Branding Myths Executives Believe #5: Patience isn’t necessary

April 23rd, 2013 by Allison Bradley

 “Branding Myths Executives Believe” is a five-part blog series that explores branding misconceptions. This blog series appears weekly on Tuesdays and is written by Allison Bradley, Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake.

“Patience isn’t necessary.” As much as we all don’t want to believe it, patience truly is a virtue, especially in branding. This untruth rounds out the other four myths from our series “Branding Myths Executives Believe.”

Branding is unlike other marketing efforts. It does not translate into tangible, quick sales spikes in the same manner that couponing or other promotions do. Instead, brand equity is like any other form of equity—real estate, a stock portfolio or even a purebred racehorse—it requires a long-term investment (both in terms of time and money) to nurture its growth. [Please Note: I elaborated on this concept further in my recent BrandPackaging article, “Taking Out a Second Mortgage on Your Brand—a DIY Guide.”]

To define brand equity is to define what a brand can be to its consumers that its competitors cannot be. As we have explored in this series, brand equity building is about making choices. There are many things a brand can be to its consumers, but it cannot be everything to everyone. A brand must focus on the following:

  1. Which brand characteristics are most important to its consumers?
  2. How is it most differentiated from its competitors?

There are numerous strategic tools that capture these choices (like equity pyramids or equity choice wheels), but in the end the tools are only as powerful as the actions they inspire, like the following:

  • The company patiently and consistently grows its brand equity.
  • The brand equity is used as a guidepost for decision-making.
  • The brand stewards regularly ask themselves: “Will this choice or decision enhance or
  • detract from our equity and/or our promise to our consumers?”

Brand equity cannot be built overnight or with a single choice or action. The process takes time and requires patience. Successful branding executives recognize this and make a long-term commitment to their equity and their consumers.

Allison Bradley is a Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake and she has patiently waited to say “thank you” for reading this blog series. She can be reached at allison.bradley (at) hyperquake (dot) com.

Branding Myths Executives Believe #4: Change is easy

April 16th, 2013 by Allison Bradley

“Branding Myths Executives Believe” is a five-part blog series that explores branding misconceptions. This blog series appears weekly on Tuesdays and is written by Allison Bradley, Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake.

“Change is easy.” Let’s look at real life, human behavior as we evaluate this branding myth. When in life is change easy? And, when did people start liking change?

In today’s rapid, digitally connected world, brands are more than distant products in boxes. Brands have character with human characteristics. Today, consumers have relationships with their brands, and those relationships have evolved to be deep and dynamic, much like a relationship with a friend. Therefore, brands must recognize that most people don’t like change, especially quick, relational changes that involve friends, family or favorite brands. For example, does a woman really “like” when their husband has an overnight mid-life crisis and buys a sports car? Usually, the answer is a resounding no.

When your brand changes too rapidly it does the same thing.  Just like the surprised wife, your consumers will usually not be happy. They may cry, “Help my brand is going through a mid-life crisis! It just bought a sports car!” Even worse, they might even abandon the brand relationship altogether because the brand “doesn’t know me anymore.”

Unfortunately, some brand marketers believe the myth “change is easy” and decide that a brand makeover is a sure-fire way to boost sales. However, when a brand changes too rapidly, loyal consumers are likely to be confused and uncertain about their relationship with that brand. Avoid this scenario and evolve your brands rather than reinventing them overnight. Doing so respects the brand’s heritage and enables loyal consumers to grow alongside the brand.

Allison Bradley is a Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake and she hopefully avoided the mid-life crisis by buying her husband a motorcycle a few years ago. She can be reached at allison.bradley (at) hyperquake (dot) com.

Branding Myths Executives Believe #3: Just throw a claim on it

April 9th, 2013 by Allison Bradley

“Branding Myths Executives Believe” is a five-part blog series that explores branding misconceptions. This blog series appears weekly on Tuesdays and is written by Allison Bradley, Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake.

