The brand, The audience and The message

3/2 2010

When creating communication there are three things to consider, the brand, the audience and the message. Of course you cannot separate these three but depending on which one you focus, the outcome can be anything in a 360 environment, basically any concept in any media.

However if we focus on the digital world are there 3 pillars equal, or is one more important that the other when creating a concept and solution? Lets briefly look at an example of each of the three in practice.

When the brand pillar is high

Absolut have successfully taken their ‘no advertising’ brand communication one step further on the web by creating an Absolut world online. Online ‘In an absolute world’ focuses on creating experiences rather than running campaigns. Allowing their audience to engage in the brand and create their own messages, just as a long line of creators have done before them. In doing so Absolut have successfully made interacting with the brand reward enough.

When the audience pillar is high

Apple has long used the engagement of their almost religious audience, to create a somewhat unprecedented buzz for a product, even before any of them have even seen it. As we have just seen, with the recent pre-launch fever of their iPad, Apple are now benefiting from the wealth of new communication channels open to their audiences. In effect the results turn not only the end consumers but also respected media outlets into brand champions.

When the message pillar is high

When Spotify sparked to life they did not have a known brand or for that matter an audience. In fact they pretty much shut out their audience, allowing only people who received an invite to gain access to their service, for free. You could pay of course but why pay for it when you can get it free. This just drove the message home even harder, and a frenzy of invite hunting ensued. This in turn empowered the few audience members they had, making them guardians of the message and spreading the access to a chosen few.

We are constantly hearing how brands are now in the hands of their audience, and that the message is now a conversation and evidence of this can be clearly seen in all three examples above. However, I have seen many digital campaigns get so close to success, but somehow fail. Sometimes this is due to a lack one of the pillars and sometimes because they place equal weight on all three. The relationship between these three pillars is a fragile balancing act, and in the digital environment, is one that needs to be reviewed at the start of every campaign. Digital communication above all, needs to hit the nail on the head first time; there is little room for forgiveness out there.

Steinar Danielsen

Steinar Danielsen is the co-founder and Creative Director of Supernative, a digital communication agency based in Stockholm. He works with providing analysis, online strategies, creative concepts and digital identities, for a range of international brands.

Inga kommentarer

The Brand Love Misconception and Need for New Knowledge Domains

28/1 2010

Loyalty Beyond Reason

The brand love concept were invented when we discovered that consumers were not the completely rational beings we thought they were. We abandoned the cognitive approach, including the unique selling point, in favour of emotional branding. And it was in this context, the concept of brand love emerged, feelings so strong for a brand that it motivated consumers to be loyal beyond reason.

Cheesy Pickup Tricks

For some reason brand love came to be treated as if it was the same and therefore fully analogous to interpersonal love, a passionate affection for another person. Many brand love theories derive their sustenance from that kind of psychological knowledge. It’s probably why the suggested branding techniques, most of the time, look like cheesy pickup tricks. Proposals that suggest that we should make our brands sexy, sensual and mysterious do not really help us. And when there is considerable amount of research that suggests that brand love is not the same as human ditto, I think it is time that we abandon that idea for good, in favour of something closer to the truth and more practically applicable.

Loved Brands are Self-Expressive Brands

Loved brands are self-expressive brands; meaning brands that largely hold self-expressive values. According to traditional brand theory these types of values are of interest only for a particular type of consumers, namely status seekers interested in showing off. But in reality self-expression is so much more than that. Self-expression is necessary in order to position an individual in all the different social contexts in which she have to participate. All consumers are constantly engaged in this kind of activity and uses, among other things, self-expressive brands as symbolic resources for meaning, identification and community, all fundamental and essential building blocks in their life projects.

Meaningful Tools Used by Consumers

So brands can be a very meaningful tools used by consumers in their (symbolic) everyday context, earning their place in their daily lives. And that way they become loved brands, motivating loyalty beyond reason. But to make that happen, we have to understand the consumers’ deeper underlying needs of symbolic building blocks and finding strategies to materialize these values. Traditional brand theories do not address these issues and are therefore not particularly helpful. We are in need of additional theories, probably taken from new knowledge domains.

Jonas Söderström

Jonas Söderström is working with Aegis Media as Senior Communications Planner. He has worked strategically with products, brands, communications and channels for nearly two decades, in different positions and business sectors. He has a degree in Behavioral Sciences and recently published a book on Consumer-Led Branding and Commercial Ethnography.

