Tag: fusionbrand

If a consumer cannot afford your brand, he won’t buy it

Published on by brandconsultantasia2 Comments

Brands are defined by the economic, emotional and experiential value they provide to a consumer. If you can’t match the attributes of your brand to those requirements for value, consumers won’t buy it. Cost is a critical element.

No matter how much you spend on expensive TV commercials that the agency says will reach the most consumers and create awareness of your product the quickest, if a consumer cannot afford your product, he won’t buy it.

It doesn’t matter how much you spend positioning your product in the mind of consumers. If those consumers can’t afford your product, they won’t buy it.

Even if you manage to completely differentiate your product from other products, if a consumer can’t afford your product, he won’t buy it.

How Asian firms and politicians can adopt social media into their strategy

Published on by brandconsultantasiaLeave a comment

When TV first started, commercials consisted of a presenter standing in front of a microphone reading from a script. Why? Because that was how it had always been done on radio. It took companies a few years to leverage the power of TV but eventually they did and now TV ad spend is estimated to be in the region of US$500 billion annually.

And in the same way as first the radio and then the television changed the way companies pass on information to consumers in the 20th century, social media is changing the way consumers source information about businesses in the 21st century. But social media will have an even bigger impact than radio and television because social media is not only changing the way we make decisions related to brands, social medial is changing the way we do business.

Consumers receive up to 5,000 messages a day
Back in the day, companies used radio and then TV to build brands by developing a one-size-fits-all message and broadcasting that message to as many consumers as possible as often as required. All communications were one way and the messages contained only the information the company wanted to share and the consumer was expected to accept this information and not dispute it. In a more trusting world, with limited competition and smaller markets, consumers were accommodating. Unfortunately, more and more companies adopted the same strategy. Soon consumers were inundated with up to 5,000 messages a day, many of them making increasingly outrageous claims.

Companies were unable to follow through on the promises made in advertising and trust, the key element of any relationship, was eroded. Repeatedly let down, consumers began to look elsewhere for independent information and the truth. They found it with other consumers. Consumers now source their information on brands from other consumers. Today, consumers have the power to make a brand succeed or fail. As consumers learn the truth about a brand, the reputation of companies and their brands is being determined, shaped, altered and increasingly discarded by consumers.

Dynamic process
And it is an ongoing, dynamic process. At any given time, consumers are searching for information on a product or service that has caught their eye. But they are not sourcing that information from TV commercials, the radio or the company website, they are looking to other consumers for the information they require.

And they are doing it, on the whole via social media. And social media is yet another tool that organizations must embrace because it is replacing marketers and the marketing department and other barriers between the organization and the consumer.

Social media cost of entry is low
Social media is not a fad. Those companies that don’t buy into social media will be left behind. But a lot of companies in Malaysia are going to be intimidated at the prospect of opening their virtual doors and giving the general public the opportunity to interface directly with them. But they are going to be talked about anyway so they might as well be part of the conversation. That way at least, they will have the chance to contribute a corporate take on all issues. And the good news is that the cost of entry is low and there are very few barriers to participation.

So what should Malaysian firms do to leverage social media?

1. The first thing they have to understand is that social media is not about you. It is not PR and it is not advertising. Social media is not for the hard sell, it is for engaging prospects and customers and for entering into two way conversations with them. Do this, and you will get opinions on issues that are important to an audience who is interested in your product. If you listen and use this information wisely, you will be able to match your product attributes to your customer requirements for value.

2. Identify which social media platforms you intend to use and develop a strategy to use them. Transparency, consistency, honesty and longevity are key so don’t just jump in and fire away for a fortnight of frantic activity and then get bored and stop communicating.

3. Do some research and find out how your customers are using social media, what platforms and so on. 350,000,000 million people read blogs. Identify which ones your prospects and customers are reading and how can you get involved by responding to articles.

4. Offer forums on your website that allow customers to express freely their experiences of using your products. You’ll be astonished at how valuable the feedback will be as you listen to what really matters to consumers and incorporate the feedback into your strategy.

5. Over time, develop a formal process to monitor and review what consumers are saying about you and where they are saying it. This monitoring will allow you to enter into dialogues that are very personal and transparent. It will also allow you to address negative issues as they arise and before they develop into crises. Casual monitoring will give you a real time view of what is being said but it is resource consuming and may not be as effective as a more formal program via a third party such as BuzzMetrics.

6. Set up blogs for key customer facing departments. Blogs are a great sounding board and instantly engage prospects and customers. Be honest, develop a personality but don’t try to sell your products. Don’t worry if your opinions differ to those of the audience. Open and transparent responses are what your audience is looking for.

7. Social media requires a fresh approach to content. Too many Malaysian firms are simply paying ‘lip service’ to social media. One government agency simply copied and pasted its website onto its Facebook page and then left it for nine months!

8. Social media is a platform for communication and collaboration, not a soapbox. Some companies simply tell followers about special offers. A number of politicians use Twitter to tell everyone what they are doing yet ignore specific issues raised by voters.

So as you embark on your social media strategy, remember that the digital environment is immense and fluid. Understand that you must change the corporate approach of one that aims to push messages onto consumers, to one that aims to listen to what they have and then responds to those issues. Take these first steps and you’ll soon learn to leverage the powers of social media and throw away the script.

Case study: Use research to form the foundations of a tourism brand strategy

Published on by brandconsultantasia4 Comments

A powerful country brand developed from a meticulously planned strategy that has at its heart the concept of providing specific value to specific identified segments and meticulously executed and measured can yield massive benefits for investment, domestic industries and culture.