Once upon a time, I worked with one of the most premium brands within its category. It was the “fairest” of its land and no “evil” step-competitor could diminish its beauty. Then one day, in an effort to boost profits, the brand fell under the spell of “just throw a claim on it” and slowly eroded its beauty. This story isn’t just a fairy tale; I lived through it in the early 2000s.

Beyond making use of a fairy tale metaphor, this story does have a point. It proves that even the best brands fall victim to branding myths. In this scenario, the brand wanted a quick turn in profits by just “throwing a claim on it” through a violator on its packaging.

This was not a smart solution because the brand’s on-pack architecture already included an iconographic way-finding system and an additional benefit claim icon. As a helpful agency partner, we did our due diligence to see if we could make the addition work. We conducted a violator/claim audit in an adjacent premium category. Armed with our audit learnings, we created a tasteful violator that wouldn’t completely devalue the brand’s equity while still meeting the original brief. In response, the client emailed me a word document that included a clip art starburst (with the claim language) atop a jpeg of the package’s front panel. Needless to say, we had a difficult conversation and eventually netted out in the middle.

This is a common scenario, and my colleague Sherwood MacVeigh addresses it in her BrandPackaging article, “Lose the Superiority Complex, Gain Brand Differentiation.” In this article, Sherwood discusses how brands focus on “-ers” like bigger, better and brighter instead of providing true benefits and value to consumers. (Sounds a bit like throwing a claim or violator on it, eh?) She writes: “There is no right way or ‘-er’ way to ensure brand superiority. However, making sure that brand improvements or iterations are based on changing consumer values — rather than a quest to better the competition — can position a brand for ‘bigger, better, bolder’ market success.”

There you have it: “Just throw a claim on it” is a quick fix that typically doesn’t enhance brand equity. Make your brand story a “happily ever after” by resisting this spell and taking the time to add true value to your equity.

Allison Bradley is a Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake and she loves a good fairy tale with a happily ever after finish. She can be reached at allison.bradley (at) hyperquake (dot) com.

Branding Myths Executives Believe #2: You can be all things to all people

April 2nd, 2013 by Allison Bradley

“Branding Myths Executives Believe” is a five-part blog series that explores branding misconceptions. This blog series appears weekly on Tuesdays and is written by Allison Bradley, Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake.

“You can be all things to all people.”

Isn’t this something each one of us wants to believe even if we know it isn’t really true? Executives want to be “all things to all people” with the best intentions of reaching the widest demographic. However, this approach is a myth and will likely hinder the brand’s growth rather than encourage it.

As an example, let’s step outside corporate America and examine a non-profit organization for which a friend of mine once worked. This organization catered to teenagers, providing a positive environment where teens could hang out on weekends and avoid common youthful temptations. The organization went through a branding initiative and was asked who comprised its target market. Being aspirational, the non-profit said its target was all teenagers in the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) because they hoped to have the most widespread, positive impact.  Unfortunately this target cast their net far too wide.

“All teens in an MSA” is not a consumer target; it’s a population demographic, a slice of humanity. Also, being too inclusive with the target market ignored the following considerations:

  • –Consumers’ natural brand affinities (e.g., the common interests of the youth who like the organization’s services)
  • –How brand benefits align with consumers’ aspirations (e.g., a youthful consumer wants to feel “cool” and fit in)
  • –Obvious barriers to brand adoption (e.g., half of the target audience cannot drive, thus geographic distance was a limiting factor).

Trying to be all things to all teenagers hindered this non-profit organization. It didn’t allow the organization to create a brand that resonated with their actual consumers.

Large corporations innocently make similar mistakes when they define their target consumer as “moms” or “seniors.” In doing so, they overlook the rainbow of differences along the consumer spectrum and create “least objectionable” products/services. As a result, the brand becomes less ownable and weakens its value-added consumer connections.

