Truth 48. Effective advertising is 90% what you say, 10% how you say it
Tremendous energy goes toward developing interesting advertising. Writers, art directors, producers, TV directors, editing houses, and music studios converge to produce 60 seconds of video. Sometimes the result is groundbreaking work, such as Apple's "1984" spot introducing Macintosh. (The lone female runner hurdles her hammer toward the large screen depicting Big Brother.) Sometimes it's a misguided missile like Coca-Cola's widely criticized campaign, which depicted nice moments (such as graduation) degenerating into an ugly fight over Coke.
All this activity (lighting sets, casting calls, scouting locations, and storyboarding) centers around the "how to say it" element of advertising. Although how you say it (the execution) is important, far more important is what you say (the strategy). A powerful, meaningful message can overcome a bland execution. But an exciting, vibrant execution does not compensate for the lack of a brand story.
Print advertising for Viagra featured various men candidly discussing how Viagra has improved the quality of their romantic relationships and urging the reader to speak with their doctor. There was nothing particularly dramatic about these ads. There weren't unusual fonts, clever headlines, or eye-grabbing graphics—nothing that was particularly "creative." There was simply straight talk around a compelling and important message. This campaign's success resided not in a creative execution, but rather in the brand message.
Apple's recent TV campaign had two guys standing against a sparse white background. One of the guys represented Apple, and the other guy PC. The Apple guy was dressed in a casual laidback style, whereas the PC guy was attired in a business suit. They simply talked back and forth. Their conversation, though, highlighted key differences between a Mac and a PC—ease of connectivity, built-in features, and simplicity of use. The advertising was creative in bringing to life the Mac and PC personas. But what made the advertising effective was the way it communicated the compelling and meaningful differentiation of Apple.
Who is responsible for the "what you say," and who is responsible for the "how you say it?" The marketing/brand team must ensure that there is a relevant message for the brand, a point of difference that will resonate with the target audience. Although the brand's ad agency can participate in identifying this relevant difference, it is fundamentally the responsibility of the company to ensure that its products and services have found a purposeful niche in the market. Without this relevant difference, there is no starting point for the agency.
The ad agency is primarily responsible for the "how you say it." It is the agency's job to turn the "what you say" into an interesting, creative execution. But without the meaningful message, the agency will not have anything to direct its creative energy toward. The result may be advertising that is clever and funny but without purpose. This type of advertising can be dangerous since it creates the appearance of good advertising but lacks the necessary substance.
The Mini Cooper has focused on developing its brand around a "fun small car." Its agency, Crispin Porter & Bogusky, brought this message to life in a variety of creative ways. There was the "mini" product brochure on the Mini. There was the Encyclopedia of Open Motoring, highlighting the fun and the virtues of top-down travel in the Mini convertible. There were numerous ads that had fun with the small size of the Mini Cooper. The work for Mini Cooper led to a number of advertising industry awards for Crispin Porter & Bogusky. That's the "how you say it." But the business success of Mini Cooper rests to a larger degree in the strategic niche the brand developed. That's the "what you say."
A recent campaign that seemed heavy on the "how you say it," but light on the "what you say" was the Burger King advertising that featured the larger-than-life big-headed king. In the ads, this "Big King" kept popping up in surprising places, like on a football field—though probably anywhere a "Big King" would pop up would be surprising. What wasn't so clear was the compelling message for the brand. What made Burger King special? What was its competitive advantage versus McDonald's? Why should consumers care? This campaign was heavy on execution, and light on strategy.
Admittedly, not every brand has the inherent appeal of Viagra. Not every brand has the cool factor of Apple or Mini Cooper. But, you should search for the right message for your brand. What meaningful point of difference does your brand have? Why should someone choose your brand over your competitors?
There is nothing wrong with creativity in advertising—creativity can help a brand break through an incredibly cluttered communication environment. Creativity can be an important spark of life for a brand. Creativity alone, though, isn't sufficient to build a strong customer base. Creativity alone isn't a brand's compelling proposition. Creative advertising is great—but effective advertising is 90% what you say, 10% how you say it.
