Thursday, April 14, 2016

3 Questions to ask about Trump, Nenshi and your brand to have people believe you.

 I am going to break my self-imposed rule about not talking politics because I think that there are a couple of politicians that can illustrate some important principles about how you can enhance the authenticity of your brands.  Donald Trump has shattered conventional wisdom with his high level of authenticity to a broad section of Americans (despite some fibbing and flip-flopping). Before Trump, who has yet to win any election, there was a total stunner here in Canada named Naheed Nenshi the mayor of Calgary. The anti-Trump.  Nenshi could be thought of as the smartest kid in the class, who is also happy to help you with your homework. He is beloved in that city, proving that the people of Calgary don’t care if you are bookish, inexperienced and Muslim. They want good government and a mayor they can trust.

 In Build Belief™ workshops we dig through brands to uncover Belief Assets that are available to a brand but are not being used effectively. Those same queries can help us understand how politicians like Trump and Nenshi develop remarkable credibility. Having people believe you is contextual and nuanced. It comes not just from what you do, but also who you are and what your motives are - in the eyes of your prospects.

Who are you?
A natural place to start is the Creation Narrative. Trump’s narrative is of a scrappy, successful, self-made, entrepreneur.  It has been bolstered by his reality TV show; people believe what they witness for themselves. His publicized story is crafted to ignore his generational wealth and privilege and certainly his many business failures.

Nenshi’s is a story of gratitude and sacrifice. It is an archetypal immigrant story in which his parents emigrated from Tanzania while his mother was pregnant so he could be born in Canada. He has remarked, “Had my family been just on the other side of the lake in Africa we might have arrived as refugees.” He has seemingly devoted his life to public service in gratitude.  That devotion included a Master’s degree in public policy at Harvard, a stint with McKinsey and consulting for the United Nations before he decided to run for mayor as an outsider.

What is your motive?
Many brands deliberately demonstrate shared values with their prospects as a way to convince their audience that they are worthy of trust and a deeper relationship. Some are credible (Chick-fil-A is closed on Sundays), some fail (Starbucks wanted to “talk about race”), many are in the middle (Bell: “let’s talk”).  Regardless, people will consciously and unconsciously sense what the brand’s true motive is.

Trump is the “true outsider” whose motive is revolution to “make America great again”. What is critical in supporting his claim is his Belief Asset that he is “paying for his own campaign and not soliciting donations”. That is apparently how “entrepreneurs” do it and it allows him a measure of arrogance.

Nenshi’s motive is service.  His archetype is that of a humble servant leader. It is most evident in his ongoing demonstrations of respect for his citizens (and others). He oozes respect and it is irresistible. It allows him to be shockingly frank because he is not haughty.  A good example is how he spoke out on Stephen Harper’s anti-niqab election issue, “This is unbelievably dangerous stuff...this is disgusting” is how he described it to the media . Clearly not pulling punches but gaining credibility along the way.

What have you done?
We know that actions convince people but as marketers we sometimes become obsessed with copy far past its usefulness.  Instead we need to showcase demonstrations of what our brands are about rather than explanations. When you message Nenshi, he often messages you back. To which some respond “what the heck are you doing responding to messages?” To which he always quips “what is more important than responding to citizens. This IS my job.” In 2013 when council voted in a 6% pay raise, Nenshi publicly gave $20 000 to charity... and on and on.

Trump’s great demonstration was, of course, his TV show. To bolster that he points to: the plane, the hotels and the personal wealth as proof of his leadership acumen “I always win. I am very smart”. It is anti-intellectual, real world “intelligence” that he peddles. He is combative in ways rarely seen before. He will “pay your legal bills” to encourage you “take action”. He acts out his traditional common sense promise when he chants “get ‘em out!” at speeches and dissenters are manhandled and tossed out.  It all supports the belief that he is passionately committed to the mission far beyond the suave political rhetoric of most candidates.

These same queries and their extensions can be applied to brands for things and services. Frequently there are Belief Assets that have been overlooked or under-exploited. Only by asking and exploring are they uncovered, creating the opportunity to get consumer feedback and potentially be part of communication that Builds Belief™ and by extension, profitability.

Feel free to add your own insights or additions in the comments below.

