Archive for the ‘Cause Related’ Category

Newer Entries »

A ‘Meaningful’ Super Bowl Postmortem

Monday, February 16th, 2009


It is the sworn duty of every agency thought leader to play Monday morning quarterback with the annual orgy of advertising known as the Super Bowl. Yeah, I’m a little late to the conversation, mainly because the whole “building the business” thing has sucked my time away. (But, hey—we pulled out a couple of new business wins!) My tardiness actually works to my advantage, as it allows some time for the Super Bowl marketing efforts to actually start showing postgame results in the market.
So, I present the Inaugural Marketing with Meaning Super Bowl Winners and Losers!
Let me begin by laying out a bit of the criteria for selection. First, just making an ad doesn’t count. I will leave that type of ranking to an agency I recently discovered called a&g, which has been running what it calls a “most meaningful” ranking for six years. a&g has a nice idea and good ranking criteria, but its focus is only on the ad itself, rather than a complete marketing campaign. The second requirement is that the marketing campaigns must fit with our twin definitions of meaningful marketing: (1) the work is something people choose to engage with; and (2) the marketing itself adds value to people’s lives. Enough with the rules; let’s play ball:
Winners
1. Denny’s—When people heard this fading diner chain was making a play for the Super Bowl, most people figured it was quite a Hail Mary. (Sports metaphors are fun!) But we never expected that the company would use its precious time to unleash an offer of free Grand Slam breakfasts on Tuesday, February 3. A campaign that cost $5 million (including $3 million to the single commercial) led to 2 million takers in 1,500 restaurants. CEO Nelson Marchioli felt the time was right to reintroduce people to Denny’s—and instead of spending money on more interruptive, over-promising TV ads, he gave something back and reaped great rewards. The $5 million generated $50 million in PR already, and Marchioli claims that with sales of drinks and other items they probably broke even on the day. Aside from great strategy, the company was prepared for its giveaway with extra wait staff and cooks.
2. Hyundai—The brand had two ad slots, and while one was a forgettable farce around how other auto CEOs are cursing the brand, the award goes to Hyundai for the promotion of its Assurance guarantee. This clever and beneficial marketing approach provides a service for wary customers by agreeing to take back bought or leased cars in the event that the household has an unexpected financial issue: losing one’s job. I blogged about this a few weeks ago, and shared that Hyundai claims the results are strong. It’s not a funny ad and falls near the bottom of popularity polls, but by sharing truly original news of a meaningful marketing program, Hyundai has a good chance of winning market share and greater profits—while its buyers receive some extra security in these troubled times.
3. Doritos—It’s hard to believe that a brand could win both in most popular and place high in my meaningful ranking, but they really scored with this ad. The ad itself is just one leg of a now third annual consumer-generated marketing contest. For months, people have been engaged in creating and voting on videos, because the brand learned in 2005 that its young consumers love to create content and make brands their own. The output is a little juvenile, but people take it as lighthearted fun and marvel that it was created by a couple of guys with a handful of dollars.
Losers
1. Go Daddy—Everyone is having a field day hating on this brand, which continues to think that the Janet Jackson episode is still relevant humor. One might argue that the ad is meaningful to some small slice of guys, who ended up scooping up the most domain names. But the reality is that the game’s audience is much broader, and, as a&g remarks, “These days, men are as likely to be offended by ads that disrespect women.” As a father of two young daughters, I agree wholeheartedly. Enough. And Danica Patrick isn’t helping her image, either.
2. Gatorade—”What is G?” Most people really don’t care to research an advertising tagline. I wrote about this campaign a few weeks ago here. Some brands and agencies still believe that a new advertising campaign will create news and turn around share—especially if you toss in enough celebrities. But the only real news this is generating is speculation about what the heck the brand is thinking. The ad itself fell near the bottom of the popularity list. Meanwhile, Gatorade misses a huge opportunity to follow Nike’s lead and actually create events such as the Nike Women’s Marathon and Nike+ service, both of which are great examples of the brand helping people actually achieve something.
3. Any other brand that just ran an ad—It is remarkable to me that after countless case studies of brands who used an ad to start a conversation or service, so many still spend 99 percent of their time and budget on this single 30-second spot. Brands that might have won a smile or two amid so many distractions, yet failed to really capitalize, include: Budweiser, Castrol, Cheetos, CareerBuilder, Pepsi, Vizio, and H&R Block.
Special Note: Pedigree vs. Kellogg’s
A few posts ago I commented on Pedigree’s move to join the list of Super Bowl ad entries on behalf of its campaign to drive dog adoption. My point was that after amazingly meaningful marketing around this cause, Pedigree took a giant step back with a funny ad that fails to connect emotionally, and fails to do more than tell people at the end to “get a dog.” Some commenters said I was too tough on the brand and that the humor might have tugged people.
To those who think you cannot win with emotion on the Super Bowl around a cause, I direct you to Kellogg’s, which used the time to launch a campaign for rebuilding sports fields in communities around the country. The ad informs of the idea, while pulling the heartstrings of everyone who remembers those days of biking to the park and playing until our mothers called for us. But what’s really meaningful is that the ad directs viewers to get involved at frostedflakes.com. There, visitors actually can nominate and vote for a specific local park to be funded. The competition will spread over several weeks, and when you vote, Kellogg’s provides a downloadable $1-off coupon.
Congratulations to Kellogg’s, Denny’s, Doritos, and Hyundai for using the spotlight of our industry to show stellar examples of Marketing with Meaning!

