tasted because why? They are team one, they are ordering food they wouldn't have normally ordered, they are being generous, they are being adventurous, they are trying new things, they are open. If your brand is in front of them at that moment with the right message, they'll try you, they'll spend, they'll remember you fondly because you became part of the best night of the year. Moment two, same person, same week, but Blackstars lost. Or forget football. They've had a brutal day at work, their boss embarrassed them in a meeting. Uh, so you know, they're tired, they're stressed, they are sat in uh crack traffic for two hours, they get home drained, and that same person is now buying the exact same toothpaste they always buy. They are now playing it safe, they're ordering the same food from the same place, they they're not trying anything new, they want comfort now, they want something that's familiar. And if your brand shows up at that moment with some aspirational, adventurous message, it will bounce off. It hasn't just failed to land. It it feels tone-deaf to them. Your brief says these are the same consumer at the same stage of the funnel. The reality is these are two completely different decision-making environments inside one human being. The demographics didn't change, the psychographics didn't change, the emotional context didn't change, sorry, the emotional context changed, and that changed everything. This is what the book means when it says the real model of decision making is messy, emotional, contextual, uh heuristic, and ultimately human. The consumer does not follow your campaign architecture, they follow their own decision logic. And if you haven't studied that logic, not the version you learned in school and not the version that makes the brief easiest to write, but the real version, then you are designing for an audience that does not exist. Campaign design that understands this produces outcomes. Campaign design that ignores it produces just activity. So it's up to you. It's either you are designing to produce an outcome or you are designing to just produce an activity because you have to come up with something. Now, let's get into rule 13. Rule 13, perception, attention, and memory are your real media channels. The media plan lists the channels, but the real channels, the ones that determine whether any communication actually works, are the psychological mechanisms through which human beings receive, process, and retain information. Perception, attention, and memory are not preconditions for campaign effectiveness. They are the campaign's actual infrastructure. The executive who plans the channels without planning for these mechanisms has planned half a campaign. Perception is selective. The human sensory system is bombarded with vastly more information than the brain can consciously process. And the brain has developed sophisticated filtering mechanisms that determine what reaches awareness and what does not. Attention is limited and expensive. The consumer's attention is the scarcest resource in modern marketing, and the competition for it is not just other brands, but the entire information environments, news, social content, conversation, environmental stimulation. Memory is reconstructive, not archival. A consumer does not store brand impressions the way a computer stores files. Complete, accurate, and retrievable on demand. They reconstruct brand meaning from the associative networks that have been built through repeated exposure over time. This means that brand memory is cumulative. So perception, attention, and memory are your real channels. The media plan gets you to the door, the mechanisms determine whether you get in. Listen, when I first read this rule, I put the book down for a hot minute. Because it's literally sets, it's literally changed everything that I knew. I mean, we all know because what this rule is saying reframes everything that we've all learned and probably everything we've known about media planning and marketing channels. We have been taught to think about media as platforms TV, radio, outdoor, digital, social, and whatnot. You buy placements, you negotiate the rates, you build a media plan that optimizes for reach and frequency, and then you present it to the clients with a spreadsheet that says we will reach 2.3 million people across these touch points. And everyone in the room notes. Strategy is done. The book is saying that's not your media strategy, that's your delivery strategy. You've planned how to get the message to the door, but you haven't really planned for whether it gets into the door. Because the real media channels, the ones that actually determine whether your communication works, are perception, attention, and memory. These ones that we're talking about, they don't live on any rate card. They live inside the consumer's brain. And the brain has its own rules that your media plan cannot buy its way past. So think about perception. The brain is filtering thousands of stimuli every minute. Most of what it encounters, it discards. Not because the message is bad per se, but because it is not relevant enough, it is not novel enough, not emotionally salient enough to clear the filter. Your billboard was there, your digital ad was saved, your radio spot was placed. But as far as the consumer's brain is concerned, it didn't happen. The placement was real. It happened, you did it. The perception was zero. Go back to the 250 billboards we discussed. Every single one of them was paid media placements. Every single one had reach. But perception, maybe one or two cleared the filter. The rest were invisible. Not because the consumer's eye didn't see them, but because their brain decided they weren't worth processing. Now think about attention as the book says. And this connects directly to what we talked about in rule 11. The book is saying attention is limited and expensive, but the competition for it is not just other brains. It is the entire information environment, the news, the conversations, social media, the tropical mid shouting, the stress from work, the arguments they had in the morning with their wives or girlfriends. Everything. So your brand is not competing with the competitors at. Your brand is competing with everything that the person is feeling and experiencing at the moment they encounter you. And here is what it makes it dangerous. Whatever you're feeling in that moment doesn't just affect the brain. Whether they are feeling in whatever they are feeling in that moment doesn't just affect whether they pay attention to you. It affects how they receive you. And in many cases, they associate that feeling with your brand permanently. Think about it. If someone