1 kommentar

Bo Bäckman: Diffusion – how and why an innovation catch on or not.

20/1 2010

Examples: Blu Ray, Mobile TV and Mobile Internet.

Diffusion is about how a new product spreads. These examples are from 2008 and of course it is necessary to measure continuously but there are no continuous data. It is more an analysis of the starting point 2008 and based on interviews from the SIFO Internet panel. The aim was to measure the initial ability to create attention and acceptance. An innovation can be helped on the way by a Superbrand but if the concept does not catch on it might cause harm to the Brand

Charts from in depth interviews (2008) to understand the Why.

1. The Blu-Ray player:

Conclusion: It is a matter of knowledge and cost consciousnes.

In-depth interviews showed that:

Too many were too satisfied with the quality they had today on their DVD-player. Why bother to learn more? Why pay extra? A few had moved on to new media before – Mini Disc and soon noticed that the number of titles was very limited and CD/MP3 was simply better and cheaper. They learnt their lesson. But in the long run better quality will win – the diffusion will take time though.

2. Watching TV on the mobile

Conclusion: A downright refusal – so far.

In-depth interviews showed that:

The perception was that it is too small, you won´t be able to see and what is wrong with my new flat TV?

Very few had the right phone and those who had it didn´t know how to do it.

Some started to talk about WebTV and the possibilities that would give with a TV in the mobile: Watch TV whenever and wherever you want. Seems like the combination will drive the diffusion of TV in the mobile. But what will it cost? Most are used to flat rates and no rates and the price sensitivity is high. In the information trailers in SVT they “warn” that the operators will charge an unknown amount.

Of course the technology interest plays an important role. After all it is only 11 % that consider it very important to be updated on technological development. They notice faster and want to try faster.

But SVT is early out of the starting blocks: Peter Settman, who does not have an image of a young technology freak, informs on SVT about TV in the mobile. He can surely move the diffusion of Mobile TV in the not so technology advanced groups. And he will be helped by the operators and the manufacturers of mobile phones.

3. Mobile Internet

Conclusion

Internet is a must – anywhere and anytime

In-depth interviews showed that:

Internet is necessary and the habits are almost compulsory. They are easy to bring to the mobile and the barriers in terms of settings are overcome because Internet is a must

4. Comparison

The prime obstacle is to create interest – Blu Ray didn´t.

The Idea that a TV in my small mobile would create interest is dumb.

Mobile Internet is to prolong the very important Internet habits.

(Source: TNS SIFO’s Internet panel 2008. 500 interviews.)

Bo Bäckman

Inga kommentarer

Rhetoric 2.0; the art of speaking in social media

January 13 2010

Propelled by the evolution of the Internet and new digital instruments, recent years have shown a flood of new communication solutions. For you as a communicator and marketer, social media offers a whole new space to operate in; a platform to talk to potential and existing customers, building trust and brand loyalty.

Considering that the digital change started to happen several years ago, one can wonder why a large part of companies with highly developed communication skills have not managed to migrate these skills to the digital world and social platforms like Twitter and Facebook. Instead they are lagging behind when it comes to social media rhetorics. One wonders what happened to the art of creative communication?

Back to square 1
Traditional marketing strategies and tools that have long been applied in commercial communications are being blown apart by new opportunities. This means that experienced communicators are brought back to square 1 in terms of core competencies within the field of communications.

Fear limits the development of new communication skills
I would argue that one of the biggest obstacles to the development of the communication arts in this respect is the fear of new technology, and the inability to be curious and adopt new beliefs in the context of digital communication and social media.

The consumers’ power has vastly expanded thanks to the information and communication revolution, which has also changed the very dynamics of the marketplace. Companies no longer rule, the consumers do. Effectively, enterprises can no longer expect customers to be impressed by grand campaigns or exaggerated product benefits. Consumers cannot be fooled.

Most importantly, consumers want to be let into the process where strategies and decisions are being made. Your trade mark will be created in symbioses with the consumer, and due to the speed of information today, it will be re‑created every day. There is no way around it; companies need to be on their toes in order to satisfy the market in these “new times”.

Survival of the fittest
It pays to be sensitive to changes in consumer demand, and to meet these expectations just-in-time. This means that listen and learn are now crucial behaviors in the marketplace. The company that can adapt most swiftly will survive. The company that can provide the best service and user experience will win.  All the knowledge you need to make good decisions is out there if you dare to listen to your customers.