UPDATE: Here’s another very good post-mortem with consistent themes from Joseph Jaffe.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Achievement, Cause Related, Connection, Contests, Marketing Without Meaning, Solution | 3 Comments »

SunChips Becomes a Meaningful Brand

Monday, February 9th, 2009

Back in November I had a chance to join a panel on social networking at the Harvard Business School’s annual marketing conference. It was a chance for HBS students and other guests to get firsthand perspective from a range of leaders on the front lines of marketing change today. My panel went well, but I had more fun listening to some of the other speakers who joined the event. One of my favorites was a keynote presentation by Jaya Kumar, Chief Marketing Officer of Frito-Lay North America.

Kumar shared how the company is really rethinking its entire marketing approach across its brands, and was enjoying a 10 percent organic sales lift in 2008 as a result—the highest rate among the largest CPG companies in the country. Perhaps the best story he shared was that of the incredible shift of the SunChips brand toward meaningful marketing. I wanted to share his story here, bolstered by some other research I discovered.

SunChips was originally launched in 1991 as a healthier snacking choice, featuring whole-grain chips made with sunflower oil. The key benefit pitched at the time was its 30 percent less fat versus regular potato chips. While the brand held a niche on shelf, it never really took off and growth stalled over time. Most people only encountered it as a snack option on airline flights.

A few years ago, however, the brand team discovered that the same people who buy SunChips because they are more concerned about health also happen to be more concerned with the planet around them. According to Gannon Jones, Frito-Lay VP of Marketing, in Brandweek:

We started to see that there was an intersection of people who were concerned with their health and with the planet’s health. Out of that was born the hypothesis that we could begin to connect SunChips more prominently with the environment so [the brand would become] a small step for me and the planet.”

The team decided to test the hypothesis and realigned its brand and marketing to deliver on a promise to “Grow the best snacks on earth.” One early step was moving to a California manufacturing plant that is completely solar powered—thus literally delivering on the “sun” in SunChips. It’s the largest solar power field in the state and produces 145,000 bags per day. The brand also “buys green energy credits to offset 100 percent of the electricity needed to produce SunChips snacks.” The billboard above is another clever way to show what the brand stands for.

The results of the SunChips repositioning have been dramatic: Sales grew 17.6 percent to $201.8 million in 2008. It has tripled its household penetration in the past four years. Remember, that’s for a brand that has been around since 1991.

Now the company is driving aggressively to do more in support of SunChips by doing more for the environment. Kumar described how Frito-Lay is working to invent the first completely biodegradable bag. A teaser video claimed that they are targeting Earth Day 2010 for its arrival, and he promised to give away the technology to all competitors. Naturally, SunChips will be the first to bring it to market.

Lessons from the SunChips story:

1. Even an older brand can remake itself. It’s never too late to teach an old brand new tricks. Here, SunChips simply stretched what it could mean as a brand and discovered insights into what its core target market found meaningful.

