Yet Another Clueless National Media Company

NBC runs a news segment called "America's Correspondent," a grass roots news program.  Unfortunately, the graphic that they use in the segment is a map of the United States.  Well, not exactly a map of the United States.  It's a map of the 48 contiguous states.  There are two other states ... and they have been in the union since 1959.  The graphic includes the line "Your voice.  Your vote.  Your town."  I guess NBC doesn't realize that it is offensive to leave people out of this message. 

NBC's Graphic for America's Correspondent

How long does it take to figure this out?  You would think 50+ years would be enough.

Sometimes the excuse for using an incorrect graphic is that it's easier.  For a news organization, especially, that is a poor excuse.  Either use the correct version of the U.S. map or find a different graphic.  There's Lady Liberty's torch, one of the monuments in Washington, a Minuteman, Uncle Sam, etc. etc. 

How to confuse a customer ...

Taco Bell recently introduced breakfast as a new daypart for the chain.  Marketing breakfast is a tall order for Taco Bell since McDonald's spends a fortune in marketing that daypart and owns an established position as a fast food breakfast spot.  Taco Bell also has to convince customers that a Mexican concept is the right choice for breakfast.  So, Taco Bell needs a very strong and coordinated program to succeed with this new venture.

Unfortunately, it seems that their efforts are half-hearted.

One problem:  not every Taco Bell unit offers breakfast.  A recent ad for breakfast at Taco Bell included a list of restaurants that had the breakfast menu.  That means the customer has to remember who does and doesn't offer breakfast.  Not the case with McDonald's.

Just recently I came across a banner on a Taco Bell announcing that this location had breakfast.  Oddly, the banner read "Open for Breakfast 7 a.m. or earlier."  What does that mean?  If I go earlier, will I get breakfast or not.  Apparently, to save money, banners were created for all stores and hedged on the breakfast hours.

Will Taco Bell succeed in the breakfast category? Not unless they go all in.  As they say ... "go big or go home."

How to Show What You Can't Show on TV

K-Y jelly is (ahem) a personal lubricant.  While the product solves the problem of painful sexual intercourse, the company wanted to broaden its appeal andcommunicate K-Y's ability to spice up a couple's sex life.  But how do you show that?  Well, literally, you can't.  But you can be creative and use a visual metaphor.

In this television spot, K-Y uses kittens to show how a mildly playful relationship can heat up by
using the K-Y product.  Anyone who has watched kittens play with all the stops pulled out will get the message.

Product demos are almost always effective in communicating product benefits.  Sometimes you just have to be creative about how to do the demo. 

The Colonel's Back - Is That a Good Thing?

The New Colonel

KFC in anticipation of its 75th anniversary is bringing back Colonel Sanders.  Not the Colonel Sanders - the real Harland Sanders has been dead for 35 years - but a characterization portrayed by former Saturday Night Live actor Darrell Hammond.    Click here for the introductory commercial. 


The reason, KFC states, is that KFC has lost its relevance (and market share) to up-and-comers like Chick-fil-A.  KFC has 4,800 stores generating $4.2 billion in revenue while Chick-fil-A has 1.900 stores generating $6 billion in revenue (and they're not even open on Sunday!).  I get it.  There's a problem here.

However, I don't believe that bringing back the Colonel - especially in this reincarnation - is the answer to KFC's woes. 

According to Greg Creed, KFC's CEO, 60% of Millennials  have not eaten the company's chicken.  The problem is:  how is bringing back the colonel going to provide relevance to this group?  The real Colonel Sanders was a genuine spokesperson for the company (he had the original recipe) and was able to sincerely pitch the product.  But he's been off the air longer than the lifespan of the Millennials.  So, what is there for them to remember?

Here are some issues:

The Original Colonel on TV

• The new Colonel Sanders isn't authentic.  In their book "The Human Brand" by Malone and Fiske, they conclude "noting better conveys the identity and character of a leader and the warmth and competence of the company or brand he or she leads than the genuine story to their journey together serving customers."  That's what the original Colonel Sanders did.  Click on the image for one of his commercials for KFC. 
• Even if Millennials recognize Darrell Hammond, he's out of character.  He's not portrayed in a comedic role.  So, the talent that they're paying for is off target. 
• The original Colonel focused on his point of difference - his secret recipe.  The reincarnation looks like any other fast food creating different menu options to create ephemeral "product news" rather than an enduring brand position. 
• 20% of KFC customers say they "hate" the new ads.  The CEO publicly stated:

"And I am actually quite happy that 20% hate it, because now they at least have an opinion. They’re actually talking about KFC, and you can market to love and hate; you cannot market to indifference."

          True, you can't market to indifference, but can't you find a position that doesn't generate hate?

We'll have to see how this plays out for KFC.  I've always been impressed with what Jack-in-the-Box has done to create the imaginary CEO Jack.  Unfettered by reality, Jack can create unique messages for the company and has developed his own persona.  Unfortunately, for KFC (and those who remember the original Colonel) he and the company had a persona, and the new character doesn't align with it.  For those who didn't know the original Colonel, well, they're probably scratching their heads. 

