Guess Who's Skating Into Town?
Robert Passikoff, Jul 14, 2009 03:02 PM
Tim Hortons Inc., the company founded in 1964 by NHL hall-of-famer Tim Horton, former hockey player for the Toronto Maple Leafs, the New York Rangers and the Buffalo Sabres, just started serving its premium coffee and fresh baked goods for the first time in New York City. It's entering the New York City market with 12 new locations, including 10 in Manhattan.
Tim Hortons has more than 500 locations in the U.S. and sells about 2 billion cups of coffee annually. With 3,000 stores in Canada, it accounts for more than seven of every 10 cups of quick serve coffee sold in Canada, but Manhattan poses a challenge with an already over- caffeinated market. Both Dunkin Donuts and McDonald's have more than 100 locations within five miles of each other, while Starbucks has more than 80.
But it's not all about the real estate. Something else drives customers, more than convenient locations. It's the "something else" that showed up in our metrics three years ago, allowing us to predict the decline of Starbuck's before anyone would believe it. Let's just say here that it's a lot
more centered on customer experience than it is what corner you're standing on. This is how the brands currently rank in the annual Brand Keys Customer Loyalty Engagement
Index:
1. Dunkin' Donuts
2. McDonald's
3. Starbucks
4. Krispy Kreme
Should the new team worry current players? Well, for the six months that ended in February, Dunkin' had posted a 9% growth in system-wide sales and a 4% increase in U.S. same-store sales.
For that same period, Dunkin' Donuts had total sales of $1.55 billion, and offered such new items as caramel iced coffee and an expanded rollout of scones. But McDonald's is expanding the coffee portion of its business in the U.S. and Canada too, and has installed McCafé mini-coffee shops featuring recreational coffee beverages at more than 10,000 U.S. restaurants It will test its in-store McCafé coffee shop concept in Canadian locations later this
year. McDonald's also recently launched a promotion for its Premium Roast coffee in Canada and, this week, McDonald's began a U.S. summer promotion called Mocha Mondays that gives customers a free iced or hot mocha beverage at participating stores.
Meanwhile, Starbucks, once first in our rankings, reported reductions in net revenues, comparable store sales, operating income, operating margin, and net earnings during Q2 2009, and is continuing with plans to close about 800 company-owned stores in the U.S. this year. But it's offering ice cream now, and via Facebook is promoting its ice cream by offering 20,000 pints of it free each day, at a rate of 800 per hour. This offer ends on Sunday.
Krispy Kreme isn't faring a whole lot better. It slipped slightly for the entire system, of which company-owned stores account for 29%, and same-store sales are down 2.4% for combined company-owned and non- company-owned -- and that's after closing what supposedly were its
"bad" stores. At the company's annual meeting, Krispy Kreme says it's planning to test "proprietary" ice cream in stores in cones, cups and shakes. And a doughnut sundae.
Advice for Tim Hortons? Well, hockey great Wayne Gretzky once noted, "Some people skate to the puck. I skate to where the puck is going to be," and the same is true about engendering loyalty. If you have predictive consumer metrics, you always know where consumer values are going to end
up. And winning and keeping customers is a goal to which every brand should aspire.
Dr. Robert Passikoff
Founder & President - Brand Keys, Inc. partner of
Brand Lounge in the Middle East and North Africa
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Differentiate Or Die
Differentiate or Die
Jack Trout, President & Founder Trout & Partners Ltd.
posted by Hasan Fadlallah, Managing Director Brand Lounge
What has changed in business over recent decades is the amazing proliferation of product choices in just about every category. Its been estimated that there are 1,000,000 SKU’s (Standard Stocking Units) out there in America. An average supermarket has 40,000 SKU’s. Now for the stunner. An average family gets 80 to 85% of their needs from 150 SKU’s. That means there’s a good chance we’ll ignore 39,850 items in that store.
The dictionary defines “tyranny” as absolute power that often is harsh or cruel.
So it is with choice. With the enormous competition, markets today are driven by choice. The customer has so many good alternatives that you pay dearly for your mistakes. Your competitors get your business and you don’t get it back very easily. Companies that don’t understand this will not survive. (Now that’s cruel.)
Just look at some of the names on the headstones in the brand graveyard: American Motors, Burger Chef, Carte Blanc, Eastern Airlines, Gainesburgers, Gimbels, Hathaway Shirts, Horn & Hardart, Mr. Salty Pretzels, Philco, Trump Shuttle, VisiCalc, Woolworth’s.
And this is only a short list of names that are no longer with us.
In this global killer economy you have to find a way to differentiate yourself or you better have a very low price. To do this, here are the steps you must follow:
Step one. The context.
Arguments are never made in a vacuum. There are always surrounding competitors trying to make arguments of their own. Your message has to make sense in the context of the category. It has to start with what the marketplace has heard and registered from your competition.