Personal interaction & co-creation of brands online
Consumers in the digital space are not easily seduced, but demand influence. They want to be listened to, taken care of, and feel important. Through new digital platforms, the relationship between the consumer and the company becomes personal again. The cost of reaching out to your consumers via the internet is close to zero. The distance is none. Companies no longer create brands on their own, rather they are co-created with the consumers. If consumers are not let in, they will break in.

Training your social media skills
In order to be more specific I want to share my thoughts on how communicators can train their “social media-skills”.

What does ’social skills’ really mean?
There is no uniform definition of social competence, but two important building blocks is the ability to listen to other people and to understand their situation.

A receipt of social skills might be other peoples’ judgments about a person, e.g.:
“he is so pleasant”,
“she is a very likeable person.”
“she makes people feel good”

What do you want your audience to say about you, when they interact with your brand online?

The art of speaking with other people.
Let´s think about common sense, and how this should impact our actions online. Internet platforms offer companies and individuals a place where they can talk to consumers and friends. However, the platform itself offers no intrinsic value. If a conversation contains no content, there is no value generated. Hence, neither interest nor confidence is being created.

Let´s take a look at a few examples:

-If you were the owner of a consumer electronics store, would you stand in the door of the entrance, shouting out random offers through a megaphone to every customer about to enter? (Many online banners have the same effect. Offers are not targeted, hence irrelevant to the exposed consumers).

-Would you stand up on the table during a dinner and begin to brag about how good your products are? (This would be totally out of context, even if the offer would be relevant to the crowd).

-Would you interrupt midst of an exciting film during a cinema show, in order to put up a big advertising banner with an irrelevant offer? (Some online video ads have the same disruptive effect).

The three pillars of communication on the internet
Many consumers think there is too much noise and narcissism in social media. If companies would put more effort into calibrating their communication better, social platforms offer an excellent place for business. The tone of the communication is crucial, as well as the relevancy of the content and the value of the offer.

Do-it-yourself philosophy
In the last few years, social media consultants have emerged like never before, and many communications agencies have increased their focus on viral and online communication. The quality of this kind of consulting vary of course, and so far, it may be difficult to assess what is good and what is less good, because of the immature nature of the business. However, I believe that much of the job can be done and quality checked by yourself, simply by asking some questions before launching a social media campaign, or fleshing out your social media strategy.

Below I have made a list of some questions that I believe is important to consider at any given time:

Ask yourself these questions:

1. Do I deliver value?
What customer benefit does your blog or e.g. Facebook campaign generate? Respect your customers’ time and realize that they are smart individuals.

2. Am I being relevant?
Talk about subjects that have a natural link to your field of activity.

3. Am I speaking with my customers, or am I talking to them?
Consumers are much more interactive than 5 years ago; they want to have a dialogue. If you can relate to your customers in this interactive way, you will soon discover that your customers will begin to talk about you, convincing others that your brand is superb.

4. Am I being transparent?
Transparency is one of the most important building blocks in the digital marketing. Transparency in combination with complete access to information means that you must be completely truthful and open. If you try to cover up facts or incidents, you will get caught.

5. Am I engaging my target group?
Invite your customers to co-creation, or make sure you supply them with quality entertainment. Consumers have developed incredibly efficient “bullshit-filters”, after many years of media noise.

6. Am I thinking of my brand as a personality?
Choose the right tone for your brand and be consistent in the way you speak. No one likes schizophrenic or obsessive personalities. No one will listen to shouting or bragging. Be nice, self-confident and charming.

7. Am I taking my brand too seriously?

Keep the playfulness and the self-distance. Ice cream is good, but it is not the most important thing in the world. :–) Again, remember that your brand has a personality.

8. Am I being sensitive and flexible?
The world is constantly changing, and the Internet changes even faster. It is important to reflect upon trends, and concurrent happenings in the communication. Because of the dynamics behind communication, it is difficult to make a perfect communication plan that you can rigidly stick to for a whole year. It is impossible to know in advance what events whose waves you can ride of.

9. Am I realizing that everything talks and has ears?
Your brand is communicated from a variety of sources on the Internet, not just from the sources you choose. This means that your message can not be isolated to e.g. your blog, your website and your Facebook page. The viral power of the Internet, will operate both to your advantage as well as to your disadvantage. So make sure to keep track of what is said about your brand, in order to meet the criticism in a clever and brand building way. One method is to search micro blogs, in order to find out what your customers are satisfied and dissatisfied with. Also, ensure that it is not only bad PR at the top of your search results on Google. The grass root movement is a fascinating internet phenomenon.