Truth 49. Compromise can destroy a brand
Brands are built on consistency—consistency of message, of image, of tone, of logo…the list goes on. Consistency does not happen overnight. It is developed through collaboration: collaboration between departments, with suppliers and vendors, with retailers, with all those who in any way touch or influence the brand. Everyone works together in a single-minded effort to connect the brand with your consumer. Compromising on even the smallest of details potentially begins an erosion that, once begun, can be difficult to stop.
Consider Boston Chicken. Do you remember them? They were the very popular, fast-growing chain that provided home-cooked chicken and meals—only they forgot what got them there. They compromised the brand: changing the name to Boston Market, extending their product offerings, and identifying different locations from what had originally worked. The result: brand erosion, fall off in sales, significant drops in earnings and stock price, and, ultimately, bankruptcy.
Compromise often feels like an easy answer. The pressure is on to drive sales and to increase share. The brand manager cannot possibly figure out how to gain additional sales in a competitive environment from the same target audience. So, "scope creep"—a slow gradual reduction in the focus of the brand—occurs. If you expand your target audience, if you express new elements of the brand, or if you partner with a brand that is not totally in sync with your brand values, perhaps you can squeeze out that additional share point. A little compromise goes a long way in brand destruction, as it leads to inconsistency and confusion in the marketplace. So, although the brand manager may, in fact, squeeze out a few additional share points, the long-term strength of the brand may have eroded a bit.
A bakery had a strong premium position in the marketplace. Its pricing reflected that position—it was clearly able to command a premium price since the consumer was enamored with the quality of the product. In a meeting, the sales manager was excited because it was able to obtain a TPR (temporary price reduction) at point of sale so that for the next week, it would be priced five cents below the closest competitor. The sales manager was thrilled, but shouldn't have been. That compromise on the brand's premium image might drive a few short-term sales, but what is its impact on the long-term sustainability of a well-regarded brand?
Compromising on price is a big, red flag for brands. However, the little, red flags can cause just as many problems. Many people believe that a small compromise here or there won't hurt much. However, the pain is two-fold. First of all, don't be mistaken—small compromises are noticed by the marketplace. Secondly, small compromises set the stage for compromise in general, which can significantly hurt the value of the brand.
Be vigilant on the little things. The smallest of elements can compromise a brand. Importantly, if you compromise on the small issues, you set the stage to allow compromises on the larger issues. Long-lasting Energizer is communicated by the bunny that keeps going and going, except when the person in the bunny costume at different outdoor events gets tired and stops. The compromise of the message does not go unnoticed—a small example, but a compromise nonetheless. How many small examples does it take before the brand's message is eroded? Why take the risk of finding out?
Collaboration, on the other hand, can help to enhance a brand. Collaborating with partners, ensuring that vendors, retailers, and service providers all understand the nuance of the brand, can help eliminate unintentional compromise. It is so easy to keep the brand close to the vest—to consider vendors as vendors and not partners. However, all those who touch, impact, support, and drive your brand have the ability to unintentionally compromise the brand. "Collaborate, be transparent, and ensure consistency" should be your operating style.
Successful brands require that constant vigilance. They require everyone to become supportive of the direction taken by the brand. They require everyone to be consistent in the communication of the message. Compromising on even the smallest of details can erode your brand's meaning. Collaboration focuses the team on building consistent meaning for your brand.
Truth 50. Don't let the pizazz outshine the brand
Marketers sometimes get so caught up in doing such fabulously creative marketing that they forget that the purpose of marketing is to communicate a message about a product or service. Many times, an ad campaign, a promotion, or an event is so spectacular, it overshadows the brand it is supposed to be supporting.
Energizer marketers often used to look out the window, down the street, at Anheuser-Busch and remind themselves not to take the same road that A-B took with Spuds Mackenzie. Spuds, the popular dog spokesman for the beer giant, became so overexposed that he became ineffective at selling beer. Spuds became an icon, a "cool" dog that was everywhere: a part of the advertising, in fabulous promotions, a hot stuffed toy…the list goes on. Unfortunately, Spuds overwhelmed the beer he was supposed to represent, so Spuds had to go.