The context also includes what’s happening in the market. Is the timing for your idea right?
Nordstrom’s differentiating idea of “better service” played perfectly into the context of a department store world which was reducing its people and service as a way to cut costs.
Lotus launched the first successful network on “groupware software” called Notes just as Corporate America was networking its PC’s. (IBM ended up buying Lotus and Notes for 2.5 billion dollars.)
It’s like riding a wave. If you’re too early or late you’ll go nowhere. Catch it just right and you’ll get a long and profitable ride for your difference.
Step two. The differentiating idea.
To be different is to be not the same. To be unique is to be one of its kind.
So you’re looking for something that separates you from your competitors. The secret to this is understanding that your differentness does not have to be product related.
Consider a horse. Yes, horses are quickly differentiated by their type. There are race horses, jumpers, ranch horses, wild horses and on and on. But, in racehorses you can differentiate them by breeding, by performance, by stable, by trainer and on and on.
A product or service can be differentiated by feature, leadership, preference, heritage, specialty, how it’s made and on and on. ( I wrote a book on this subject if you want more ways to differentiate your brand.)
Step three. The credentials.
To build a logical argument for your difference, you must have the credentials to support your differentiating idea. To make it real and believable.
If you have a product difference, then you should be able to demonstrate that difference. The demonstration, in turn, becomes your credentials. If you have a leak-proof valve, then you should be able to have a direct comparison with valves that can leak.
Claims of difference without proof are really just claims. For example, a “wide-track” Pontiac must be wider than other cars. British Air as the “world’s favorite airline” should fly more people than any other airline. Coca-Cola as the “real thing” has to have invented colas. When it’s “Hertz and not exactly” there should be some unique services that the others don’t offer.
You can’t differentiate with smoke and mirrors. Consumers are skeptical. They’re thinking, “Oh yeah, Mr. Advertiser? Prove it!” You must be able to support your argument.
Step four. Communicate your difference.
Just as you can’t keep your light under a basket, you can’t keep your difference under wraps.
If you build a differentiated product, the world will not automatically beat a path to your door. Better products don’t win. Better perceptions tend to be the winners. Truth will not out unless it has some help along the way.
Every aspect of your communications should reflect your difference. Your advertising. Your brochures. Your website. Your sales presentations.
In marketing, the rich often get richer because they have the resources to drive their ideas into the mind. Their problem is separating the good ideas from the bad ones, and avoiding spending money on too many products and too many programs.
Unfortunately, without the proper resources, even the best differentiating idea won’t get off the ground. Look what happened to AT&T in recent years. They failed to differentiate themselves from Sprint and MCI. The result: A price war which ended in the ignominy of being bought by a Baby Bell.
As I said, Differentiate or Die.
With more than 40 years of experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the acclaimed author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, Marketing Warfare, The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing, Differentiate or Die, Big Brands, Big Trouble, A Genie's Wisdom and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "Positioning" and other important concepts in marketing strategy.With more than 40 years of experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the acclaimed author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, Marketing Warfare, The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing, Differentiate or Die, Big Brands, Big Trouble, A Genie's Wisdom and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "Positioning" and other important concepts in marketing strategy.
Jack Trout, President & Founder Trout & Partners Ltd.
posted by Hasan Fadlallah, Managing Director Brand Lounge
What has changed in business over recent decades is the amazing proliferation of product choices in just about every category. Its been estimated that there are 1,000,000 SKU’s (Standard Stocking Units) out there in America. An average supermarket has 40,000 SKU’s. Now for the stunner. An average family gets 80 to 85% of their needs from 150 SKU’s. That means there’s a good chance we’ll ignore 39,850 items in that store.
The dictionary defines “tyranny” as absolute power that often is harsh or cruel.
So it is with choice. With the enormous competition, markets today are driven by choice. The customer has so many good alternatives that you pay dearly for your mistakes. Your competitors get your business and you don’t get it back very easily. Companies that don’t understand this will not survive. (Now that’s cruel.)
Just look at some of the names on the headstones in the brand graveyard: American Motors, Burger Chef, Carte Blanc, Eastern Airlines, Gainesburgers, Gimbels, Hathaway Shirts, Horn & Hardart, Mr. Salty Pretzels, Philco, Trump Shuttle, VisiCalc, Woolworth’s.
And this is only a short list of names that are no longer with us.
In this global killer economy you have to find a way to differentiate yourself or you better have a very low price. To do this, here are the steps you must follow:
Step one. The context.
Arguments are never made in a vacuum. There are always surrounding competitors trying to make arguments of their own. Your message has to make sense in the context of the category. It has to start with what the marketplace has heard and registered from your competition.
The context also includes what’s happening in the market. Is the timing for your idea right?
Nordstrom’s differentiating idea of “better service” played perfectly into the context of a department store world which was reducing its people and service as a way to cut costs.