The DNA and building blocks of a brand
An important insight may be that a lot of companies are not built for a social personality from the start. It is difficult to be an interesting brand personality if the core business is the making of mechanical products. Despite this, it is interesting to think about a company or a brand as a personality. If Caterpillar was a man, would he go to a lot of cocktail parties and stand up on the table and dance? Probably not! What would Coca Cola do? Is your brand´s personality reflected in the way it is expressed in social media? Do stay close to your brand´s core values and personality when interacting with your clients online.

The mobile revolution is here and intensifying
The evolution of digital does not end with the internet. New platforms will emerge and revolutionize the way we communicate, over and over again. The flavor of 2010, is that communication platforms are being engined by increased mobile access worldwide, and will be the next change in the way we communicate and do business. Mary Meeker, internet analyst, stated this in her annual trend report for the Internet. Meeker establishes that the mobile Internet is, and will be, greater than everyone thinks.

Last but not least, remember that courage is a very forgiving thing. Consumers will appreciate companies who dare to try new things, and that are humble to changes.

Kim Alltorp

Kim Alltorp
Kim Alltorp works with the marketing of Google’s Consumer Products in the Nordic markets, and has worked in the company for three years. She graduated from the Gothenburg School of Business, Economics and Law in 2006 and during her studies, she worked with the marketing of brands such as Volvo Cars, Kilroy Travels, AstraZeneca and P&L Nordic AB.

1 kommentar

Bo Bäckman: Price-value elasticity (PVE) – Nokia´s transformation into a Superbrand

2009/12/18

Today Nokia is the undisputable Superbrand in mobile phones – but threatened by Samsung, LG, Rim and soon Google. When and why did this happen? What did Nokia see in the market that many others did not foresee? And how do you measure factors that will turn a market upside down. In this case from an engineering product developed by technicians to a total experience (Nokia) set in motion by designers (both technical platform designers and experience designers).
The basic assumption is that it pays to do market research and that you need to go from often non committing attitudes to priorities among the consumers. And that price has to be taken into account.
What is so important that the market is prepared to pay for it? What is so unimportant that few are willing to pay?

The method – Conjoint analysis
Traditional market research often asks “what is important to you when buying a mobile phone”? The answers you get are often a Christmas wish list. “I want it all at a low price”. The trick is not to ask about each feature at a time but instead combine the factors systematically and ask about a whole with a price tag. The basic assumption is that the market can prioritize between offers . They can weigh between price and utilities. Even more subtle utilizes like image. “I want to be seen in an Odd Molly dress and besides I love their unique design. They cost more but it is worth it”. When you buy a detergent you have a large selection of brands to choose from but you often know what you are looking for, what features you prioritize. A price reduction on a detergent you usually do not buy might jolt your priorities. “That is a good price and I know the product. I buy that instead of my old brand and will save money”

Attitudes are often measured in research. Priorities are what should be measured. The method that can handle priorities is Conjoint – Considered Jointly. Not sequential questions as in traditional research but in a systematic fashion that uses “Full concepts” instead of one question at a time.
The respondent in the survey assess a”whole” – not attitudes to each feature. Not price by itself, not design by itself but the tradeoff between price and design. You need to find the priorities, the tradeoff between features and price

The Nokia case

The study was initiated by SVID, Stiftelsen Svensk Industridesign, who was primarily interested in the impact of design.  Below are the attributes and the parameters that were used. It is a simple model that focused on elasticity for design vs. price.  What trade off between designs and price was the market prepared to make? At that time (end of the 1990:ies) there were two main design features: The more square Ericsson design and Nokia´s more organic design. Today the design of mobile phones has entered a new realm. But still possible to analyze with a Conjoint method.

Conjoint is a very cost effective method done on the net today. It is easy to set up but you must not have many attributes and parameters. It makes answering the questions too complex and will reduce reliability and validity. As it is a cost effective, fast (2-4 days with analysis) method it is possible to do more than one test. You can refine by penetrating deeper into a parameter.

The results
Price was the single most important factor followed by design. The more technical aspects and manufacturer had less impact on the choice of a new mobile phone.