encounters your brand for the first time while they are stressed, exhausted, stuck in traffic, frustrated with life, they don't just crawl past. Something worse happens. They are bringing files your brand under the emotional state. And the next time they see your logo, your colours, your name, your feeling comes back before the message does. So your message has to work over time to override that. So it's not just your tagline, not your value proposition, the feeling that they get. You've been tagged with an emotion you didn't choose and you can't control. And now you are fighting uphill. That's what the book means when it says memory is reconstructive, not archival. The consumer is not storing your brand impression like a file on a computer. They are storing it in ways that build up some sort of impression, right? It's not complete, it's not accurate, it's ready to retrieve. They are reconstructing it from fragments, their emotions, their associations, the context in which they experienced you, the feeling they had when they first encountered you, as we've discussed. Then every subsequent campaign either reinforces that associative network or it tries to reinvent it, which is why consistency really matters. We will talk about consistency in the subsequent episodes. The campaign that reinforces existing post associations will build more durable brand memory than the campaign that tries to recreate entirely new ones. The practical implication of all of this should change how every campaign in the market is planned. Plan your campaign for perception before you plan it for reach. Design for attention before you design for frequency. Invest in consistency before you invest in variety. And recognize, as the book says, that the media channel is only the delivery mechanism. The real work happens inside the consumer's brain. The media plan gets you in the door, perception, attention, and memory determine whether you get into it. So let's get into rule 17. Rule number 17, segments with precision. Mass markets are a myth. Hmm. Okay, let's see. The idea of the mass markets, which is a single, undifferentiated audience that can be reached with a single undifferentiated message, was always a simplification. The contemporary media and consumer markets, it is a fiction. Markets are composed of groups of people with different motivations, different decision processes, different media behaviors, and different conceptions of value. Communication designed for everyone is in practice designed for no one in particular. And communication designed for no one in particular achieves precisely the level of relevance you would expect from it, which is to say very little. Segmentation is the discipline that converts the heterogeneous reality into manageable strategic focus. It identifies the meaningful differences within a market, the dimensions along which groups of people differ in ways that are relevant to how they should be communicated and uses those differences to direct communication resources where behavioral response is most likely. The most common segmentation error is treating demographic variables, age, gender, income, location as if they are behavioral variables. They are not. Two consumers with identical demographic profiles can come have completely different motivations, decision processes, and relationships with a category. So everyone is not your audience. The campaign designed for everyone is designed for no one. Segment with precision and communicate as if you mean it. I think we discussed something similar in the previous lines. Essentially, communication designed for everyone is in practice designed for no one in particular. And most times we are deluded into thinking that because a product was made for a mass market, its communication should be should do the same. But communication designed for no one achieves precisely the level of relevance you would expect, which is to say very little. That's a trap. That's what the book says. The product might serve millions of people, but the campaign cannot speak to millions of people at the same the same way and expect to move any of them. Because those millions are not one audience, they are groups of people actually with different motivations, different decision processes, different relationships, different backgrounds, with their category and their different conceptions of value. The book is clear about this. The mass market is a fiction. The sooner we stop designing communication as if mass market is real, the sooner our work starts landing. So let me show you why precise segmentation is more powerful than mass targeting using the campaign we've already talked about. When MTN launched the mobile money in Ghana, the technology was available to anyone with a phone. You could argue that the product was built for the mass market. And before the Minsaca campaign, that's exactly how most of the telcos approached the communication. They ran educational ads, explainer contents, rational messaging, about convenience and functionality, broad targeting, and none of it moved the needle. The Minsacka came. The Minsacka ad came, and here's what most people miss about the campaign. It wasn't designed for the masses. It was not designed for the masses. It was designed for a specific group of people, the unbankable. Think about who mobile money was actually built for. Not the Airbnb professional who actually already had a bank account, a debit card, and banking up on their phone. That person didn't need mobile money per se. They had options. Mobile money was built for the person in the rural area who had never had a bank account, the trader in the market who dealt only in cash. And the grandmother in the village who needed her grandson in a car to send money home. Right? So it was not for the masses. It wasn't for the masses. Those were the real users, the unbankable. That was the person with the deepest need and the highest adoption barrier. And Minsaaka, I have received it, was designed exactly for that person. Not the tech savvy early adopter, not the corporate professional, but the person who needed to know in the simplest possible term that money had arrived. The relief of confirmation, because remember, we talked about trust. The trust that the system worked. The message didn't explain features, it didn't talk about transaction fees or platform capabilities. It captured a single human moment. Now, back to bad conversations again. We had an episode where a guest was talking about how she ran a campaign where they they were talking about a techno campaign where they were talking about the features and specs of the phone, and it didn't move the needle, but they brought in a campaign with Stone