As marketers, let’s erase this myth and replace it with reality. Brands need precise consumer targets to encourage consumer engagement, capture consumer loyalty and reap the greatest financial benefits.

Allison Bradley is a Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake and believes she’s the target consumer for brick-and-motor bookstores. She can be reached at allison.bradley (at) hyperquake (dot) com.

Branding Myths Executives Believe #1: If you build it, they will come

March 26th, 2013 by Allison Bradley

“Branding Myths Executives Believe” is a five-part blog series that explores branding misconceptions. This blog series appears weekly on Tuesdays and is written by Allison Bradley, Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake.

“If you build it, they will come.”

This famous quote from the movie “Field of Dreams” is not universally true in the branding world. Just because you “built it” doesn’t necessarily guarantee that consumers “will come.” Let’s explore this notion a bit more to find out why.

Building Solely to Corporate Competencies: Many organizations create products/services solely based on their competencies and capacities. At first glance, this practice might make sense. But with a closer look, we understand it skips a critical step—consumer understanding. Why? Superior, profitable products meet relevant consumer needs in a manner that complements a brand’s equity. Without embedding this approach within product attributes, brands take on otherwise avoidable risks:

  1. Consumers may dismiss the new product/service altogether.
  2. Consumers may devalue the entire brand portfolio.

Not Recognizing Where Consumers Are Today: Brands need to recognize where consumers are today before creating new products/services. Why? Great brands complement consumers’ current mindsets toward the brand and its category. These brands create roadmaps that realistically reflect current consumer understanding and projectable future brand/consumer relationships. They take the consumer along on the journey, creating the foundation to long-term engagement, in a manner not possible with an “if you build it, they will come” product.

Skipping Research: If you just build a product quickly research is often skipped. Research does take time and money but it should not be passed over in order to expedite a launch. Why? Consumer research done correctly will position the company for the greatest return on investment (ROI). Research can help marketers know how high to price without decreasing share of preference. It can also educate the brand team on which product attributes are most important and which to ignore or remove. Recently, Hyperquake conducted a choice-based, conjoint analysis for a client’s new product. The resulting pricing simulator showed us how to configure and price a product to gain 34% in share preference. Still think research is worth skipping?

Not Recognizing When Consumes will Arrive: If you build it, consumers might come . . . but perhaps not right away. Consciously considering in-category behaviors and attitudes will help marketers understand consumer adoption. Consumers might not come right away, but, if you evaluate the landscape properly you’ll know when they will. Then, the brand can plan the spending and develop an ROI timeline appropriately.

“If you build it, they will come.” It’s an easy branding myth to believe (or want to believe). Hopefully in consideration of this myth debunking, you and your c-suite will believe brand truths and base your product launch on them.

Allison Bradley is a Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake and is not afraid of referencing movies that prove she’s a part of Generation X. She can be reached at allison.bradley (at) hyperquake (dot) com.

Consumer Consciousness & Brand Expectations: The True Drivers of Health Insurance Transformation

March 21st, 2013 by Allison Bradley

Transformation is coming to the health insurance industry…but for very different reasons than most people think.

On October 1, 2013, the launch of health insurance exchanges, as mandated by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), will mark a paradigm shift within the industry. At first glance it appears as though politicians and public policy are steering this transformation. In reality, the power resides with the people. Consumer consciousness and brand expectations are the true drivers of transformational change in the health insurance industry.

Recent history repeating itself

In the not-so-distant-past, banking had an industry-altering event that prompted it to become more consumer-centric: the 2007-2008 U.S. financial crisis. In the wake of bank bailouts due to insolvency from sub-prime mortgage losses and other adverse industry practices, people became more aware of how patriarchal banks were. They noticed products and services were developed to benefit the institutions rather than their customers. Eyes newly opened, consumer trust in financial institutions was eradicated. As a result, an industry that historically looked out for its needs first and consumers’ second had to transform its business model to win over a very skeptical American public. To their credit, numerous financial institutions responded remarkably well by launching new customer-centric products and services.

