Engage Research

The Brand Battle of the Sexes

2012-01-24T23:47:00.001-08:00

So Lynx launches a female product – does this mean that feminism has finally run its course. Well maybe not, but it has certainly generated a lot of interest in the marketing community. One could argue that in our “lady to ladette” culture, it is surprising that it has taken so long for a brand which is all about youthful sexual attraction to extend its reach to women. But the more interesting questions are: whether this necessarily represents a game changer for the sector? Does it swing both ways – can female brands crossover to men, especially as the male grooming category has grown by adopting traditionally feminine products and behaviours? And are there any implications for other gendered categories and brands?

The rise of the unisex fragrance sector in recent years has shown, particularly in the bathroom, that the boundaries between the genders are beginning to blur. The impact of programmes like The Only Way Is Essex on crossing over grooming and tanning products from the women's to the men's markets had underpinned the success of the sector. However, this has largely been on the back of discernibly male brands developing new products, rather than established female-friendly brands breaking into the men's market.

Developing cross gender brands, though, is nothing new. It is something that Levi's has successfully done in the jeans market and Gillette has achieved with razors, though both are examples, like Lynx, of a male brand being adapted to target a female audience. There are fewer examples of it working as successfully the other way around. Unilever’s other global personal care brand phenomenon, Dove, has arguably made the move from female to male, especially given its assertively female positioning, with the male equivalent Men+Care successfully launched a couple of years ago. However before the Campaign for Real Beauty came along, Dove was a more gender neutral soap and its challenging of gender stereotyping has also made it something of a post-gendered brand.

It is interesting that this is a lack of female to male brand extension, whilst products freely travel, suggesting that there is something insecure in men’s psyche which makes “appearing female” far less acceptable than women adopting some male traits. This despite years of the apparent “feminising” of traditional masculinity (male grooming, male parenting, male emoting...). So it seems that it would take a brave brand to make that particular play. So where do we see more gender ambiguity in branding?

Chanel, widely perceived as a predominantly female brand, has had success winning men over to its range of watches, but less so to its core fragrance products. Success seems to come most readily at the luxury end of the market, where there is less of an obvious demarcation between male and female product use than elsewhere. Brands like Hugo Boss, Louis Vuitton, Chanel and Cartier seem to say more about the user's status and success than they do about their gender and this seems to override any gender sensitivities.

Some companies have succeeded in developing genuinely unisex brands, most obviously in the fragrance market, whilst others, like the watchmaker Swatch, have developed as distinctly gender-neutral brands. Perhaps the future lies in this continued development of androgynous brands, like Calvin Klein, which will challenge established brand demarcations head on, both in product design and brand positioning, and may well win.

So what might this tell us about other gendered categories : cars, media, clothing, technology...Lynx’s move must question the assumption that brands targeted largely at men OR women are basing their gender bias on functional needs, historical precedence, even the idea of psychological pre-disposition (which seems to have become fashionable again as the nature nurture debate lurches back towards “nature” in matters of gender). So will we see hitherto staunchly “male” brands such as Yorkie following Lynx and targeting a female audience and, hopefully, classically “female” brands like Comfort successfully targeting men. Then surely the post gendered brand world will have arrived.

Celebrity Brand Match

2012-01-11T02:54:00.001-08:00

Using celebrities to advertise products is nothing new. Even before Hollywood legends Rita Hayworth and John Wayne took up the challenge of promoting Tru-Color Lipstick and Camel cigarettes respectively in the 1940s and 1950s, brands had recognised the allure of being associated with the idols of the day.

So this week’s news that chocolate bar Snickers is replacing A-Team hero Mr T with former Dynasty sirens Joan Collins and Stephanie Beacham shouldn’t be that much of a news story. Except it raised eyebrows in our office and nobody I have spoken to since can see an overt Joan Collins – Snickers connection. But we also remembered that some initially arresting associations turn out rather well (John Lydon with Country Life); and some which look solid gold (Tiger Woods and Gillette) can become somewhat tarnished.

Is the use of Joan Collins an example not of direct “endorsement” or association, but of the way that some brands are abandoning the traditional view of needing a celebrity that has an obvious brand fit in favour of one that offers talkability? Or is the brand merely continuing to tap in to the prevailing mood of 80s nostalgia providing a warm feeling from the past as we contemplate a somewhat chilly immediate future ! Time will tell when we see the campaign.

Whilst ad agencies might be nervous of the role of research in such “irrational” celebrity associations, we think that good research should be key. It can be fundamental to understanding how to maximise the value of this style of campaign and can explore irrational appeal of an apparently unconnected character, as in this case, as well as the more straightforward fit of an obvious celebrity link (Parky with over 50s life assurance for example). Ensuring that you bring on board the right ‘face’ (one which can resonate with your target audiences whether rationally or irrationally) as well as getting the tone and humour content of the campaign is essential and research will help here.

We can only presume that research has been undertaken that shows Joan Collins works – in the context of this campaign - for Snickers’ target audiences. Although an older celebrity like Joan Collins significantly reduces the risk of tying your campaign up with a one hit wonder, none of that is beneficial if it doesn’t achieve the desired cut-through and again good research which “gets” the creative idea can help here.

The choice to link Snickers with Mr T was clearly well researched. Not only was he retro and identifiable to those of us of a certain age, he was also cool to a younger generation through a resurgent interest in The A-Team on the back of the Hollywood remake of the television series. It remains to be seen how well Joan Collins will straddle these various demographics.

Can brands feel consumers’ pain?

2012-01-04T03:35:00.001-08:00

A report by the housing charity, Shelter, this week has confirmed that almost one million Britons have taken out an emergency ‘payday’ loan to help pay their rent or mortgage in the last year. In addition, the charity also reported that seven million Britons – that’s 10 per cent of the population - are relying on some form of credit to help pay their housing costs.

With so much of the population under such fundamental financial pressure this situation necessarily has implications for brands.

Consumers will likely be more vigilant and more eagle-eyed than ever and are likely to be not only rationally searching for the best bargains but will be willing to put more effort into securing them. They will also be looking for emotional pay offs: higher level benefits such as “doing the right thing”, “being responsible” etc as well as more basic “animal” drivers such as “competing for scarce resources”, “protecting your family” etc. It will be interesting to see how people’s well developed need to be part of herd and community plays out against this background.

Whilst brands might be tempted to introduce “value” variants of their best loved products we would caution against straying too far from accepted brand values and setting the brand up for a later fall. Brands could more fruitfully consider greater innovation in promotional strategy (we have seen iterations of this with retailer schemes such as Asda’s “Price Guarantee” and Sainsbury’s “Brand Match”). They could do this by applying product innovation research techniques to create, develop and test truly innovative new value/promotional ideas rather than relying on the classic well-trodden path. Larger, global brands may even look to see what has worked for them in less well off, emerging markets to see whether messaging or products for ‘poorer’ consumers might be transferable.

In this sense, there is also a communications role here for brands. They, a little like MPs during this period of austerity, could do worse than to try and look like they are feeling the pain too. It’s tricky to pull off authentically but can cement the relationship with your customer base if you can do so.

As much as there may be temptation for brands to set themselves up to operate within a recession, they often forget to plan for leaving a recession. Launching value brands might bring some dividend now but longer term could damage their positioning if it they operate in a more premium segment. Own Label will by default boom right now, and may be the trick for brands and retailers alike is to promote ‘the game’ of saving money with rewards who can shop savvy whilst still retaining the brands to which they are emotionally and behaviourally are too strongly connected. Who can be the first supermarket to genuinely reward consumers by spending less or buying more efficiently? It is something energy companies have tried in the past – rewards for being more energy efficient. Let’s try rewards for being more shopping efficient.

Brands will need to work harder to put themselves in a position that they do not become the ‘dropped brand’ so that when the inevitable exit from recession arrives they are, from a value perception, in the right place for their brand. In a current economic climate dominated by us having to ‘make do’ with a raft of bland value brands, there will always be a place for more premium products that we aspire to, those brands have to work harder though to keep those emotional ties both through maintaining their position but without appearing to be out of touch with the financial reality people face.

Getting out the crystal ball – what does 2012 hold in store?

2011-12-20T02:12:00.001-08:00

With the outlook for 2012 not exactly optimistic, I’ve dusted off my crystal ball to try and see what the next year hold for brands, marketers and consumers.

The continued economic trouble will see will see consumers continuing to become more careful - which for people with little will mean an everyday focus on best value and for the better off will be more thrift and localism. Everyone will be looking for comfort or escape as well as some sense of hope. I think people will become quite cynical and will wish for a greater sense of community and support but will look after number one - this will translate into even further decreasing brand loyalty and continued "forced experimentation" to get the most from your cash.

Supermarkets will maintain their push to appear on the side of the consumer, with the public either sticking with supermarket closest to them because they will be less able to afford to drive to a cheaper one or favouring the more budget supermarkets if they are within close proximity. We anticipate a return to make it yourself food and there may be a push to support local shops in the light of the recent Portas Report, provided the price differential isn’t too great.

As times get tougher mental health may become more significant for the mainstream and brands might reflect this - expect wellbeing to emerge with a harder more urgent edge - functional foods for the mind (fighting depression and dementia as much as cholesterol and cancer).

We also see brands that continue to innovate and add interest in small areas (new flavours. new tastes, new ways of cooking) appealing to consumers as a way of spicing up their everyday lives in small (cheap) ways and as alternatives to more costly eating out. Brands in some categories may have to rethink how and why consumers buy their products and adjust to ensure they ride the tough times.

Culturally we will continue to be increasingly mobile, less patient and more stressed. The mobility will increase. The fact that I can put money on my pay as you go mobile phone and pay for shopping with it also means brands should be able track exactly what consumers are doing and therefore more accurately market their products.

Brands will need to stay close to their consumers and to see where consumers are lapsing in their purchasing. It may be a time for brands to revisit fundamental questions about their relationship with their consumers in an effort to consolidate existing customers but more importantly build a new base as well. Research into why buyers buy, why people stay loyal or move away from certain brands during periods of austerity and why some people have never bought particular brand will provide a level consumer understanding that could inform post-recession planning now.

In the marketing and research sectors we anticipate pressure to drive more value from every project; engaging consumers to get better data and therefore understanding, which ultimately enables us to inspire marketing teams with our 'voice of the consumer' to make better, more successful products. In a recession price becomes a dominating factor, leading to further heavy promotions. Brands, though, can be better served understanding the more subtle drivers of purchase to be more profitable, as well as the obvious BOGGINGOFF that we know and love. We are likely to see brands going into more in depth in their understanding of consumer drivers of purchase.

Apparently there’s also going to be a big sporting event in 2012. We will see lots of Britishness coinciding with the Olympics and I think brands will interpret this in lots of different ways from the reactionary (Rule Britannia nostalgic values) through the inclusive (modern multi-cultural Britain) to the purely aesthetic (Union Jack everywhere) also linked with our floating off into the Atlantic away from the EU. But the Brit's love affair with exotic products, tastes and new brand experiences will continue so innovation will remain key - it is a constant in the nation's ever evolving DNA. The biggest game, though, may be to spot the brand with no link to the Olympic Games and to see whether anyone really suffers because of non-association.

BRITONS FOCUSING ON HOPE AND TRADITIONAL VALUES AS WE PREPARE FOR AN AUSTERITY CHRISTMAS.

2011-12-05T02:51:00.000-08:00

A new qualitative research study that we will publish this week shows how Britons plan to reject traditional consumption and spend Christmas reconnecting with the things and people that matter most and are closest to them.

The study paints an emotional picture of a traditional Christmas as respondents talk about sending cards to and buying gifts for a closer set of people than normal; people they care about rather than gifts as random tokens and looking forward to “just spending time” with those close to them.

We found that consumers are viewing this Christmas as a buffer against a painful present, a time to recharge batteries, and to reconnect with matters they view as genuinely important. Consumers seem less concerned with magic and spontaneity, more with practicality and planning. There is more emphasis this year on planning and buying early as a way of budgeting at a time when thrift has become more than merely a lifestyle choice.

Linked to this is feedback that being savvy is not only a necessity but also something that can be genuinely rewarding. Greater effort is being invested in finding a bargain or in doubling up vouchers, finding a discount code, collecting and using points across all purchases, really checking deals in order to make hard earned money work harder and go further.

Christmas is obviously about enjoyment and escape, and a certain degree of excess is traditional but, in keeping with the subdued times, our respondents have said that a sense of modesty and restraint is the order of the season.

