Category Archives: Branding

Women, advertising and societal stereotypes

Posted on by
Reply

Stereotypes are societal shorthand. Stereotypes are simple ways of communicating complex ideas in a simplistic ways. Stereotypes are manifested through many forms in media and are used to represent both men and women. What defines stereotypes is the amazing consistency they display. They may reflect changing societal norms, sometimes they do, yet they don’t move away from hard codes of imagery that exists in society.

The fact is that advertising industry has not created any of the stereotypes, but they certainly have strengthened and propagated many of these stereotypes in order to sell many brands and categories. Advertising does not necessarily depict how women actually behave but how we think women behave.

Today despite changing gender roles, increase in literacy levels, greater number of women joining work force, increased financial independence, greater ownership of cars and bikes certain gender stereotypes have not changed.

These are four stereotypes that the advertising industry refuses to let go off.

1.Curse of dark skin: This is one stereotype the world of advertising has just refused to give up on. Possibly the origination of this stereotype could be the rule of English in India where the fair skinned women were thought to be the epitome of beauty. The entire fairness category is stuck in this time wrap. The women protagonists can be good singers, working women, Cricket commentators, budding entrepreneurs but they cannot succeed in life if they are not fair. Wish the advertising and research industry stepped out to see how dark skin need not be a curse.

2.The ultimate smell test: As a housewife earlier she lived by the kitchen test, today she lives by the smell test. She wasn’t a good wife or daughter-in-law if her kitchen wasn’t sparkling clean; today she is a failure if her toilet is not smell free. Bad odor has become the final frontier of womanhood, mom hood and everything else. Seriously!

3.The melt by diamond wife: As clueless husband you are allowed to make as many mistakes as you can make, only until you can break the bank to buy a 3 carat princess cut sparkling rock for your wife. If only this mistake and make up situation was as simple world will be free of domestic strife and divorces. A sparking rock does not lead to domestic bliss; this is one stereotype that is not going away soon.

4.The fairy Godmother: she knows it all has all the answers. She knows where the missing socks are, she knows which cooking oil will produce tastiest food, what exercise regime you need to follow, how using a home made medicine will make acnes vanish! Yet the fairy godmother knows nothing about finances, insurance, holidays, credit cards, driving, computers and mobiles. So either she knows it all or she knows nothing! It’s time the industry made up its mind

The reality is that women have changed. Working women don’t always wear pants to work. Their husbands don’t sleep hungry in the night.  Their kids do very well in school. If such concepts are ever tested in focus group, women will react with disdain. Some of these portrayals have started to diminish, but most are going strong.

Stereotypes are shorthand, they simplify complex ideas, it’s time the advertising and marketing industry become change makers and sow seeds of new stereotypes. Its time the advertising professionals themselves changed

 

Original Article was published in Marketing Booster Magazine of March 2013

Social Consumerism or Sociomerism

Posted on by
Reply

What do you after you buy that uber cool laptop that you had been eyeing for sometime? Open the pack, admire the computer, switch it on, log in and explore?

 

Not really, you actually take a snap of the packaging,  upload it on the social networking sites and enjoy the admiration! The admiration will peak, your social chatter will make you feel good about your buy, and only then will you sit back and enjoy the laptop you bought.

 

In today’s expectation economy where the consumers want to buy the best, they want to boast about it first. This is what I call Sociomerism.

 

Sociomerism is bold new powerful driver of consumer choice. Infact what your social network will say about what you buy almost predisposes the consumers’ choice. In today’s hyper-connected world where social networks define rules of engagement in personal life, they are doing so in brand choices also.

 

While this is a relatively new phenomenon, some maven brands are catching upon this new trend.

 

The Coke honesty commercial is clearly an example of leveraging Sociomerism. As a consumer you are least likely to talk about Coke the brand and the liquid in glowing terms. Who will ever want to upload a picture consuming Coke? Who will ever hear good comments about your love for Coke? But when the same Coke honestly opens up and speak about sugar, obesity and possible ills of the brand, the world doesn’t snigger at them. The world stands up and applauds.

What coke has done is that It had made people talk about Coke the brand, the liquid and people’s love for the brand! This otherwise would not have happened.