Energizer was searching for a new promotion firm and went through the process of bringing five or six firms in to pitch. Each one had many fabulous ideas, but the ideas were all about the bunny. In a fit of exasperation, the director finally asked one firm, "Do you know what we sell?" The promotion agency responded, "Well, you sell batteries, but there are so many amazing things we can do with the bunny." The director shook her head and said, "We don't sell bunnies. Do something amazing for the battery." Fortunately, one last firm came in and discussed the battery business; the bunny never came up. Guess who got the business? Yes, the bunny was used in its creative product, but it understood: The business was batteries.
Pets.com used a silly sock puppet as a mascot for the brand. They continued to sell sock puppets while its main business—pet supplies and food—swirled down the drain. Burger King has had a long history of problems, including disgruntled franchisees and a revolving door of senior executives. Burger King has run advertising with a slightly larger than life "king." This outsized Burger King symbol has been developed into a video game character. With as many problems as Burger King has had in a highly competitive market, it would probably be better served focusing on tasty burgers and fries than on turning its advertising character into a video game.
Whether as a marketer you are using a character, a personality, or some other creative engine to communicate your product or service's benefits, a most difficult task is staying on point—managing the brand to drive sales and profits. Unfortunately, marketers often get the accolades in their industry for their creative genius. It is hard to limit the creative genius when there are some personal rewards to be attained. However, that very creative genius can frequently get in the way of the brand benefit communication.
Now, this isn't to say that pizazz is all bad. Not at all. It has a strong capability to engage and attract consumers, bring them into the brand franchise, and generate some interest and enthusiasm for the brand at hand. This is about understanding your fundamental objective. The brands that have resonated over time and have shown consistent success are those that have practiced moderation, even though spectacular opportunities abounded for them. Tony the Tiger and his communication of "They're grrrreat" could have been exploited in so many ways (alarm clocks that growl "They're grrrreat" at the appointed time is just one example) that this iconic line would have worn out. It is the containment of that energy and the focus on Frosted Flakes that makes the brand strong year after year. True, there are web pages and YouTube commercials all linked to this famous tiger. But the pizazz of Tony doesn't get in the way of the message he communicates.
When you think of the brands that are strong year after year, most likely every single one of them has had the same conversation that occurred at Energizer. "Mr. Brand Manager, do you know what we can do with those Keebler Elves?" "Do you have any idea how exciting we can make the Michelin Man?" "The idea of having the Jolly Green Giant do____ (you name it) is as exciting as it gets." But, that is not the point. Characters, personalities, and icons are simply tools in the brand manager's arsenal—important tools, but not the end game.
It is easy to get enamored by an amazing character or a fabulous event. It is fun to be creative, and most marketers are always trying to "outdo" the previous manager. But, by doing that, you take the risk that the pizazz begins to overshadow the product. Most critical for the manager is the product or service. Keep your focus there and don't succumb to the excitement of pizazz.
Truth 51. There are no commodity products, only commodity thinking
Marketing managers commonly complain that they are in a commodity business. Products (or services) are functionally the same, they say. All that customers care about is price. Competition quickly copies our innovations, they complain.
Differentiation is the route out of a commodity business. Brands can differentiate in one of three ways—on physical attributes, service attributes, and symbolic attributes. Differentiating on physical attributes comes most naturally to mind. Many brands rely heavily on this form of differentiation. Crocs sandals have become very popular. The sandals have a unique plastic design with distinctive openings throughout the sandal. Crest offers many variations on its toothpaste. Cinnamon and citrus are just a few flavors offered. You can buy Crest in traditional paste or, if you prefer, gel or liquid gel. You can get Crest with baking soda added.
Gillette introduced the Mach III shaving system in 1998. At the time, this three-blade razor was an innovative step forward—and a move by Gillette to differentiate its shaver on physical attributes (three blades instead of one or two). Key competitor Schick followed with its four-blade Quattro. And most recently, Gillette fired back with its five-blade Fusion. Competition on physical attributes.