This Christmas will be about reconnecting, being playful rather than
over-indulging, and a more careful and thoughtful, rather than excessive, consumption of products, food and drink. This will be the Christmas of only moderate excess.

And in response to the prevailing sense of economic gloom, consumers appear to be responding best to brands which are using their advertising and marketing activity to capture the traditional spirit of Christmas.

Consumers seem also to be tapping into the power and comfort of ritual. In these times of uncertainty the comfort of rituals is very appealing. Most respondents saidthey were looking forward to “the day” and “the people” rather than “the things” and are being attracted by brands which convey that.”

In terms of brand advertising, the John Lewis advertisement, which revolves around a playful inversion of the classic ritual of waiting for Christmas day, has tapped most particularly into our desire for a return to a traditional sense of giving. But the advertisement that was cited most often was Coca-Cola’s “Holidays are Coming” spot with the illuminated Coca-Cola truck and convoy snaking through the wintery hills to a “universal” town. This advertisement was spontaneously discussed as a signifier of Christmas, and welcomed as enthusiastically as the families in the advertisement welcome the Coca Cola truck.

In the face of what feels like unrelenting economic gloom, unrest and
uncertainty affecting many levels of society, respondents have been switched on
by advertising that has captured their mood, hopes and fears.

There is a real hunger for hope. As well as being a lovely seasonal story, the John Lewis advertisement particularly resonates with people’s need for stories of hope; hope that values of giving are alive and well in a world which has been so much about receiving or taking; Even the more ambiguously received M&S advert captures a hope of a future where “dreams come true.

Five themes emerge from the study, which have significance
beyond Christmas, long after the decorations have been put away. These are (1) a profound need for hope; (2) a sense of post materialism; (3) a focus on people and things closest to us; (4) the comfort of ritual and (5) the idea of the rewards of practicality, planning and hard work. So what should brands take away from this seasonal analysis?

The messages from our respondents are quite clear.

Articulate hope and a positive long term vision as consumers are looking for inspirational light at the end of the tunnel; reflect the way that consumers have, in some ways, temporarily lost faith in materialism and focus on values rather than things; focus on the local, facilitate family, be active in communities and, at very least, continue to overtly support the British economy with products created and built locally. Brands should continue to tap into
rituals which offer familiarity, comfort and trust for consumers and create promotions which reward planning and effort, as well as “hard to ignore” deals.

Don’t diss the innovators in our society

2011-11-23T02:38:00.001-08:00

“Britain rock bottom of world innovation league” was the leap-out headline from the business pages of The Independent this week. The story behind the headline was the news that the Thomson Reuters Top 100 Global Innovators survey was about to place the UK bottom of the innovation table ranked alongside Lichtenstein.

At a time when the economy is creaking and we’re all doing our level best to keep creating wealth and jobs, to say the headline and the story is unhelpful is something of an understatement. Is it, I wondered, another example of Britain’s ability to talk itself down and into the dreaded double dip recession?

On closer reading, though, I am happy to take issue with the findings. The survey has been put together based on patents: volume, global reach, how frequently a company has a patent granted and the so called influence of those patents.

But are patents really a useful (or indeed reliable or only) barometer of innovation in our society? I don’t think so. Using patents as the benchmark misses the fact that innovation is endemic in many UK companies, from the smallest to the largest, day in, day out. Simply registering hundreds of patents does not make a company successful; they have to be insightful and relevant patents, a few good ones will always be more innovative than a truck load of bad ones.

Few would argue that Google is one of the world’s great innovative companies; perhaps even a model for a 21st century brand. But Google is the perfect example of how innovative thinking isn’t always a success. Just think Google Buzz, Google Page Creator, Google Audio Ads and Google Wave to name but a few. The jury’s still out on Google Plus.

This brings forward the question: what is innovation?

One could argue that newer or smaller brands are innovating more because they have to make a footprint in the market and to simply replicate what is already there is unlikely to lead to success. There are plenty of SMEs innovating within their own sectors in order to compete but at a time when multi-nationals dominate western economies and are making in-roads into developing markets too, it can be difficult for smaller brands to bring their innovations to market. Some older, bigger brands meanwhile are ‘renovating’ to keep alive what they already have; this may mean replicating the innovations of smaller companies using their greater reach and bigger budgets. True innovation is always going to be more ground breaking and ‘new’ than renovation but it doesn’t actually mean that it will be more successful. The relationship between innovation and success is not necessarily a given.

One of the report’s authors, Bob Stembridge, comments in the article that the lack of UK patents (and therefore purported absence of innovation) is down to the economy. This is unlikely to be true as most Western countries are gripped by the same global downturn. One can argue that it’s a pretty level playing field in that respect.

A more pertinent question, perhaps, is whether we as a society really value innovation and recognise it well enough. In the current “heads down, just get through it” economy, few people lift their eyes above their computer monitors to see the real intelligent business thinking going on around them – whether that’s in product design or development or even, for example, in the way one can apply new thinking to something as apparently mundane as market research, yet we are.

Innovation isn’t necessarily about making things – innovation is a state of mind, a culture. In this sense, I think many of our businesses are ahead of our cultural curve.

When it comes to research, the devil is in the detail…

2011-11-08T05:44:00.001-08:00

I read some interesting, if slightly perplexing research today, which headlined with the fact that around 80% of brands are not regarded as beneficial to factors like health, happiness, financial security and environmental protection.

The research was conducted among 50,000 people in 14 countries, including Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Japan, the UK and US.

Some of the findings may have been superficially interesting but, when given thought, actually posed more questions than answers.

For example, the research was reported as saying that:

• Most consumers "would not care" if 70% of brands were to "disappear", while only 20% of brands were seen as having a positive impact on shoppers' sense of wellbeing.

• 30% of respondents in Latin America felt brands exerted a favourable role in their lives, totals falling to 8% in Europe and 5% in the US.

• 65% of people had a "very strong attachment" to Coca-Cola, but only 35% thought it improved their quality of life.

But what does any of this actually mean?

Generally 20% of brands make up roughly 80% of any market, because not only do they meet consumer needs concerning benefits but also because they can out-market the competition – the other 80% of brands make up niches within the market and are driven by other smaller needs and benefits but still needs and benefits nonetheless

With regard to those consumers who "would not care" if 70% of brands were to "disappear", this should come as no surprise either. Most consumers only buy about 20% of brands in a category regularly, so why should most consumers care if smaller brands that they don’t buy disappear?
We have a mantra that just because we can ask something, doesn’t mean that we necessarily should. When you are designing a piece of research, it is esssential to keep it focused on actual business needs in order to deliver relevant customer insights that genuinely serve the company’s commercial objectives. Anything less and the relevance and value of the research have to be called into question.
Whilst a sound fundamental understanding of consumer behaviour and market dynamics is what underpins most successful marketing strategies, for such research to have any true value, it must deliver practical, tangible insights that can inform either new product development or marketing planning. This means that research always needs to go deeper than the headline-grabbing numbers.

Baby 7 Billion and her message to brands

2011-11-02T05:13:00.000-07:00

So the world has its seven billionth occupant, designated by the United Nations to have been a baby girl born earlier this week in the Phillippines; seven billion people, predicted to become eight billion by 2025.

On the surface this indicates a growing potential global market for multinational or aspiring multinational brands to target. After all, as The Guardian reported, with more than 1.1 billion people living without clean drinking water, opportunities certainly exist for companies equipped to transport and distribute water, and upgrade or build infrastructure. And that’s before anyone has even considered consumer goods. But the details behind the headline figure – India to become the world’s most populous company, Zambia’s population to double whilst others decline -are just as important in revealing how brands may try to tap into changing demographic trends.

Although the BRIC countries have been on most multinationals’ radars for some time, the news of population growth may lead to a new raft of 'initiatives'. But population growth alone may not be a good enough reason to 'chase a country'. Having worked on various washing powder launches in India in the past, one of my colleagues at Engage came up against the issue of home washing where wooden debris from the cooking stove was used as an abrasive to clean clothes instead of a detergent. Some 25% of Indians were still doing this and, as it is effectively free, they were understandably reluctant to spend money on something branded that does the same thing.

There are other lessons to be learnt here. Take Nokia, as an example, which has been spectacularly pushed to the sidelines of the mobile market as western consumers look to smartphones by Apple, Blackberry and HTC, whose stock market value recently surpassed Nokia’s. However, the threat to the brand is double-edged because in emerging markets like India, where Nokia is still the most trusted mobile phone brand, low-end local handset makers are beginning to attract an increasing number of customers.

It is important to get beneath the cultural, emotional and functional reasons for brand purchase decisions. Cultural and economic issues can impact on how brands develop differently in different territories. In some markets 'western' brands are too expensive and cheaper local alternatives that do a good enough job are preferred instead; in others brands can be a status symbol, creating different sorts of opportunity for different sorts of brand.

In Japan, for example, it has always been very cool for younger people to wear western brands. Over the last twenty years or more, younger Japanese have tried to differentiate themselves from traditional Japan and become more outward looking. Branding has been a big part of it and it is a process that may well be replicated in China in the coming years.

Brands have to button down the 'insight' for a product in emerging markets just as they you would in any other country. This is equally applicable to brand marketing strategy. How can you leverage social media in a highly populous country with limited Internet accessibility? How can you tap into cultural norms to make your brand’s arrival seem evolutionary rather than revolutionary. It’s not only about the potential size of the market, it is about the potential for brand acceptance in those markets and the two are not necessarily in tune with each other. Research is key to this and being sure you can develop a sound and growing consumer base as a platform for longer term brand success.

Design and customer insight are not mutually incompatible

2011-10-18T02:55:00.001-07:00

British industrial designer Sir James Dyson, inventor of the dual cyclone bagless vacuum cleaner, was recently quoted as saying: “Steve Jobs has shown you ignore good design at your peril and that breakthrough products come from taking intuitive risks, not from listening to focus groups.”

On first glance this may sound like an obvious statement, that good design emerges from the maverick, creative mind and that research in the market place serves only to stifle that creativity and genius. However, on second reading, it also looks not only a little elitist, but also that the designer or the brand (and in Dyson’s case the two are, of course, inextricably linked) either doesn’t trust or isn’t interested in the judgment of its potential customers.

It will come as no surprise that I don’t agree with this approach. Ultimately research tells you what you set it up to do. You have to ask a question and create sound and effective research to deliver the answer . Framing research properly is key to getting the right result.

But, of course, focus groups are not the only available research tool. An experienced researcher, like my colleagues at Engage Research, will be able to point clients in the right direction. Effective research can either improve or kill off an idea, perhaps saving the brand thousands in development costs. Research will highlight broader market issues maybe can or can’t be addressed but which, either way, would be crucial to success in market. We have all tested a few brilliant products that people really liked, but that quantitative research has showed could not succeed in market and saved their manufacturers a fortune by not launching it as planned.

My colleague saw this in evidence most recently when working on a particular product, where a sample of 800 respondents liked the idea but just wouldn’t buy it due to perceived credibility and price issues. The research was showing that it was a high risk, niche product launch at this time, whilst the manufacturers were arguing it should be launched because one guy in one focus group said he would buy the product.

As well as classic research tools that “test” ideas, we also use techniques and approaches which engage with consumers in the nurturing, development and co-creation of ideas. Consumers, treated with respect and given the appropriate tools, can be just as intuitive as contemporary boffins like James Dyson.

So the message is the focus groups are certainly not the panacea for all evils. However, to go to the opposite extreme and ditch the many sophisticated and subtle customer insight tools now available to brands, is to wander into a market place blind. And who has the available cash to do that in the current economic climate?

Brands & The Cult of Personality – What to learn from Steve Jobs

2011-10-06T04:26:00.000-07:00

I started writing this blog before the sad news of Steve Jobs’s death had been announced, though this news, if anything, brings the subject into even sharper focus. I began writing on the back of the perceived lacklustre launch of the iPhone 4s this week and the suggestion that, whilst the media felt new Apple CEO Tim Cook presented well, the whole event lacked the presence and the force of Steve Jobs’s personality.

In truth the disappointment surrounding the iPhone 4s launch had less to do with Steve Jobs and more to do with expectations being raised too high for the product to live up to.

Apple will continue to flourish without Steve Jobs because it has the necessary culture in place to enable it to do so. Big personalities should be able to render themselves redundant once successful.

So how great an asset can the force of one personality be to the prospects for brand success?

In a sense, Apple is something of an anomaly. It used to be all about the tribe, the cult of the creative collective, but latterly has been heavily associated with its cult leader, Steve Jobs.