And for most South East Asian countries, tourism will have a prominent role to play in their country brand strategies. And so it should be as most governments recognize the contribution of tourism to stimulating economic growth across all sectors of society.

It also helps that tourism is also considered to be the world’s largest industry with revenue of over US$500 billion. The World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) estimates International tourist arrivals for 2009 to be at 880 million. Although this was a 4% drop over the previous year, Asia and the pacific saw the first signs of recovery with positive growth in the last 2 quarters.

Going forward, the UNWTO expects international arrivals to reach 1.56 billion by 2020. Of these, almost 400 million are expected to head for Asia and the pacific.

But because of the tendency of politicians to seek a quick fix, most Asian tourism brand strategies look no further than creative advertising campaigns that look the same as many other destinations and are soon lost in the muddle of messages currently carpet bombing consumers.

One country in South East Asia has recognized the futility of this approach and commissioned us to develop a brand strategy based on trade and consumer requirements for value. Client confidentiality doesn’t allow me to reveal the country involved however I am able to share the methodology and some of the results and findings.

The project took just almost 2 years from appointment to implementation of the strategy however some urgent recommendations were implemented earlier.

The tourism office is tasked with marketing the country both domestically and internationally. Our focus was internationally. They were facing a number of challenges including:

Challenges
1) The increased effectiveness of competitor marketing strategies. All regional competitors are investing heavily in tourism products and developing segment focused branding campaigns.

2) Growing ineffectiveness of mass marketing, especially generic print & TV advertising. Increasingly fragmented media and an increase in leisure time activities are making it harder to reach consumers via traditional channels.

3) The increase in the influence of the Internet on the destination decision-making process, especially the increased influence of peer-to-peer networks. Figures released by The Association of British Travel Agents (ABTA) in November 2004 showed that 19% of holidaymakers booked their holiday online – six times more than in 2000. By 2008, this figure had grown to 67% (Online shopping survey). Only about 13% of those surveyed said they would use a travel agent. The Internet is also growing in importance as a communications medium through P2P networks with 34% of respondents to a Mintel survey choosing their destination on the basis of a face-to-face recommendation

4) Poor repeat visitor rates. Repeat visitors not only represent an increased return on the initial marketing investment but also tend to stay longer and spend more. Additionally, they represent a low-cost source of referrals and other word-of mouth advantages. Currently, the country has a below average number of repeat visitors compared to two main competitors which represents a threat to future growth.

5) Lack of awareness and knowledge of the country worldwide. What has been the impact of the country advertising? Has it been effective in improving the perception of the country? How much is it contributing to tourism in the country?

Our research showed that there were about 600,000 competing communities in Asia and more than 1,000 regional and national economic development agencies, all competing for visitors. This made it easy for even the most compelling messages to get lost amid all the destination claims.

We recommended to the client that in this cluttered environment, effective branding depends on data and knowledge about current and prospective visitors and not simply trendy creative campaigns featuring mass marketing tactics across all major channels.

Moreover, choosing the most effective branding strategy depended on sound market & customer research to determine current attitudes and perceptions toward the country among travel agents, previous visitors to the country and those that had never visited the country.

Measurement
By understanding the sources of those perceptions and attitudes, the client would be better able to evaluate current branding efforts, develop strategies to target high-impact segments with the most potential more effectively, drive internal education and other program development, leverage the emerging medium of Web 2.0, develop benchmarks to measure branding progress and ensure that resources were used cost-effectively.

The research could also be used to pinpoint, prioritise and drive online community-based branding. A core requirement as consumers spend more time in those communities.

Other key requirements included communicating knowledge of current branding and target market imperatives among personnel, as well as ensuring knowledge and data transfer.

After extensive discussions with the research division and others and to provide a 360-degree approach to understanding the brand, FusionBrand developed and conducted a multi-phase, six-month international research project that incorporated multiple research methodologies.

These methodologies included:

• 39 focus groups (FG) in thirteen locations in twelve countries comprised of 3 segments:
o Travel Agents
o Travelers who have visited the country in previous 3 years
o Travelers who have not visited the country but have traveled long haul in last 3 years
• Online surveys
o 12 countries
o Worldwide via client website
• Mystery shops in specific countries plus home country
• Internet CGM (consumer-generated media) monitoring & analysis
o 22 million blogs
o 60,000 usenet forums
o 6,000 discussion forums
o Plus podcasts, web sites etc.
• Internal brand audit in HQ and at tourism offices worldwide
o One-on-one, in-depth interviews with domestic & international staff
• External brand audit
o In depth interviews in specific countries
o 3 segments
o Tourist operators & agencies
o Media representatives
o Local tourism associations
• Communications audit (print)
o Brand analysis of print materials
o Comparative analysis of 11 regional competitor materials
o Framework for evaluation, scoring & future design developed
• Communications audit digital
o Own sites
o Brand evaluation based on Internet & customer relationship best practices
o Social Media initiatives

The countries were located in the following regions:

• Asia
• North America
• Europe
• Middle East
• Australia

The research project completely designed by FusionBrand was not only comprehensive, but innovative as well. For example, the Internet monitoring had yet to be accomplished by any destination, while the digital communications audit looked at what is necessary to advance into the emerging era of Internet 2.0.