Lotus launched the first successful network on “groupware software” called Notes just as Corporate America was networking its PC’s. (IBM ended up buying Lotus and Notes for 2.5 billion dollars.)
It’s like riding a wave. If you’re too early or late you’ll go nowhere. Catch it just right and you’ll get a long and profitable ride for your difference.
Step two. The differentiating idea.
To be different is to be not the same. To be unique is to be one of its kind.
So you’re looking for something that separates you from your competitors. The secret to this is understanding that your differentness does not have to be product related.
Consider a horse. Yes, horses are quickly differentiated by their type. There are race horses, jumpers, ranch horses, wild horses and on and on. But, in racehorses you can differentiate them by breeding, by performance, by stable, by trainer and on and on.
A product or service can be differentiated by feature, leadership, preference, heritage, specialty, how it’s made and on and on. ( I wrote a book on this subject if you want more ways to differentiate your brand.)
Step three. The credentials.
To build a logical argument for your difference, you must have the credentials to support your differentiating idea. To make it real and believable.
If you have a product difference, then you should be able to demonstrate that difference. The demonstration, in turn, becomes your credentials. If you have a leak-proof valve, then you should be able to have a direct comparison with valves that can leak.
Claims of difference without proof are really just claims. For example, a “wide-track” Pontiac must be wider than other cars. British Air as the “world’s favorite airline” should fly more people than any other airline. Coca-Cola as the “real thing” has to have invented colas. When it’s “Hertz and not exactly” there should be some unique services that the others don’t offer.
You can’t differentiate with smoke and mirrors. Consumers are skeptical. They’re thinking, “Oh yeah, Mr. Advertiser? Prove it!” You must be able to support your argument.
Step four. Communicate your difference.
Just as you can’t keep your light under a basket, you can’t keep your difference under wraps.
If you build a differentiated product, the world will not automatically beat a path to your door. Better products don’t win. Better perceptions tend to be the winners. Truth will not out unless it has some help along the way.
Every aspect of your communications should reflect your difference. Your advertising. Your brochures. Your website. Your sales presentations.
In marketing, the rich often get richer because they have the resources to drive their ideas into the mind. Their problem is separating the good ideas from the bad ones, and avoiding spending money on too many products and too many programs.
Unfortunately, without the proper resources, even the best differentiating idea won’t get off the ground. Look what happened to AT&T in recent years. They failed to differentiate themselves from Sprint and MCI. The result: A price war which ended in the ignominy of being bought by a Baby Bell.
As I said, Differentiate or Die.
With more than 40 years of experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the acclaimed author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, Marketing Warfare, The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing, Differentiate or Die, Big Brands, Big Trouble, A Genie's Wisdom and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "Positioning" and other important concepts in marketing strategy.With more than 40 years of experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the acclaimed author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, Marketing Warfare, The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing, Differentiate or Die, Big Brands, Big Trouble, A Genie's Wisdom and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "Positioning" and other important concepts in marketing strategy.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Tales From The Marketing Wars (3)
Branding Lessons From GM: What Not To Do
Jack Trout, President & Founder Trout & Partners Ltd.
posted by Hasan Fadlallah, Managing Director Brand Lounge
Toyota is about to pass General Motors' seven-decade reign as the world's largest car producer by volume. That’s right 70 years of leadership coming to an end. Today, Toyota has America’s best selling car, the Camry, and GM is struggling to make dwindling brands, such as Buick and Pontiac, mean something to consumers.
When something like this happens to a company of this stature, it's important to discover why this occurred. These are important lessons as George Santayana warned, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." I mentioned the GM brand schizophrenia problem in an earlier column. Here’s a more detailed analysis of what went wrong.
When Alfred Sloan joined GM in 1924 as operating vice president, he inherited what he called an "irrational product line"--one that had no guiding policy for the marketing of its many brands. The company's only objective was to sell the cars. The brands stole volume from each other and, with the exception of Buick and Cadillac, all lost money.
Sloan immediately realized that GM had too many models and too much duplication and lacked a product policy. In one of the earliest examples of market segmentation, he reduced GM’s offerings to five models, separated them by price grades and emphasized individual brand image to entice customers into the GM family and move them up.
These distinct and strong brands allowed GM to capture more than 57% of the U.S. market by 1955. Aware that pursuing more market share could lead to antitrust actions and the threat of a breakup, GM fatefully shifted its strategy from making better cars to making more and more money from a relatively stable number of sales.
Nothing dramatized this new direction more than the concept of "badge engineering," or selling identical vehicles under different model names. This invention of GM's finance staff was a way to increase profits through uniformity, by, among other things, making parts interchangeable. Slowly but surely, the different brands lost the individual personalities that the company had so painstakingly established. At the same time, to improve their numbers (and bonuses), the GM divisions began to push the boundaries of the product policies that defined their brands: Chevrolet went up in price with fancier models, as did Pontiac. Buick and Oldsmobile offered cheaper versions. In time, GM was once again producing multiple cars of different brands that both looked and were priced alike. For GM, it was 1921 all over again, with brands that look alike and are priced alike.