Other brands, however, are personifications of their owners. A lot of have been grown by the person at the helm and the personalities of the two are intrinsically linked. Although he no longer owns every business, imagine Virgin without Branson, Ryanair without O’Leary, Dyson without Dyson and even Easyjet without Stelios (even though they are in dispute). These personalities have values which people associate with the brand, such that the brand personality becomes an extension of their own over time.

Brands that consumers can clearly associate with something or someone tend to do better in market than woollier ones. Indeed some of the more emotional attributes are the hardest to cement with consumers - which is where a personality can be helpful.

This is not true for all brands, of course. Some brands, like John Lewis, for example, thrive despite the "positive absence of personality". John Lewis benefits from being democratic, there for you, whatever you want us to be sort of feel, rather than a "this is me, take it or leave it" notion of a personality-led brand.

Of course the values of the 'leader' are also often reflected in the employees of the business as well. If you get it right, having a strong character or leader with clear values and a vision can drive a brand faster and stronger than others and carry consumers with it. Brands represent who people are. Buying Apple products has made people feel cool, it has made them feel different and they have bought in to the chilled, relaxed feel that Steve Jobs embodied so well. Maybe Apple will find it tougher than we think without him. Only time will tell.

On the first day of Christmas, the product sold to me....

2011-09-19T03:28:00.001-07:00

I'm no Ebenezer Scrooge but I am writing this on a crisp, bright early Autumn day and almost as soon as the leftover Easter eggs have been removed from the shelves, so the supermarkets have aisles dedicated to Christmas.

So the news this week that Air Wick, the Reckitt Benckiser air freshener brand, is launching a £3m Christmas campaign to support of its new colour-changing candle, had me wondering about the changing importance of Christmas in the marketing calendar and how brands can best prepare themselves for it.

The importance of Christmas to certain sectors is undeniable. For example, for the gift confectionary sector, the Yuletide season represents more than half of annual sales.
As researchers, we would usually have to have results ready before Christmas for trade presentations early in the New Year ready for the following December.

But it is no longer just about the obviously seasonal products. Just look at the shops on Christmas Eve with people panic buying for gifts as well as food, the effort put in to make the house look ready for the big day, new clothes for parties and dare I say it, even seasonal air fresheners. Getting ready for Christmas is a multi-sector pre-occupation.

In terms of timing research, it can be tricky. For all research you want to try and make the situation as typical as you can - so you would avoid the Christmas season itself for a lot of things. However, with a product designed specifically for Christmas, a special effort may be required to make the research situation look and feel a bit Christmassy if you are not able to research in the lead up to an actual festive season.

As with all good marketing, there is a need for brand fit and there are bound to be a few seasonal shockers jumping on the bandwagon and I wonder if brands with apparent "integrity" or "authenticity" are harmed by being all Christmassy or whether uncharacteristic seasonal brand behaviour is forgiven, rather like uncharacteristic seasonal office party indiscretion.

Anyway - as a person that loves Christmas - amid the same old, same old I do notice when a brand goes above and beyond or is just a little bit different! So amid the Christmas clutter it is important to stand out and research can be key to finding ways to achieve such cut-through.

And with that, I'm going sit back and enjoy the Yuletide scent from my mulled wine and cinammon apple air freshener.

Ends.

How to mark “World Awareness of Awareness Days Day”

2011-09-06T04:23:00.000-07:00

This is going to be a busy month for me. Not only do I have it in my diary to mark National Organic Month, World Suicide Prevention Day, International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer, International Talk Like A Pirate Day (yes, really), World Reflexology Week and World Alzheimer’s Day, I have also just found out that September is also Oral Health Month.

I know this because of a report that Colgate is launching a £1m campaign this month to drive awareness of dental health care and hygiene. Oral Health Month will, apparently, run throughout September to remind the public about the importance of keeping their teeth and gums healthy.

Whilst improving the oral health of the nation is an important and worthy cause, the fact that Oral Health Month is an annual event created by the Colgate-Palmolive Company itself may raise concerns in some quarters that, at least in part, its creation has a purely commercial imperative behind it. This compares , for example, with National Smile Month, created by the British Dental Health Foundation, the UK's leading independent oral health charity.

There seems to have been a massive proliferation in recent times as brands attempt to cut above the line budgets in favour of “smart” PR/CSR style activity. The risk, of course, is that the sheer number of awareness events gives each of them – even the most worthy – the impact of wallpaper. However if, like any other piece of communications, the event is poorly aligned and badly thought out then the the assumption that just because it’s “Hybrid lawnmower engine Sunday” in your company, consumers will be as gripped, can actively work against the brand.

So normal diligence is the order of the day with research. Good early stage creative development which focuses on connecting the brand and consumer through the idea would be helpful and a resistance to using research to provide part of the story rather than test the story idea. Remember, also, that no matter how many awareness days or events there are, only a few rise to the surface of our consciousness. For instance there are nearly 400 film and TV awards events each year but as a film and TV follower I think most would only recall the Oscars, Golden Globes and the BAFTAs and maybe one or two others.

There are now so many awareness days that brands need to be careful which ones they choose to associate themselves with. Best to associate yourself with an event organised independently and without obvious commercial motive and to do so in a way that fits both the brand proposition and the objectives of the event.

And with that, I’m off to look for a sponsor World Awareness of Awareness Days Day.

TEA & SYMPATHY FOR TWININGS

2011-08-31T04:33:00.001-07:00

Tea brand Twinings is facing a high street rebellion, according to The Grocer this week, with apparently “furious” tea drinkers angry at the changing taste of its Earl Grey tea and demanding reinstatement of the original recipe.

More than 150 consumers (not exactly an enormous sample of the tea-drinking public) have expressed their displeasure online after Twinings revamped its Earl Grey earlier this year by adding extra bergamot and citrus and renaming it “The Earl Grey”. And all this despite an increase in sales since the new blend was introduced.

This is not, of course, the first time there has been opposition to a recipe change to a well established product. Probably the most famous example was Coca Cola, whose ‘New Coke’ formula ‘won’ in blind taste tests against Pepsi but the market reaction to which was so poor, that the company revered to its original formula, which it re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", leading to a significant gain in sales. Is this a silver lining for Twinings in the Earl Grey cloud?

So is the message to brands that a dramatic change of recipe to a well-loved product could lead to regular, loyal consumers starting to explore other brands? Is it akin to a form of betrayal from a trusted friend?

There will always be reasons behind such a fundamental product change. Sometimes bringing a revised product to market can be viewed as an exercise in damage limitation to cause as little alienation of current buyers as possible. There can be other reasons though, including a longer term view that the current core buyers are not sustainable. Sometimes, if a brand is deemed to be in long term decline, a decision is taken to target a whole new set of ‘cooler’ and younger core buyers. In this instance, upsetting their current buyers can be acceptable in the interests of longer term sustainability.

From a research standpoint, you need to ensure you understand both the change to the product and the strategy for its introduction, and structure the research accordingly. There is no single answer to the best way to run this type of research – you have to evaluate it on a case by case basis. For example, will you tell people it’s a new and improved taste or hope to slip it in under the radar? This would certainly influence how you introduce the product when testing.

This, of course, is not just any old product. There is likely to be more risk attached to ‘tampering’ with a cherished institution like Earl Grey tea than with a lot of other projects. So research should not only focus on innovation but on “conservation” too. This is where semiotics in research can be so important, having an inherent and detailed understanding of category rules, which are sacrosanct and which could survive or even thrive with reinvention.

If the product is changing and offering a tangible benefit which you will communicate – lower salt or fat or sugar ... etc. it is wise to let people know so that they can evaluate the product and the message as a bundle. Or are you changing to make the product appeal to a wider audience or is retention of current buyers a key objective? This would impact on who you would want as respondents to your research.

Change isn’t always dangerous and isn’t always bad, provided you factor in from the outset what you are trying to achieve. If retaining core customers is still the objective, changing both the recipe and the name at the same time might be too much for a devoted consumer. And they are the ones who would be hardest to get back once they leave.

Could corporates really bring brands to market as quickly as The Apprentice?

2011-08-09T06:40:00.000-07:00

A few weeks ago I wrote a piece about my sense of disappointment at the quality of business ideas offered up by all four of the finalists in the UK’s version of The Apprentice. This was based on their startling lack of originality and the sense of let down that, if this was supposed to be the cream of the UK’s entrepreneurial talent (which we know it isn’t), it didn’t offer a spectacular return on Lord Sugar’s investment in time and energy.

But now, just a few weeks later, comes the news that Talkback Thames, the makers of the BBC reality show, are preparing to make two food brands, created in the tasks in this year's series, real-world businesses.
British pie brand MyPy and biscuit brand Special Stars have been trademarked by the programme's creators in preparation for bringing them to market. MyPy, which was invented by eventual winner Tom Pellereau and runner up Helen Milligan, focused on British ingredients.
Special Stars, created by Helen and her team in an earlier episode, was a children's biscuit brand, with the slogan "any time is treat time". Special Stars received an Apprentice record order of 800,000 units from one supermarket outlet.

The issue this raises in my mind, however, is not whether these businesses will fly or whether we’ll all be eating pies by the end of the year, but how easy it is for entrepreneurial ideas to win out in many of our larger organisations.

Save for Talkback Thames and the profile boost it received via The Apprentice, would an idea like Special Stars actually stand a chance of coming to fruition? Or would the forensic examination the idea would receive from every department in a cautious corporate – from marketing to manufacturing – render the idea still-born? I know where my money lies. Either way, the speed with which ideas like this are being brought to market are a world away from the months, even years it can take in a larger corporate organisation.

And that’s a shame. In a market that is already suppressed, we want our brands to be bold, to create stand-out and deliver imaginative and innovative brand and product concepts that excite our interests as consumers. We want them to follow the business fundamentals that are needed to successfully bring a brand to market, and we want the brand to embody all of the entrepreneurial qualities that went into its creation. Because if it does, it will capture our imaginations as consumers, we are more likely to purchase, which will allow money to flow and will again help drag us all towards more optimistic pastures.

A matter of convenience

2011-08-03T05:35:00.001-07:00

If you tuned in to ITV2 this week for Gordon Ramsay’s new series of Hells Kitchen USA you will have noticed that the The English Provender Company has done the deal to sponsor the series with its Very Lazy ingredients brand.

Their marketing manager, Karen Fowler, is quoted as saying that the sponsorship is being used to promote the speed and ease of using the products, thereby tapping into the growing prevalence of time poor, convenience-driven consumers.

In this context, the sponsorship makes perfect sense. After all, identifying and then aligning yourself with emerging consumer trends is fundamental to long term brand success. Increasingly our eating patterns are being forced to fit around our busy lifestyles. Research has shown that because we are hectic and time poor more and more of us are actively looking to reduce the time we spend preparing meals. But balance this with the economic downturn and more consumers are also cooking at home in order to conserve cash. This is one reason why many of us are opting to buy in fully or part-prepared meals, but also one reason why we are looking for products that enable us to prepare healthy food, more quickly at home.

The popularity of new television concepts like “Come Dine With Me” and “Dinner Date” are testament to our growing interest in eating at home, and are perfect partners for convenience ingredients products.

What is clear, as well, is that although consumers are cutting back on the amount they spend eating out, the convenience of good value restaurants remain a substantial pull. Restaurants are already targeting the time poor, cash strapped consumer. Two for one offers on main meals and sharing platters in some restaurants are beginning to re-define the eating out experience for some, whilst ‘formalising’ a new lower cost route to eating out. Similarly, take-out food, whilst under pressure because of the economy, is also seen by many as a way to continue enjoying the eating-out experience without the costs attached to restaurant dining.

These trends are increasingly reflected in the briefs that clients are bringing to us. There is an increase in the mood for price vs value–based promotions and a growth in the number of innovations that are being considered in the area of convenient but still “good” food. It’s a trend that is unlikely to fall away any time soon.

The Apprentices Make Schoolboy Errors

2011-07-19T07:50:00.000-07:00

Were you glued to the television? Were you one of the record 10.7 million people who apparently tuned in to watch Tom Pellereau win the seventh series of BBC1’s The Apprentice, thereby securing himself Lord Sugar as an investor and business partner in a new business which, by the end, I think was about producing orthopaedic chairs?

I say I think, because to be honest, by the end, it wasn’t entirely clear what any of the business plans were given that most had been systematically deconstructed and thrown on the scrapheap by Lord Sugar’s henchmen.