Output was comprehensive and extensive and included:

• Recording and analysis of relevant input in complete reports
• County-by-country reports concerning perceptions and experiences with the country, including key influencers on travel destination selection
• Brand workshops for client personnel incorporating research results to ensure a corporate-wide understanding of the country brand strategy
• Analysis of Internet and marketing collateral relevance and effectiveness in segment-based branding
• Review of social media initiatives
• Quantitative benchmarks concerning experiences, perceptions, influencers and preferences of target segments
• Detailed insights concerning five key target segments identified in conjunction with the client

Each report not only included the findings from the research, but also prioritised recommendations for addressing the issues raised by the research.

Over 300 actionable recommendations
More than 300 actionable recommendations were made. These recommendations were incorporated into a comprehensive, segment-based brand plan that was developed over six months. The brand plan had a strong emphasis on the internet and social marketing and included strategic planning for marketing, advertising, both online and traditional, public relations, direct marketing, web and other programmes and outlined goals, messages, target markets, measurements, activities, timelines, responsibilities and budgets.

The benefits include consistent messaging and images among target markets, synergy among multiple programs, and elimination of uncoordinated activities that were wasting resources. Crucially, the brand plan also provides tools to evaluate program results.

In addition, in conjunction with representatives in country, country specific brand plans were developed. The Country Brand Plans are primarily focused on specific marketing activities within those countries. These activities include, but are not limited to, PR, local trade shows, agent recruitment and communications, cultural events, advertising, segment specific publications, promotional events, etc.

Although the brand strategy was for 2009, urgent recommendations such as consolidation and improvements to web sites and the appointment of regional PR companies were implemented immediately.

A key element of branding is consistency and yet, during the communications audit, the lack of consistency was evident. A strong recommendation was made for a corporate identity brand manual to be developed immediately. The manual was conceptualized and completed by FusionBrand in 4 months, during the writing of the 2009 brand plan.

Throughout the research and planning process, workshops were designed and presented to client personnel to keep them abreast of the process and educate them.

The project has been deemed a success with many targets met ahead of or on schedule. Furthermore significant savings have been made in a number of areas such as a reduction in collateral printing and a move to print on demand. Finally the destination has appeared on more than one ‘must visit’ destination for 2010 for the first time in its history.

More effective brand communications required to build the Volvo brand in Malaysia

Published on by brandconsultantasia2 Comments

Building a brand in any country requires more than a series of tactical initiatives to create awareness and ‘get the name out there’. It takes a meticulously planned and integrated strategy that incorporates the participation of numerous stakeholders and initiatives, both internal and external. Internally to ensure the whole organisation is on brand and externally to ensure communications and content resonates with target markets and are communicated via relevant channels. There’s more but for the purpose of this article that’s enough for now.

And what if the brand is to penetrate other markets? There was a time when all it took to do this was a continuation of the positioning tactics carried out in the home country, perhaps with a few language changes in print media and perhaps some dubbing of TV commercials (TVCs). An over simplification perhaps, but essentially correct.

But as we all know, the world is very different today.

Building western brands in Asia
To build a Western brand in Asia today, as many international brands are finding out the hard way, takes an even more robust and integrated brand strategy that has at its core organisational excellence. Only once has that strategy been developed can the brand strategy be executed. And part of the brand strategy, a small but critical part, is the communications campaign.

This is particularly true of the automotive industry that has seen a number of well known European and other Western brands find it hard to repeat the successes at home in new Asian markets. There are other issues such as high duties etc but many European brands perform below expectations, despite large marketing budgets.

One of those is Volvo. Despite an extensive presence across most media, in 2009, out of a total industry volume (TIV) of just under 537,000 units, Volvo only sold 600 cars in Malaysia, South East Asia’s largest passenger market. This gives Volvo about 0.15% of the market. Although this is a slight increase over 2008 when Volvo sold 524 cars, it is way below the 2007 total of 752 units. Interestingly, in 1999 Volvo sold 839 cars, giving it 0.3% of the market. So Volvo’s market share of the Malaysian passenger car market has halved in 10 years. I think I know why.

Last Thursday, 28th January 2010, a half page full colour ad in the New Straits Times, (NST) Malaysia’s ‘premium’ newspaper caught my eye. The ad features the Volvo V50 and a headline “There’s more to life with Volvo.” The ad goes on to sell space and luxury using images of a kayak, a windsurfer and a mountain bike. The ad lists, in really small print, a number of dealers in key cities. There is no website address.

Last Friday 29th January 2010, Volvo ran another half page ad in the same publication, this time a spot colour ad. This ad features a Volvo XC60 parked on a snow covered road with the occupants, a man and a woman in warm fur collared winter parkas sitting in a pile of snow staring out at a snow covered landscape. This time the headline is “Volvo owners get more out of life!”

If I’m not mistaken, the traditional rule of thumb has it that you have approximately 3 seconds to grab a readers attention with a print ad headline, perhaps less in today’s noisy, cluttered world. I don’t know how effective the Volvo ads have been but I did notice that the offer in the second ad has been extended, rarely a good sign. I also noticed that there is no tracking mechanism in the copy. And, in case you can’t read it, the tagline in the print ad reads “Volvo owners get more out of life!” So the ad is targetting both existing and potential customers.

Coincidentally, there is a Volvo billboard outside my office, at the busy intersection of a very busy highway. The billboard ad features the Volvo XC90 Diesel. This time the headline is “Winner of fuel efficiency award.”

Sitting in my office in the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur where the recent hot spell has seen the temperature top 40 degrees centigrade on more than one occassion and the humidity is often around 90%, I tried to figure out a couple of things.