Facing the future, one member at a time

The current combination of policy, politics, and the national conversation around health care’s future are the health insurance industry’s version of the banking crisis. These events have raised consumer consciousness and interest in the workings of the U.S. health care system to historic levels. These events have also forced an industry response to consumers’ dissatisfaction with their perceived sub-par health care category experience, including the rising cost and impersonal nature of health insurance.

Like banking, the health insurance industry has not traditionally focused on its end user, the plan member. Until recently, companies have devoted their attention to developing products for the wholesale employer market; mitigating risk and controlling utilization; and, keeping their balance sheets in the black. Reform has changed that business model. Analysts predict that coverage through individual insurance markets (exchanges) is projected to increase by 23-69 million between 2012 and 2021. The result: insurance companies can no longer craft brand strategies or products solely for the employer that is purchasing healthcare plans for its employees. Instead, insurers must consider and speak to the needs, emotions, and values of their end user—the individual member.

Some health insurers have jumped in front of this new branding and communications challenge. They are taking cues from consumer packaged goods brands by drawing upon traditional toolkits for consumer marketing: themed messages, loyalty and rewards programs and new brand marks. Consumer-focused re-branding and marketing campaigns are only the first step in the right direction. Health insurers must deliver on their promises by building their products, services and brand around improving member health versus merely mitigating risk and cost. A few notable insurers already have begun to create such offerings:

  • In July 2012, New York State insurer Independent Health introduced a new approach to innovate health care delivery, The Primary Connection. This program elevates primary care physicians’ (PCPs) role in patient management by placing them at the center of patient care and coordination. The program also provides PCPs with the tools and incentives to collaborate with Independent Health. Each primary care practice has an assigned Practice Care Coordinator, a registered nurse, who plans, coordinates and evaluates all options and services available to develop individualized care plans for each patient. In addition, The Primary Connection contains a reimbursement model based on pay-for-value and quality of care rather than full reliance on fee-for-service.
  • In September 2012, Walmart and HumanaVitality partnered to create a healthy foods program to incentivize wellness. This program allows HumanaVitality members to receive five percent savings on foods that display the Walmart “Great for You” icon, like fresh fruits, vegetables and low-fat dairy. To participate, members log onto HumanVitality.com and complete a health assessment questionnaire. They then receive a “Vitality HealthyFood” card qualifying them for the savings, which are loaded onto the member’s card as a credit toward their next purchase. These points can be used for redemption on anything sold in store at Walmart.

The brand is the experience, and the experience is the brand

In addition to dealing with reform-related branding challenges, health insurers must manage and leverage changes in consumer information-gathering and purchasing behaviors. The advent of “me-centered” technologies such as smartphones and tablets has given consumers instant access to information and products that target their specific needs and desires – from household goods to health insurance. As a result, insurance brands must adopt a new philosophy about brand-consumer engagement: the brand is the experience and the experience is the brand.

For starters, insurance companies must begin to develop brand equities and promises that meet the needs and aspirations of all stakeholders – members, brokers, administrators, physicians, et al – in equal yet individually relevant ways. Doing so will make their brand experiences personal and positive. In addition, insurers must evaluate all products, services and operational choices against the litmus test of fulfilling these brand promises. Similar to changes within the banking industry, health insurers must also restructure their brand architecture to reflect that they are consumer-driven service organizations versus patriarchal institutions. Finally, they must adapt and change their public personas – in word and deed – from untouchable, distant institutions to brands that represent the voice of the consumer

Health care reform may be the tipping point but consumers are the way forward. Regardless of politics, U.S. health care is evolving to become more consumer-centric. In response, health insurance companies must become consumer-focused brands – regardless if those consumers come to them via an employer, state exchange or other individual policy – if they hope to be viewed as allies in the quest to transform the U.S. health care system.