Simulation – The eternal “What if” question.
What if we raise price – what is the price elasticity? Will we lose market share?
What if we introduce a new design – what is the value elasticity? Will the new design attract new customers and at what price?
After the survey and the initial analysis the interviews were set up in a database. We “constructed” two phones:
1. A Nokia design with different prices
2. An Ericsson design with different prices
The technical aspects were the same – we wanted to focus on:
1. Value – design
2. Price – what was the design worth
In the simulation phase we analysed a number of “phones” in order to find what the design was worth.
With the same price 25% would chose Ericsson with its design. 54% Nokia.

If an Ericsson cost 500 Nokia could charge 1 000 and still get the same choice share. The design had doubled the value of a Nokia.

Segmentation before you start
Today the market is much more fragmented with specific target groups and a large variety of features and applications. This means that you need to segment before doing a Conjoint.
A broad segmentation in Sweden today:
1. The silent majority (51%) – just calling and answering
2. The talkative (30%) – communicating with the phone
3. The applicationists (15%) – the terminal as a tool for experience and the daily life
Choose segment and do a Conjoint. It is worth it.

Inga kommentarer

Bo Bäckman: Find and develop Gaps in the market

11/12 2009

As much of brand perception is based on values it is interesting to identify values that are “homeless” in terms of Brands.

Today in Sweden we are 10 months away from the national election. The political map is changing and volatile and values will play an important role.

Are political parties’ brands? Yes I think so. They are dependent on brand promises, strategy, communication, media tactics, ambassadors, management, PR … The same prerequisites as for creating a Superbrand.  Many of  the prerequisites  are mirrored in values.

To measure political parties

Traditionally you ask a sample about “Which party is best today”. But below “Best” there are more or less probable options. These you can identify by asking: “Which parties can you consider voting for”.

• Definitely
• Probably
• Maybe
• Hardly
• Never

The analysis will show:

• Percent convinced – have a “Definite Party”. These are hard to move and make good ambassadors
• Shared potential – might consider two or more parties. Make then go your way. They will listen as they are hesitant and need to find a reason to make a choice.
• The “neverists” – they will never believe anything from that party. And they will take every chance to discredit that party.

• In short: Find and influence the possible flows.

Political BrandMapping:

SD: Sweden Democrats S: Social Democrats FP: Liberals M: Conservatives C: Center party V: Socialist party MP: Environmental Party

1: Modern life style, but with a focus on the local.
2: Concerned about the society – empathy.
3: Selfcentered with a focus on a troubelsome everydaylife.
4: Open for modern life style and pretty content with life. Want to express themselves. A global perspective.

The concept for Political BrandMapping is to start with many values, extract the Political Drivers by finding what core values correlate with having a political party on your “Short list”:

The Core values map (see below) is formed by plotting values against each other so that the values have a maximum distance between them and then position the parties with a maximum distance between them.  If you have a value in the right hand upper corner and another in left hand upper corner these are not shared by the same individuals. They split the political Brand map and the parties.

Conclusions

The new party (SD) is filling a Gap among those who are more passive. The SD possible voters are hostile towards the large cities. They want to protect their little world from changes – be it new values or strangers. Life is often tough for them (and unfair in their opinion).

The party that is closest to SD is the Social Democrats – but still a distance away. We must remember that S is a large party that holds sometimes opposing values. The common denominator is equality.

The environmentalists feel a little bit lonely. Their values do not correlate with other values as you can see in the chart. Environmental matters are quite far from other values.  Being an environmentalist seems to be a priority – not very much else matters.

The two parties that attract the votes of the environmentalists are MP and V.

KD and C are close and their potential voters are quite content – life is good to them. An interest in Looks&Fashion is correlated with thinking “Life is good”. But that life is good doesn´t prevent them from taking in new impressions.

Being a liberal (FP) is to be split: To be an early adopter as well as a traditionalist.

The conservative party M is very close to the liberal party FP. M is far away from S but as S is a large party there are values in the new M strategy that attracts S-voters

The next step in value positioning is to elaborate on the values. The values above are a condensation of several values that correlate and have been labelled. There must a more thorough analysis in order to understand more of the value drivers. This will not be done in this article.

The possibilities

Spring 2009: How many are possible for the parties? How many are convinced?
Source: Orvesto 2009. 16 000 interviews

In all 61 % have a “definite” party. The sum of all possible parties is 224 i.e. the voters have 2.2 alternatives.