Water is commonly cited by economists as a great example of a commodity product. Yep, common H2O. Dasani, a Coca-Cola brand, makes vitamin-enhanced variants claiming to cleanse and restore, defend and protect, or refresh and revive. Aquafina, a Pepsi product, starts out with regular tap water, adds some vitamins, some flavors, a nice package, and creates a strong seller. You can get water bottled from Iceland (Iceland Springs), France (Perrier), and Canada (Penguin Ice). So much for water as a commodity.
Physical attributes are not the only way to distinguish a brand. Service and symbolic attributes can serve as effective differentiators. Service attributes include things like warranty, post-sale support, and financing options. Consider the brick—a hardened piece of clay. Is this a perfect example of a commodity? Not for Texas-based Acme Brick Company. Although not the most distinctive of names, Acme bricks are backed by a confidence-inspiring 100-year warranty. Isuzu recently offered an industry-leading 7-year/75,000 mile powertrain warranty to help differentiate its pickup trucks.
Austin game shop Great Hall Games competes against Internet retailers by creating a local community of gamers with regular in-store events. Although the games it sells can be found at various online merchants, the welcoming environment and game-friendly facilities cannot be duplicated over a computer. Starbucks sells coffee. It's fancy coffee. It's expensive coffee—but it is coffee. Starbucks has taken this basic commodity and wrapped it within a cozy, inviting ambiance staffed by knowledgeable baristas. No commodity thinking here.
Symbolic attribute differentiation is differentiation developed around brand image. Consider the highly competitive soft drink category. Soda is basically carbonated sugar water. Success in this market is less about warranties and ingredients and more about image. Coca-Cola is a more traditional brand infused with the spirit of American life. Pepsi-Cola has differentiated itself on a more youthful image. Dr. Pepper has been a bit more of a wacky, off-beat brand. What about RC Cola and Shasta? No strong image—no symbolic differentiation.
Vodka is one of the most basic of distilled spirits. Although there are a number of vodkas infused with assorted flavors, much vodka is sold in its virgin state. Vodka producers turn to symbolic differentiation, imagery, to sell their brands. You can get vodka associated with a great musician (Chopin) or a great artist (Van Gogh). You can buy vodka named after a place (Finlandia) or ancient warriors (Vikingfjord) or one that evokes the space race of the 1960s (Sputnik). These vodkas compete not on taste, but on imagery.
Colognes and perfumes are marketed primarily on symbolic imagery. Although there are certainly some physical differences here and there with the scents, the real marketing power comes from the imagery created around the brands. Cool Water by Davidoff evokes imagery of refreshing tranquility. Stetson cologne promises the "legendary fragrance of the American West." No idea what the American West actually smells like—it's the imagery it is selling. Ralph Lauren's Polo Black evokes a sophisticated urban sense, whereas the promotional ad for Ralph Lauren's Safari features imagery of rugged guys in khakis, helicopters, vintage SUVs, and a tough desert environment. Symbolic differentiation in action.
Agricultural products are commonly considered commodities. Yet companies and industry trade groups have succeeded in creating brands—brands that have transcended the ordinary inherent in their business. Sunkist oranges, Dole pineapple, Idaho potatoes, and Washington apples have all created a positive distinction based on branding.
Colombia, South America, is fertile coffee-growing territory. Coffee, like oranges, pineapples, potatoes, and apples, is a basic agricultural staple. The National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia built symbolic distinction in its brand through the use of Juan Valdez. Sporting a mustache, sombrero, and with his ever-present donkey, this icon became a symbol representing the quality of 100% Colombian coffee.
Do you consider your brand to be competing in an undifferentiated commodity market? Have you not created your brand's unique distinction? There are no commodity products—only commodity thinking.
References
Truth 3
Ind, Nicholas. Living the Brand: How to Transform Every Member of Your Organization into the Brand Champion. Kogan Page, 2001.
Truth 4
Hindo, Brian. "Monsanto: Winning the Ground War; How the Company Turned the Tide in the Battle over Genetically Modified Crops." Business Week, Dec. 17, 2007, p. 34.
Truth 5
Aaker, David A., and Erich Joachimsthaler. Brand Leadership. The Free Press, 2000.
Truth 6
Davis, Scott. Brand Asset Management: Driving Profitable Growth Through Your Brands. Jossey-Bass, Inc., 2000.