Allison Bradley is Brand Strategy Director at Hyperquake.  She can be reached at allison.bradley (at) hyperquake (dot) com.

Out Pedaling Cancer

March 13th, 2013 by lauren.kroeger@hyperquake.com

 

 

 

This past weekend Hyperquake participated in the 4th Annual Race to Anyplace cycling charity event. The race is held every year by the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. Donations go directly to LLS, which is the world’s largest blood cancer research organization. Race to Anyplace is an amazingly powerful event that our Quakers have been committed to attending every year since its founding.

 

 

 

Team Hyperquake managed to cycle almost 100 miles in six hours of spinning AND raise $600! Although we did not finish first, our team finished in style! Not many people can spin in jeans and look good doing it, just saying. Race to Anyplace is an event that our Quakers will continue to participate in every year. By keeping this tradition alive we can truly begin to out pedal cancer.

Is it really “hip to be square”? A closer look at Starbuck’s mobile partnership with Square Wallet

March 1st, 2013 by Allison Bradley

Starbucks thinks it’s “hip to be square” and the ubiquitous coffee chain hopes consumers will agree. Starbucks now accepts payments through Square’s mobile payment app, Square Wallet, at approximately 7,000 U.S. Starbucks stores. Boasting a customer base brimming with early adopters and the successful 2011 launch of its own Starbucks Card app, the brand is positioned once again to use mobile commerce to elevate the customer service experience.

Starbucks and Square first announced they were partnering in August 2012, when the coffee purveyor invested $25 million in Square — best known for its device that easily turns retailers’ mobile phones into credit card terminals — and said it would start using Square to process transactions with customers who pay via debit or credit card in the U.S. The new Square Wallet app turns consumers’ mobile phones into credit cards at participating merchants like Starbucks.

For Starbucks’ technically savvy consumers, this could be a welcome change in their caffeine consumption routine. Square Wallet users show a barcode to Starbucks baristas to be scanned for payment. In summer 2013, customers will be able to add a tip to their checks via their Square Wallet or Starbucks apps. Starbucks also plans to utilize Square’s GPS technology to recognize that a consumer is physically in-store and allow for payment without even scanning a mobile device.

Will consumers win with the new Square/Starbucks venture? By most accounts, the partnership is predicted to propel the mobile payments movement forward. The catch? The Square Wallet app only works with merchants that use Square to process their credit card payments. In essence, Square Wallet (as well as other mobile wallets) takes an open payment device, such as a Visa card, and constricts it to a closed network of merchants who utilize Square. In the process, the retail industry takes steps both forward and backward in their effort to expedite payment processing and provide an ideal consumer experience: The forward step is the embracing of a new mobile payment technology. The backward step is limiting general credit cards’ function to that of merchant-branded, in-store cards that work only in very select locations.

In general, the innovation path for mobile payments is relatively consumer-friendly. Unlike early-adopter innovations of the past (think beta-max in the 1980s), early adopters won’t have to make any personal monetary investments. Instead, they’ll just download free apps and “invest” by divulging personal data, such as credit card or banking information. However, without careful consideration of mobile payment’s limitations, newfound consumer freedoms could lead to consumer frustrations.

In the Square Wallet scenario, consumers will need to have a collection of payment apps (like Square Wallet, Google Wallet, et al) in their phone instead of a collection of multiple credit cards in their wallets. It can be argued that multiple apps are easier to “carry” around than numerous cards; however, they can still lead to a less-than-ideal consumer experience. Why? As mentioned before, these mobile wallets won’t be accepted everywhere. Also, ease-of-use is limited because keeping track of multiple apps for payments at varying merchants adds complexity to the consumer’s overall mobile payments experience and perception.