The Apprentice makes great television. Not so much some of Britain’s brightest business brains, but certainly some of Britain’s biggest egos competing for a prize which is, frankly, all about television entertainment and not so much about business. The saddest thing of all is that for many this is their only interaction with entrepreneurial Britain and how sad it was that all of the ideas this year seemed to lack any semblance of innovation.

And part of the reason for the deconstruction of the business plans was because each of the finalists appear to have done little, if any, market research. Jim’s plan for an e-learning business hadn’t involved any market testing among head teachers; Susan’s extravagant forecasts for her cosmetics business were based on what she had achieved from one market stall; Helen ‘s idea for a concierge business hadn’t taken into account what requirements her potential clients would have and whether she had the contacts to deliver on those requirements, and even Tom’s initial idea to go into companies to assess potential for back pain hadn’t been run past any real companies.

Aside from the sadness that here was a group of people, smart people, who had managed to only come up with a collection of dull, unoriginal business concepts, it was more frustrating to see that they had failed to even undertake the most basic form of market research. Yes, we need programmes like The Apprentice to promote entrepreneurialism, but we also need it to enthuse and inform current and future business people. And that requires the show to also pass on some fundamental business tenets – one of which is the absolute need to research your market thoroughly before launching a business, service or product, and that requires you to gain the insights of your potential customers as to whether there is even a desire or a need for what you are proposing to sell.

Failure to do so means you are likely to always remain little more than an Apprentice!

Nifty at 50 may be new brand mantra

2011-07-06T05:54:00.001-07:00

They used to say that life begins at 40, but now it would seem, being 50 is particularly cool. Madonna, George Clooney, Michelle Pfeiffer and Denzel Washington have all chalked up their half centuries, and now it seems, the 50 plus age group is the one in most demand for marketers.

Behind the headline figures that a record 28.6 million people in the UK visited Facebook in May and that both Twitter and LinkedIn are also recording unprecedented visitor numbers, is the revelation in a piece of UKOM/Neilsen research that older age groups are more likely to visit Twitter than younger age groups.

Moreover, it seems, Facebook’s growth in the UK is being driven by the over-50s. Since 2009, the number of 50 to 64 year-olds visiting the site has grown by 84%. As a result, the membership of Facebook is now more representative of the overall UK population than it previously has been, whilst under-18s are less likely to visit Twitter than they were two years ago.

So are the over 50s becoming the marketer’s new nirvana? Well, official statistics would suggest that, in an economic downturn, they are a demographic worthy of consideration. The over 50s not only hold 80% of the country’s wealth, but also have a 30% higher disposable income than those under 50. The over 50s also make up over one third of the population and the 55 to 64s have the highest disposable income of any age group.

From a customer insight viewpoint, this has us questioning some of the standard client sample requests for 18-49s or 18-64s, but it also underlines what we have been saying for a long time about the validity of online research for a wide range of demographics. If the social media stats are true and the over 50s are making Facebook and Twitter their natural home, then targeting them online is a great way for brands to tap into their accumulated years of experience.

And there may be a plausible reason why brands will be targeting this demographic through social media. Whilst many brands are keen to target their share of this grey pound, they are wary of being seen to overtly target older consumers by younger people. Brands are trying to ride two horses at once and social media provides a more discreet way of targeting the older consumer, now that they are making the medium their natural home.
But I’m not sure it’s a straightforward as this. The master of marketing to the over 50s is, of course, Saga, which has been selling cruises, insurance and other products for decades. I can think of any number of brands that would love to get their hands on Saga’s database and the information that it contains, but marketing to the over 50s is about tapping into a mindset not just an age.

In addition to minding the sensitivities of the younger consumer, brands also need to be aware that some people just don’t want to be reminded that they are getting older in what is increasingly a youth-obsessed world. Only in recent years have brands like Dove broken the mould and used older people in their advertising.

The key, I think, is not to focus on age but to focus on older people’s desire to stay younger older. If brands can tap into that, then they may well be able to profit from a new kind of grey market.

Howdy partner – can brands really work well together?

2011-07-04T01:29:00.001-07:00

Although brand partnerships have been around for years – some successful, some less so – I was intrigued by the news that Heineken and the relatively new national newspaper i are launching a joint hybrid app that will gives readers the chance to read the paper's content in selected pubs and bars.

The initiative forms part of Heineken's Hub initiative, which kicked off in April and involves providing superfast broadband in selected premium bars and pubs across London and Cardiff. The brands will also offer monthly competitions with prizes such as new gadgets and technology.

Brand partnerships in FMCG can work nicely if you are a brand that goes together, although often this is retailer-driven, unless you are Unilever or P&G and you can cross sell your brands by giving freebies or vouchers of one onto another. In the media sector, publishers often bundle magazines to encourage trial but ultimately the partnership has to offer a degree of synergy and consumer benefit.

What’s interesting is that this particular example seems to buck the trend of many brand partnerships, which often adopt the safest route by pairing two brands which have an obvious synergy: luxury and luxury, indulgent and indulgent, active and active. The tie up between Apple ipod and Nike works because there is a direct and beneficial link between the brands through the offer, whilst the link between McDonalds’ McFlurry with, say, Smarties is based on them both being – allegedly - yummy products.

But perhaps more impact can be achieved if you have a surprising juxtaposition but one that works. So i and Heineken – apart from Heineken getting into media relationships that other beers can’t reach - may both benefit from the initially surprising fit. Heineken appears a little more intellectual, but not too heavy – the Volvo/Audi of beers - whilst “i” cements its “more rock n roll than its parent” image.

But who knows where this might lead? After Marks & Spencer threatened Ann Summers with legal action for adapting its “Your M&S” logo and slogan for a promotional deal on lingerie and other goods, I suspect we’re still a way off of M&S joining forces with Ann Summers to launch an S&M range. Or are we?

Never Mind The Pollocks – Sustainable Fish Drive Reflects Behavioural Economics

2011-06-15T05:51:00.000-07:00

There’s something new taking place at your local Sainsbury’s. The supermarket’s “Switch The Fish” campaign is offering shoppers free portions of lesser-known fish as Sainsbury’s contribution to the sustainability drive.

For one day only – this Friday - Sainsbury’s shoppers who ask for cod, haddock, tuna, salmon or prawns - the ‘big five’ – on fish counters, will be offered a portion of one of six lesser-known fish free of charge instead. These include coley, megrim, hake, mackerel, rainbow trout or pouting (which is something I thought only Amy Winehouse did).

But is there really substance behind this ambition or is ‘sustainability’ just the latest transient campaign following on from ‘organic’, ‘locally produced’ and ‘non-genetically modified’ to give shoppers the sense that their multiple of choice is leading the way in social responsibility?

The biggest challenge to the success of the sustainability campaign lies in the way we think compared to the way we act. As a nation, we’ve been eating cod for generations – it’s a British staple, and so shoppers have a very hard time believing that it’s actually now an endangered species. Moreover, the drive to change our fish eating habits rests largely with those who buy from the fresh fish counter, who are more likely than others to be prepared to experiment.

Television documentaries are increasingly being recognised as a successful medium for prompting social and behavioural change. High-profile examples have included Supersize Me, and Jamie's School Dinners, and it is true that in the aftermath of Channel 4's Fish Fight campaign earlier this year, all of the leading supermarkets reported significant increases in the sale of fresh fish.

I would imagine, however, that the % of sales from the freezer remains higher than at counter and the ability to cross these shoppers over to more sustainable breeds will be more challenging. My impression is that the freezer brands (Birds Eye) etc are talking much more about authenticity of the product (i.e. real cod in the fish fingers, Scottish salmon, not just salmon etc.) than sustainability. And, at the moment, of course, they speak to the mainstream shopper.

In this sense, this seems like a classic application of behavioural economics, the notion that people often don’t make rational or logical purchasing decisions. Is there a dissonance here between what people feel, think, say and then what they ultimately do?

I think there will be. How will consumers act when presented with a more relevant choice to push them towards sustainable behaviour, especially when it is a – more or less - cost neutral choice? On the face of it, you would expect them to opt for the sustainable choice but we are asking the public to eat fish they’re not familiar with and, at the point of making the purchase decision, how many will truly opt to take home megrim or hake to the family table instead of cod, haddock or plaice?

Is Twitter helping to define brands of the future?

2011-06-08T13:52:00.001-07:00

Unless you’re Ryan Giggs, it would seem, most celebrities are big fans of Twitter.

Many are active not only in informing their adoring followers of every new development in their lives but also in interacting in a way that previously would not have been possible. Twitter makes our celebrities (and our brands) more accessible. It has become the forum for interacting with consumers as well as the playground of the famous; the sniping and counter-sniping between VIPs in the Twittersphere are feeding the media with content in a way the previously only ‘exclusive’ interviews in a celebrity magazine might have done.

I wonder, though, if this emergent behaviour in media shows us the way that brands and marketing may begin to go generally. We are moving towards a position of sharing a brand with consumers, who will purchase on an increasingly pragmatic, needs basis. If this is the case, it places a greater onus than before on how to customise products and involve consumers in your “brand”.

In the mass-market, people are increasingly turning away from the physical to the online and this is perhaps the defining move of the new digital age. Fewer and fewer people are buying ‘physical’ music any more, books are increasingly digital and our lives are lived online. What does this mean for the consumer and the brands of tomorrow?

The music sector is already embracing this quite effectively. For their new album, Kaiser Chiefs have made 20 tracks available and when fans buy the album they can choose which ten tracks they want to be on their particular version of the album. They can set the track listing, and choose the album. If fans then sell their particular ten track album to others, they will receive a £1 commission for each one sold.

From people I’ve spoken to, I can see that many consumers are already wrestling with the implications of this and it’s not necessarily split down age lines as one might expect. The suggestion is that a book or a vinyl record has more inherent value that the digital copy of the music or the e-book which is merely reproducible content. This may be down to cost but also down to markets splitting between products of either actual or perceived high added value versus those that are seen as functional commodities.

So there seems to be an ever-growing divide between consumers who still want to own physical product and people who really don’t care anymore as long as they can access the actual content; a divide between the niche “haves” and mainstream “have nots”. Consumers battle between their heads and their hearts, where the heart says physical but head says digital. The key for brands is to learn the lessons of this development and be on the right side of that battle.

Fighting the food price flak - how customer insights can assist in winning consumers over

2011-06-02T03:28:00.000-07:00

Whether it's perception or reality, I'm not alone in thinking that food prices are rising. When I reach the checkout in my local supermarket, notwithstanding the buy one get one free offers, the extra points on my loyalty cards or the promotions to feed my family for a week for only £50, the money in my wallet doesn't seem to be stretching as far as it did twelve months ago.

But who is the consumer going to blame? Whereas the government and to a lesser extent the oil companies seem to be in the eye of the storm over petrol and diesel prices, are the latest promotions from our leading supermarkets a way of deflecting consumer anger that they are making higher than necessary profits at a time when some families are struggling to put food on the table.

The multiples would argue, and not without some justification, that their ranges have adapted to suit the changing economic circumstances. Whilst the prestige own brand ranges continue, the multiples have also broadened their ranges of value or basic products. Even stores with a perceived higher end clientele have adjusted, with Waitrose extending its Essentials range and Marks & Spencer re-running its Dine In for £10 promotion.

Perhaps the highest profile bid to wear the "we're on your side" crown has come from Sainsbury's with its Feed Your Family for £50 campaign. More interesting than the microsite with meal plans, recipes and nutritional information, is the way Sainsbury's are using social media not only to extend the reach of the promotion but also to engage with consumers and reinforce the positioning that "we're on your side".

This is evident in the video application on the microsite which encourages consumers to film their interpretations of the meal plans, with some being featured on Sainsbury's advertising in the breaks of Britain's Got Talent.

It is even more evident on the Sainsbury's Facebook page. What is more interesting than the slightly gushing comments about the recipes - "it was delicious, much tastier than I expected," according to Dionne, and "lovely, lovely" according to Russell - is the fact that Sainsbury's has fronted up to some negative comments and is engaging with consumers to resolve their issues. To do that in a public forum is a sign of a confident brand.

But that confidence will not have been arrived at by accident. Using customer insight and knowing the issues that concern its customer base, Sainsbury's has taken a calculated risk that this promotion will not only protect it against any flak that may fly over food prices, it will encourage loyalty among its price sensitive consumers and support the company's ongoing financial performance. But, given the research that would likely have supported this strategy, Sainsbury's will already know that the risk is low.