So everything is possible – the political map is volatile. This also makes political choices very sensitive to different moves from the political actors and media. The closer you get to the election the more important it gets to make a choice – you observe more, you listen more and you discuss more. And media and politicians are very eager to provide “information”

The table below shows cross possibilities. I.e. if you have C as a possibility what other parties can they consider? 68% of the possible C-voters have FP as a possibility (definitely or maybe vote for). As you see from Sum possible The smaller parties (C, FP, KD, SD, V) have higher sums. The flows between them can change rapidly. You can also see that there is a rather large propensity to move across the political boarders. 24% of the possible S-voters can consider voting for M.

Bo Bäckman

Inga kommentarer

Mass personalization.

2/12 2009

In the 1970’s Burger King introduced their “have it our way” slogan summing up its difference from rival McDonald’s. The slogan was abandoned soon after, only to be brought back in full effect in 2004. Andrew Keller, creative director in charge of the account at Crispin, said at the slogans re-launch  “At a time when self-expression and mass customization are critical elements of culture, the line makes total sense.”

Keller was tapping into the rising culture of ‘ME’ which is so much more prolific with the rise of social media. Social media now sets the individual firmly in the center of their world, leveling the playing field and allowing their opinions to carry as much, if not more, influence than that of the traditional channels. You may see narcissism as a negative trait, but to the ME generation it as a means to an end. In a recent poll of American students the consensus was that “being self-promoting, narcissistic, overconfident, and attention-seeking is helpful for succeeding in a competitive world.”

This growing narcissism is leading to more and more brands allowing their customers to personalise their products. Since 2007customers to Nike have been able to create their own unique shoes online. With the Nike iD Website a customer can pick the shoe model, choose the color of almost every aspect and have a short message embroidered on the heel. This today, has developed into Nike placing “customisation” as an integral part of their webshop.

Mini Cooper allow their American customers to create their own personal mini online, with almost every part of the car being changeable. This of course, has been offered before from other manufactures, but mini goes one step further, with their custom paint shop. Here customers can use an extensive set of design tools or even go as far as uploading their own images to create a truly personalized mini.

HTC is successfully using personalisation in the fight against the mighty iphone. The Make It Mine, concept is “About feeling your HTC phone was created for and by you.” HTC are not only doing this through the customisation of Googles Andriod mobile operating system. They are also allowing their customers to design their own personal cover for their phones.

Finally a newly started Swedish company, Few are taking on the traditional watch industry, by combining logistics with e-commerce allowing their customers to create their own personal timepiece. Customers can choose to combine all details of the watch leading to, as they say  “around 1 billion possible combinations – offering a unique possibility for you to wear a unique watch!”

These are just a few examples of how advancements in manufacturing, logistics and e-commerce, are enabling brands to cater to the demands of the ME generation. More and more customers are no longer satisfied with the premium product. They also expected it to be to personal.

Steinar Danielsen

Steinar Danielsen is the co-founder and Creative Director of Supernative, a digital communication agency based in Stockholm. He works with providing analysis, online strategies, creative concepts and digital identities, for a range of international brands.

Inga kommentarer

How to make your customers into raving fans

25/11 2010

We all dream of building successful brands like Apple or Nike. Few pull it off.

We call ourselves professionals, so shouldn’t we do better? Especially since mankind obviously has had a clear understanding of the power of a brand for thousands of years. A quick glance at the christian cross, or the muslim crescent, is proof enough.

An embarrasing question comes to mind:
Can today’s brand managers learn from the ancient religous sages?

To find the answer we have to turn to neuroscience, or more specifically, a fMRI-scanner. Thanks to this piece of equipment we can gather data of exactly what goes on inside our heads when we look att pictures of famous brands – and compare these with those of diehard religious people when they’re exposed to spiritual symbols. And here’s the earth-trembling news:

The neuro-patterns are exactly the same.

Clearly, we’re missing something obvious, but what? Because here we are, in the beginning of the 21st century, trying to find the holy grail of advertising. We go to universities to learn the theories, we manage focus groups to figure out how people think and react, and we constantly look for more effective ways to connect with our audiencies. Yet the answer is both simple and old-fashioned.

It all comes down to telling a good story.

Whether you want to build a strong brand or start a new religion you have to start with a compelling plot.

Here are a few pointers:

First, you need a character your audience can relate to. Correction: you need to be a character. This will create identification.