Thursday, January 7, 2016

Who the heck is the Quaker guy?

In 1901 when the Quaker Oats Co. was founded in New Jersey they used the trademark that they had previously acquired for the innovative product of packaged cereal. Notably, the company was not run by Quakers or associated with Quakers. In fact the guy who trademarked the symbol had simply read about them. I suspect he knew that people thought of Quakers as principled and honest folk - the kind of people who would put out a high-quality box of oatmeal.

It’s fair to say that in the 114 years since Mr. Quaker appeared consumers have been trying to see through the hype and manufactured imagery that brand owners have been flinging at them. The consumer’s challenge to suss out authenticity is not new. It has, however, been amped up. The first
big change is brand proliferation. The shopper has many more choices available in most categories. The second obvious influence is the information fire hose online – manufacturer sites, social, experts, consolidated ratings and reviews etc.

Until recently, there was a well-established brand strategy approach that was applied by most disciplined marketers and is still in use today. Put simply: identify the consumer need, articulate how your brand fulfills that need as a benefit and provide one or two nuggets that support your benefit claim. These “nuggets” are often called “support points” or “reasons to believe” or “proof points”.  Mass media, especially TV, only has room for one support point. A critical decision has always been what the winning support point for that benefit should be. In a classic sense it is an ingredient (Trident with Dentec) or a formulation (11 herbs and spices) and so on.
The opportunity for brand owners now is to exploit the new found dialogue with consumers to expose them to multiple support points in whatever ways are appropriate. Marketers rarely concentrate intensely enough on discovering and polishing these potentially valuable gems. They don’t always know what they are looking for and they don’t necessarily know how to look. That is why I developed a collaborative approach to doing that called Build Belief™.

Build Belief starts from a model of four key areas to uncover Belief Assets: Recognition, Observation, Intention and Action and roughly 20 specific triggers among those areas. The approach is a series of workshops and quantitative research to determine the best array of support points for a brand’s desired benefit.

 I think the Build Belief method is rigorous and valuable but if you prefer not to hire help I think that you can still make gains “going it alone”.   Get a broad array of operations, R&D and sales people who are intimate with the brand into a room with some facilitation and, chances are, you will discover assets you didn’t know were there.

Pepsico acquired Quaker in 2001. It was really Gatorade that they wanted, not so much the oatmeal.
I buy my grains, including oatmeal, from Bob’s Red Mill. There is a Bob; he wears a bolo tie. There are a lot of reasons to believe that he sells high-quality grains. You can read about them here.

On one side is Quaker with longevity but not really “heritage”. It is completely contrived. On the other is Bob’s Red Mill: founded by Bob Moore - entrepreneur, passionate about milling and its craft, single-sourced in Oregon, philanthropic and employee-owned. Back in 2010 Bob gave the business to the employees. I am sure he had offers. Maybe even from Quaker. Bob just felt better handing it over to the people who had built it. Okay, I’ll buy your quinoa.

Sunday, April 19, 2015

How do you sell a $90 000 bed?

 I don't mean a rare and exotic antique or something that Elvis personally slept in, this is a brand. It is a bed pretty much like any other,  in the same way that a Porsche 911 Carrera  is a car and  Jimmy Choo makes shoes.  The bed is a Hästens Vividus and it does not have any special gadgets; it’s just the best bed money can buy.

Hästens is a Swedish company and they sell their beds around the world. In fact they have a retail store in Toronto and many more across the United States.  They have a wonderful marketing challenge justifying a premium price that is 100 times more expensive than competitors that are pretty much functionally equivalent. Their communication is a great example of articulating an array of substantial support points to convey the authenticity of their brand. Here is how they go about it... 

Climbing the Benefit Ladder

Of course Hästens does not try to sell you a bed. They even know better than to just sell you a good night’s sleep. They sell you all the mysterious benefits that flow from a kind of sleep that you have never experienced. They taunt you, “come discover how it feels to sleep for real”.  They offer you the success, well-being and energy that will come from spending a third of your day in a state of ultimate recharge. If you are philanthropically inclined, you can be part of enhancing the world by enhancing its sleep. 