Boy, and all of a sudden everybody ran on it. Why? Because it made them feel something. Their trust that the system worked and how you're able to communicate it easily because the Tech Savvy professional understood the specs or products information that you're going to share with them. So the trust that the system worked and the fact that the message was not explaining any features is what really made it work. It captured a single human moment that the target audience, which is the unbankable, could feel in their chest. Your grandmother in the village could relate. The trader in the markets could relate because the campaign was designed for them, not for everyone. If it was designed for everyone, then what was the point? Right? And here's the paradox the book is teaching us because the segmentation was so precise, the campaign spoke so directly to a specific audience with a specific need, and it's rippled. The Airbank professional saw it and understood it too. Now the Airban professional knew that when they send money home or when they say they are going to send money to their parents or their grandmother in their village, they know they would receive it. So the urban professional adopted it not because it was designed for them, but because any work that is genuinely specific to one audience has a way of becoming universal. The truth it captured was human enough that everyone could feel it. And even if they weren't the primary targets, that is the difference between a campaign designed for everyone and a campaign designed for someone that everyone ends up talking about. The first scatters, the second penetrates, then spreads. Every campaign that preceded Minsaaka tried to talk to the whole markets and the whole markets ignored them. Minsaka talked to the unbankable and the whole market adopted mobile money. Listen, the mass market is not your starting point. It is your outcome if you do segments with enough precision to earn it. Data is not insights. Know the difference. The distinction is clear. Data describes what happened. Information organizes data into patterns. Insights explains why the patterns exist in terms of human motivation, psychological structure, or social context. And it does so in a way that enables strategic action. An observation becomes an insight not when it is accurate, but when it is explanatory, when it reveals the mechanism underneath the behavior, rather than simply describing the behavior itself. The practical test is this. Can the finding answer the question, so what should we do differently? If the data tells you that a segment has a lower purchase frequency than average, that is information. If the insight tells you that the lower frequency reflects not disengagement but a specific anxiety about value for money that your current communication is not addressing, that is an insight. Because it tells you what to change and why changing it will work. The data describes a gap. The insight explains the gap in a way that points directly to the intervention. The professional who can develop genuine insights, who can get beneath the surface, is what the data describes to find the human explanation that makes it strategically actionable. Has one of the most valuable capabilities in marketing communications. It is not a technical skill, it is an interpretive one. Develop it deliberately. Data tells you what happened, insight tells you why and what to do about it. One is a report, the other is a strategy. Know the difference. Now, I need to make a distinction about that I think over time we've all missed, sort of. And the book just gave me the language for it. There's, I believe, a difference between being data driven and being data informed. And most of the time, when someone tells you they are data driven, what they are really telling you is that they have outsourced their thinking to a dashboard. The data driven means the numbers lead. You pull a report, the report says your audience is 60% female, age 25 to 34, most active on Instagram, highest engagement, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, all of that. And then you build your campaign on these numbers. You target the demographic. So you post at a certain time, you allocate budget to that platform, and everyone in the room feels smart because there's a spreadsheet backing every decision. But let me ask you, where is the curiosity in all of this? Where is the question that says, why is engagement highest at 7 p.m.? What is happening in that person's life at that hour that makes them more receptive? Is it because they've just finished work and they are decompressing? Is it because the children are asleep and they finally have their moments to themselves? Is it because they are trying to avoid something? The data tells you when. It doesn't tell you why. And the why is where the insights lives. Data informed is a completely different posture. And it means you take the numbers seriously, you respect the evidence, but you don't stop there. You treat the data as the starting point of a question, not the end of an answer. You look at the patents and you ask, what is this actually telling me about human behavior? What can't the data see? What would I need to understand about this person's life, their context, their fears, their motivations, to turn this information into something I can act on strategically? This is the difference the book is drawing. Data describes what happened, information organizes data into patterns, but insights, genuine insights, explains why the patterns exist in terms of human motivation, psychological structure, or social context. And it does so in a way that enables strategic action. The book gives a practical test for this, and it's one that I think every marketer should memorize. Can defined it answer the question, so what should we do differently? If the data tells you that a segment has a lower purchase frequency than average, that is information. It describes a gap. But if the insight tells you that the lower frequency reflects a specific anxiety about value for money, that's your current communication is not addressing. That is an insight. Because it tells you what to change and why changing it will work. The data describes the gap. The insight explains the gap in a way that points directly to intervention. Here is where it gets uncomfortable for a lot of us. Most organizations and professionals alike. There was a case, the book references it, where a health insurance company survey data showed stable customer satisfaction. On the surface, everything looked fine. The data said satisfied, not a communication problem. But when someone had the curiosity to dig deeper, to move from data to insights, they discovered