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. 

What Were They Thinking? - and - Who Approved This???

Once again, we're seeing a public company embarrassed by a stupid marketing mistake.  Bud Lite, in an effort to extend its "Up for Anything" marketing campaign added this to its bottles:  The Perfect Beer for Removing No from your Vocabulary for the Night."

Now, I don't know what rock the Budweiser management has been living under, but there has been - for years - concerns about the words "yes" and "no" ... especially around the hugely sensitive issues of rape and drug use.  So, while it made sense to somebody that this line would be identified with the "up for anything" positioning, it set off a firestorm of incredulity.

This is one of those instances where I would have loved to be present in the boardroom when this idea was presented.  Didn't ANYBODY see the problem coming?  Didn't someone pipe up and say "we're gonna get in trouble with that line"?  Didn't the lawyers ... or management ... or ANYBODY catch this clearly insensitive and clueless proposal??   Maybe even a worker at the bottling plant could have noticed this and said "what are you guys thinking?"

I don't know why, but no one stopped this runaway bad idea.  Now Budweiser is making a public apology and dealing with brand damage control. 

The Prognosis Is Not Good

Traditional department stores have been in trouble for some time.  They have been buffeted on one end by big box stores and on the other with specialty retailers and overall with virtual competitors.  Sears, J.C. Penney's and others have been closing stores and cutting back services in a desperate attempt to stay afloat.  Many flagship department stores in major cities have been swallowed up by the likes of Macy's.  But size doesn't seem to be helping Macy's survive. 

Here's the primer for desperation marketing:  When desperate, run sales.  When really desperate, run sales with huge discounts (like 50% or more).  When in extremis, pull out all the stops and go to illogical tactics.  That's what Macy's seems to be doing.  There is always a sale at Macy's and the discounts are often more than 50%.  In that environment, who in their right mind would ever pay full price at Macy's?  And, even at 50% off, Target or WalMart may offer lower prices yet.

In the illogical tactics category, Macy's in Hawaii advertised a "One Day Sale" that was actually two days!!  The big headline says "One Day Sale" but it goes on to say you can shop the sale on Friday and Saturday ... because "it's a sale to big to fit in a day!"  What's next?  Who knows, but it can't be good.

I worked in marketing for a Pizza Hut franchise just as the competition was heating up.  I tried very hard to keep the company focused on quality and points of difference to minimize the amount of discounting we had to do.  Unfortunately, the whole pizza category moved into the world of deep discounts, ruining profitability and turning pizza into a commodity.  Nationally, Pizza Hut is trying to introduce new products to get away from the deep discount game, but I suspect it may be too late.

Once your price integrity is gone, life expectancy can be short, indeed.  

  

Whatever Happened to Proofing?

I don't usually post grammatical sins on my blog - there are just too many of them.  But, here's a headline from the Honolulu Star-Advertiser.  It seems that Kauai is creating a venue for sharks. 

You talkin' to ME?

Taco Bell has decided to enter the fast food breakfast market where McDonald's is the entrenched and dominant player in the category.  Obviously Taco Bell needs to up its budget to effectively compete against this Goliath.  The big question is: how to spend the money.

Until now, the launch of Taco Bell breakfast has focused on its product advantages (taste and portability).  The launch ads use competing products as a foil, but the real story was about what Taco Bell has to offer.

Now, Taco Bell has switched gears, producing a long format , three minute film (which I presume will spawn thirty second commercials) focused on making McDonald's a demon ... titled "Routine Republic."  Most of  the message is about how awful McDonald's is ... leaving the Taco Bell message as an afterthought.  I will be anxious to see how this campaign plays out because these kinds of ads are usually more of a hit in the boardroom (where executives celebrate with fist pumps as they watch film that trashes the evil empire) than with consumers, who may be perfectly happy with McDonald's.  Click here to see the film. 


If I were a Taco Bell executive, I would be especially concerned about the cost of this little film. I'm sure it wasn't cheap. Competing with McDonald's is going to cost a lot.  Producing a three minute film whose primary audience is the executive boardroom takes a big chunk out of the budget.