1) What was the relevance of these communications to potential and existing Volvo owners in Malaysia?
2) Why are they using images featuring snow to sell a service in the tropics?
3) Why is an ad targetted at existing Volvo owners also trying to get the attention of non Volvo owners?
4) Where is the consistency?
5) Is this part of a planned out, integrated strategy or a series of one off tactics?
6) Why would anyone get out of a nice warm car and sit on wet cold snow to admire the view?

OK, ignore the last one.

Hemorrhoids and Frost bite
Well as far as I can tell, more out of life for the couple featured in the second ad is likely to be hemorrhoids and frost bite. I don’t mean to be fecetious, but what is the relevance to the Malaysian market? There are some marketers who insist that to build a brand you need to be first in a category and perhaps Volvo wants to be first in the frost bite category but I think not.

More confusing is the content. The main copy of the ad is encouraging existing Volvo owners to bring their cars in for servicing, repairs or to buy accessories and be entered into a competition to win vouchers that can be redeemed for more accessories and parts. Shooting off on a brief tangent, the takeaways I get from that copy, as a non Volvo owner are, in roughly equal amounts:

1) you are going to be spending a lot on parts and accessories so here’s a little help or
2) these cars are built so well that you will never actually win anything because nothing needs to be repaired but the model sold is so basic you’ll be spending a lot on accessories. Interestingly Volvo also offers a 3 year warranty/100,000km for cars sold in Malaysia so if you’ve got a new car you may have to wait 3 years to receive your prize!

Seriously though, The Volvo communications are confusing. Furthermore, according to the Star newspaper, 86% of Malaysians don’t trust advertising. So that means the print ads mentioned earlier are targetted at only 14% of Malaysians. Moreover, with an entry level Volvo S40 at around RM170,000 (US$48,000) it is off the radar of the average Malaysian so a mass media approach is a waste of valuable funds.

There are a number of other things Volvo can do to halt the slide in its market share and build a profitable brand in Malaysia.

1) Separate the acquisition strategy from that of the retention strategy.
2) An indifference to retention branding is short-sighted. Michigan State University estimated that US$1 spent on acquisition generates US$5 in revenue, while every dollar spent on retention creates US$60 in revenue. Bain and Co has estimated that increasing retention by 5% can increase profits by 25%. Companies have a 5 – 15% of selling something to a new customer, but a 50% chance when selling to an existing customer. But retention branding requires a completely different strategy to acquisition branding.
3) In the mass economy the brand communications goal was to increase awareness. This evolved into persuasion but the ultimate goal today is adoption. Adoption ensures the brand is seen as the best or, better still, the only choice. But adoption of a brand is not an event it is a process built on the back of organisational excellence and reinforced by the ability to deliver relevant solutions on customer terms.
4) Volvo cannot expect adoption if messaging is inconsistent and fragmented. If print campaigns and billboards are to be part of the brand communications, keep them consistent. Announcing fuel efficiency awards is not going to drive traffic to showrooms.
5) Review communication tools and explore social media options. I believe there is no benefit at all for a luxury product like Volvo to advertise in a daily newspaper in Asia.
6) Understand social media is for communities and those communities must be relevant. The only opportunity for interaction on the Volvo website leads the viewer to an international site. Volvo owners in Malaysia will want to be part of a community here, and learn about issues and opportunities in Malaysia, not in Istanbul.

The purpose of this article is not to embarrass Volvo. So if anyone from Volvo reads this article, please view my comments as feedback, not criticism. There are a number of automotive manufacturers making similar mistakes but Volvo caught my eye!

8 reasons why the iPad will fail

Published on by brandconsultantasia15 Comments

Apple owns some of the finest brands on the planet. And I’m an Apple loyalist and brand ambassador. I bought the green iMac when it first arrived in Malaysia. Even though there wasn’t any software to run on it and because it wasn’t compatible with anything else it required multiple peripherals. And even though it spent more time being fixed than it did on my desk and despite the fact that the keyboard was awkward and the mouse hopeless, I loved it and I’ve never had anything else since.

I now have macs in my home and at the office. Every morning when I walk into the office I catch my breath as I look at the sleek lines and brilliant screen of my top of the line iMac.

Every member of my family has an iPod and my two older kids have macbooks. I even convinced my luddite wife to switch from PCs to macs and her company now has 10 of them. Baes on my recommendations, at least one friend bought macs for his event management firm.

I’ve seen the stock I once owned soar over 5,000% from the price I sold it at.

And even though I know that Apple is making margins of over 40% on some of the products I own, I buy them because they are cutting edge in terms of design and functionality, are easy to use and have great features. And because the experience I have with my sales agent is brilliant and he’ll come to my house at nine o’clock at night to help me troubleshoot. At every touchpoint, it’s a great brand.

So you’ll never hear me say a bad word about a mac product. But I think the iPad is a mistake. And here are 8 reasons why:

1) It doesn’t have a camera or a webcam. If the iPod can have a camera, why can’t the iPad? A webcam would also have made sense.
2) The touch screen on the iPod is temperamental so if it’s the same with the iPad, users will need an external keyboard. Reading through the information, users will have to buy a separate keyboard that costs US$75 and can’t use any of their existing Apple keyboards.
3) The iPad doesn’t have any USB ports or card slots so I’m not sure how users are supposed to transfer documents from other devices. There is an iPod connector feature that means users will have to buy another adapter.
4) The iPad doesn’t have Adobe flash which means that any web pages that have applications, videos or advertisements on them will have large blank areas. You read that correctly, users can’t watch video on websites. If true, what are the implications for the travel industry?
5) The iPad doesn’t allow more than one programme to run at a time. So users can’t be working on a document in word and have a video downloading on youtube at the same time.
6) The iPad is not HD ready so watching movies will not be the experience it should be.
7) It can’t be used as a phone.
8) Apple will be able to remotely disable applications.