It makes sense to move from functional to emotional benefits at that price point.
The benefit of better sleep getting you a better life is somewhat more believable at $90 000 but competitors can do the same. Simmons Beautyrest promises you “sleep that recharges” and “sleep that luxuriates”.  Kingsdown explains in its video that “your quality of sleep” is “ultimately your quality of life”.

In beds and mattresses  there is no safe haven of differentiation to be found by climbing the benefit ladder. Once upon a time taking the high road of emotional benefits could help differentiate a brand from  its functionally-oriented competitors. Nowadays though, there are too many competitors and too many “values-based brands”. There’s nothing wrong with deeply emotional benefits, provided that you can execute the strategy. The overwhelming challenge is to make prospects believe the claim.

Conveying Authenticity

Hästens does a great job offering a transformational sleep experience but to make you write that cheque for over $100K (sales tax!) they have to convince you that its true and they have to do it without a test drive.  The claims are be supported by genuine differences in the tangible and intangible attributes of the product and the company that makes it.

Here is what they convey to you in their video and website:
  • Hästens is a family company that has been making beds for 5 generations. They demonstrate it in different ways (Ownership, Creation Narrative)
  • They were founded in 1852 and have been making beds for over 150 years (Heritage)
  • Every bit of the bed is handmade by them with care. They show you beds being carefully crafted and the people who do it (Craft)
  • It comes from Sweden and the voice over sounds like a Swede (Place)
  • The bed is made entirely of natural materials: cotton, wool, flax and most notably horsehair that has near-magical properties. There is nothing synthetic.   (Ingredients)
  •  The unique layered design is proprietary and time-tested. It includes a flax layer that enables the discharge of static electricity (Design)
  • It has a 25 year warranty, but many last generations. They torture-test it. They once dragged a bed behind a car for a kilometer - it was fine. (Guarantee)
  • It’s the only bed that  meets the Oeko-Tex 100 standard  where “they often dismantle products to the molecular level” (Third-Party Endorsement)
There is more. Quite a bit more but you get the idea. In the relatively new world of always-on dialogue with consumers and prospects we have ample bandwidth to convey the authenticity of our brands.  We can go way beyond the one Support Point for the TV spot. We can demonstrate “Reasons to Believe” and “Proof Points” in a variety of powerful ways. This is an important pathway to developing authentic, engaging brands.

Opportunities to strengthen support are often overlooked. Which is why over the last few years Lighthouse has been developing and “beta-testing” an approach to improving brand strategies called Build Belief™.  It defines brands in ways  that strengthen  consumer belief in brand claims.  More about that next post.

Here is the link to the Hästens site and video. If you are desperate to try the ultimate bed but are a little short on cash, you can try one for a night  at the Ivy at Verity boutique hotel on Queen Street E.  I’m not sure what you do if you love it.

Monday, September 22, 2014

Consumer insights make marketing work.

I recently agreed to teach two marketing courses for “execs” at the University of Toronto, so in between shopping for a natty tweed with leather elbows and a burled walnut pipe I have been thinking about some brand fundamentals. One of the most challenging yet critically important concepts is the Consumer Insight. To keep our Marketing jobs we occasionally have to demonstrate that we can sell stuff by figuring out things about consumers that others have overlooked. Finding meaningful insight when you need it is a challenging task; a good first step is understanding what it is or is not.

It’s useful to make the distinction between THE Consumer Insight and Consumer Insights. THE insight is part of the Creative Brief (or sometimes a brand strategy document) as the link to the brand benefit to be conveyed. THE Consumer Insight might be: “Younger buyers still believe Cadillac stands for quality but are embarrassed by its lack of performance credentials”.  Consumer Insights, in general,  can happen at any level from merchandising to a great idea for a promotion. The principles are the same, but it is good to be clear on the context.

What’s your problem?

Consumer Insight is strategy work. Strategy is just a solution to a problem. Richard Rumelt one of my favorite strategy gurus says, “Unless you state what the problem is – and how to overcome it, then it’s not a strategy.”
A key component of any Consumer Insight is the definition of the problem (call it an “issue” or an “opportunity” if it fits better). The definition is not the preamble or just context. There is no Yin without a Yang.