Second, you must decide on a goal that’s both tough and inspiring – so bold in fact, that your success/failure ratio is 50-50. Now you have a vision, a direction and a strategy. At this point you should have butterflies in your stomach, or something is wrong.

To make things even worse, enter a fierce antagonist. The sole purpose of this character is to prevent you from reaching your goal, because the antagonist’s motives are exactly the opposite of your own. This will lead to conflict and suspense.

Now you’re in the heat of the action, which in turn, will create lots of feelings. Don’t be afraid, feelings are great, they are nature’s way of getting things done. Now, not later.

Suddenly your goal seems even more distant and you start to realise that you need help. That’s why you need a flag (think christian crusaders), on which you print a visually strong symbol. Because this quest of yours will be a hardship, and in the midst of the battle you need to let others know what side you’re on, so they instantly can decide whether they want to take part of your vision or not.

If done cogently, you could soon have a whole army of raving fans by your side, always prepared to act on a wink, a nod or a flick of the wrist.

For every step you take, every battle won, the myth grows larger and deeper, and your image as a hero builds up.

You will without doubt face defeats. This is the crux of storytelling: You’re part of a story. A story needs action. And action is built by a number of small setbacks followed by the sweet smell of victory.

Never give up. Don’t fear opposition. Don’t run from conflict. Don’t fear the fear. They are your best friends. If you lose them you don’t have a story.

No story, no hero.

No hero, no brand.

That’s all to it, really.

All good writers know this, of course. But you’re a businessman. If you’re like most businessmen you were taught to make brand decisions based on core values, not stories.

Here’s a tip from The School of Hard Knocks:

Forget core values. They don’t lead to anything. They have no conflict, no suspense, no interaction. All they’re saying is »I’m perfect!«. And that’s pompous bullshit to the average consumer.

If you want to build a successful brand, my best advice is to study how the great religions are sold to the world, or how the entertainment industry works. We are, after all, in the storytelling industry.

Stories are sticky. Stories unite people, make them interact and engage with each other. Stories create a sense of belonging, just as they’ve done since man learned to walk upright.

Now, what’s your story?

Per Robert Öhlin
works as brand strategist,
creative consultant, author and lecturer.
Mail: pr.ohlin@luckyman.se
Blog: www.minegoestoeleven.com

Inga kommentarer

Bo Bäckman: Segment of behaviour and urge.

18/11 2010

The Process: Define the segment (What?). Identify and find the most appropriate target group in the customer database and on the market (Who?). Reach in selective, effective media (Where?). Influence by understanding the drivers (Why? – With a ‘Wow! This is for me!’).
In short:  “What? To whom? Where? Why? (And Wow!)”.

Different segmentation parameters:
• Behaviour – What you do.
• Urge – What you desire.

Analysis:
You need a survey with information about brand penetration and loyalty together with values, activities, interests and target group information. This is often available in your tracking studies or can be found in cost effective open surveys.

Cluster analysis – splits the market in clusters that are exclusive. A customer can only belong to one cluster/segment. Internally the clusters are homogenous, externally as different as possible from the other clusters.

Chaid – forms a prioritized tree of wishes, preferences. First the kitchen is prioritized then the living room. …… This way we can find priorities and segment the priorities. Prioritizations are often correlated with willingness to pay. This way profitability is built in to the segmentation.

RU – segmentation (R=Revenue U=Urge). It is based on taking many different values (general and product specific) correlating them with loyalty and thus identify the drivers. These drivers are then transformed into a continuous variable and “sliced” into (often) 3-4 segments based on tradeoffs between urge – spending. The rationale is of course that it is more profitable to acquire a new customer that spends more and to serve and protect your own profitable customers.

Factor analysis – finds the patterns in what the markets wants and allows the customer to have more than one “wish” at a time. You might like a large kitchen but you might as well have a smaller kitchen and a dining area when you need a new home.

Output: Of course there will be a lot of tables, a lot of statistical factors that need to be interpreted, transformed into actionable conclusions/recommendations.

Example: Phone Behaviour.

The phone operators make money on traffic.  Many of the new applications are provided by the mobile manufacturers through outside innovators. The applications generate traffic. The basic for the operator is to measure behaviour – how much do people spend on their mobile. Below is behaviour segmentation based on spending. The largest segment is “The silent Majority” –they spend very little on their mobile. Less than 20 euro per month. That´s where the challenge is – to make the Silent Majority heard and listened to. The smallest segment today is those who use many applications/services.