Truth 7
Travis, Daryl. Emotional Branding. Prima Publishing, 2000.
Truth 11
Aaker, David A., and Erich Joachimsthaler. Brand Leadership. The Free Press, 2000.
Truth 16
Ind, Nicholas. Living the Brand: How to Transform Every Member of Your Organization into the Brand Champion. Kogan Page, 2001.
Truth 17
Davis, Scott. Brand Asset Management: Driving Profitable Growth Through Your Brands. Jossey-Bass, Inc., 2000.
Laverty, Kevin J. "Market Share, Profits, and Business Strategy." Management Decision, Vol. 39 (8), 2001, pp. 607–617.
Miniter, Richard. The Myth of Market Share: Why Market Share is the Fool's Gold of Business. Crown Business, 2002.
Truth 20
Adamson, Allen P. Brand Simple: How the Best Brands Keep It Simple and Succeed. Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.
Truth 22
Markey, Rob, John Ott, and Gerard du Toit. "Winning New Customers Using Loyalty-Based Segmentation." Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 35 (3), 2007, pp. 32–37.
Ries, Al. Focus: The Future of Your Company Depends on It. HarperBusiness, 1996.
Truth 25
Trout, Jack. Differentiate or Die: Survival in Our Era of Killer Competition. John Wiley & Sons, 2000.
Trout, Jack. Trout on Strategy. McGraw-Hill, 2004.
Truth 26
Ries, Al, and Jack Trout. Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind. McGraw-Hill, 2001.
Truth 27
Reichheld, Frederick R. Loyalty Rules: How Today's Leaders Build Lasting Relationships. Harvard Business School Publishing, 2001.
Truth 29
Till, Brian D., and Michael Busler. "The Match-Up Hypothesis: Physical Attraction, Expertise, and the Role of Fit on Brand Attitude, Purchase Intent, and Brand Beliefs." Journal of Advertising, Vol. 29 (3), pp. 1–13.
Zafer, Erdogan B., Michael J. Baker, and Stephen Tagg. "Selecting Celebrity Endorsers: The Practitioner's Perspective." Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 41 (3), 2001, pp. 39–48.
Truth 31
McWilliams, Jeremiah. "It's Super Sunday for Advertising and Bud Brands Are Set for Kickoff, Too." St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Jan. 22, 2008, p. C9.
Truth 35
Adamson, Allen P. Brand Simple: How the Best Brands Keep It Simple and Succeed. Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.
Truth 36
Ries, Al, and Jack Trout. Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind. McGraw-Hill, 2001.
Truth 38
Aaker, David A. Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name. The Free Press, 1991.
Trout, Jack. Differentiate or Die: Survival in Our Era of Killer Competition. John Wiley & Sons, 2000.
Truth 42
Ries, Al, and Jack Trout. The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing. HarperBusiness, 1993.
Truth 43
Sullivan, Luke. Hey Whipple, Squeeze This. John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
Truth 44
We are grateful to our colleague, Ken Stern, for this wonderful line—"It's a Long Walk from the Focus Group Room to the Cash Register."
Truth 46
"Can VW Finally Find Its Way in America?" Business Week. July 23, 2007, p. 31.
Selden, Hank. Advertising Pure and Simple. AMACOM, 1990.
Truth 49
See Hitting the Sweet Spot, by Lisa Fortini-Campbell (The Copy Workshop, 2001), for a great discussion on the difference between compromise and collaboration.
Acknowledgments
We would like to express our thanks to Jennifer Simon at Pearson Education for her support and strategic guidance with this book. Also, thanks to Russ Hall, whose editing suggestions and counsel sharpened both our ideas and our writing. We also appreciate the early counsel of Scottie Priesmeyer on the rewards and challenges of writing and publishing.