that the real driver of the customer attrition was not dissatisfaction, it was fear. The specific psychological anxiety about unpredictable future cost that satisfaction, that no satisfaction survey was designed to detect. The data set satisfied. The insight was afraid. Those are two completely different strategic realities. A campaign designed around the data would have reinforced satisfaction messaging that was already irrelevant. A campaign designed around the insights addressed the actual barrier, the fear, and it changed behavior. That is not that is really the difference between a report and a strategy, as the book is telling us. So data tells you what happened, insight tells you why and what to do about it. One is a report, we know which one is a report now, and the other is strategy. Tell me the difference because by now you know it. Rule 27 data-driven profiling builds evidence, but evidence still needs interpretation. The promise of data-driven audience profiling is compelling and genuine. The ability to build detailed, real-time, behaviorally grounded understanding of audiences at scale and specificity that was simply not available to previous generations of marketing professionals. Digital platforms record navigation patterns, engagement sequences, and interaction data. Transaction systems capture purchase behavior at granular levels. Social media generates a continuous stream of attitudinal and lifestyle signals. The data environment of contemporary marketing is richer than it has ever been. Data is the start of audience understanding, not the end of it. The analytical work that transforms data into actionable audience intelligence is interpretive work. The work of asking what the patterns in the data mean, what human motivations and social dynamics explain them, and what strategic implications follow. This work requires conceptual frameworks and genuine curiosity about the people behind the data, not just statistical capability applied to the data itself. So data is raw material, interpretation is the craft. The executive who mistakes the data set for the insights has done the easy part and called it done. Now, here's a second part of this, and this is where rule 27 extends the arguments we built in rule 19. We live in an era where the data environment is richer than it has ever been, right? Social media generates a continuous stream of attitudinal lifestyle signals, as the book stipulated. The promise of all this data is compelling and genuine. We can build audience profiles with it. But the risk that comes with the richness is real. And the risk is this we start confusing the data with understanding. We treat digital behavior as though it were some trail of a complete picture of the human being when it is actually a partial record of their behavior in a specific digital environment. The consumer who appears in your data as a high-frequency mobile user in their in the 28 to 34 demographic with demonstrated interest in health and fitness. That is a real data profile. But the person is also someone whose relationship with the category shaped by things your dashboard will never show you. A recent experience that changed their priorities, a cultural context that frames their attitudes, a conversation with their spouse that shifted their perspective, a social relationship that probably influenced their decisions. The data shows you who what they did. It does not really show you who they really are. And this is where the craft comes in. The analytical work that transforms data into actionable audience intelligence is interpretive work at best. The work of asking what the patterns in the data mean, what human motivations and social dynamics explain them, and what strategic implications follow. This requires conceptual frameworks and genuine curiosity, not just statistical capability. So the executive who lets the data substitute for interpretation will produce audience profiles that are technically detailed and strategically shallow. Remember, we are supposed to be, we are not supposed to be strategically dangerous, right? The executive who uses data as a starting point, who asks what these patterns reveal about real human behavior and what they do not yet explain and where qualitative research needs to fill the gap will produce audience intelligence with genuine explanatory depth. And uh too many people in this industry are doing the easy part. All of us sometimes we do it and and and we we do the easy part and call it done. We are not pulling the reports, building the profile properly, we are just skipping the hardest parts, mostly the valuable step. Actually, sitting with the data long enough to ask what is what it actually means. Because the data is always telling us what happened, insight will tell us why and what to do about it. One is a report, the other is a strategy. Do you know the difference? So, what are parts two and three of this book really telling us? The consumer is not the rational person in your brief. They are a human being shaped by emotions, context, and experience. The channels that determine whether your communication works are not your media plan. They are your media plan is perception, attention, and memory inside that human being's mind. You cannot reach the mind by speaking to everyone. Precision is what ends resonance. And the data that tells you where to aim is only raw material. Without interpretation, it is a report pretending to be a strategy. Understand the human, reach them through psychology, not platforms, and speak to someone specific, not everyone, and also interpret your data and don't just report it. Let me ask you something before you go. After everything we've just talked about, are you data-driven or data informed? Are you designing for the rational consumer in your brief or the real human being in the trot? Are you speaking to everyone or are you speaking to someone specific? If if all of these questions made you pause, then I guess this episode did its job. So share it with someone on your team who needs to hear it. So drop a comment and tell me which rule challenged you the most, and also get the book. Please get this book. Again, it's the rules of the marketing communications executive by Joe Netty and Professor Robert Ebohinson. And the details to where you can get it is on your screen right now. And if you look at uh if you look in the comment section as well, it's also there. In this episode, there are 20 rules across uh the two parts, but we only did five. So the rest are waiting for you. Subscribe so you don't miss what's coming in the next episode. This has been the making here on MAT Conversations. I've been your MAT friend Abeku. See you in the next one.