2009 November | brandSTOKE

Archive for November, 2009

Nov

Psychographic research on the fridge

By Kirk Closed

Categories: advertising and promotion

Over Thanksgiving weekend I will likely spend a lot of time in front of refrigerators. Mine. Other peoples’. And I’ve noticed something. They serve as display space for photos, post cards, grocery lists, note pads, and — fridge magnets.

Low tech, I know. But when did fridge magnets become such a ubiquitous marketing channel?

In your home, in your face, several times a day. And you grant them permission to be there. In fact, you install them yourself.

Which magnets do I have on my fridge? I took inventory:

Lawn care service
Sailboat charterer
Veterinarian
Meijer
MarathonFoto
Electric cooperative
Movie theater
Levi’s
Coca-Cola
Angie’s List
O.S.U. football schedule
Park preservation association
Hospital
Direct mail vendor
Urgent care center
Big Ten Network

I may have stumbled upon a whole new research methodology and matching one-to-one channel strategy. It works like this:

Audit the fridge magnets in a particular household
Determine the needs and interests of the owner
Target marketing messages based upon those needs and interests

There must be a high-tech application for this. Someone should get working on it.

What’s on your fridge?

Nov

Patagonia: They also sell clothes

By Kirk 2 Comments

Categories: brand essence, budgeting, cause marketing, loyalty, mass media, promotion, retail and social media

There are brands and then there are affinity brands.

The difference? Community.

You don’t just experience an affinity brand. Your identity is enmeshed with it. You are a proud member of the club.

“Cult Brands aren’t just companies with products or services to sell,” says BJ Bueno, co-author of The Power of Cult Branding: How 9 Magnetic Brands Turned Customers into Loyal Followers. “To many of their followers, they are a living, breathing surrogate family filled with like-minded individuals.”

Few brands exemplify affinity branding as well as Patagonia.

Patagonia makes outdoor apparel for climbing, surfing, skiing, and other low-impact sports. Its clothes are renown for their durability and performance.

But at Patagonia, it’s not about the clothes — which is characteristic of affinity brands. Selling apparel at Patagonia is practically an afterthought. Or so it seems.

Instead, affinity brands build a community of diehard evangelists around a common cause or set of values.

Patagonia’s cause began with its founder, Yvon Chouinard.

Chouinard, a rock climber and surfer, got his start making tools for climbers. Around 1970, he became aware that steel pitons were causing significant damage to rock-climbing surfaces. Inspired, he developed new alternatives and introduced a style of climbing called “clean climbing.” The result: his innovations revolutionized climbing, despite destroying the sales of pitons which accounted for 70% of his income.

Planet first. Company second.

“What is it that we all so love about the experience of being in raw nature?” Chouinard asks. “And having known raw nature, don’t we have an obligation to protect it?”

At Patagonia, protecting it is the priority.

In 1986, Chouinard committed the company to environmental activism and paid employees to work on local community projects. In 1994, Patagonia switched to using pesticide-free (organically-grown) cotton as well as recycled polyester in its clothing. Always planet first.

Today, the scale of Patagonia’s commitment is impressive. The environmentalism page of its web site lists its numerous initiatives, including Conservacion Patagonica, working toward the creation of Patagonia National Park; The Conservation Alliance, encouraging companies in the outdoor industry to support environmental organizations; 1% For The Planet encouraging all businesses to donate at least 1% of their annual net revenues to the environment, and more.

Through its Common Threads Recycling Program, Patagonia uses a fiber-to-fiber system to make new garments from old.

“For us at Patagonia, a love of wild and beautiful places demands participation in the fight to save them.”

How do brands create affinity?

“Brand communities exhibit three traditional markers of community,” according to Thomas O’Guinn and Albert Muniz in “Brand Community,” a 2001 article published in the Journal of Consumer Research. “Shared consciousness, rituals and traditions, and a sense of moral responsibility.”

All are present within the Patagonia community.

Company “ambassadors” share knowledge and experiences from the field on its blog The Cleanest Line, its own video channel The Tin Shed, and its YouTube channel. Outdoor enthusiasts and preservationists connect on Facebook and Twitter.

True, there’s a big difference between summiting Everest and wearing a Patagonia hoody to the park. But an affinity brand allows one to participate in the common cause. As Patagonia says, “Reward comes in the form of hard-won grace and moments of connection between us and nature.”

Which other brands inspire community?

Nov

Schmoozing the brand samplers

By Kirk Closed

Categories: loyalty, research, retail and strategy

tp_h_wholecare_ppmt_5oz Next time you are practicing your oral hygiene, think about this:

Why can’t Colgate and Crest, the two top-selling toothpaste brands, achieve the customer loyalty of Tom’s of Maine?

And more importantly, if loyalty is the ultimate purpose for branding (as consultants say), why doesn’t Tom’s of Maine dominate the toothpaste category?

Are you familiar with Tom’s? In 1970, Tom and Kate Chappell decided to make and sell their own natural products in rural Kennebunk. They started with a $5,000 loan and the philosophy that their products would not harm the environment. Among other offerings, they launched the first natural toothpaste in 1975.