The electronic payments, mobile, and retail industries will need to collaborate to create long-lasting infrastructures and systems that allow for more universal mobile payment acceptance. This, in turn, should encourage widespread consumer adoption of mobile payment apps like Square Wallet and enhance consumer relationships and experiences with retailers like Starbucks. In the meantime, Starbucks will need to figure out how to satisfy the Google Wallet or PayPal consumer who wants to pay via smartphone for their grande mocha latte.

 

Hyperquake teams up with the Reds

August 31st, 2012 by Molly Danks

As I sat in section 121, with a next-door neighbor from Boston on my left and a boyfriend from Chicago on my right, I couldn’t help but think how strange it was that I was a lone Reds fan sandwiched between these two outsiders. As a child, there was never any question as to who I was rooting for.  A family of 5 dressed in matching Reds attire, didn’t leave much to question. But now all grown up, sans the Reds flare, sitting next to a Cubies fan and a whomever-people-from-Boston-root-for-fan, people had to ask me which team was mine. For a fan like myself, that cares more about having a good time rather than who is winning or losing, I stick with the Reds because of tradition, and I go to the game when I get a good deal.

As the game went on, I noticed the lawn crew out on the field, dragging the Scotts Lawn Care equipment, and I couldn’t help but think about effective marketing tactics and the work that my agency had done with the Cincinnati Reds.  So, I anxiously looked around the ballpark for any signs of our work. Where was it?  I can’t say that I wasn’t slightly confused that the work we helped to create seemed nowhere to be found.

I had a couple more Yuenglings and watched the Reds play some excellent baseball, and soon forgot all about marketing and branding until Monday morning when I was in a meeting. I thanked the Bosses for letting me use the company seats, and told them about my search for our work, and how I couldn’t locate a single thing.  That’s when I realized that I might never physically see the work that we did with the Cincinnati Reds.

Not because the work wasn’t exceptional, but because the partnership that we had wasn’t the kind that was going to change a logo, or make the park or programs look any different.  It was the Brand Evolution kind of Marketing.  The kind that you don’t always “simply see”. It’s the kind you have to teach and believe. And this couldn’t have been explained more clearly, than as written in the article on Hyperquake and the Reds in the Cincinnati Enquirer.

Over the Top Olympic Marketing Campaigns

August 8th, 2012 by rachel.robbins@hyperquake.com

Olympics: a two-week+ span where viewers are glued to their television in hopes to see new world records created and their favorite athletes bring home that gold medal or medals, especially if you are a swimming fanatic. According to Advertising Age, “The first five nights of the games averaged 35.6 million viewers, the most for any Summer Olympics outside the U.S. since Montreal in 1976”. Hmm…having 35.6 million viewers seems like a great opportunity for new marketing campaigns to be created, right?

Many companies have jumped on this Olympic marketing campaign bandwagon. As there have been many outstanding campaigns, I would like to discuss two in particular: P&G’s “Thank You, Mom” Campaign and Nike’s “Find Your Greatness” Campaign. These two campaigns, in my personal opinion, have outdone the rest.

I believe both of these companies had a crucial obstacle to overcome when deciding the direction for their 2012 Olympic Campaign.

  1. When people typically think of P&G products, sports and the Olympics are not the first things to come to mind.
  2. It was critical for viewers to remember Nike’s campaign, seeing as Adidas is the official sportswear sponsor for the Olympics this year.

You will be able to see from watching both of the videos below how well P&G and Nike overpowered these obstacles.

One of the key reasons I believe these campaigns surpass the rest is their ability to relate to viewers on a global scale. Not only can an Olympian’s Mom associate themself with P&G’s video, but all mothers, from across the world can appreciate and relate to this video. Nike was able to inspire a wide-range of viewers through their motivation for greatness approach. Viewers also remembered Nike’s campaign from their tagline, “Greatness isn’t reserved for the chosen few in one special city; it can also be found in London, Ohio, and London, Norway, and East London, South Africa, and Little London, Jamaica, and Small London, Nigeria and the London Hotel and London Road.”