2. “Marketing” means much more than advertising. Nowhere in Kumar’s speech was talk of high-scoring television copy or digital media buys. Rather, the marketing came in the form of PR about a change in the brand’s production process. It is remarkable that the brand positioning was able to impact how a factory was powered. It is extremely rare to see this happen in a large, established company—making this story even more powerful.

3. Actions speak louder than words. A few posts ago I wrote about how marketing with meaning involves actually doing something to show what you stand for as a brand, rather than simply throwing up a piece of advertising that talks about it. SunChips gets the fact that today’s consumer is skeptical of claims (take the oil companies’ advertising, please), so it had to take big actions to win.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Cause Related, Organizational Behavior | 3 Comments »

The Clean for the Cure – Meaningful?

Friday, September 26th, 2008

October is National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and a ton of brands are lining up to support this worthy cause. My wife is a huge believer in the cause, and has raised thousands of dollars in each of the past two years for The Breast Cancer 3-Day walk. On Wednesday I wrote about an email from Delta that allowed me to donate miles to research organizations while collecting a few for myself. But today I ran across a tie-in that makes me think this marketing support for the cause is going too far.

While reading an article at CBSNews.com today, I saw a banner ad for a special-edition Oreck pink vacuum that offered a $50 donation to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure program. The promotion/product page is titled “One Powerful Cause. One Powerful Vacuum.”  The site includes some copy about the charity, but is focused on product features and performance claims such as “Strong enough to pick up a 16-lb bowling ball.”

I’m sure the hearts of the people at Oreck are in the right place. It is a worthy cause and a novel way to sell vacuums, but it left me doubtful as to the true meaning and marketing results from such a program.

The most basic question is whether or not this promotion is meaningful to the target audience. The banner ad certainly got my attention, but more because it seemed odd than interesting. I’m not sure people in the market for a new vacuum cleaner have charitable tie-ins at the top of their decision matrix. I find the best cause marketing happens when people can do something small that seems to have a real impact. That’s why it works for small purchases in the CPG category, or with quick initiatives like the Delta example. But a $500 vacuum is a big bank account decision that is likely driven by lower levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

Further, the whole pink vacuum thing really is strange. It looks unsightly to me, and I wonder if people are looking for the weekly cleaning regimen to be a time to remember the campaign to cure breast cancer.

In terms of marketing results, a lot will depend on whether or not consumers find this to be a compelling offer. Again, I think $50 off the price might be closer to what people are looking for in a big-ticket item like a vacuum. Of course, Oreck could experiment with such an offer alongside this promotion and see the results using online conversion measurement. Interestingly, when I reloaded the page that displayed the original banner for this promotion, I got served a different Oreck ad promising $100 off an upright vacuum.

Unfortunately, the cost of designing and manufacturing special pink-and-white vacuums is a significant cost and risk. The last thing the brand needs is a warehouse full of these things. I can tell you from personal experience that managing special inventory like this can be a pain – and when your product is gathering dust in the back, it’s an ongoing reminder of the failure of your promotion.

Whether $50 to a cause or $50 off the price, meaningful marketing is in the eye of both the customer and the marketer. Even large, historically successful efforts like the tie-in to National Breast Cancer Awareness Month need a careful approach that is tailored for individual brands. I fear that Oreck might have reached too far in its hope to “clean for the cure.”

UPDATE: Another really odd tie-in I saw over the weekend, was this Xbox Live ad for a “Go Pink!” version of Madden NFL ’09.  Is this really going to connect with young guys who play video games?  Check it out:

Tags:
Posted in Cause Related, Marketing Without Meaning | 3 Comments »

Delta Makes Me Smile (again)

Wednesday, September 24th, 2008

A few weeks ago I wrote about a great experience with Delta, in which the airline noticed that I was stuck in the middle seat on a Monday morning and rewarded me with an apology and a few bonus miles. This week, I was again pleasantly surprised with a nice charitable tie-in to the Breast Cancer Research Foundation.