Tom’s of Maine sells 12 varieties of toothpaste. Crest sells 41. Colgate sells 31, not counting its Ultrabrite brand.

Tom’s outperforms its much larger competitors in the toothpaste category, according to Brand Keys‘ 2009 Loyalty Engagement Index, a list of rankings of customer loyalty. In other words, Tom’s of Maine customers are more loyal to Tom’s than Crest customers are loyal to Crest.

So why doesn’t Tom’s own a larger share of smile?

Because, although Tom’s of Maine has more loyalists, Crest and Colgate have more samplers.

You know — flip-floppers. The undecided, uncommitted, experimenting, switch-hitting, test-driving swing-voters. The people that decide our elections.

Every brand has them (or doesn’t have them), along with loyalists who always prefer the brand and rejectors who always prefer the competitors.

Why don’t the brand samplers commit?

Some simply don’t care. Perhaps they think the category is a commodity. They buy the cheapest or the nearest. Eat Kellogg’s Frosted Flakes one week, then mix it up with some Post Grape-Nuts the next. It doesn’t mean one isn’t at least a little favorable toward Frosted Flakes. Just not every frickin’ morning.

Other samplers may enjoy sampling. I know guys who can rattle off with pride the pros and cons of every make and model of sports car they have ever owned. They fancy themselves as connoisseurs who appreciate variety.

There is great value in brand loyalty. As has been famously pointed out by Kuczmarski & Associates, loyal customers, on average, are willing to pay a 20% premium for their brand of choice. And it’s common knowledge that retaining customers is less expensive than acquiring new ones.

In 2006, Tom’s of Maine was purchased by Colgate-Palmolive. (There goes that idyllic illusion of the family making their own toothpaste in the Maine backwoods.) Certainly brand loyalty to Tom’s had an impact on the price.

Achieving loyalty is the ultimate purpose of branding, but the strategies vary by audience segment, depending upon where they are on the loyalty scale. Branding should focus on:

Converting the samplers to loyalists
Converting the rejectors to samplers
And, of course, keeping the loyalists happy

Which strategies are most effective at converting samplers to loyalists?

Nov

Your social media marketing linchpin: branding

By Kirk Closed

Categories: art direction & design, brand essence, guest posts, mass media, social media and standards

I’m pleased to share the following guest post by Gary Moneysmith. At the time of posting, Gary was the Interactive Strategy Director and social media guru at Conrad | Phillips | Vutech (where I work). Be sure to visit his blog, Social Media @ Work & Play, for more insights.

Ever watch your grandmother sort through her (postal) mail? If your granny is anything like mine, she carefully inspects and opens piece after piece. You just want to scream, “Just scan and throw it out — it’s all junk!”

Having grown up in the era of bulk postage rates, we’ve developed a ninja-fast ability to discern what’s real and what’s not when it comes to the daily mail haul. Why? To preserve our mental health. We’re overloaded with marketing messages every day on the radio, television, billboards and of course, our mailbox. If we gave every offer a neighborly, 1900s-like consideration, we’d never make it through our day. It’s too much and most of it’s crap.

As a defense mechanism, we’ve developed a sixth sense to gauge what’s legitimate and what’s not. We can scan an email inbox with hundreds of messages and quickly identify the few “real” ones. We rifle through pages of Google results to find sources we can trust and which should be ignored. We read product reviews on Amazon and quickly decide which are helpful and which aren’t. Our brains are gold-panning supercomputers instantaneously filtering our way through daily information overload.

Now, consider social media, the most eclectic, ever-changing fire hose of information in human history. As online marketers, what can we do to make sure our legitimate voice and information is taken seriously?

Answer: Branding. Yep, that old school marketing stuff …

Your brand is the genuine, distinct personality of your company. It’s what your organization stands for and makes you unique in a sea of otherwise sameness. It’s an emotional connection or way people react to a logo or product. And while it’s often associated with a visual/logo (an icon that symbolizes your brand), it includes what you say and how you say it as well. Over time, your brand builds equity — it means something to people and has value. It builds trust, justifies your attention, and rationalizes a premium price.

When it comes to social media, the need for branding is greater than ever. People may find your organization’s Web site in search engine results along with your Twitter account, Facebook group, YouTube channel and blog. Do all these places “feel” the same? Do they speak with the same voice? Do they offer consistent materials?

Now, considering the chipmunk-on-meth attention span of most Web visitors, does your social media channel pass the five-second brand consistency test? Pull up one of your social media channels (say, your blog) then quickly review it for visuals, personality and content:

Visual Presentation
Are you using your logo correctly — colors/size/spacing? Does your color scheme match your Web site? Do your photos match your other marketing materials?
Personality
Does it convey the right tone and spirit? Does it “feel” like your organization?
Content
Is the material you offer appropriate? Or is it just copy-and-pasted from your annual report? Does the depth and breadth of content reflect your expertise? Is it what people would expect?

There’s a lot in social media that you can’t control, but what you say and how you say it is still your choice. Your online brand identity should be treated as an invaluable asset that MUST be nurtured and protected. Because without it, you’re just a commodity fighting to breathe in an increasingly crowded online marketplace.