In simple terms you can define the problem as a) target group plus b) action. As in, “get 19-24 year olds in Ontario to purchase Labatt Blue more often” Or, “get current Hall’s cough drop users to use the brand more frequently in the spring and summer”.  There may well be additional nuance that is useful in framing the problem. Go for it. In classic strategy work defining the problem, the depth of problem and the gains from solving the problem are essential parts of “insightful” planning.

Consumer observations

Having defined the problem, marketers can then set about looking for solutions by studying the target group in the context of the category. It’s obvious but the relationship between the consumer and our brand is only part of the story. You need to explore the buying process and the performance of competitors or substitutes.

It doesn’t matter HOW you do the research. Well, actually, it matters a great deal but the choice of methodology is idiosyncratic. Invariably, you will learn all sorts of things that, to a greater or lesser degree, shed light on your problem.  Some people call these learnings “insights”; I call them “observations”. You need to find the best solution to the problem at hand; that will be your Consumer Insight.

Choosing a Solution

Strategy is a solution to a problem. It is also matching opportunities to capabilities. Brands have limits to their effectiveness.  The limits, like the brands themselves, are a function of existing consumer perceptions. Having identified a particular problem the best solution will work with the “assets” of the brand in a way that is credible with consumers.

If Coca-Cola brand observes that it is losing consumers to beverages that are perceived to be more healthful, it strains credibility to pitch Coke as a healthful drink. This would likely be the case, even if they added vitamins and ginseng to it. While you may be chuckling at the absurdity of that example, the genuinely smart people at Amazon launched the Fire smartphone at $199 and are now flogging it for 99 cents.  Brand owners generally overestimate the capabilities of their brand. In my case on Labatt Blue in the nineties the problem was “Dad’s beer”, the DNA was as a fun/party brand and we had to figure out how to dip it in the Cocoon pool or market it to older drinkers. The Consumer Insight among the younger segment was that “the best kind of fun was spontaneous fun”. So, we chose to be the brand of spontaneous fun. Was it credible? Not so much.

The Consumer Insight is the observation about the consumer that solves the brand problem in a credible way. The insight is “leveraged” as a deliberate choice is made to follow a particular route. I suspect it is more of an “aha moment” only in the retelling of war stories years later. In practice, choosing a strategic path usually means rejecting a reasonably attractive alternative. They can be tough decisions.

Putting it into Practice

I often hear business leaders complaining that the Research team or Brand Management are failing to bring forward the “consumer insights” required for success. Assuming that the business is willing to do some studying of the consumer, the main cause of “no insights” is “no defined problems” to focus on. Use your planning process to figure out and define the important problems. Then allocate resources to studying the relevant consumer groups to reveal Consumer Insights that make marketing investment actually work.

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Process and Creative are having an affair

Creative is the tall, curvy, sensual woman in the corner office. With her wardrobe and great hair she could have any man she wanted. Strangely she has been quietly hooking up with Process. He of the pocket protector and RACI charts. He is skinny and socially awkward but not without his own quiet intensity.  What on earth does she see in him? What do they have in common? Apparently this has been going on for a long time.

Developing Marketing Communications is not the least bit difficult; the challenge is doing it well. To get the kind of ROI most of us crave obviously involves applied creativity. That’s where it all goes sideways.  To achieve creative creative even the most experienced marketers can be challenged by the tango of Creative Development.  For over 10 years I have worked with Marketing groups and their agencies to install and train best practices in this regard.  Starting a recent project with a top 10 multinational reaffirmed for me the value of getting the process right in Creative Development.
The right approach is never one size fits all, but there are 5 simple practices that almost always help you get to better stuff and happier people.

Explicit Process:
Make it someone’s job on the client side to create, communicate and monitor the process.  Among other things it should include: who is the project team that should be in all the meetings, who is the ultimate “Decision Maker” and a realistic budget. “TBD” is not a budget. 

Have a Great Brief (ing):
Make sure that the Brief form you are starting with is reasonable. Sometimes they can get quite bent out of shape to serve a “distinct creative approach”.  Whether the Brand Manager or the Account Manager/Planner starts writing the Brief, make it a shared responsibility. In the end  It has to be owned by both parties. When the Account Manager briefs the creative team, a client should be there. It’s funny how some agencies resist this; usually this is a vestige from bad briefs that had to be ignored and reinterpreted or badly behaved clients.