I received an email from Delta inviting me to register for a promotion in which 250 miles would go to both me and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation if I simply booked a flight or checked in online at Delta.com. In terms of meaning, this provides value to me on two levels. First, I’m definitely a mile collector, and I like the chance to add a few to the bank for future free tickets. We call this Solution marketing.

But this goes further to add the benefit of helping me, in a small way, improve the lives of others by sending miles to this worthy cause. All I have to do is print a boarding pass online, so it’s little effort and a nice reward. It makes me feel a little better about myself.

And this is where the marketing benefits kick in for Delta. The brand benefits by linking the benefit to an action that builds Delta’s business. It might sell a couple more tickets, and also saves on costs by getting people to check in online. Shifting habits might lead to long-term benefits for Delta.

Another long-term benefit is the boost to the brand equity. Smart cause tie-ins like this make customers feel better about giving their business to Delta.

Finally, thanks to its loyalty program and ability to track customers through extensive data on each interaction, Delta can get ROI results for even modest promotions like this, and it can start personalizing the offers that it provides to individual members. Delta might find that it is more meaningful for me to receive cause-related offers, resulting in greater efficiency and results.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Achievement, Cause Related | No Comments »

Economic Impacts on Meaningful Marketing

Monday, September 15th, 2008

In what seems like just weeks since the media world had embraced fully cause-related and sustainability marketing, it seems we’re already questioning ourselves and rethinking the best way to build brands in modern times—again. Some predicted that cause-related and sustainability marketing would fall back as the latest fad, or lose out to the next “what’s next.” Instead, it’s the economy, stupid, which seems to have us questioning these forms of meaningful marketing.

The growing countertrend is a belief that people are less willing to pay attention to brands’ good works for the less fortunate when they are forced to worry about feeding and clothing their own families. Advertising Age seems to have broken the seal on this line of thinking with an article today titled “Economic Blues Leave No Room for Green.” Reporter Jack Neff wrote of a survey of CMOs completed by Professor Christine Moorman at Duke’s Fuqua School of Business (who, incidentally, our president, Jay Woffington, has guest-lectured for). Moorman’s survey showed that CMOs who were more pessimistic about the economy tended to de-prioritize marketing around causes and environmental sustainability. A graph of the results is shown above.

Neff called me for my perspective on the study and whether we were seeing this with our clients, and ended up using several of my quotes in the article. My take is as follows:

First, I think it makes complete sense that people will, on average, be less interested in external causes when there is more pressure on their own budgets and families. A quick search of recent news shows that food pantries and the Red Cross are seeing fewer donations because of the economy. Donna Goldfarb, VP of consumer and market insights for Unilever Americas, makes a good point that we can follow Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs here. In other words, when food and shelter are secure, we can aim to improve society, but when these basics are under pressure, we retrench, cut coupons, and stick with the cheaper store brands.

On the other hand, I believe that brands that support worthy causes and truly make a difference with their work can reap a strong return on investment. Cause-related and sustainability marketing still help brands differentiate themselves in a competitive marketplace. And, as I said at the end of the article, “Coupons won’t get you on The Today Show.”

But the big question for this space is: Does a worsening economy dampen Meaningful Marketing? I think not.

To be clear, Marketing with Meaning has nothing specifically to do with cause-related marketing. Rather, it suggests that each brand must choose marketing activities that are meaningful to its target customer. Following Maslow, in great economic times, this might mean cause and sustainability efforts, and when people are under pressure to pay the bills or find work, a free sample or BOGO (Buy-One, Get-One) will move more cases.

Smart brands and CMOs should continually monitor their customers’ need states and adjust their approach accordingly. A move from higher-order causes to coupons and money-saving tips might be more appropriate today, on average.

But brands with historically successful and significant causes should think twice before abandoning these projects. These programs are built over decades, and a short-term cut may destroy a long-term win. Finally, we should remember that it is human nature to rally together during tough times. Lately I’ve been reading my 7-year-old a historical fiction series about life as a child during the Depression (yes, it’s an American Girl series). The stories depict one of nation’s toughest times, but also one in which neighbors banded together to help each other and the unfortunate.

The brands that stick to what their customers find meaningful in both the short and long term are more likely to weather the economic storms and come out stronger than ever.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Cause Related, Sustainability | No Comments »

Newer Entries »