Like BMW, Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) pushed one brand in many forms. All these cars benefited by sharing in one powerful differentiating idea: reliability. And when they went up into the super-premium category, it became a Lexus with all "Toyota" identity carefully eliminated. Also, they are quick to invest in new innovations such as the hybrid (Prius) and, coming soon, the wheelchair friendly Porte, aimed at Japan’s elderly population.
The bottom line is that in the branding business, less is more.
A successful brand has to stand for something. And the more variations to attach to it, the more you risk standing for nothing. This is especially true when what you add actually clashes with your perception. If Altira's (nyse: MO - news - people ) Marlboro stands for cowboys out in Marlboro Country, how can it sell Marlboro Menthol or Marlboro Ultra Light cigarettes? Real cowboys don’t smoke Menthols or Ultra Lights.
If Coca-Cola (nyse: KO - news - people ) is the company that invented cola and the owner of that special formula, how can it be the "Real Thing" when the company offers a parade of new things including one called "Zero"? Why change that unique formula?
Should Wal-Mart Stores (nyse: WMT - news - people ) try to sell more up-market products to compete with Target (nyse: TGT - news - people )? No, that's not its market.
Should Porsche risk its sports car image by selling SUVs? No, it's an iconic sports car brand.
Should Dell (nasdaq: DELL - news - people ) try to sell home electronics to compete with the Japanese and Koreans in this category? No, it sells computers directly to businesses.
Until companies come to grips with the simple fact that they don’t really have an inordinate need to grow, but an inordinate desire to grow (because of Wall Street), bad things will continue to happen. Slowly but surely, brands will lose their meaning as they try to become more.
What is happening to General Motors (nyse: GM - news - people ) should be a lesson to all companies no matter how big and powerful they are. You cannot be everything for everybody, and the more you try, the more you risk sinking the ship.
As I say to many senior executives as a reminder of what can happen, put a simple sign on the wall that reads: Remember the Titanic.
With more than 40 years of experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the acclaimed author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, Marketing Warfare, The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing, Differentiate or Die, Big Brands, Big Trouble, A Genie's Wisdom and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "Positioning" and other important concepts in marketing strategy.
Jack Trout, President & Founder Trout & Partners Ltd.
posted by Hasan Fadlallah, Managing Director Brand Lounge
Toyota is about to pass General Motors' seven-decade reign as the world's largest car producer by volume. That’s right 70 years of leadership coming to an end. Today, Toyota has America’s best selling car, the Camry, and GM is struggling to make dwindling brands, such as Buick and Pontiac, mean something to consumers.
When something like this happens to a company of this stature, it's important to discover why this occurred. These are important lessons as George Santayana warned, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." I mentioned the GM brand schizophrenia problem in an earlier column. Here’s a more detailed analysis of what went wrong.
When Alfred Sloan joined GM in 1924 as operating vice president, he inherited what he called an "irrational product line"--one that had no guiding policy for the marketing of its many brands. The company's only objective was to sell the cars. The brands stole volume from each other and, with the exception of Buick and Cadillac, all lost money.
Sloan immediately realized that GM had too many models and too much duplication and lacked a product policy. In one of the earliest examples of market segmentation, he reduced GM’s offerings to five models, separated them by price grades and emphasized individual brand image to entice customers into the GM family and move them up.
These distinct and strong brands allowed GM to capture more than 57% of the U.S. market by 1955. Aware that pursuing more market share could lead to antitrust actions and the threat of a breakup, GM fatefully shifted its strategy from making better cars to making more and more money from a relatively stable number of sales.
Nothing dramatized this new direction more than the concept of "badge engineering," or selling identical vehicles under different model names. This invention of GM's finance staff was a way to increase profits through uniformity, by, among other things, making parts interchangeable. Slowly but surely, the different brands lost the individual personalities that the company had so painstakingly established. At the same time, to improve their numbers (and bonuses), the GM divisions began to push the boundaries of the product policies that defined their brands: Chevrolet went up in price with fancier models, as did Pontiac. Buick and Oldsmobile offered cheaper versions. In time, GM was once again producing multiple cars of different brands that both looked and were priced alike. For GM, it was 1921 all over again, with brands that look alike and are priced alike.
Like BMW, Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) pushed one brand in many forms. All these cars benefited by sharing in one powerful differentiating idea: reliability. And when they went up into the super-premium category, it became a Lexus with all "Toyota" identity carefully eliminated. Also, they are quick to invest in new innovations such as the hybrid (Prius) and, coming soon, the wheelchair friendly Porte, aimed at Japan’s elderly population.
The bottom line is that in the branding business, less is more.