We extend our sincere appreciation to our colleagues who we have worked closely with, and studied from, at great companies and universities. Interactions with the wonderful people at organizations such as Campbell-Mithun, DePauw University, Energizer Battery, Indiana University, Monsanto, Prophet, Ralston Purina, University of South Carolina, and the University of Texas at Austin have shaped and influenced our thinking over the years. Specifically, we'd like to acknowledge the following individuals who have been particularly rewarding to work with and have engaged us in great conversations about marketing strategy and branding: Dr. David Aaker, Dr. Dan Baack, Steve Burkhardt, Bob Graham, Mark Halton, Tom Hayden, Dr. Tom Hustad, Jay Milliken, Bob Morrison, Kevin O'Donnell, Maurice Parisien, Andy Pierce, Dr. Terry Shimp, Laurie Steam, Ken Stern, and Susan Widham.
About the Authors
Dr. Brian D. Till is the Steber Professor of Marketing and Chair of the Marketing Department at Saint Louis University. He holds a B.S. in Advertising and an M.B.A. from the University of Texas at Austin. His Ph.D. is from the University of South Carolina. At Saint Louis University, he teaches primarily marketing strategy and advertising courses to M.B.A. students. His research is in the areas of celebrity endorsements, associative learning, and brand equity. He has published in Journal of Advertising, Journal of Advertising Research, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, Sport Marketing Quarterly, Journal of Product & Brand Management, and Psychology & Marketing. Dr. Till serves on the editorial review boards of Journal of Advertising and Psychology & Marketing.
Prior to his university career, Dr. Till worked in brand management at Purina. He continues to serve as a marketing strategy and advertising consultant. Previous clients include Energizer, Monsanto, AT&T, Boa Construction, Charter Communication, Concordia Publishing House, Squeaky Clean Car Wash, and Medicine Shoppe International. He is active in the community, with recent nonprofit board appointments with the Stella Maris Child Center (where he recently completed four years as board president) and Forest ReLeaf of Missouri. Dr. Till is also a founding principal of the Brand Cartography Group, a market research firm that specializes in research designed to provide strategic insight into the structure of brands.
Dr. Till is single, and in his free time enjoys travel, his historic home, and outdoor activities such as running, flying, and motorcycle riding.
Donna Heckler is the Brand Strategy Lead for Monsanto, where she leads the company in its brand building and brand portfolio management. Ms Heckler has a B.A. in Zoology from DePauw University and an M.B.A. in Marketing from Indiana University.
Ms. Heckler has provided strategic brand guidance for a variety of firms. She has worked for Energizer Batteries to lead brand efforts both domestically and internationally. She led the brand marketing domestically and internationally for a division of Cardinal Health. She also led brand activities for Kimball Office.
Ms. Heckler had a brand strategy consulting firm for a number of years, where she supported such clients as The Clorox Company, Emerson Electric, Maritz, Inc., The American Red Cross, and Ralston Purina.
Ms. Heckler is actively involved in the community and supports a number of art institutions. She currently serves on the Alumni Board for the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University. She is a board member for the Center for Brand Leadership and The International Institute of Greater St. Louis. She also sits on the Alumni Board for Indiana University.
Ms. Heckler loves traveling, experiencing new cultures, and art. An avid animal lover, she lives with two cats—Honey and Muffin.
Financial Times Press
In an increasingly competitive world, it is quality of thinking that gives an edge—an idea that opens new doors, a technique that solves a problem, or an insight that simply helps make sense of it all.
We work with leading authors in the various arenas of business and finance to bring cutting-edge thinking and best-learning practices to a global market.
It is our goal to create world-class print publications and electronic products that give readers knowledge and understanding that can then be applied, whether studying or at work.
To find out more about our business products, you can visit us at www.ftpress.com.
Simply the best thinking THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH
The Truth About Series offers the collected and distilled knowledge on a topic and shows you how you to apply this knowledge in your everyday life.
Learn real solutions for problems faced by every manager in this de. nitive, evidence-based guide to effective management.
ISBN: 0132346036
Stephen P. Robbins
$18.99
Creating a team of self-motivated individuals who love their jobs is possible. Learn how, regardless of budget or industry.
ISBN: 0132354918
Martha I. Finney
$18.99
Great people don’t want to work for desperate employers. It’s a war for talent and you need to win.
ISBN: 0132381869
Cathy Fyock
$18.99
Also Available
The Truth About Avoiding Scams
The Truth About Negotiations
The Truth About Confi dent Presenting
The Truth About Making Smart Decisions