Before the launch of the iPad The Wall Street Journal wrote: ‘The last time there was this much excitement about a tablet, it had some commandments written on it.’ Apple leapt on that and included it in there marketing collateral at the launch.

Personally, whilst it won’t affect Apple’s position as one of the finest brands on the planet, I don’t think the iPad will fly. Only time will tell if I am right. What do you think?

Stop your product joining the 95% club

Published on by brandconsultantasia6 Comments

According to an Ernst & Young study, the failure rate of new U.S. consumer products is 95%. 95%! Imagine if Boeing or Airbus had a 5% success rate! Yet despite this appalling return, companies spend approximately US$1.5 trillion on marketing, and in particular advertising, annually!

A couple of years ago, (before the explosion of social media, Dominique Hanssens, a director at the Marketing Science Institute in the US and a professor at UCLA’s Anderson Graduate School of Management, reported that the average advertising elasticity for established products is .01. He went on to say that if one of those brands increased its advertising expenditure by 100%, it would see a sales increase of only 1%.

He used as an example Anheuser-Busch. If the firm doubled the US$445 million that it was spending at the time on TV, print, radio, outdoor, and Internet advertising, it would enjoy a 1% increase in net revenues from the then base of US$5.7 billion. Put another way, Anheuser-Busch would spend a total of US$890 million to make US$57 million.

We have to accept that mass economy models that made global brands out of such products as Coke, Budweiser, Marlboro, Sony and others are no longer relevant. And if firms continue to invest in outdated tactics that no longer work, their products will join the 95% club.

If they are to survive, brands today must address current branding imperatives. Current branding imperatives include building and maintaining relationships with customers and partners, internal communication, education, understanding and adaptation of corporate goals throughout the organisations.

Clearly defined organisational processes that are developed with the customer in mind and not shareholders or the organisation. These processes must be developed for both customer facing and non-customer facing departments, not independently but in tandem.

Communications, including advertising are important, but not the traditional one size fits all mass market approach. Communications must understand the requirements of prospects and customers and communicate with them using content that resonates with them via channels that are relevant to them.

Branding imperatives also require effective use of technology and, most important of all, ongoing feedback, measurement and improvement. These establish the foundations for identifying prospects and acquiring and retaining (key to brand success) profitable customers.

If John McEnroe were to play tennis against Roger Federer today, using the racquets he played with back in the day, he might win a few points but he is going to lose the match. It is the same for companies who fail to adapt to the branding imperatives of today.

If consultants recommend you emulate models used by such brands as Coke, Pepsi, Sony and other mass economy brands that were built when tennis racquets were made of wood, show them the door. Likewise, enormous budgets, integrated, synergistic, holistic, innovative, design or creative driven, energetic, positioning campaigns will not establish a brand.

Companies, and governments must understand that there is no quick way to build a brand. It is this obsession and belief that there is a silver bullet and it is called advertising that keeps the 95% club growing.

You cannot build a brand with advertising alone

Published on by brandconsultantasia1 Comment

86% of Malaysians don’t trust advertising. The Star) . 78% of Malaysians trust the recommendations of other consumers. There are more than 1,500,000 Malaysians on Faceboook. 80% of affluent Malaysians (those with a household income (HHI) above RM5,000) use social networking sites. Nine of the Top 20 websites in Malaysia are social networking sites. These consumers are the new world order. They are online for many hours a day and pay little attention to traditional mass media. Despite this, Malaysian companies continue to poor billions (RM6.45 billion in 2008. Adoi) into mass market advertising in the mistaken belief that what they are doing is building a profitable brand.

Advertising was much more relevant in the past when the mass media was limited to only one or two TV stations, few radio stations, a couple of national newspapers and the occasional billboard. Limited leisure time pursuits meant consumers spent a lot of time interfacing with the mass media. Finally, there was little competition so high product or service standards were unimportant. With frequency and timing, mass media advertising generated enough ‘awareness’ to justify the budget.

With limited competition and consumers who were willing to accept low standards or didn’t know any better, such awareness could result in sales and for some, it was enough to build a brand.

Using advertising to build a brand is ineffective
Unfortunately, using advertising to build a brand will not work anymore. Mass media has disintegrated into niches or communities. Consumers have been carpet bombed by so many messages – up to 3,000 a day and for so long, that they have learned to block most of those messages. The favoured reaction of advertising agencies to declining responses and lack of effectiveness is to increase frequency but this doesn’t help because it just adds to the cacophony.

In a media saturated world, awareness is just background noise that means very little. For most companies, and there are very few exceptions, in an age when information on every product and service is widely available, and consumers have more choice, are better informed, and more powerful, creating awareness is not going to build a brand. For instance we’re all aware of Mazda, Alfa Romeo, Eon Bank, Pan Am, Airbus, Ritz Carlton and many other multi national global brands, yet most of us will go through life without ever buying something from these companies.

Indeed, many companies have realized, sadly after spending millions on advertising, that advertising can raise awareness (and even that outcome is not a given), but still fail to transform an offering into a brand. Settling for awareness, when so much more is possible and required is a total waste of valuable funds.

But this doesn’t mean that advertising is no longer important. Advertising is, and will probably always be, important to branding. But its role has changed. Advertising can no longer be a tactical initiative to ‘reach’ as many consumers as possible to ‘get the name out there’.