Good Luck on your……business overhaul

2011-05-19T04:02:00.000-07:00

Earlier this month, Clinton Cards, a mainstay of the British high street, posted a 3% decline in like-for-like sales for its year to date. As a result, it has announced a number of new initiatives and store improvements in order to turn trading around, including a new smartphone app, a loyalty card which will appear this autumn and an in-store web-based kiosk which will allow customers to design their own cards. The company has also been working with a branding and store design specialist on four redesigned stores.

But will that be enough? Can Clinton engage with consumers and persuade them again to buy in bigger numbers? Or is this a case of traditional bricks and mortar businesses being usurped online for good?
I think card shops are a bit like book shops or the Royal Mail in that that their core business (physical communication/media) feels a little like it is in terminal decline. However unlike some physical media businesses which have been sluggish to diversify, anyone who has recently been into a Clinton store might have been struck by the already evident diversification.

But the Internet, once a dark, serious and impersonal place, is now more able than ever to compete with cute, fluffy person-to-person affection – whether that is the brash and direct approach of Funky Pigeon or the ever increasing social networking, smartphone interaction amongst Clinton’s target audience. A web kiosk also sounds like fun, but feels like it relies on people being in the store rather than being a reason to visit in itself.

Customer insight will be key to sending Clinton’s down the right track. Research will help them understand what people want from a card, what a card can do like no other medium – so that they can leverage the physical equity of sending something tangible and understand what the card needs to convey so that the offer is aligned. They can explore specific card occasions and behaviours around them, understanding what pulls heavier and lighter buyers of cards apart so that you can find ways to encourage heavier buying (buying for more occasions, for more people, gaining a greater share of all purchases, …).

Clinton’s will have explored buying behaviours (ad hoc vs stocking, planned vs impulse) so that offers can be tailored to maximise purchasing, as well as reviewing what other lines can be offered (for example, cards and wrapping paper) and what role they can play
They will also be very aware of their position relative to the competition. Brands that do well tend to really stand for something in the consumer’s mind . If Clintons’ positioning statement is ‘cards for all occasions’, where does that place them in the context of W H Smith, M&S or Funky Pigeon? Where is their point of differentiation?

Consumers want, as much as ever, to connect with each other and to express how they feel, to share, to gift – all the things that Clintons is about. But they have an infinite virtual world of possibilities with which to do this; so success for bricks and mortar businesses is all about embracing the multi-channel world which is so fast moving. This means that ongoing consumer connection and insight is absolutely essential to deliver the innovation in store that is needed to bolster the business. Here’s hoping Clinton’s are on for some congratulations cards of their own before too long.

London's not the only show in town...

2011-05-10T07:42:00.001-07:00

London is, without question, one of the most ethnically diverse cities in the world; more than 300 languages are spoken and there are more than 50 non-indigenous communities. Figures from the Office for National Statistics show that, as of 2006, London's foreign-born population accounted for 31% of the total, and it has probably risen again since then.

This cultural melting pot, for all its strengths and benefits, poses a challenge to marketers. How do you target your product marketing effectively to a population this diverse? And does this make London a special case in the marketing mix compared with your approaches to populations elsewhere in the country with a less multi-cultural demographic?

In one sense we’re asking is there any such thing as typical Londoner, any more so than a typical New Yorker and for brands is there a disparity between this and how they might market their product to a typical Huddersfield or Grimsby resident, for example.

So in the aftermath of a Royal Wedding that placed the capital as the focus of world attention and with next year’s Olympic Games and Diamond Jubilee still to come, is there – or could there be - such a thing as Brand London?

We’re not sure. We believe that the sheer size and complexity of the London population makes it impossible to have a single London strategy. Experience would suggest that brands look closest of all at the buying habits and tastes in the capital, and research can play a role in determining opinions and attitudes of consumers in the capital compared with other parts of the country, but this appears not to be on the basis of diversity or ethnicity.

There are, though, now marketing communications agencies in London that specialise in targeting diverse communities, which suggest it is, at the very least, an area of interest for brands. What, of course, this can do is enable a brand to align itself culturally with a particular group or other. There a few brands that are so all-encompassing that they transcend national or cultural boundaries, but for others niche targeting can be a way to introduce your product to a group previously resistant, and research delivering customer insights is critical in preparing the path for this.

We have seen instances of products being launched in cities or towns perceived as “cool” or “diverse” but this is usually more than just London and more connected to of the perceived target audience for the product. Beyond that, though, there seems little evidence at present of London-centric planning. Brands may focus on needing or wanting to be seen in a cool context to give them the kudos they need, whether that is in London or anywhere else. For grocery products, the emphasis is different. Their sales volumes do not come from being in cool places but from being bought regularly by people in regular places: familiarity and availability are key wherever in the country you happen to be.

The flip side of this is an over-interest in London at the expense of other areas. Brands that are based in London, managed and marketed by people who live (and may always have lived) in London can often act as if what’s right for London is what’s right for everyone else. In a city with restaurants of every origin, the concept of exotic food, for example, is not the same as it would be in a small, provincial town and getting that messaging and positioning correct for both audiences can be something of a balancing act.

London 2012 – Brand marathon not a brand sprint

2011-05-03T03:48:00.000-07:00

Did you book your Olympics tickets? Are you concerned that you might actually get the £10,000 worth you ordered and will have to pay the whole hog? Or are you heartily sick of the whole thing with more than a year still to go?

Given the minor furore over the ticketing process for London 2012 – namely the fact that you could only purchase tickets online with a VISA card – are you as an ordinary punter ready for the sheer bombardment that your senses are going to receive from sponsors over the next twelve months in what could easily become the most branded Olympics ever?

And it’s the brands themselves that perhaps need to be most concerned. In the enormous advertising and sponsorship noise of the Olympics, with all its commercial cacophony, the effectiveness of individual brands' activities and voices is bound to be diluted.

Brands which simply hang up their running shoes for the duration of the Olympics will inevitably come nowhere but brands which adopt guerrilla tactics rather than carpet bombing, stand a chance of prevailing over bigger spending brands like Visa and have the potential to make more of an impact, especially in a modern media and communication landscape. So we would recommend adopting a more subtle strategy than compelling people to use your brand or dominating consumer consciousness by sheer ubiquity. This way brands can still enjoy the benefits of a mass heightened attention to the Olympic shared spectacle but retain personality and integrity.

The key for non-sponsoring brands is to carefully plan their activity for maximum impact. It's not only how loud your voice is, but what you're saying that is going to be important. And research has an important role to play, exploring NOW how off beat and subtle communication strategies might work, co-creating ideas that will enable brands which haven't bought their place on the podium, to punch above their weight against heavyweight and heavy spending rivals.

And as for Visa and its monopoly on online purchasing, this seems to us to be an oddly one-sided conversation for any brand (especially a financial services brand) to be having with consumers at the moment. Some might say it exhibits an arrogance or unseemly wish to control that might see them sailing close to the wind in terms of balancing the benefits of being the sole credit card voice versus appearing to be telling consumers what to do. After all in the Olympics proper, we won’t be cheering an athlete for winning the 100 metres by virtue of being the only competitor on the track.

Own brands v branded products - which one's the Finest?

2011-04-18T03:28:00.001-07:00

Sainsbury’s has announced that is has embarked on “the single biggest own-label development” it has ever done as a business. Apparently 7,500 of Sainsbury’s standard own label products are being revamped over the next year to feature the new ‘By Sainsbury’s’ label.
The ‘own label’ sector has come of age. Long gone are the days when you simply bought a Sainsbury’s this or a Tesco’s that, most likely to save a few pence off the brand leader. Now, there are sectors within the own label sector itself. Tesco’s offers products across its Value and Finest ranges, Sainsbury’s pairs its Basics range with its Taste The Difference products, and even Waitrose got in on the act recently with the launch of its Essentials range.
The power of the own label became evident last Christmas when Waitrose enlisted the help of celebrity chef Heston Blumenthal to put his name to some of its own Christmas ranges. Thwarted shoppers turned to eBay, apparently bidding up to £250 for Blumenthal’s Waitrose Hidden Orange Christmas Pudding despite an rrp of only £13.99. Retailers have upped the stakes by revamping their own-label products and investing in strong-growth, high-margin premium products.
With retailers working hard than ever to give their own-label lines the cachet of branded products, own labels have become brand labels in their own right and in some categories have achieved brand leadership. But given that they not only offer extensive product ranges, they also own the major supermarkets, what are the longer-term impacts for established brands?
At a time when the price gap between branded and own-label products is lower than ever, you would expect branded products to be regaining ground. Yet, aside from ‘heritage products’ like Lea & Perrin’s Worcester Sauce, Heinz Tomato Ketchup and Coke and Pepsi, to what extent will branded products - established or new – be able to compete with own brand products in their own store environment over the next ten years?
Are we looking at a future where, with a few legacy brands aside, you will only be buying own label products from different own label premium or value ranges?

The reality is that established brands have been concerned with own label products for years and, although many manufacturers make those own label products, sometimes to a more successful recipe, the power of the retailer and its own label arsenal means that manufacturers are often searching for innovation that is harder for own label products to copy e.g. packaging innovation, or brand development via innovation or marketing.
But then, there is one retailer that is simply bucking the trend. For years, Marks and Spencer only sold own label products. Now it has started stocking certain brands like Marmite, proving that there can be a limit to own label domination if the positioning and the marketing of the branded product is so distinctive that there is no commercial advantage for an own label equivalent.
So, in that sense, this isn’t just any old blog. It’s an M&S blog.

Back To Basics - Social media offers nothing if you don't get the fundamentals right

2011-04-13T04:43:00.000-07:00

Simon Carter, marketing director of Fujitsu’s government arm, was quoted in Marketing Week as saying that marketers are becoming lazy by over-using social media and ignoring the skills and disciplines traditionally learned by marketers.

And we think he may have got it right. The Internet explosion and the seemingly exponential growth in social media provides enormous opportunities for brands to connect and engage with consumers. But at the end of the day it is just another channel to market – a powerful one – but just another one. Getting the most effective use out of social media requires the fundamentals of marketing strategy to have been conducted first.

This means identifying achievable commercial objectives and appropriate demographic groups, arrived at through effective customer insights, which are then used to inform strategic marketing planning. Only once the strategic building blocks have been put in place can you look at the tactical roll out and which channels or communications tools are going to be used to bring your proposition to market. Leaping right in with your social media – or indeed your PR, your direct marketing or your advertising – is like building something on shifting sands. It’s not secure and you can never be absolutely sure it’ll be there in the morning.

Some brands are so eager to leap on to the social media bandwagon that not enough consideration is given either to the synergy with the brand or product or whether the form of social media being used builds a bridge with the consumer.

We think that it’s important that social media is used as a natural part of an integrated marketing programme. Marketing this week reports on how Comparethemarket.com has almost defined the way to use social media with its ‘Meerkat’ campaign. Although the social media campaign was successful, this was only because it formed part of a well thought-through and well conceived marketing campaign brought to life by iconic television advertising.

Craig Inglis, director of marketing at John Lewis, is quoted in the same article as saying: “You should not let the channel dictate the communication. Start with the big idea then the media channel comes second.” He’s spot on!

Carter believes that social media has made some marketers less concerned than they should be about accuracy and targeting. Some marketers, he says, no longer worry about even getting email addresses right. “If something goes wrong it’s like ‘so what, we’ll send another batch of 10,000”.

True marketing, though, is all about targeting and messaging – it’s not always a case of reaching the highest numbers full stop. If you get the fundamentals in place, you’ll reach the numbers you need and your message will be more relevant and accurate for doing so. And that’s the key route to achieving brand cut-through – social media or no social media.

I’m A Celebrity…Get Me A Product To Endorse

2011-04-07T05:45:00.001-07:00

Have you ever bought chewing gum because Ben Fogle told you to? Maybe your decision to treat yourself to a coffee machine was influenced by George Clooney? Or perhaps Kerry Katona and Jason Donovan lured you away from your usual supermarket to join the other mums going to Iceland?

Celebrity endorsement is an ever-present part of brand marketing these days but though the face may fit the brand at the start of the relationship, there can be any number of reasons why a parting of the ways becomes inevitable.

Gatorade, AT&T and Accenture all ended their association with golfer Tiger Woods following his admission that he had been unfaithful to his wife. And now Coca-Cola has ended its relationship with Wayne Rooney. The footballer’s contract with Coca-Cola expired last year and is not being renewed. Although Coke are focusing their promotional efforts on the 2012 Olympic Games, Rooney’s alleged infidelity and latest dalliance with authority by swearing into a television camera after a recent Premier League game wouldn’t have done much for his stock.