A successful brand has to stand for something. And the more variations to attach to it, the more you risk standing for nothing. This is especially true when what you add actually clashes with your perception. If Altira's (nyse: MO - news - people ) Marlboro stands for cowboys out in Marlboro Country, how can it sell Marlboro Menthol or Marlboro Ultra Light cigarettes? Real cowboys don’t smoke Menthols or Ultra Lights.
If Coca-Cola (nyse: KO - news - people ) is the company that invented cola and the owner of that special formula, how can it be the "Real Thing" when the company offers a parade of new things including one called "Zero"? Why change that unique formula?
Should Wal-Mart Stores (nyse: WMT - news - people ) try to sell more up-market products to compete with Target (nyse: TGT - news - people )? No, that's not its market.
Should Porsche risk its sports car image by selling SUVs? No, it's an iconic sports car brand.
Should Dell (nasdaq: DELL - news - people ) try to sell home electronics to compete with the Japanese and Koreans in this category? No, it sells computers directly to businesses.
Until companies come to grips with the simple fact that they don’t really have an inordinate need to grow, but an inordinate desire to grow (because of Wall Street), bad things will continue to happen. Slowly but surely, brands will lose their meaning as they try to become more.
What is happening to General Motors (nyse: GM - news - people ) should be a lesson to all companies no matter how big and powerful they are. You cannot be everything for everybody, and the more you try, the more you risk sinking the ship.
As I say to many senior executives as a reminder of what can happen, put a simple sign on the wall that reads: Remember the Titanic.
With more than 40 years of experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the acclaimed author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, Marketing Warfare, The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing, Differentiate or Die, Big Brands, Big Trouble, A Genie's Wisdom and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "Positioning" and other important concepts in marketing strategy.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Tales From The Marketing Wars (2)
Differentiate Or Be Fired
Jack Trout, President & Founder Trout & Partners Ltd.
posted by Hasan Fadlallah, Managing Director Brand Lounge
Chief marketing officers (CMOs) have a shorter tenure than NFL coaches. In fact, as you can see by the chart, they barely get beyond two years before they move on.
Average number of months at a position
CEO 44
CFO 39
CIO 36
CMO 26
"The job is radioactive," according to a recent article in BusinessWeek. The problem, it said, is that 70% of companies don't know what they're looking for when they recruit a CMO.
The chief marketer at Gap (nyse: GPS - news - people ) for two years, Jeff Jones, reported that he discussed 22 CMO positions over a five-month period. Not one, he says, spelled out coherently what he or she would be accountable for.
It's gotten so bad that Advertising Age editorialized: "Perhaps we should just call for the end of the CMO position." They went on, "Put the job out of its misery. It isn't really working anyway, is it?"
All this caught my attention, so I've decided to take a closer look at the problem and figure out what's going on. I'm starting with a quotation from legendary management consultant Peter Drucker that's worth repeating: "Because the purpose of business is to create a customer, the business enterprise has two--and only these two basic functions: marketing and innovation. Marketing and innovation produce results; all the rest are costs. Marketing is the distinguishing, unique function of the business."
So there it is. The father of business consulting pointed out that the CMO has one of the most important jobs in a company. And he even went on to describe its function, which is to develop "the distinguishing, unique function of the business." In other words, what is it that makes the company or product unique and different? That's the CMO's assignment. So, in simple language, marketing's role is to turn the one idea that differentiates your brand or product from all competitors into a full-scale program. The idea is the nail. The program is the hammer that drives it into the mind of the prospect. What could be simpler? Why all the fuzziness? In fact, my book on this subject, Differentiate or Die, lays out how to do all this in great detail.
Then, one day, I opened the Nov. 26 issue of Advertising Age and came across an interesting set of data culled from senior marketers. Anderson Analytics surveyed 1,657 senior marketing executives. Six hundred replied. Wow, I thought, that should tell me what's going on. And sure enough, it did.
The researchers asked respondents to rank the marketing concepts to which they devote time in their working day. The following list shows where they spend the most time:
Top 10 Percentage
Customer satisfaction 88%
Customer retention 86%
Segmentation 83%
Competitive Intelligence 82%
Brand loyalty 82%
Search engine optimization 81%
Marketing ROI 80%
Quality 79%
Data mining 78%
Personalization (one-to-one marketing) 79%
There, in graph form, is why CMOs are being fired left and right. "Differentiation" doesn't even make it onto the chart. While they are worrying about customers or segmentation or return on investment (ROI) or search-engine optimization, their brands are sinking into a sea of commoditization. Drucker told them what to do, and they ignored him.
Forget all about data-mining or number slicing or niche segmenting. Why should a customer buy your company's product instead of the 10 or so other competitive choices? That's the question you should be answering. Build a program around that answer.