Advertising
Advertising must do more than try to create awareness. Advertising must work to ensure consumers adopt offerings into their lives. Adoption enables an offering to be seen as the best option. But this adoption also needs organisational excellence and the ability to match offerings to client requirements for value. Advertising cannot be expected to do this on its own. And it is wrong of advertising agencies to give the impression it can but it is also wrong of business owners to expect advertising agencies to be solely responsible because advertising is not a silver bullet.

It may seem like I am stating the obvious, but advertising must also communicate trust. This is the key element in any relationship. Prospects won’t make that critical initial connection without trust. And for trust to grow into loyalty, the key to brand building, companies must deliver on the promises made in the advertising. If you don’t deliver on the promises made, your target market is reduced by 86% and you are trying to sell to the 14% of Malaysians who trust advertising.

Some of the claims being made by property developers, automotive distributors, airlines and others in their advertising are often bordering on the ridiculous. Consumers, already pressed for time and cynical, are doubtful as soon as they see the advertising. If you foster doubt from the moment of the initial contact, you’ve wasted every dollar spent on that campaign. If you are making claims you must follow through with them across every touchpoint. And don’t expect it to happen overnight. It takes time to build loyalty.

Understand that building a brand requires not just advertising but also a significant investment in building loyalty and organisational excellence and the money you spend on advertising may be money well spent. Failure to do so and you may as well pour it down the drain.

Singapore Airlines Suites, branding blunder or recession victim?

Published on by brandconsultantasia1 Comment

There have been numerous branding blunders and you can read about some of them here but rarely does Singapore Airlines feature. Singapore Airlines (SIA) consistently leads the industry in profitability and manages to ride out turbulent times better than most in its class. It has always been aggressive, acquiring aircraft and expanding its fleet quickly, in 1979 it set a record at the time, when it traded relatively new aircraft for an updated version of the B-747 for a then record of S$2.2 billion. SIA also differentiated itself early on with its adoption of the Singapore Girl as the face of the airline and service as the unique selling point.

But the world of today and the world of the 1970s are very different. The 1970s were the halcyon days of the mass economy. In the mass economy, with its mass markets and mass media, perhaps a little bit of help from the government and a large dose of nationalism. And by broadcasting the same message to large audiences who had limited sources of information, it was a lot easier for an airline to establish a brand.

More of this and more of that and better this and better that or bigger this and bigger that coupled with large advertising budgets worked well. As competition increased, consumers became more segmented and media choices fragmented, like many other industries, airlines turned to positioning as a strategy.

Positioning
Positioning consisted of creating a position in prospects minds that reflected the strengths and weaknesses of the offering as well as those of competitors. Ideally, this position was based on being first in a particular category. If someone was already first in a category, then companies attempted to redefine themselves in a new category to be first. In the airline business, this tended to be related to passenger comfort or service. The effectiveness of positioning depended on the ability of advertising to drive branding perceptions in the mind of consumers. To do this, airlines often made promises they were unable to keep (admittedly, often due to third party issues out of their control), failed to meet traveller expectations, often because dynamic competitors moved quickly and so raised the bar, which in turn led to brand disillusionment.

Positioning was ideal for the mass economy. It was also ideal for advertising agencies and marketing departments because it gave them enormous power without the responsibility of accountability. Al Ries and Jack Trout invented the concept of positioning. The preface to one book states, “Positioning has nothing to do with the product,…. (it) is what you do in the mind of the prospect.” So, essentially this means that the consumer can be made to believe, through extensive advertising and PR in the right conduits to consumers, and other vehicles, what an offering means to them.

Airbus A380
When Airbus announced it’s super plane, the Airbus A380, ever aggressive, SIA was one of the first to sign up and the first A380 delivered was delivered to Singapore Airlines on 15 October 2007. It entered service on 25 October 2007 with an inaugural flight from Singapore to Sydney. Passengers bought seats in a charity online auction paying between US$560 and US$100,000 for seats. Understandably, the new aircraft, a clever publicity stunt and an inquisitive general public, generated a lot of media coverage and by the end of February 2009, a million passengers had flown with Singapore Airlines on the A380.

Suites
But the majority of those passengers are flying economy. The problem has been getting passengers to use the suites, positioned as, “a class beyond first.” When the new A380 service was launched, in the way that has always done, SIA used global TV, print and online advertising and PR campaigns to launch the new A380.

Beautifully executed TVCs were developed for the Suites by a top advertising agency using taglines such as “your own private bedroom in the sky”. Other taglines included “an unprecedented level of privacy” in a “cabin unlike any other”, and sleeping on a “standalone bed that was not converted from a seat”. Givenchy Beddings (and pyjamas) Ferragamo toiletries and Krug or Dom Perignon were also part of the deal.

But despite a unique product, some slick marketing based on a huge investment in a one-size-fits-all message to mass markets using mass media, consumers and corporations haven’t bought into it. Why not?

Lack of research
One of the reasons could be that SIA didn’t talk to customers and prospects about what they might want from such a service, and, more importantly, how much they would be preparred to pay for it. In fact, it appears that SIA didn’t even engage with members of its Frequest Flyer Programme. SIA simply went ahead and developed the product and then, in a traditional 4 Ps (product, price, place and promotion) and positioning strategy, tried to sell it.

To make it even harder for themselves, and despite charging a premium of more than 50% over the first class fare, SIA would only reward loyal members of its Frequent Flyer Programme (FFP) Krisflyer with 10% more miles than a regular first class ticket! Moreover, any redemption of miles could only be for economy, business or first class and not for the Suites!