One Creative Presentation:
Or, as close to one as you can possibly get.  Manage your client culture to have the important people in the first and only creative presentation, including the ultimate Decision Maker. To do this, clients need to learn to have a productive discussion about the concepts presented without too much regard for rank. They need to get over the obsession with making decisions on the spot and spend more effort on understanding the submissions and getting comfortable with risk. You can actually make the decision “tomorrow”. 

One Creative Presentation Part II:
I am not a fan of “tissue sessions” (rough/early idea presentations). Most clients have a hard enough time envisioning the end product at a tight creative presentation. It is hubris to think they need you in the creative process. You will enjoy the Creative so much more if you the skip the trailer.  Many agencies like to present “Creative Platforms” or Areas. What you really need is a good idea (subject for a later post).  Ask the agency to present ideas and executions concurrently.  Most of us are not skilled enough to judge a “platform”  divorced from its “output”.  Its only purpose, after all, is to create good executions, so let’s see it do that.

Provide Written Feedback:
Do it always.  Your response might be a one line email for a dangler or a three pager for a major campaign.  Writing has several advantages: it creates a record, forces alignment among clients (amen) and benefits from the precision of the written word. If the project is substantial, deliver this written feedback in person or at least on the phone to allow for conversation.

It is easy to find people who disagree with these practices. There are many ways to do it, and they are welcome to their methods.  The most popular ice cream flavour in Canada is still vanilla. I guess it just works. I have firsthand experience with both large and small Marketing teams witnessing improvement in their Marketing Communications when they apply these simple process improvements.  But simple is not the same as easy and they require both clients and agency partners to raise their games.

Friday, April 4, 2014

US Tax reform proposes unbelievable changes to marketing and advertising

The United States government needs money. Wars and recessions can do that to your financial health. They also want to lower corporate taxes to be more globally competitive. I guess that leads to some very different ideas being put on the table...and some stay there.

Early last month David Camp the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee brought forward a draft tax reform package fully bent out of shape by lobbying efforts. In an effort to offset proposed corporate tax breaks he is recommending a wholesale change to the way in which adverting is expensed for tax purposes.

Camp is proposing that the first 50% of advertising costs are expensed in the year they are incurred and are tax deductible (like most other business expense). The deduction on the balance would be amortized over the next ten years. Apparently this passes for tax “simplification”. The impact of a change like this would be significant reductions in near term media spending and all that implies. Needless to say, agency, media, marketing jobs would go away. It would undoubtedly affect Canada as well.

Thankfully, what started as bi-partisan tax reform has quickly become no party non-reform. The general belief is that this bill will never make it to the floor for a vote this year.  Mr. Camp has also recently announced that he will not be running for re-election this year, making it unlikely that anyone will provide the impetus to move these reforms forward.

It still scares the heck out of me! Where on earth did it come from and can you put that genie back in the bottle? Once an idea like this gets floated it can be tough to sink. The advertising industry lobby will be doing their best to kill it once and for all.  I know that Tony Clement is not on my distribution list. I don’t think he reads Ad Age and I suggest that you NOT tell him about it.

You can read more about it, or at least verify that I am not making it up in the Adweek article here.

Monday, February 10, 2014

Stop wasting money on market research

Everyone in business does Market Research. Some even pay for it.  Whether you are an experienced and sophisticated marketing manager or a startup trying to better meet your customers’ needs you need to make sure that you are asking the right questions.

My favorite story in this regard  comes from Sergio Zyman’s book “The End of Marketing as We Know It”. As you likely know, Mr. Zyman was, for many years, the Chief Marketing Officer of Coca-Cola Ltd. His tenure included that legendary marketing mistake, the New Coke fiasco when they “improved” the ninety year old Coke formula and “relaunched” the brand with the new product. Consumers, of course, were outraged, the company was humiliated and within the year they reversed course and returned to the original formulation.

Mr. Zyman explains in print how the marketing team did extensive market research to inform their business decision (no kidding!) and they felt certain that the new formulation was preferred by both competitive users and current users. He distills his mistake this way: “we asked them ‘what would you do if we gave you [this] product as Coke? They told us, ‘they would buy it’. We didn’t ask The Question…‘if we took away Coca-Cola and gave you New Coke, would you accept it?”