But be careful. Don't expect the advertising agency to come up with this answer. Chances are, they will try to sell emotion, or entertainment, or something that doesn't supply that critical reason to buy. I saw another study by a well-known research company that analyzed 340 commercials shown in prime time and identified a differentiating brand message in only 7% of those ads. Ugh. (If you look at much television, I'm sure you'll agree with that observation.)
Figuring out the right positioning strategy is only the beginning. Next, a CMO will have to convince the CEO and chief financial officer that building or even maintaining a brand is a long-term process that requires patience and incremental change. They will have to avoid line extensions that just undermine what the brand stands for in the mind. And Wall Street's emphasis on quarterly and monthly results is a problem that you will have to tackle. I never said it would be easy.
All you can do to fight off the financial sharks is to point out that without that point of difference--what Drucker calls "distinguishing and unique"--you'd better charge very low prices. There's nothing in the middle. And low prices mean very low profits.
Following Drucker's advice is how CMOs can move from "radioactive" to influential. That's a far better place to be.
With more than 40 years of experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle For Your Mind; Marketing Warfare; The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing; Differentiate or Die; Big Brands, Big Trouble; and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "positioning" and other concepts in marketing strategy.
Jack Trout, President & Founder Trout & Partners Ltd.
posted by Hasan Fadlallah, Managing Director Brand Lounge
Chief marketing officers (CMOs) have a shorter tenure than NFL coaches. In fact, as you can see by the chart, they barely get beyond two years before they move on.
Average number of months at a position
CEO 44
CFO 39
CIO 36
CMO 26
"The job is radioactive," according to a recent article in BusinessWeek. The problem, it said, is that 70% of companies don't know what they're looking for when they recruit a CMO.
The chief marketer at Gap (nyse: GPS - news - people ) for two years, Jeff Jones, reported that he discussed 22 CMO positions over a five-month period. Not one, he says, spelled out coherently what he or she would be accountable for.
It's gotten so bad that Advertising Age editorialized: "Perhaps we should just call for the end of the CMO position." They went on, "Put the job out of its misery. It isn't really working anyway, is it?"
All this caught my attention, so I've decided to take a closer look at the problem and figure out what's going on. I'm starting with a quotation from legendary management consultant Peter Drucker that's worth repeating: "Because the purpose of business is to create a customer, the business enterprise has two--and only these two basic functions: marketing and innovation. Marketing and innovation produce results; all the rest are costs. Marketing is the distinguishing, unique function of the business."
So there it is. The father of business consulting pointed out that the CMO has one of the most important jobs in a company. And he even went on to describe its function, which is to develop "the distinguishing, unique function of the business." In other words, what is it that makes the company or product unique and different? That's the CMO's assignment. So, in simple language, marketing's role is to turn the one idea that differentiates your brand or product from all competitors into a full-scale program. The idea is the nail. The program is the hammer that drives it into the mind of the prospect. What could be simpler? Why all the fuzziness? In fact, my book on this subject, Differentiate or Die, lays out how to do all this in great detail.
Then, one day, I opened the Nov. 26 issue of Advertising Age and came across an interesting set of data culled from senior marketers. Anderson Analytics surveyed 1,657 senior marketing executives. Six hundred replied. Wow, I thought, that should tell me what's going on. And sure enough, it did.
The researchers asked respondents to rank the marketing concepts to which they devote time in their working day. The following list shows where they spend the most time:
Top 10 Percentage
Customer satisfaction 88%
Customer retention 86%
Segmentation 83%
Competitive Intelligence 82%
Brand loyalty 82%
Search engine optimization 81%
Marketing ROI 80%
Quality 79%
Data mining 78%
Personalization (one-to-one marketing) 79%
There, in graph form, is why CMOs are being fired left and right. "Differentiation" doesn't even make it onto the chart. While they are worrying about customers or segmentation or return on investment (ROI) or search-engine optimization, their brands are sinking into a sea of commoditization. Drucker told them what to do, and they ignored him.
Forget all about data-mining or number slicing or niche segmenting. Why should a customer buy your company's product instead of the 10 or so other competitive choices? That's the question you should be answering. Build a program around that answer.
But be careful. Don't expect the advertising agency to come up with this answer. Chances are, they will try to sell emotion, or entertainment, or something that doesn't supply that critical reason to buy. I saw another study by a well-known research company that analyzed 340 commercials shown in prime time and identified a differentiating brand message in only 7% of those ads. Ugh. (If you look at much television, I'm sure you'll agree with that observation.)
Figuring out the right positioning strategy is only the beginning. Next, a CMO will have to convince the CEO and chief financial officer that building or even maintaining a brand is a long-term process that requires patience and incremental change. They will have to avoid line extensions that just undermine what the brand stands for in the mind. And Wall Street's emphasis on quarterly and monthly results is a problem that you will have to tackle. I never said it would be easy.