In a sense there is an irony to this. His alpha-male, total committed approach and attitude – all of which are cited as what makes him the footballer he is – chimed with the target market for Coke Zero, where the male-focused campaign built around no compromise seemed a perfect fit. Now, though, Rooney it would seem has taken the ‘no compromise’ just a little too far.

With the level of investment – financial and otherwise – in securing the right face for your product, brands are increasingly using research to determine if the 'fit' is going to work. And this means understanding your brand 'shape' and the correct 'shape' of the celebrity to promote it. A star who may be perfect for hair and beauty products may not be the right person to offer relationship advice, for example.

Testing the market perception of celebrity options is crucial, not so much for asking why a celebrity may be suitable for the brand, but as importantly asking why not. Ask not only what the consumer’s perception of the celebrity is in the context of the product, but also what their general opinions of that person are. The rest, to an extent, is a game of chance and ensuring there is a swift get-out clause for the brand in the event of celebrity misdemeanour.

It’s impossible to accurately say whether there is any retrospective re-interpretation of a brand when its associated celebrity goes bad. However, effective research can help highlight the risk areas and then swift action in the event of a problem can help minimise any lasting collateral damage.

Supermarkets are failing to use their loaf

2011-03-30T03:44:00.000-07:00

In a survey a couple of years back, baking bread was recorded as Britain’s second favourite smell, just behind fish and chips. Apparently the aroma of bread, lovingly prepared by hand and freshly baked, is comforting and evokes fond memories of childhood.

So, whilst not many of us have the time to bake our own these days, how fantastic it is that all of our major supermarkets, it would seem, have invested in their own in-store bakeries. Or have they…

We were drawn to Rose Prince’s interesting piece in the Daily Telegraph this week – “The truth about your supermarket loaf” – which in its opening headline asserts that the said loaf is made with flour that’s been shipped across the globe, then frozen for up to a year before you buy it.

According to Rose, we all need to wake up to reality. “That crusty loaf on sale at opening time in your local supermarket may not have been kneaded, shaped and proved by a real baker, but brought in deep-frozen from a plant hundreds of miles away, defrosted and “baked-off” by staff who only need to know how to throw a switch.”
If that’s genuinely the case, we’re not ashamed to admit we feel a little bit violated and are ready to scurry off back to our local independent bakers. Because this is another example of big supermarkets using smoke and mirrors to give the impression of one thing when the reality is quite different. They might argue that the loaves and the cakes are, technically, being baked in-store. But the concept of an ‘in-store bakery’ conveys more than the technicality; it gives off the concept of freshness and all that is encapsulated by bread being prepared from scratch on the premises each and every morning.

But is this even important? We think so, because when brands play fast and loose with the truth and start using huge amounts of artistic license, the consumer’s belief in them as a truthful and trustworthy brand becomes severely tested. The consumer doesn’t like to be treated like a fool!

We know this from quantitative research we conducted last year around the whole issue of healthy labelling of food. In the research consumers told us that manufacturers had deceived them in the past with marketing strategies that lead them to believe products were healthy. Consumers were clear; they wanted honesty. Now this issue of baking in-store would seem to be the flip side of the same coin.
The game, it would seem, though, may soon be up. The Telegraph reported that a change in European law will require retailers to identify all foods that have been previously frozen. This means that the “thaw and serve” will be revealed for what they are and, perhaps as importantly, the hood they have been pulling over the consumers’ eyes will be lifted once and for all.

Can Brands Make You Happy?

2011-03-23T02:17:00.000-07:00

Buried amongst the doom and gloom of spending cuts, rising prices and military action, the Government recently decided that it wanted us to be happy; and, just to make sure, it is going to measure how happy we are. It’s interesting that brands don’t really overtly tell consumers they will make them happy so tend not to measure this directly. So who’s got it right? Rather than settle this the Harry Hill way (“Fight!”) we asked our consumer consultation community - the Engage Brain – what they thought happiness was all about and how it related to brands. Here’s what they said.

First of all it seems that there is more to happiness than just being happy. Our community told us that there are really two kinds of happiness – short term “joy” and longer term “contentment”. (Interestingly this matches academic thinking in this area which defines two forms of happiness “dynamic” and “peaceful”).

Our consumers say that both are necessary – joy provides the highs, the hits of happiness, the peaks to our days that keep us going through the troughs. However underlying contentment with who you are, what you are doing, the people you are surrounded by, where you are going ...is more fundamental and somehow more authentic. As one consumer put it short term happiness is what we all want, but long term contentment is what we probably really need.

Another theme in consumers’ definition & discussion of happiness is the idea of the smaller things making a bigger difference. In fact the disproportionate joy that finding a misplaced favourite novel, your partner coming home early from work, the stereotypical child’s smile can give makes those small things so significant in contributing to longer term happiness.

On the other side of the equation the things which make people unhappy also fall into short term irritations and longer term disappointments, stresses or problems. So whilst short term joy can alleviate the anxiety of missing a friend, worrying about a sick relative, feeling insecure about jobs and finances, these longer term issues do not go away and how we deal with many of these things being out of our control ultimately has a greater effect on how happy we are.

Short term irritations get people very angry in the moment, and can sour relationships with people and so with brands – rudeness, unfairness, waste, other people’s bad behaviour or bad moods are all common everyday downers for our consumers!

So where do brands fit into all this. Well consumers tend to lump brands (and consumption generally) into the “short term joy” category. There are some exceptions, but the general feeling is that brands should focus on bringing moments of happiness rather than trying to make us fundamentally more content (which they will not be able to achieve).
This is because people feel (indeed they know from experience) that buying something, however fabulous, provides short term elation, a hit of happy, but that this rarely lasts beyond the point of purchase or first use. So even though we might not be able to buy long term happiness, brands can offer a welcome distraction from the challenges and anxieties of everyday life. How do consumers feel they do that?
Well they can simply amuse us – consumers consistently feed back to us that they love funny or warm ads (the Andrex puppy, The Specsavers mistaken identity kiss, the BT Adam & Jane story) whilst ads which are probably effective through irritation (Compare the Market, Go Compare are examples that were shared by consumers) really tick them off.
Consumers tell us that brands can also make people feel happy by making them feel special; this might be through the experience they provide or by reinforcing their choice, again one consumer put it thus : a reinforcement of our good judgement, our cleverness for selecting it in the first place, for using our discriminatory senses and not buying something inferior. I bought the very best – and I am happy.
Brands can also make us happy by being happy brands. A brand with a bright, fresh image or a personality which exudes positive warmth, can lift a consumer’s mood (Persil, Top Shop, Heinz all do this, consumers tell us, but in different ways). Brands which play on our guilt, make us feel needy, create want where need doesn’t really exist – consumers know that these brands might be successful but they do not make us happy!
Brands can also contribute to longer term happiness by having an honest, human relationship with consumers, by keeping promises or making things right when they have gone wrong; by rewarding loyalty; by delivering a succession of joyous moments to consumers to keep them going through their bad patches. In fact focusing on the smaller things in life seems to be a blueprint for greater happiness.
So brands don’t need to try and make us happy to be successful, but as life gets more grim brands which adopt this strategy might be more successful than those which are seen as more cynical. So if they are concerned with making consumers happy brands should take these simple steps :
• Think small, not big
• Think personality as much as product
• Make promises that you can keep...and keep them
• Reward me, genuinely, realistically for my loyalty
• Surprise me
• Deliver serial joy, everyday happiness hits

Simple as that.

Doing something funny for money

2011-03-14T05:01:00.001-07:00

It’s that time of year again. The Comic Relief bandwagon rolls into town this week with Red Nose Day 2011 and your chance to do something ‘funny for money’.

But increasingly it feels like it’s becoming ‘buy something funny, slightly funny or only vaguely connected with the event…for money”, as Red Nose Day – like most major charities – becomes intrinsically bound up with major retail brands.

We’re not knocking Comic Relief. Far from it. It’s a fantastic charity doing amazing work and we’re sporting our monster noses as we write. The association with major brands and retailers is logical; it spreads the word about the event and, through mass product marketing, adds significantly to the charity’s coffers. And, at a time when charities are suffering because of the economic downturn, we understand that perfectly. Indeed, where there has been a long term association with a brand – for example Sainsbury’s and TK Maxx with Comic Relief or Tesco’s ten year support for the Race for Life – the relationship seems perfectly natural.

But more so than ever this year, it seems, there are Comic Relief products on our shelves that make you question the extent of genuine altruism and the extent to which there is a rush for any brand to link itself to Comic Relief. Has the charity reached brand overload this year and does the consumer see through that?

So far this year, I’ve eaten my Jimmy Con Carrne and Stephen Fry-up crisps for Comic Relief, munched on my Kellogg’s Comic Relief Rice Krispies Squares with edible noses, supported the Mini Babybel and Comic Relief Guinness World Record attempt for the most jokes told in a one-hour relay, washed my clothes with a special pack of Ariel Liquitab, eaten some
Carte D'or Chocolate Inspiration Comic Relief ice cream, spread Comic Relief Flora Buttery spread on my bread to have with my salad, that’s dressed with Hellmann's Balsamic Salad Dressing, with a proportion of the price going to Comic Relief. I’ve even sprayed myself with Impulse True Love Body Fragrance and seen 5p from the special pack donated to Comic Relief. You have to question whether any brand is really recognised for its association with the charity in such a crowded field. And that’s before I’ve bought any ‘official’ Comic Relief merchandise.

This in itself isn’t inherently wrong. Comic Relief is a great national event, a time for everyone – brands included – to come together in a combined endeavour. But are we reaching the point when the novelty wears off if anyone can be persuaded to buy a product in aid of Comic Relief when only a matter of a few pence is actually finding its way to the charity? And how can smaller charities possibly be able to compete with this?

You don’t need to be in such a crowded field to do good, be seen to do good and yet remain true to the values of the brand. Waitrose champions local charities by giving shoppers a token to give to one of three charities local to each store every month; similarly Marks & Spencer has been running its range of pink products for Breakthrough for a number of years.

The risk here for brands is quite simple. The more crowded the charity association, the more likely they are to be seen to be associating simply to avoid being seen as not associating. And therein lies the potential for brands to be accused of riding the Comic Relief bandwagon. Charities and brands should be a natural fit, but it may sit better with consumers for brands to build their alliances with charities with which there isn’t such an obvious commercial clamour. The brand still fulfils its CSR obligation, a needy cause still benefits and yet the brand creates some stand-out from the crowd and becomes a leader rather than a follower. Plus, and I say this still wearing my nose, there are other causes worthy of brands’ support.

Will consumers be turned on by product placement?

2011-03-08T05:12:00.001-08:00

Last week Nestle’s Dolce Gusto became the first example of paid product placement on British television when it appeared on ITV’s This Morning in what is rumoured to be a three- month, £100,000 deal.

But with recent research suggesting that most UK consumers do not believe product placement will increase their likelihood of purchasing particular brands, will product placement change the balance of brands’ marketing mixes? And what should brands consider?

Product placement is nothing new. It has been a feature of films and American television for some time – remember the specific car brands driven in different movies by James Bond or the blurred out Coca Cola cups on the judges’ desk in American Idol.

Indeed the 9.5 minute video for Lady Gaga’s single ‘Telephone’ featured at least ten different brands, including Virgin Mobile, Diet Coke, and Polaroid. And yet, she was accused of commercial opportunism.
So will product placement work for brands in the UK or could it leave consumers feeling dubious about both brand and media property?
Our view is that consumers are not really in a position to judge the effectiveness of product placement. It will likely prove as effective – or possibly more so - than other forms of "ambient" media, but what they can provide are the parameters for acceptability. A gratuitous product taking over a shot or scene will likely irritate whereas a relevant product or brand used in a natural setting or sitting inertly on the sidelines likely to be more acceptable.

Conversely using actual brands rather than either made up brands (bottles of ‘fake’ lager in the Vic on Eastenders) or products with their labels covered (from Big Brother to Blue Peter etc.) could become less distracting and maybe even less noticeable, as there will be less conflict between what we expect to see (familiar, branded products) and what we actually see (made up/covered up).

So the message to brands – make certain your placement clearly makes sense. Don’t be seduced by television, choose the property based on its synergy with the brand and its relevance to your target market (research can help you with this) and ensure the brand or product is set in a correct context. The setting should feel as authentic and 'real' as your brand does in the ‘real world’. If you achieve this, then success is possible when used in selective, tactical bursts.