If those smart, experienced and well-resourced people in Atlanta can get it wrong…well, anyone can.  To get it right you need to do what I do at the outset of every research project, a Strategic Research Review.  By doing it you will a) save money by avoiding useless research that you don’t need b) ensure that your research is relevant and has a high value to the business c) enjoy the long term benefits of making smarter decisions.

Like most “problem definition” documents the SRR is neither easy to do nor easy to explain. It is not something you do perfectly; it is a continuous improvement thing. Experience helps. Despite the obvious challenges I want to give you a sense for how you can ensure that you have done your homework prior to implementing market research.

Why do we need research?

This is relevant background. It has to describe the business situation and category dynamics that have created the research need. It should demonstrate that you have identified what you think is the root cause of the business problem. To do that it usually breaks the problem down into its component parts.

Example: Brand X is getting squeezed in the yogurt category between a local brand with superior quality and a global brand with extensive innovation across flavours and formats. (and so on)

What relevant research has already been done?

What is that George Bush-ism about “known unknowns and unknown unknowns?” Previous research is a “known unknown”, that is, there is almost always something useful if you are willing to look carefully. Articulate a concise summary of what you learned and note the studies for future reference.

What are the business decisions to be made with the research?

Clear links to the decisions to be made are your security against useless research. Articulate realistic and accurate aims for the research. There may be multiple decisions to impact, but it is important to convey their priority. There is nothing wrong with having secondary decisions, they can be handled on a “nice to have” basis.

Some projects are suited to “decision choices” i.e. the brand needs to do A or B depending on if the research outcome is 1 or 2.  These decisions should relate to the components of the problem outlined earlier.

Example: Yogurt Brand X needs to choose  where  to focus investment and how best to position the brand to win in those segments versus competitors.

What are the research objectives?

What are the specific questions, the things you want to learn? What information would enable you to make the decisions? You can frame them as questions (How do consumers switch among the various brands?) or as information needs (Determine brand interaction). This section will also convey exactly whom you want information from. Again, it is important to convey the priority of the various objectives. “Self reported media habits” may be nice to have, but brand image perceptions would be critical. This is where the new Coke team failed to pull out the precise question that related to the specific business problem.

To understand yogurt consumer purchase habits in terms of frequency, location of purchase, formats, brands, container size.
To understand consumption behavior in terms of who consumes the product and  the type of occasion.

What is the expected use of the results?

This section articulates specifics of how will the research information help with the decisions? It may not be required for simple projects. For others, however articulating specific analyses and uses ensures that you are getting the right data.

To develop an in-depth profile of the yogurt purchaser, particularly the heavy purchaser both for the category overall and for the most profitable yogurt formats.

To populate a scorecard of key measures that will evaluate the overall effectiveness of marketing programs.

Once those questions have been answered, only then can you  start designing a methodology. In general, there is far too much attention on innovative methodologies (MRI scanning? Sentiment monitoring?) and not enough focus on defining the research problem.  The issue is exacerbated by research suppliers who are selling off-the-shelf “products” that are standardized and easily executed by relatively junior staff.

What happened to poor Mr. Zyman? Well he had to leave in disgrace a year later…but he may have been out to prove something.  He wrote a bestselling book , started Zyman Group consulting, sold it seven years later to MDC for $64million  and was hired back at Coke as CMO for 3 years. It seems he did okay… once he learned to ask the right questions. Luckily, I have not sold out yet – just call or email.

Lighthouse Clients

Cases, examples and client references are available upon request. Some of my clients over the last few years are:

Toyota Canada
Labatt Breweries/AB-InBev
Canadian Blood Services
Cadbury Adams
Constellation Brands/Vincor
Prime Restaurants - Casey's, East Side Mario's, Fionn MacCool's, Bier Markt
Sigma Alimentos - a large food company in Mexico
Multiple Sclerosis Society - MS WALK
Yellow Pages Group
New Balance Canada
Ideazon -(Gaming Hardware)
Edwards Builder's Hardware

Going further back:
Pfizer - Viagra, Detrol
Volvo Canada
Red Lobster USA
Xerox Canada
Sprint Canada
Absolut (Maxxium)

Powered by Blogger.


© 2013 Lighthouse Consulting. All rights resevered. Template by

Back To Top