Nice to see a local business cut through the clutter of bad names like AAAA Plumbing from the days of competitng for the top spot on the yellow pages.
This is simple and memorable branding, that also works really well for digital marketing. That said, they could've used images of bacon on the B and P to make it pop more ;)
| | | |
|
As I sit here writing performance reviews for my team it begs the question of who to reward and who I should encourage to move on. That led me to this really interesting presentation by Reed Hastings of Netflx.
While his approach might too agressive for most companies I really like the fact that they take their culture of performance seriously. And they continously refine the team by hiring all-stars and cutting not just the under performers but those who are adequate.
| | | |
|
The "Good" - building your brand where consumers are spending over 50% of their media time
A comScore study last October showed that only 16% of Internet users click on display ads, with 8% of users accounting for over 85% of all clicks. Does that mean no one should use display ads? Hell no. It means that display is for branding your business not trying to drive action (that is what Search ads are for). Does anyone doubt that TV/Radio/Print ads can build awareness of a brand? They typically don't drive immediate calls to a business but they do build brand awareness over time so that when a consumer has a need they evaluate that product and hopefully buy it.
Studies by comScore and others have shown that display ads, regardless of clicks, generate significant lift in site visits and both online and offline sales by those exposed to the ads. This "lift" is has been proven time after time so why do businesses think their campaign isn't working when they see a low CTR? Just like TV ads or any other offline media advertising, display is about carving out space in someone's mind so they remember you when they are ready to buy. Fortunately, display advertising is so cost-effective (low CPM) that most businesses can afford to now brand themselves online where they couldn't with expensive traditional media alternatives.
| | | |
|
The "Bad" - allowing employees to build their own brand at the expense of the company brand
The leading analyst firm Forrester announced last week that their analysts can no longer have stand-alone "off-site" blogs but rather need to blog on Forrester's official blogs. There is a lot of chatter about this decision and Josh Bernoff provided a semi-official response on the popular Groundswell blog. In summary, as an intellectual property company, Forrester believes blogging is an extension of their product which is intellectual property, and which they pay the analysts to create. Therefore it is sub-optimal to have popular analysts build their own brand which they can then easily take with them should they decide to quit Forrester.
I am facing the exact same situation in my company and am struggling with the decision. Should I allow all our field personnel to create their own blogs and market themselves under their own names? Or should I get them to blog on our platform under the company brand? There are pros and cons of each approach but I think I'm coming to the same conclusion as Forrester. These folks are under our employment and as such are paid to promote the company and differentiate us from the competition. The little brand benefit we get from all of their individual promotion is offset by confusion created in the market by 500 different brand voices.
I need to explore a solution in more depth but my initial thought is that we need to create a standard company branded platform from which the field representatives can market themselves. This is the approach that many real estate and financial services firms take. I'm not saying it is perfect but the pros appear to outweigh the cons. Let me know how you dealt with this issue.
| | | |
|
The "Bad" - allowing too many cooks in the kitchen while you are redefining and redesigning your brand
Just a few weeks ago I left Entrust and joined a great VC-backed company called ReachLocal. We are one of the biggest/best local search marketing companies you never heard of. Hence the reason they needed a new VP of marketing. On my 5th day we held a two day brand summit with 20+ execs, salespeople and product experts. It was an excellent way for me to get up to speed on the company strategy, our core values, competitive advantages and persona. As you would imagine the discussion was lively with lots of points/counterpoints but ultimately we locked down a brand pyramid that everyone agreed with.
Wary of design by committee we commissioned a small core creative team to develop the brand concepts with creative and copy points, as well as an updated logo treatment (always a risky thing to do but it really needs it). In just a little over a week we developed 5 concepts, pitched them to the execs, selected the best one and got approval to move forward to execution.
I write this post not to brag about achieving a quality brand makeover so quickly (though it is pretty amazing) but more to say that you don't have to pay an outside agency millions and take 4 months to achieve great results. I'll write another post in a few weeks when we take the site live and you can see for yourself. At the risk of being stupidly obvious, I'll point out that you absolutely cannot allow design by committee -- and must shield your creative SWAT team from the interlopers who want to offer their commentary about liking/disliking certain colors. I used the analogy of an award winning chili recipe with all the interlopers and it seemed to work...i.e. if a chef lets each of 20 chili experts add their favorite ingredients the chili is totally ruined. Here's a great video that shows the disastrous consequences if you don't heed this warning.
| | | |
|
It's that time of year again when we are inundated with the the good, the bad, and the ugly Holiday eCards. Here are some I've received in reverse order....
The "Ugly" – creating negative brand perception with a holiday eCard so unimaginative and uninspired that it turns people off. I’ve received a lot of these this year so maybe the cost-cutting started with creative departments. I’ll spare you the pain of seeing all of them and use MS&L’s card as the poster child for “ugly” marketing. Clearly they get paid by the word, but do people really want to read about arcane renaming updates in a holiday card. I expect a top tier global PR firm to be savvier than this.
The "Bad" – wasting the time and money to produce a boring holiday eCard. The companies in this group at least put some effort into their cards, but clearly not enough to make them enjoyable. They want to do a nice card but just don’t put enough creative energy into making it a positive brand experience for the recipient. The card from lead-gen firm Madison Logic exemplifies a “bad” card with no music and some scrolling images of the staff…yawn! Check out the screen shot below, or if for some masochistic reason, you want to see the “live” card then click here.
The "Good" – using imagination and creativity to make a holiday eCard that entertains the recipients and conveys a good impression of your company. My favorite in this group is the one from The Loomis Agency which uses sock puppets singing a parody of The Carol of Bells. PMSI created a cool card by mixing holiday tunes and a sketch artist drawing Santa. Check it out here. And Eisenberg Associates offers up a simple but fun game in their card.
| | | |
|