All you can do to fight off the financial sharks is to point out that without that point of difference--what Drucker calls "distinguishing and unique"--you'd better charge very low prices. There's nothing in the middle. And low prices mean very low profits.
Following Drucker's advice is how CMOs can move from "radioactive" to influential. That's a far better place to be.
With more than 40 years of experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle For Your Mind; Marketing Warfare; The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing; Differentiate or Die; Big Brands, Big Trouble; and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "positioning" and other concepts in marketing strategy.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Tales From The Marketing Wars
Fixing The Ad Industry
Jack Trout, President & Founder Trout & Partners Ltd.
posted by Hasan Fadlallah, Managing Director Brand Lounge
The press is abuzz with stories about big companies moving dollars out of traditional advertising media and into product placements and other newer marketing methods. One expert after another is predicting that the ad industry as we know it has lost its way and is in decline. Stories about TiVo, buzz and the Internet are all the rage. But before everyone packs up their resumes and jumps ship, I think it's time for a more reasoned view of things--or at least one that gets us away from all of the negative hype and the doom and gloom. Let's start with what should be the role of the advertising agency.
Traditionally, the agency's role is to be the objective "outsider." The agency counsels the client on how to best sell their products or services to their marketplace, how to position the brand vis-a-vis the competition, and how to verbalize their message with that "reason to buy." Candor and honesty were always the hallmarks of a good agency/client relationship, as agencies played a major role in developing strategy for their clients.
A true story is in order here: Many years ago, a senior account supervisor was reminiscing to me about the old days in the business. He recounted a meeting in a hotel where the CEO of the client and the head of the agency were lying in bed together discussing strategy. The account supervisor said to me, "Jack, the industry problem is that we're not in bed with the CEOs anymore."
He was right. As the years have rolled by, I've seen less and less of that kind of relationship. Agencies have backed off on pushing strategy, as clients became more assertive in this regard. Instead, agencies retreated to creativity, emotion or humor as their contributions to the brand. The net result: Today, a lot of advertising lacks that reason to buy. Too many people looked at the advertisement and said, "What are they trying to sell? It's no wonder clients are beginning to question traditional advertising's usefulness. As Pogo would say about the ad business, "We have met the enemy and he is us."
Step One: Get Back To Strategy
Forget about emotion, bonding, borrowed interest or show business, agencies have to rebuild their reputations around being able to help top management figure out the right competitive strategy for a brand. In simple terms, they have to be able to help establish the point of difference for a brand. Forty years ago, it was called a "Unique Selling Proposition." In more recent years, it has been called a "Position." In all cases, it's why a customer should prefer your product over the many other choices out there.
This difference is your ultimate weapon against all of this talk about who needs advertising when you have "buzz" and "product placement." Unfortunately, most of these new marketing tools that are getting all of the attention don't enable you to deliver that message. All they are good for is getting a name out there with no story attached.
Consider the famous Oprah giveaway of 200 Pontiac G-6s. (It won a Cannes Media Lion.) The result was great press but lousy sales, which are 30% below expectations. What was missing was the story about why I should buy one if I didn't get one for free. On the other hand, strategy gives you a guide for all of these newfangled activities. This differentiating idea can be carefully introduced into these non-advertising vehicles. In other words, your carefully developed strategy is the cornerstone for your multi-media plans. They can extend your selling message beyond advertising.
Step Two: Dramatize The Strategy
Creative people tend to resist a strategic approach to advertising. To them, it restricts their creativity. They sometimes view advertising as an art form. To me, the role of a good creative person is to take the strategy and dramatize it in a way that better involves the prospects. In a way, you are dramatizing that reason to buy. It could be a product demonstration or a dramatic solution to a perceived problem. Whatever it is, it captures people's attention while you deliver your sales message.
Consider BMW as a model client. More than 20 years and many agencies ago, they launched an attack on Mercedes-Benz with the dramatic concept of "The ultimate sitting machine vs. the ultimate driving machine." Today, they are still driving with the same concept and are one of the world's most successful car companies. Great strategies never die. Nor do they fade away.
Step Three: Do Away With Awards
Do away with all those creativity-awards shows, such as Cannes and Clios. Nothing does more long-term damage to the industry than making creative folks think that they are making movies and not commercials. Consider the "Curse of the Clio;" it's widely known that a large number of Clio winners lost their accounts not too long after taking home their statuettes. All of this undermines the industry's perceptions of being strategic in its work. It would be like lawyers having awards for creativity in trials. Agencies are supposed to be professionals helping clients solve problems and sell products. Their award should be getting to keep the account.
Besides, clients are on to the fact that awards are there to help agencies get more accounts, not to help clients get more business. That is not a helpful perception for an industry under attack.
With over 40 years experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the acclaimed author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, Marketing Warfare, The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing, Differentiate or Die, Big Brands. Big Trouble, A Genie's Wisdom and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners (represented as Brand Lounge in the Middle East & North Africa) and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "Positioning" and other important concepts in marketing strategy.