 

So why would Sociomerism big and powerful as we move forward? Here are four possible reasons

 

  1. We live in a world of choice saturation. Buying new thing no longer gives the same joy and hearing applause on the choice
  2. Status is the differentiator humans seek. Brands are the equalizer, celebration of choosing the brand is the differentiator
  3. Consumerism is not a good word consumerism cannot be celebrated. Consumer movement is a different ball game. Sociomers will actively seek newer consumer movements to enhance their social status. They will force more and more brands to come out of closet and be Honest.
  4. Sociomers will seek more and more customizing options to drive online chatter. Till now buying was not really a two way street. Buying things did not generate conversations. Today Sociomers want buying to generate chatter. This makes them feel powerful.

 

The younger consumers who are wired differently drive the new experience economy. Merging experiences with ownership is something that comes naturally to them.

 

Brands now have to be ready to face them

 

Original article is published here:http://blog.creamglobal.com/right_brain_left_brain/2013/02/social-consumerism-or-sociomerism.html

Intimate Wash, Insensitive Insights

Posted on by
2

Once upon a time there was a couple who was going through serious marital discord. Then they discovered a ‘Midas’ cream which made intimate parts of woman’s body fairer. After they used the cream they rediscovered their mojo and lived a blissful life. This is roughly what the new “Intimate Wash” promises. Now this brand is available in market, and if you haven’t you can watch the ad here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8phEyKrxBZM.

India has been obsessed with fair skin, since the time the British ruled us. There is a very large category in India that owes its roots to desire of Indians to have lighter skin. For many years, it was women who wanted to be fair, today in this age of metro sexuality; even men have jumped on to the bandwagon. There is nothing wrong if the consumer desires a fairer skin, after all Afghan Snow promised luminous skin much before Fair and Lovely came on stage. The issue is that brands linked fairness to girls getting good grooms, getting success in life or even getting accepted by their fathers as worthy of affection. In a society which is so polarized against girl child, by doing so the brands have only helped the desire for fair skin become mainstream. In the process the brands have heightened the colour divide. Here was an opportunity where the brands could have fulfilled their greater role towards society by being responsive and sensitive. Instead we have brands that promise fairness of all kinds making us cringe with disgust

ImageImage

Then there is this global car brand that promoted its iconic car in India as the most ‘expensive wedding gift’ for your daughter.  The finest silk, the most beautiful jewelry and the most spectacular wedding wouldn’t have made the wedding memorable, if the father didn’t gift his daughter the curvy ‘yellow one’. The print ad promises that it is best gifted as it is ‘fittingly expensive’. In case you haven’t guessed it, here’s where to find them http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8NM3VEMp48

Weddings and dowry are very much a part of popular culture. It is that part of culture that we all can do without. Incidentally dowry is outlawed in India and therefore promoting ‘expensive gift’ for wedding does fall in the grey zone of being illegal. The issue is not of legality, the issue is of sensitivity. By being insensitive to sacred institution of wedding, the brand almost certainly misses being liked or loved. Mercifully, while the whole category of fairness cream sold fair is better, the automobile category did not follow gift an expensive car for dowry as an insight

There also this telecom brand that uses a dog first as cupid, then as voyeur and finally as the guard, to let a young couple meet, serenade and fall in love. The only hitch in the tale is the fact that the young couple is just two preteen children, who may not know the meaning of all the dog does, and definitely leaves the moms queasy. What has a telecom brand got to do with them is another matter of debate altogether.

The usual defense of this too has been that this is happening in the society around us. This is exactly the reason why the brand should have stayed away from giving a romantic angle. The fact is that children make friends easily; they are without prejudices and find joys in new connections. How much warmer the brand would have been if the two preteen children would have been used with sensitivity and care in brand communication

These are not three isolated examples of brands that have bordered on being insensitive. There are a lot of ads today on media which often cross the line of being responsible in order to push a commercial message. The usual defense that these are insights of today may be right, but should the insights be used without being evaluated with sincerity, empathy and responsibility?

Communication has the power to shape society, and we must remember that. Otherwise in these days of connected consumers, the backlash would be hard and fast. These three brands are surely a testimony to that.

Marketing to kids in 21st century

Posted on by
1

There is an advertising stereotype that exists for kids in advertising.

The kids are supposed to be cute, wear a spectacle to add to cute value, they sit and watch TV, and run to parents demanding whatever latest they saw on TV. To appeal to the kids the commercial used to be fast paced, had bright colours and had the right drool value and the kids will respond. This may have been correct years ago, but is it true today?