All For One & One For All - Group Buying Sites & Brand Communication

2011-02-28T05:02:00.000-08:00

If there’s one sector doing particularly well in the current economic downturn, it’s the group buying market.

Groupon, which is leading the way in the UK, has nearly 2.5 million users and has become one of the top 50 most visited sites in the UK. And now, rumour has it that Internet giant Google is set to launch a daily discount service of its own - Google Offers - to compete with Groupon, Incahoot and others.

Worldwide Groupon reportedly had sales of $760 million in 2010 and is said to be targeting revenue in 2011 in excess of $1 billion. It’s big business.

The appeal is easy to see. Rather than paying the full price, group buying websites allow users to join forces to take advantage of special offers on experiences, restaurants and hotels. The sites use the group buying power of their members to negotiate discounts on products and services that consumers are looking for.

It represents something of a cultural shift. Until now there has been a dichotomy in modern life between “standing out and fitting in”. Whereas ‘standing out’ has tended to be “winning” in recent years, many developments - not least social networking and the re-emergence of the fundamental human need to connect and be sociable - suggest that “fitting in” might be becoming more important once again.

So with the group buying concept seemingly set to flourish, brands need to understand the implications for their own communication with consumers. In recent years, the whole thrust of development of brand messaging, communications, and even innovation has been to achieve as much individualisation as possible. Now it might seem that the pendulum may be swinging back to collectivism. This will require brands to adopt different strategies and a different tone of voice.

Nobody has done this more naturally than T-Mobile with its flash-mob advertising and the theme of “life’s for sharing” which contrasts campaigns that focus so heavily on the needs of the individual, like L’Oreal’s “because you’re worth it.

Brands need to appreciate what the group consumer approach might mean for their brand. It may require brands to talk less about “me” and the themes of individual empowerment, individual expression and individual needs, and more about “us” and how their brand can help customers connect with other people and what it means to be a part of a social group.

‘Till the souvenir garden gnome do us part

2011-02-23T03:44:00.001-08:00

The Centre for Retail Research’s estimate that April’s royal wedding between Prince William and Kate Middleton will provide a £515.5 million boost to retailers - with souvenirs bringing in £222 million – proves, as if proof was needed, that this is much more than just another set of nuptials.

But along with the official Royal Collection handmade plates, cups and pill boxes that feature the couple’s entwined initials in gold and silver, a whole host of very unofficial merchandise is hitting the market.

In addition to the recently launched “lavishly lubed” and “regally ribbed” Crown Jewel condoms, design agency KK Outlet is reporting strong interest in its unofficial royal wedding plates bearing the slogan ‘Thanks For The Extra Day Off’, whilst B&Q is preparing to fill its stores with commemorative royal wedding gnomes at £20 for the pair. And as if that wasn’t enough, a graduate from the Edinburgh College of Art is preparing a second run of Royal Wedding sick bags, which are decorated with a crown, a drawing of Prince William and Kate Middleton and the slogan, ‘Throne Up’. The first batch sold out almost immediately.

Is this a disrespectful slant on an important national occasion? Are we too reverential as a nation and is there any reason why brands should not treat the royal wedding with a bit of irreverence? Does this constitute having fun with the British population – or offending it? How big a risk is this for brands to take?

Sense of humour is, of course, important; it’s one of the factors that contribute to giving a brand a personality….but the personality must always match that of the brand’s natural customer base. This is a classic case of knowing and understanding the motivations of your consumers and your target market base and assessing the fine line between irreverence and offence.

If you know and understand your target market properly then irreverent products won’t offend a target base you know to be irreverent itself. Moreover, how great is the risk in offending people who aren’t going to buy your products anyway? Doesn’t that make the brand edgy and therefore more appealing to its core customer base?

The royal wedding together with the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee next year present massive merchandising opportunities for retailers at a time when the economy remains suppressed. No retailer will want to miss out on that opportunity but creating a point of differentiation in what is and will be a crowded market will be key to commercial success. And understanding the motivations of your core customer base is central to that objective.

Is Facebook becoming the Tesco of the Internet?

2011-02-15T03:21:00.000-08:00

If everyone who had a Facebook account voted for The Social Network in the upcoming academy awards, the movie would walk away with every Oscar for which it is nominated. After all, currently more than 600 million of us are active users, including almost half the US population.

But all is not as it may seem in Facebook-world. What began in 2004 as a way for each of us to connect with old and new friends online, share embarrassing photographs we wish we hadn’t posted and let everyone know in real time what we’re doing, where we’re going and how we’re feeling has clearly become more than just that.

Spam has become the latest retro brand to implement a social media strategy to tell the brand's story and widen its appeal. The 70-year-old canned-meat brand will focus on promoting the ‘character of the brand’ through coupon distribution, competitions and special events, centred on social media.

It is against this background that Facebook is fast becoming the Tesco of the Internet; a ubiquitous, benign presence that is infiltrating every aspect of our lives. The sheer number of brands using Facebook is fast changing its character from being a site intended for social-connection towards what is almost a self-contained version of the Internet – a one-stop shop for life.

The beauty of Facebook was always that it was the product of its users; we controlled the content. Somehow we were in charge. By inviting such overt commercialism, is there a risk to its success when we conclude the Facebook is so all pervading? What will be particularly interesting is whether and how Facebook users kick back against this.

Brands are still trying to work out how to concentrate their efforts online. A social media presence is only really useful if it creates a genunie two-way conversation which works for both parties. Greggs do this particularly well, welcoming sandwich ideas and then putting them into practice. And the key – don’t be too slick about it. Social media was always intended as user-generated content and brands need to play by the same rules to be authentic and also need to judge if they are actually attracting new fans or merely engaging with consumers who have already been won over.

Twitter is, to an extent, still in the user-controlled stage from which Facebook appears to be emerging. Twitter saw how users dictated the features it wanted from the platform, which led to the creation of features hashtags and retweets. Individuals and brands seem to cohabit more naturally on Twitter, where brands seem less willing to overtly sell to consumers and more content in watching what they say and observing how they act. Perhaps it is this form of engagement that will lead to the happiest online relationship for brands and consumers alike.

Remember when a Kit Kat was really a Kit Kat?

2011-02-08T01:04:00.000-08:00

Remember the days when the only decision you had to make when buying a KitKat was whether to get the two-finger snack or go the whole hog on the four finger option. Now, not only is there chunky, chunky duo and king-sized chunky, Kit Kat has been one of the brands leading the way with alternatives to the traditional recipe.

Latest on the ‘caramel trail’ is Aero, which has topped its famous bubbly chocolate with caramel. This is all part of Nestlé’s plans to make a "huge" investment in Aero this year, kicking off with the re-introduction of Aero Caramel. The company is pouring £5m into a four-month media campaign to celebrate the relaunch of the Caramel variant, which was originally introduced in 2004.

The "irresistibubble" product is getting the full treatment from an integrated advertising campaign including interactive touchscreen quizzes at bus stops to its own Facebook page (we’re still not too sure why you’d befriend a chocolate bar on Facebook). Nestlé, which has also launched an Orange variant of its Aero block, recently reported that sales of Aero blocks soared during 2010, up 70% year on year.

This all follows on the back of perhaps the most bizarre – and to be honest slightly unsettling combination - Marmite’s pre-Christmas launch of a creamy milk chocolate bar with a hint of the famous yeasty spread. Unilever, owner of Marmite marketed the bar as a "devious treat for the in-laws" at Christmas or for those struggling to find a present for a loved one.

We love a bit of chocolate just like the next team, but we also have a nagging concern. If you play around too much with a much-loved institution like the good old Kit Kat or Aero, at what point do you begin to forget why you fell in love with it in the first place? At what point does Kit Kat stop being Kit Kat and start being something else that perhaps you don’t like as much? How far is too far and when do the manufacturers stop staying true to the brand they spent so many years building up?

Now, what would be interesting, perhaps Cadbury’s will really go radical with a re-launched Dairy Milk that has added……chocolate?

Water In A Box – Gimmick or Lifestyle Choice?

2011-02-01T03:10:00.000-08:00

A few months ago a BBC documentary – “The Foods That Make Billions; Liquid Gold” – explained how, over the last 40 years the bottled water industry had gone from a business that few took seriously to a global industry worth billions.
One point made by the programme was that, with water natural and sourced at minimal cost, the real value to the industry lay in how the product was marketed and branded. After all, why else would you pay money for something that you can otherwise get for free? In a sense the market now has 20 or 30 varieties of something that actually has no variety.
The latest addition to the market – and with its own branding twist – is Aquapax, from Just Drinking Water, which makes a big play of its packaging in a 500ml carton mostly made of wood, which as they helpfully point out is a natural and renewable resource.
The Engage team road-tested Aquapax and wondered what impact – if any – drinking water from a carton in a sector dominated by bottles there would be. Our findings were split between the practical and the emotional.
The first point to make, of course, is that consumers are already used to getting drinks (albeit not water) from cartons, so there should not be a major educational job to be done in convincing the consumer to embrace a carton.

However, those in the team who drank water particularly when exercising were concerned that shape of the Aquapax was just not as ergonomical to hold as a water bottle, whilst some of the ladies in the team were worried about the durability of the carton versus a bottle if they chose to carry one in their bag.

On the more emotional side, clearly the carton appears more sustainable than a plastic bottle. At present, at least, it is achieving some stand-out for the brand in what is a crowded sector and, for those so-inclined, it enables you, the buyer, the chance (in the short term) to stand out from the crowd.

The bottom line, we guess, is that the brand is asking you, the consumer, to buy into an ethos not just a drink. But, when push comes to shove, and with sales of bottled water falling as more people turn on the tap at home and when eating out, we’re not sure that it’s ever going to be anything more than just another drink on the shelf.

I'm A Celebrity...Give Me A Product To Endorse

2011-01-17T02:34:00.000-08:00

Celebrity chef Aldo Zilli is the latest to put his name to a range of products, in his case a new range of organic baby foods. But just how important is the attachment of a celebrity name and how much does it impress or influence the consumer?

The key always is the synergy between the brand and the personality, particularly if the celebrity name is going to become as intrinsic to the product as Zilli for his baby food, Loyd Grossman for his sauces and, of course, George Foreman and his lean, mean grilling machine. The question is whether the celebrity brings more to the table than the product itself. If the celebrity is a trusted name and is perceived to be involved with the product beyond just lending a name and a face, then this can be a powerful marketing tool. In this sense, people like George Foreman actually become the brand.

Of course, the use of celebrity endorsement is endemic in brand communications. You only need take two minutes to come up with names like Jamie Oliver (Sainsbury’s), Delia Smith and Heston Blumenthal (Waitrose) and the loved-up Louise and Jamie Rednapp doing the business for Thomas Cook. Even John Prescott is doing a turn for moneysupermarket.com whilst rock god, Iggy Pop (and his latex double) are fronting a car insurance campaign.

But there’s also a risk. It’s easier to drop your celebrity if they are perceived to have behaved ‘badly’ or not in keeping with the brand values. It is far less easy to drop them if they are in fact, the brand itself.

Welcome the age of Social Shopping

2011-01-11T05:29:00.001-08:00

Research, just published in the US by ATG, suggests the UK like the US could be set to enter an age of ‘social shopping’.

In the US, 29% of respondents aged 18-34 said they had found a product or service through a social network and 37% said it was important or very important that merchants provide them an opportunity to interact through social networks.

The implications of this are that brands who research how their products interact with consumers in a retail environment now need to consider how best to incorporate social networking as a central part of their marketing strategy.

It is important to combine offline and online strategies with consistent messaging but taking advantage of the ability that social media permits to create communities around your products. Use the community to ask for input on product development – and reward consumer participation and interaction by taking on board customer ideas and creating social media-specific promotions.

We all know that social media is perfect for high value or aspirational brands and products, like the iPad, where consumers can meet together and discuss their feelings towards the brand but it can work equally well for lower value products, provided the context of the social media marketing fits with the brand.

One brand that does this particularly well is Lucozade Football, whose Facebook page now has in excess of 55,000 followers. Lucozade had recognized the importance of using social media to fit their brand in as part of their customers’ lifestyles and interests. It’s the perfect example of a brand engaging its consumers for the long term and creating an environment in which to share their mutual pleasure and interest in a subject pertinent to the brand. In this case it’s football, but it could just as easily be technology, music, books, coffee, chocolate or whatever.