Nov

Retail clinics vs. your doctor: it may come down to branding

By Kirk 2 Comments

Categories: brand essence, health care, retail and strategy

They treat cuts, burns, sprains, rashes, allergies, fevers, and infections.

They are called MinuteClinic, Take Care Clinic, RediClinic, The Little Clinic, The Clinic at Walmart, and Target Clinic.

They are located in the aisles of Walgreens, Walmart, CVS, Target, and Kroger.

There are more than 1,100 of them in the U.S., and more are on the way. (Find the one nearest you at Merchant Medicine.)

They are retail-based medical clinics — and your doctor doesn’t like them.

The primary advantage of retail clinics (also known as walk-in clinics and convenient care clinics) is convenience.

They accept walk-in appointments (no waiting for an opening at your doctor’s office) and they may be open late. They are often less expensive. You can usually fill a prescription on premises.

Your doctor says retail clinics don’t provide the same quality of care. (Meanwhile, he or she may be losing patient visits to them.)

Here is your doctor’s argument. Retail clinics:

do not have a physician on site (Usually they are staffed by a nurse practitioner.)
have limited medical capabilities and resources
do not provide continuity of care (coordinated care over time)
do not provide full-spectrum care
do not know if you have a pre-existing condition which might impact treatment

In marketing terms, your doctor is claiming the quality position.

However, a new study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine by the RAND Corporation, the nation’s largest independent health policy research program, concluded “retail medical clinics located in pharmacies and other stores can provide care for routine illnesses at a lower cost and similar quality (my emphasis) as offered in physician offices, urgent care centers or emergency departments.”

Uh-oh. Lower cost and similar quality? And more convenient? That’s a problem for your doctor.

How should he or she respond?

Join ‘em? Some practices have accepted they can’t compete and instead have aligned themselves with retail clinics for referrals and follow-up treatment.
Lower prices? Keep in mind: retail clinics treat only simple conditions. And they generate revenue through the in-store pharmacy. Your physician has higher overhead because he or she must maintain the resources needed to diagnose and treat more complicated conditions. Your practice probably cannot lower its prices.
Improve convenience? Most physicians I know prefer practicing medicine to running a business. Few will experiment with innovative consumer-friendly concepts, such as expanded hours, walk-in appointments, and in-house clinics.
Enhance quality? This may be the best option. Your doctor’s advantage is that he or she knows you, your family, and your medical history. You have a personal relationship, perhaps long-term.

Doctors call this concept your “medical home.” At your medical home, your personal physician serves as the coordinator of all of your medical needs and maintains your comprehensive health records. This centralized control results in care that is customized, instead of off-the-shelf.

Brands are built on perceived intangible attributes. The attributes your doctor should own are dependable, trustworthy, knowledgeable, concerned — attributes that may be difficult to perceive in the aisles of a discount store.

When it comes to health care, which do you prefer? Convenience or quality?

Is having a medical home of value?

How should doctors respond to the threat of retail clinics?

Nov

Absolut Strategy.

By Kirk Closed

Categories: book reviews

BrandSTOKE Book Review: ♦♦♦

The Absolut Vodka ad campaign is so well established and formulaic that it now seems as if any art director could develop a new ad in the series. Even Richard W. Lewis, author and account director, says, “Some people say we had an easy time.”

Which is to say the campaign is brilliant.

What is obvious when reviewing the beautifully reproduced ads in Absolut Book.: The Absolut Vodka Advertising Story is how well crafted they are, featuring interpretations by renown artists (Warhol), photographers (Newton), fashion designers (Piccone), and many more. (Some of the ads are featured in a video and .pdf file here.)

What is not so obvious until one looks behind the sheen is how brilliantly strategic the campaign is.

Absolut was unavailable in the U.S. before its launch in 1981. Common practice would have indicated a national TV campaign, but the Absolut brand was built with magazine advertising. The ad format was simple, a “bottle and a two-word headline.” No copy. The ads never addressed the attributes of the vodka itself, but rather focused on building awareness of the name and package.

Absolut was positioned as a premium brand and placed in trendsetting magazines. Only ad topics associated with “high value or an upscale activity” were selected.

Lewis’ team reached audiences demographically through their careful selection of publications, including some belonging to the counterculture. They targeted markets geographically by featuring cities in ads. They stayed fresh by commenting on current events such as Glasnost and the MLB strike.

The production team experimented with special-effect inserts, such as microchips, records, puzzles, postage stamps, scents, and snow globes. They developed custom ads for targeted publications, such as a digital-art interpretation of the Absolut bottle in Wired and a centerfold in Playboy. They “crowdsourced” ad ideas from readers before the practice had a name.

Still, after marveling at the stunning elegance of this campaign as presented in the book, there’s not much to learn — except that simplicity works.

The most successful communications tend to be the most concise, an opinion I have expressed in previous posts, “Less isn’t just more — it’s omnipotent,” “Speak less. Say more.” and “Why strong design is always on Target.” It’s a pleasure to see a brand stick with a simple recipe for nearly 30 years.