Jack Trout, President & Founder Trout & Partners Ltd.
posted by Hasan Fadlallah, Managing Director Brand Lounge
The press is abuzz with stories about big companies moving dollars out of traditional advertising media and into product placements and other newer marketing methods. One expert after another is predicting that the ad industry as we know it has lost its way and is in decline. Stories about TiVo, buzz and the Internet are all the rage. But before everyone packs up their resumes and jumps ship, I think it's time for a more reasoned view of things--or at least one that gets us away from all of the negative hype and the doom and gloom. Let's start with what should be the role of the advertising agency.
Traditionally, the agency's role is to be the objective "outsider." The agency counsels the client on how to best sell their products or services to their marketplace, how to position the brand vis-a-vis the competition, and how to verbalize their message with that "reason to buy." Candor and honesty were always the hallmarks of a good agency/client relationship, as agencies played a major role in developing strategy for their clients.
A true story is in order here: Many years ago, a senior account supervisor was reminiscing to me about the old days in the business. He recounted a meeting in a hotel where the CEO of the client and the head of the agency were lying in bed together discussing strategy. The account supervisor said to me, "Jack, the industry problem is that we're not in bed with the CEOs anymore."
He was right. As the years have rolled by, I've seen less and less of that kind of relationship. Agencies have backed off on pushing strategy, as clients became more assertive in this regard. Instead, agencies retreated to creativity, emotion or humor as their contributions to the brand. The net result: Today, a lot of advertising lacks that reason to buy. Too many people looked at the advertisement and said, "What are they trying to sell? It's no wonder clients are beginning to question traditional advertising's usefulness. As Pogo would say about the ad business, "We have met the enemy and he is us."
Step One: Get Back To Strategy
Forget about emotion, bonding, borrowed interest or show business, agencies have to rebuild their reputations around being able to help top management figure out the right competitive strategy for a brand. In simple terms, they have to be able to help establish the point of difference for a brand. Forty years ago, it was called a "Unique Selling Proposition." In more recent years, it has been called a "Position." In all cases, it's why a customer should prefer your product over the many other choices out there.
This difference is your ultimate weapon against all of this talk about who needs advertising when you have "buzz" and "product placement." Unfortunately, most of these new marketing tools that are getting all of the attention don't enable you to deliver that message. All they are good for is getting a name out there with no story attached.
Consider the famous Oprah giveaway of 200 Pontiac G-6s. (It won a Cannes Media Lion.) The result was great press but lousy sales, which are 30% below expectations. What was missing was the story about why I should buy one if I didn't get one for free. On the other hand, strategy gives you a guide for all of these newfangled activities. This differentiating idea can be carefully introduced into these non-advertising vehicles. In other words, your carefully developed strategy is the cornerstone for your multi-media plans. They can extend your selling message beyond advertising.
Step Two: Dramatize The Strategy
Creative people tend to resist a strategic approach to advertising. To them, it restricts their creativity. They sometimes view advertising as an art form. To me, the role of a good creative person is to take the strategy and dramatize it in a way that better involves the prospects. In a way, you are dramatizing that reason to buy. It could be a product demonstration or a dramatic solution to a perceived problem. Whatever it is, it captures people's attention while you deliver your sales message.
Consider BMW as a model client. More than 20 years and many agencies ago, they launched an attack on Mercedes-Benz with the dramatic concept of "The ultimate sitting machine vs. the ultimate driving machine." Today, they are still driving with the same concept and are one of the world's most successful car companies. Great strategies never die. Nor do they fade away.
Step Three: Do Away With Awards
Do away with all those creativity-awards shows, such as Cannes and Clios. Nothing does more long-term damage to the industry than making creative folks think that they are making movies and not commercials. Consider the "Curse of the Clio;" it's widely known that a large number of Clio winners lost their accounts not too long after taking home their statuettes. All of this undermines the industry's perceptions of being strategic in its work. It would be like lawyers having awards for creativity in trials. Agencies are supposed to be professionals helping clients solve problems and sell products. Their award should be getting to keep the account.
Besides, clients are on to the fact that awards are there to help agencies get more accounts, not to help clients get more business. That is not a helpful perception for an industry under attack.
With over 40 years experience in advertising and marketing, Jack Trout is the acclaimed author of many marketing classics, including Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, Marketing Warfare, The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing, Differentiate or Die, Big Brands. Big Trouble, A Genie's Wisdom and his latest, Trout on Strategy. He is president of marketing consultancy Trout & Partners (represented as Brand Lounge in the Middle East & North Africa) and has consulted for such companies as AT&T, IBM, Southwest Airlines, Merck, Procter & Gamble and others. Recognized as one of the world's foremost marketing strategists, Trout is the originator of "Positioning" and other important concepts in marketing strategy.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)