According to Shashank Nigam, “Several HR departments of companies, including civil service departments in Singapore, issued circulars or directives stating that “Since the Singapore Airlines Suites are a class beyond first, officers who are usually eligible for First Class travel will be ineligible for Suites”. So by now, SIA had upset its two most important customers, its own government and elite members of the frequent flyer programme!

In 2008, as the economic crisis began to take hold and suite sales nosedived, SIA maintained its pricing strategy, making it even harder for financial institutions, already under scrutiny for lack of risk management, to justify such extravagance.

Another reason for the poor response is probably related to the ground experience. Although positioned as a class beyond first, elite passengers were expected to use the same check-in facilities as passengers travelling in first class, the same lounge and essentially, the same food as first class passengers.

Premium revenues drop by 40%
By the middle of 2009, SIA was feeling the heat on a number of fronts. The economic situation gripping the world caused international premium passenger numbers to fall by 18% year on year in the first 10 months of 2009. At the same time, premium revenues dropped by up to 40% over the same period (IATA). Another challenge was from competitors such as Emirates and Qantas who don’t offer Suites but do have exceptional first class experiences including cabins on their A380s that feature a Bar and bathrooms with showers, limousine transfers at departure and arrival (not available to SIA passengers, even those using Suites).

SIA reviews incentives
SIA scrambled to recover some marketshare. The first incentive was a free night’s accommodation at the Raffles Hotel in Singapore for all passengers flying Suite class. Neat, but hardly enough to justify a 50% premium over first class. Then SIA remembered the people who have made it such a success story in the past, first class passengers and lucrative members of Krisflyer. SIA relented on the bonus miles and began offering 300% bonus miles instead of 10%. Definately a step in the right direction but perhaps too little too late as it is rumoured that a significant number of key SIA customers have defected to Emirates and Qantas. If this is true you can be sure these airlines will make it harder for these premium passengers to leave than did SIA.

So what could SIA have done better? Here are 5 things I would have done although, if they had done number one the rest would have been redundant. What else would you have done?

1) Research. Your existing customers are your best source of information. Talk to them, find out what they are looking for and match attributes to their requirements for value. If SIA had talked to its premium passengers and its own government departments, it would have realised that the market could not support the suites product.
2) Mass market branding with a focus on the 4 Ps is no longer effective. Brands today are built on relationships, access, personalisation and relevance.
3) SIA should have focussed on developing more profitable relationships, not a more profitable product. Brands evolve when companies start buying for customers instead of selling to them.
4) Branding is an organisational not a departmental responsibility. And the organisation is the responsibility of the CEO. To expect a passenger to pay a 50% premium over the price of a first class ticket and not offer a limousine service on the ground when all competitors offer it to first class passengers shows a real lack of judgement.
5) Retention is key to brand building. Companies no longer sell a product, customers buy a product. And once they’ve bought the product, companies should do everything possible to hang onto those customers.

SIA is a great brand. As I write this, I am sure SIA is working out what to do with its Suites. If SIA aims to meet customer requirements for emotional, economic and experiential value, then the airline will bounce back stronger and better for the experience and the Suites can be written off as a victim of the recession. If they don’t the suites may become yet another branding blunder.

Outstanding performance by Tourism Malaysia

Published on by brandconsultantasia3 Comments

Tourism Malaysia should be commended for its performance last year. A total of 23.65 million visitors in 2009, beating the target set by Putrajaya by an impressive 4 million. In fact the 2010 target of 23 million visitors was beaten by over 500,000 visitors. This generated over RM50 billion for the country despite the difficult global situation.

You may be interested to learn that FusionBrand carried out the research that addressed numerous areas and culminated in over 300 actionable recommendations, including that TM move away from a global one size fits all strategy to a geographic focussed, segment specific stategy.

To realise these recommendations, FusionBrand also wrote the 2009 Tourism Malaysia global brand plan and 12 key market brand plans that were the back bone of the Tourism Malaysia brand strategy for 2009.

FusionBrand would like to think it was responsible, at least in a small way, for part of this impressive performance by an organisation that will be, within 10 years the number one industry in Malaysia, in terms of revenue.

In a social media world, are Billboards a necessity or expensive exercise in vanity?

Published on by brandconsultantasia2 Comments

We all accept that the way consumers source and absorb data has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. Instead of listening to brands and what they have to say about themselves, consumers now listen to other consumers and buy brands based on data sourced from those other consumers.

The way consumers partition their worlds is also changing and nowadays, consumers segment themselves into communities. For companies, this should be seen as an exciting development because it gives them the opportunity to communicate directly with consumers in pre identified commuities using content that resonates with those communities in a more personalised and dynamic manner and using tools that are widely available and relatively inexpensive.

But when we meet with prospects, they only seem to be interested in traditional tools such as print ads, TV commercials and billboards. And they soon lapse back into semi indifference as we suggest the future is not about these expensive, outdated tools that are increasingly closed out by consumers.

All prospects seem to want is reach, awareness and creativity to build a brand. The high profile, mass economy tools and creative stuff that looks good, reaches the most consumers, irrespective of whether or not the product or service is relevant to those consumers and wins agencies awards.

Even if it means spending millions of Ringgit on immeasurable campaigns that are lost in the fog of messages consumers are bombarded with every day. Even if it means they cannot measure the effectiveness of the campaign with real, actionable data that they can use to save money and improve the effectiveness of future campaigns. Even if the messages within the campaign make claims the company simply cannot live up to, they still prefer this route to less expensive, targeted messages with relevant content to specific communities based on the requirements for value of that community.

