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

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

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...

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

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?

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

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

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.