Source: Orvesto Sweden. 16 000 interviews. Open survey.

Urge.

Maybe there is no such thing as a pure need (if we ignore drugs). There is often an urge present that shows as preferences for different concepts – brands. Life Style Magazines is an urge product. Superbrands are urgedriven. Below an example for Amelia – one of the leading Life Style Magazines in Sweden. An RU-segmentation (Revenue and Urge)

Drivers/Anti drivers for Amelia:

Drivers – City Pulse: Enjoy shopping, follow trends in fashion, active to change their life, Want inspiration, responsible – personally and to the environment.

Anti Drivers – The small world: Don´t want change, avoid the city, hesitant to fashion, need confirmation of their life style

Segments: Spending on Life Style magazines and have City Pulse Drivers. Consumer Base: Women 15 – 79 years.

High spenders – 3.6%: The Core segment: High spenders with the right Drivers.

Medium spenders – 4.3%: Probably need a price incentive. The drivers are right

Low  spenders – 7.6%: Like to read about their drivers but not to pay

Never – 9.7%: Forget theese. They probably have an attitude towards glossy magazines but might well read with a scorn.

Bo Bäckman

Inga kommentarer

Consistency Warning

11/11 2009

Today, most firms want to build a strong brand. Most firms also realize that a brand is a set of associations in the mind of the customer – and that this set develops over time while the customer accumulates experience from the brand. In other words, it is assumed, correctly, that a customer will encounter one particular brand many times and that each such encounter adds information to what the brand represents.

In the light of this, it is not surprising that many firms make serious attempts to manage the signals they send about the brand. And the most common strategy is to think about the signals in terms of a consistency-over-time paradigm: each new encounter with the brand should fit with what is already known from previous encounters. Thus, there should be no deviations in the signals and no main surprises. This way of thinking materializes in many different ways, but it can be seen perhaps most clearly with regard to the management of the logotype – which, in the typical case, is subject to strict policies stating that the same graphic representation should be used every time the customer may encounter it. Variation in shape and colours, for example, is not allowed. The same thinking can also be seen in many service firms’ brand building efforts, particularly in retail chains: the employees’ behaviour and appearance in encounters with customers are becoming increasingly standardized and carefully scripted. Smiles, eye contact, nods within 15 seconds, always wear a black top, never display tattoos – these are some examples from existing service policies. Such activities, then, ensure that the customer will be exposed to the same brand signals every time the brand is encountered.

Many firms, however, want also something else – loyal customers. And many firms are successful in their relationship marketing efforts, in the sense that many customers are indeed existing customers who are coming back. This may suggest that the consistency-over-time paradigm promotes brand loyalty. Well, it may be so – at least in the case of moderate brand loyalty.

Yet consider the case of the customer who is indeed coming back repeatedly and who is also encountering the brand in the same way each time. In the beginning, the customer will quickly feel familiar with this brand. But when the customer continues to come back, again and again, the brand will become very predictable if it always appears in a consistent way. And this is when problems can arise, particularly if the ambition is to build a strong brand (and now we are talking about a really strong brand).

The problem is this: really strong brands, which are characterized not only by customers who come back, but also by a strong emotional and attitudinal customer-brand relationship, are typically not predictable. In contrast, it seems as if unpredictability over time is a key characteristic of the really strong brand. Think about it in terms of, for example, football clubs, which have a well documented ability to develop strong commitment among fans: the clubs are typically not at all predictable in terms of the outcomes of games, the performance of specific players, the transfer of players during one season etc. Indeed, why would you want to follow your favourite team if you know exactly what would happen? Think about it also in terms of strong brands such as Apple, Google, and Harley-Davidson – it is not so easy to figure out their next moves in the marketplace. And think about entertainment products, such as novels and movies, in which the story is the core product: the really absorbing products in this category would hardly provide a predictable story. Think about it in terms of another really strong “brand”, namely God. Read the Bible and try to figure about why God is sometimes good and sometimes almost evil vis-à-vis various characters in the story – this is indeed a difficult task. Finally, particularly if you want to develop a strong personal relationship with customers, think about another person who you find very interesting and exciting – and with whom you want to interact repeatedly. Is this person highly predictable? Would he or she behave in a highly consistent way each time you meet? I bet the answer is no.

Magnus Söderlund
Professor in marketing, Stockholm School of Economics
Magnus.soderlund@hhs.se

Inga kommentarer