It’s as if they are reassured that they are getting value for money because they can see the print ads, the billboards, the TV Commercials and therefore, so can lots of other people. Sure, billboards can be an inexpensive medium to pass on a message to a large audience. Indeed one company BPS states in their marketing collateral, …”Perhaps it’s because they (billboards) reach more people for cheaper prices than any other type of media.” But is reaching more people for cheaper prices a sound strategy for a social media world? From this we deduce that if lots of people see the product or service on TV or on a billboard, then many of them will seek out the product or remember it and buy it when they encounter it in the ‘flesh’. This may have been acceptable in a more sedate world, with limited competition etc. But we all know that in today’s marketplace, this approach is no longer effective.

Is this an Asian thing? Or is it universal? Here in Malaysia, one mass economy tool that is really popular is the billboard. Billboards, and in particular getting a company on one, is fast becoming a national obsession. One prospect recently interupted our strategic proposal and asked us to find a number of billboards at strategic locations across the capital to raise awareness of the company (The company is almost 100 years old).

The belief is that if enough consumers see the product on a billboard, preferably a really big billboard alongside a really busy highway, then the success of the brand is all but guaranteed. This obsession is growing fast. Currently, out of home accounts for only 2% of ad spend in Malaysia, but it is growing at over 35% per annum and is now worth in excess of RM100,000,000 (US$30million).

But I fail to understand the logic in this. Because think about your behaviour when you are driving. Unless you spend your days splitting molecules or working on a vaccine for AIDS, driving is probably the most complicated daily activity you will do. Not only is it a complicated activity that requires great skill, but according to research, it is a skill that consists of more than 1500 ”sub skills”.

When we’re driving, there is no opportunity to relax (This is where a wry grin appears on the faces of Malaysians). Throughout the journey, we are navigating badly signposted and unforgiving roads and terrain that changes on an almost daily basis. We’re constantly scanning the environment (well some of us are) for cars that don’t signal, pedestrians who take their time crossing the road, despite the obvious implications of being hit by a ton of steel at 50km, motor bikes driving the wrong way and debris from a recent lorry puncture. Plus, we’re constantly seeking information that can help us.

At the same time, we’re trying to maintain our position on the road. We’re also constantly checking our speed and mirrors (well some of us are), making decisions (apparently, about twenty per mile), evaluating risk and reward, looking at instruments and, despite the obvious futility, trying to anticipate the actions of the white wira with a black door and five girls in the back.

Whilst doing all this, many of us, and you know who you are, are sending an sms, talking on the phone, sipping from a water bottle or thinking about ___________________(insert name of premier league team). Others are trying to stop yet another fight between irritable kids or starting one with a spouse.

Research from the USA carried out a survey on one stretch of road in Maryland and, “found that a piece of information was presented every two feet, which at 30 miles per hour, the study reasoned, meant the driver was exposed to 1,320 “items of information”, or roughly 440 words, per minute. This is akin to reading three paragraphs like this one while also looking at lots of pretty pictures, not to mention doing all the other things mentioned above – and then repeating the cycle, every minute you drive.” (source Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What it Says About Us) by Tom Vanderbilt). With all that going on, do billboards engage consumers effectively?

And billboards are not cheap. In Kuala Lumpur, the most expensive billboard in the country is on the federal highway, costs RM900,000 a year and reaches 252,000 cars daily. Less high profile billboards cost are around RM250,000 – RM500,000 per annum, depending on traffic. But branding requires so much more than reach today. Whilst reaching hundreds of thousands of consumers and creating awareness, especially for a new product may be an important step in the branding process of some products and services, it isn’t a goal, for any product of service.

Now I’m not suggesting for one minute that billboards are a waste of money. However, I am suggesting that you should get independent advice on whether or not it is the right tool for your brand. I’ve seen a number of billboards for B2B companies, one recently was selling shock absorbers. The major investment in that billboard and the production costs, would have been better spent on sales and marketing material to engage the automotive manufacturers and repair shops that purchase shock absorbers.

You also need to be careful how you chose the location. Just because 500,000 cars pass the billboard, doesn’t mean it is a good location. Equally important is the content of the billboard. Writing an essay will defeat the object of the billboard.

Some other questions you need to ask yourself include:

What role do billboards have to play in our brand strategy?
How can we measure the effectiveness of the campaign?
If we can’t measure it, should we do it?
What happens once we take the billboard down? How do we maintain momentum?
How can we leverage the impact of the billboard?
How can we make the billboard stand out?

It may be that a billboard will become a neccessary part of your brand strategy. But it is worth asking yourselves these questions first. Otherwise, your billboard will waste a lot of money that few companies can afford.

If having asked yourself these questions, you still believe billboards are part of your communications campaign, try to make them original. 3 dimensional billboards will definately get attention and so will digital boards. It amazes me when I see a photo of a watch on a billboard. We recently had a huge watch billboard outside our office. It was there for at least a month. No one in the office had ever heard of the brand so we decided to investigate it further to see what other communications were part of the campaign.

We couldn’t find anything so we can only assume that billboard was the extent of the communications campaign. As I write this, two months later, I have asked if anyone remembers the name. Nobody does. That’s probably RM200,000 wasted.

However, if that billboard had been digital and the watch actually worked, then we would probably remember the brand. Of course this doesn’t necessarily mean we would buy the product, but at least awareness levels would have increased.

This article has some great ideas for 3D billboards. A simple search of the Internet will uncover plenty more.