Even the Divine Needs Marketing

Organized religion has been concerned about declining membership and attendance (and a growing indication that spirituality isn't necessarily connected to religion in recent research).  As with so many things, the issues related to the relevance of the "product" to its markets and an ability to connect with them.

Looking back in history, the church had a powerful and unique selling proposition:  the church was the only path to paradise and, on the flip side, without the church there was a risk of eternal damnation.  While compelling, this isn't the most appealing position in an increasingly secular society that doesn't see that "the wages of sin is death."  Compounding this, the mainline churches have focused on issues such as social justice, equality, community, and feel-good psychology that, while noble, are not the exclusive domain of the church.

Compounding the problem even further is the tendency of the mainline churches to communicate and operate in ways that are out of step with contemporary society.  I'm not at all suggesting that churches change their beliefs (be not conformed to this world is a tenet of Christianity).  What I am suggesting is that the church understand how to market itself in a changing world.

One element of this is, simply, quality.  So much of what churches do is simply abysmal in terms of quality.  I was recently at a church conference in which the video presentations were completely amateurish.  And the programming at the conference was poorly planned and, frankly, boring.  This, in a world of high quality you tube videos and slick presentations at conferences. 

It also seems that the church hasn't discovered the tectonic changes in society.  At this same conference, there was much discussion about going out into the neighborhood - into the "community" - to market to people.  That might have worked when communities were homogenous.  In the distant past, like minded people from similar ethnic groups settled in defined neighborhoods - and the church was a central point of connection.  In today's eclectic and diverse neighborhoods, it doesn't seem likely that one can find a common thread to attract people.  Instead, with the internet, it is far more likely to find a "community" of like minded people with similar interests across a wide spectrum of geography.  When these communities are found and identified, the church then needs to determine how to inject its differentiating benefit ("the gospel" if you will) so that it has a unique claim to the interests of the community - which can't be duplicated by a secular alternative. 

There are many more examples that indicate the mainline churches think they are immune from the realities of marketing.  

It is sad to see established religion decline not because it isn't relevant - but because it hasn't discovered how to communicate its relevance effectively. 

Generation Cohort Marketing

There are lots of articles about the Millennials ..marketers are always looking for some "tag" that describes a population and predicts their behavior.

Generation-based marketing can be a little dangerous.  I'm a Boomer ... but I know Boomers that are very similar to me and, yet, others that could well have come from a different planet.  But, the experiences that shape a generational cohort can, often, shape their attitudes.  The Boomers' independence and drive for change was likely spawned by the student revolution, the Vietnam War, "sex, drugs, and rock and roll," and a rebellion against the thrifty and suffocating characteristics of their parents.

Millennials have been a concern for marketers because they are sooooo different from other cohorts in terms of their behaviors and because they change with the wind.  Many marketers were hoping (praying?) that the would grow up and be more "conventional" as adults.

This article, "Millennial Values Do Not Change With Age," debunks that expectation and points out

that the tectonic shifts that have shaped this generation have made them permanently fixed within their own cohort values. So if you are a classical cultural organization ... or a mainline church or charity ... or an established entertainment medium like broadcast TV ... you should get used to the idea that this cohort is not going to flock to your business model - UNLESS you can make that business model relate to their values. 

Marketing has always been about a focus on the customer.  We can't just hope for the customer to change to our model.  We're going to have to figure out a model that works for them.

Thinking Beyond "Group Think"

I recently had the honor of introducing Robbie Alm at the Hawaii Book and Music Festival.  Robbie is a highly respected business executive in Hawaii, having served in very senior positions in Hawaiian Electric and First Hawaiian Bank.  He's just written a book, The Faith of Leadership, in which he summarizes (in a slim little publication) the wisdom he's gained in his career.

Much of what he talks about is listening.  Part of the issue that he identifies with listening is the concept of "group think" where companies become incapable of entertaining new ideas because they don't listen to ideas and concepts outside of their own. 

There are a few companies that somehow get out of the group think trap.  In the book, in a chapter called "Too Many Bankers in my Bank" he relates the story of how he, a non banker, was hired.  When he asked why he was hired since he didn't have banking experience, his manager said "I have too many bankers in my bank."  That was a very wise, perspicacious, and courageous decision. 

Too many times, we see airlines only hiring "airline people."  Banks hiring bankers.  Hotels hiring hoteliers.  The list goes on.  What happens, then, is that conventional thinking and "group think" sets in and the organization becomes moribund. 

I asked Robbie how an organization can avoid group think.  His response was "hire outside contractors and consultants."  That's certainly one way to do it.  But, if a company truly recognizes the problem of group think and is truly committed to eradicating it, there are some techniques that are easy to implement in house with existing staff that can push healthy debate to the fore. 

In my first job at Leo Burnett advertising, we had a rule (at least my group had a rule) that whenever an idea, ad or concept was presented in a meeting the most junior person in the room would respond first ... followed by the next most junior ... and so on.  In most other meetings, when the senior person (almost always at the head of the table) speaks up ... everyone else shuts up. 

I'm glad I started my career at a company that knew how to address institutional problems.  And I applied much of what I learned there throughout my own career.