Without overt selling, Lucozade has implanted itself in the psyche of its followers and will, almost certainly, be the brand of choice when those followers come to buy. And, crucially, it has all been done by conversation and engagement, not shouting and selling.

Collecting customer feedback still requires objectivity

2010-12-06T06:46:00.001-08:00

We read this week that the electronics retail giant Best Buy has started using store staff to collect feedback from customers while they shop. The firm’s Voices of Consumers through Employees system has employees logging real-time customer feedback products, services, policies, store layouts and displays onto an intranet system.

The report we read said that Best Buy’s customer insights team will then analyse the information and generate “actionable consumer insight” from the data.

Using staff to monitor customer reaction has its attractions and could certainly be cost effective – but we worry how accurate and independent the data garnered can actually be if it is front line sales staff that are providing the information. After all, isn’t it in the interests of customer-facing staff to be overwhelmingly positive?

For us if negative comments are noted down and input by the staff, the potential for 'bias' would be a worry. Better perhaps if it is via some kind of electronic device which allows customers to privately score their views rather than declare that they give service 2 out of 10.

Companies looking for instant feedback in order to improve their service are, of course, to be applauded. The issue is method. Superdrug is one of the companies that puts a code on its receipts, which the customer can use to log on to an online survey, whilst Co-op collects feedback direct from customers in store using Chip & Pin machines at the tills. One wonders how many actually do. Then there is always the more traditional shopper route with interviewers in-store to collect views on the spot….though this does add cost. Perhaps this is the time for mobile – a simple mobile survey suitably incentivised on future purchases.

Moreover, the data accumulated then has to be interpreted and used to inform business planning. One of the biggest advantages of using an agency is its objectivity. Not only does the agency manage the data collection in a manner which keeps it free from even well-intended tampering, it can use its inherent objectivity to interpret the data is a manner that is free from existing ‘brand baggage’.

Look Abroad for New Markets...But Do Your Homework First

2010-11-24T06:34:00.001-08:00

The Irish crisis and the downturn across the Eurozone has potentially far-reaching consequences for home grown British brands – and with a challenging year ahead now is the time for brands to take steps towards spreading risk and finding new markets in the months and years ahead.

The current crisis has highlighted the UK’s failure to redirect its own economy towards emerging markets. Not only do we export more to Ireland than to the BRIC countries combined, but our trade with Holland is worth more than most of our trade with Asia. We are, to an extent, at the mercy of the Eurozone even if we are not party to it.

So, is now the time for brands to begin exploring emerging markets in Eastern Europe and in Asia? Tesco clearly thinks so. It has just announced plans to nearly double its selling space in central Europe and Turkey over the next five years, whilst also aiming to quadruple sales in China to £4bn by the 2014 financial year.

Put simply, to grow the UK economy and for brands to achieve sustainability let alone profitability, they must start to find new markets outside Western Europe.

This needs to be a research-led process. Initial research can deliver insights that will help assess the viability of a particular market or markets for your products. Carefully structured research can provide extensive information on purchasing habits, particular taste buds and food choices, variations in brand meanings across different languages and even behavioural and cultural issues that would need to be considered. Start that process now and you will be ahead of the game if 2011 remains a little rocky.

There’s only one thing worse than not taking steps to explore new markets and that’s doing it without being armed with the research and customer insights you need to make informed decisions.

Evolve Creative

2010-11-19T07:20:00.000-08:00

This week we have launched our new tool, Evolve Creative, which to designed to inspire better, braver brand advertising.

Email us to find out more (engage@engage-research.com)

Here's our first bit of press

http://www.mrweb.com/drno/news12667.htm

Engage Brain Latest!

2010-11-15T16:38:00.000-08:00

Latest news on the 'Engage Brain'.... What’s So Cool About Being Cool? Part 1 of our search for all things cool!

Email us at engage@engage-research.com if you want the report.

Ideas aren't everything - the devil is in the detail!

2010-11-05T08:38:00.001-07:00

We have seen an interesting article in 1to1 Magazine (http://bit.ly/aHqbKn) that looks at how companies are embarking on innovation management strategies that draw more heavily than ever on customer insight which, claims the article, ultimately leads to more successful product launches.

The article claims that, “fuelled by a hunger to succeed in this ailing economy”, companies are increasingly turning to customers, employees, and other stakeholders to come up with the ideas that will ultimately lead to new products and services.

The piece raises some interesting points, not least in setting out the increasingly varied ways in which companies are looking for and finding innovation within their own businesses. What it doesn’t demonstrate, though, is how necessarily to do it well. Ideas conceived in isolation are only half-formed. The real challenge for brands is in whether they are brave enough to implement the ideas that will create genuine stand-out for them in their market place and the attention to detail that goes into the execution of the concept.

And that’s the point at which customer insight agencies have a genuine role to play, providing the information that help brands prioritise those ideas for development and ensuring that budget is put to work on the most important and viable of the concepts developed via the engagement strategy.

October Article in ADMAP

2010-11-01T03:37:00.000-07:00

We have an article in October's ADMAP on New Product Insight

...Consumer insight research can help to get the market positioning of a new product right and act as a pathway to success.

Email us and we'll send you a copy!

engage@engage-research.com

MANUFACTURERS’ HEALTHY FOOD CLAIMS LOSING CREDIBILITY WITH CONSUMERS

2010-10-19T02:06:00.001-07:00

Consumers are becoming increasingly sceptical about food products which claim to be ‘healthy’, That’s the key finding of a qualitative research study undertaken by market research specialists Engage Research.
The study, conducted among the company’s online community Engage Brain, found that consumers increasingly feel food companies are labelling their brands in a way which is either misleading or which disguises the true (un)healthiness of the product. Whilst not all brands are deemed equally “untrustworthy”, the scepticism may begin to affect by association brands which enjoy a strong and hitherto trusted relationship with consumers.

The study, conducted among the company’s online community Engage Brain, reported that consumers believe manufacturers are ‘hiding’ unhealthy things in their products and are instead luring consumers with FAT FREE and 1% FAT labels. Whilst these labels may be true, the fact that products might also be high in sugar, salt and artificial flavourings to compensate for the reduced fat content is regarded as dishonest by consumers.

“It seems that many consumers believe that manufacturers have taken liberties in the past in their use of the term ‘healthy’ that now many simply don’t believe it,” explains Andy Barker, Director of Engage Research. “The scepticism also applies to products described as “low calorie” and “low fat”.”

Asked to comment on a news story about restaurants being asked to provide details of fat and calories in their menus, respondents singled out low fat products which are high in sugar (and vice versa) being labelled and marketed as “healthy” options. This, the study suggests, undermines consumer demand in the claims made by manufacturers.

“Consumers seem to feel that a lot of manufacturers have deceived them in the past with marketing strategies that lead you to believe products are healthy. They want honesty. They don’t mind being told that a breakfast cereal is whole grain, as long as they are also told how much sugar is in each bowl,” adds Barker.

So what can companies do to ensure that their claims – their brands - are trusted on health? The study suggests that overall consumers do not want spin, but facts. Consumers are unhappy with the use of the term ‘healthy’, believing it is too widely used and had now lost any effectiveness it might once have had.

Introducing 'Engage Brain'

2010-10-14T04:24:00.000-07:00

Our clients need to have the latest consumer thinking at their finger tips. To know what consumers think of stories in the media, new product launches, the latest ad or more long term issues such as health, family and how the recession is or is not affecting their lives.
Follow us on twitter http://twitter.com/engageresearch or via our LinkedIn group http://www.linkedin.com/groups?mostPopular=&gid=2974024 to get the latest news.

… next week we’ll be talking about – ARE MANUFACTURERS’ HEALTHY FOOD CLAIMS LOSING CREDIBILITY WITH CONSUMERS?

Will Mother Go To Iceland?

2010-09-20T02:19:00.001-07:00

We were interested by the announcement that Iceland has launched new ranges of pub- and restaurant-style ready meals to bolster its takeaway offer. A 10-strong range called Tendercooked Meat will comprise sous vide dishes such as duck breast and lamb shank and will sell between £1.50 to £5. The sous vide technique is a popular option among restaurants and gastro pubs.

To us, this seems quite a way from the budget range of party food that Kerry Katona and others made famous as part of Iceland’s successful sponsorship of “I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out of Here”. So can the upmarket range really be compatible with the Iceland brand.

Clearly, in these challenging financial times, consumers may try to save money in any way they can. But if this means a Waitrose shopper having a dalliance with Sainsbury’s or a Tesco’s shopper making the odd trip to Asda, is it likely that they can be converted to Iceland too.

Well, with a £7.5m advertising campaign starting soon in support of the range, Iceland clearly think so. They’re even offering shoppers the chance to win a prize with every purchase. Now, that’s not very Waitrose!

But don’t write it off yet. The move towards thrifty experimentation is one of the reasons behind the success of Morrisons. If Iceland can really attract shoppers from more premier retailers to their more upmarket products as well as convincing their traditional customer base that "sous vide" is really what they’ve been missing in their lives, then Iceland will not only reinforce its place as a touchstone brand it will also oversee one of those rare and potentially seismic brand shifts. Then again - and much more likely - it could just be a range of frozen pub grub!

Pound for Pound – Consumers Getting Savvy

2010-08-23T03:08:00.000-07:00

News is out that Poundland plans to open 50 new stores this year after announcing strong increases in profits and sales. Profits rose by 81.5% to £21.5m in the year to 28 March, with turnover up 28.7% to £509.8m (source: The Grocer).

At a time of economic downturn with the threat of a double dip recession on the horizon, we wondered what might be the explanation for and impact of Poundland’s success?

It is accepted now that many people adopted thrift as part of a trendy lifestyle choice but now, with the threat of a double dip, is Poundland’s success a reflection of the fact that people genuinely feel they need to spend less?

Although the high street is a place where people can experiment without risking too much and only sacrificing a retail "experience”, there is some evidence that people are willing to put effort into finding bargains in some product categories and therefore will trade off price against the convenience of doing all their shopping in one place Poundland may be scoring on the brands or products that consumers don’t feel they need to buy from a Sainsburys, a Tescos or a Waitrose.

In the previous recession, research showed that continental consumers were shopping around more for their groceries - using chains such as Aldi or Lidl for commodities, such as flour and sugar, and a regular supermarket for more 'valued' items, such as coffee and meat.

It may even be that consumers are subconsciously segmenting their shop by category - with some products sacrosanct according to retailer or brand and some categories where it's all about value and then categories where it's purely about price.

The savvy consumer - more about information & choice than actual behaviour in the past – may be coming true in the face of a genuine financial squeeze.

PreMixing Your Drinks....

2010-08-06T06:45:00.000-07:00

The Grocer has reported Asda’s prediction of an explosion in sales of pre-mixed drinks within the next five years, suggesting that every big spirit brand will introduce a version. This backed up Mintel's earlier forecast that pre-mixed category sales would grow more than five-fold, from £25m to £140m.

Asda spirits buyer Chris Brooks told The Grocer that, despite a "very low" awareness of the category, sales had rocketed 160% in Asda between May and July this. Asda reported that pre-mixed cans attracted different consumers from alcopops, with people buying them to relax in the evening, rather than to party. But now, their halo effect means all the big spirit brands are expected to start creating their own.

At first, we were a little sceptical. In fact, we thought they were a pretty naff idea. We thought pre-mixed drinks would taste weak and not as good as doing it yourself. But we’ve found that they can fit in nicely to a busy schedule. And now, of course, you can get more than just the pre-mixed gin & tonic.

We have developed a liking for the pre mixed Bacardi Mojito. Our message to manufacturers and retailers alike it - bring on the more interesting drinks, keep them funky and cheap and definitely get them front of house where the consumer can find them easily, and you could well be onto a winner.

Welcome Back to the Tetley Tea Folk

2010-08-06T05:55:00.001-07:00

So it's true - the Tetley Tea Folk are making a comeback and I hope Tetley will re-join the many brands enjoying the inoffensive and charming delights of animation style advertising - however if sketches are to be believed Tina may look more at home in a copy of Viz. I trust Sidney will be there conveying the care and attention that goes into Tetley to give the ever-expanding range of tea brands a run for their money. The trick of course will be to make the ad as chucklesome and warm as ever but with the tongue in cheek charm that brings it up to date - MCBD no doubt have a cunning plan; I still remember delivering corking research response about their marvellous mix of the timeless Alan Whicker with the ubermodern brand Travelocity. I look forward to a tongue in cheek style cuppa without even a hint of desperation.