Today’s kids are very different from kids of just a generation ago. For one they have access to a variety of media, which they access from a variety of sources. This means that the content available to them is more eclectic, more varied. To top it there is far more commercialization around them, with even schools not being immune to it.

Two they consume far more advertising then the kids of past. The greater consumption of advertising messages is making kids more evaluative and aware. They are clever, imaginative and inventive; they know what the brand is up to and what it wants them to do.  This generation of kids is wary of advertising, and that is a true challenge for marketers.

New generation of kids needs new rules of engagements

Here are three pointers that can help us target the young consumers and come out winners

#1. Pester power is transforming

We are living in an age where ‘kids have grown up fast’ syndrome is real. They have more autonomy and greater say in brand decisions. It’s not that kids do not want to show their attitude, or come across as ‘cool’, they do, but they do it with thought and precision. They are clear with what they want and pestering is normally left to products that are low value and are impulse driven. This generation of kids gets bored with ‘brands’ fast and moves on to the next target. So if nagging is all the brand banked on, then it would lose the battle very quickly.

#2. Parents are reliving their childhood

The new trend in market is about parents reliving their childhood through their children. This is creating a new kind of ‘pester importance’ where the parents want their kid’s critical opinion before they indulge the child. New hobbies, new toys, newer thrills are all driven by parents wanting to explore things they didn’t do as a child, but never at the cost kids disapproval. This importance of kid’s opinion is something that brands have started to discover. Automobile and fashion brands are creating specific engagement strategies towards this end

#3. Kids are the new pressure groups

Questioning every set convention is inherent in any child’s psyche. They will always question rules and this questioning can open up completely new avenues for brand marketers. The issue here is to be truthful, honest and completely above board. Because the kids are ‘tribal’ by behavior, they tend to adopt the rules of tribes very quickly. The sheer multiplication effect of this behavior is enormous. The anti-cracker and anti-plastics campaign took off because the kids adopted them out of their own volition, and forced the elders to change. Imagine what they can do if you involve them in a variety of larger causes.

Going forward

Increased message clutter is a reality of our times, and Internet is only adding to the clutter. The only way then for the brands to engage their customers will be through open and honest communication. less trickery and an interactive brand environment may be the only way forward.

Published in Impact, Feb 2012 issue. http://pitchonnet.com/blog/2012/02/20/marketing-to-kids-in-the-21st-century/

Why trust matters more than ever for brands?

Posted on by
1

We live in strange times. There are more sovereign nations that are likely to default on loans then corporations. This means today citizens can’t trust their own governmental institutions, how will they ever trust their brands? Today the consumer confidence has been eroded significantly. Brands have not remained insulated from this.

Let’s evaluate the question of trust in two different contexts. One is when the slowdown had not happened and the world of brand was driven by trustful spending. The second is post the slowdown when spending became restrained; anxiety became a bigger driver of choice and thus thoughtful spending.

The trustful spending drove greater consumption where trust was the shortcut to choice. Post crisis, thoughtful spending drove better choices, and trust took a back seat.

The pre-crisis consumerism was driven by a plethora of choices was the source of identity.  Trust was the weapon that helped people cut through a maze of choices and plethora of brand messages. Brands became large when they became iconic. Trust was an integral part of brands march towards becoming icons. Together we all celebrated the consumerism.

Post-crisis everything changed. It’s not that all of us stopped buying what we needed, but the buying became a little more considerate. The need to reflect achievement and identity took other forms. The internet and online shopping made more value driven. Social media made people question even the most trusted brand. Yesterday brands made me celebrate my identity, today we are seeking different experiences, different identities.

Trust is a remnant of past when brands held a much larger place in our lives. We are living in changing times where the society is transforming. We are connecting with each other differently, technology is changing how we shop, media is fragmenting even more and status is not a driver any more.

Trust has expired and is beyond its use by date.

 

Published by http://www.bestmediainfo.com on 20/12/2011

Is the Positioning theory working today?

Posted on by
Reply

 

First the perspective

It was in 1969 that Jack Trout introduced the term Positioning, and strangely in context of industrial marketing. It was only in 1981 that the term was popularized in the bath breaking book, “Positioning, A Battle for Your Mind” with Al Reis. Jack Trout then wrote the book “New Positioning” in late 90s that never caught reader’s imagination.

The concept of positioning is based on a simple principle of identifying a ‘differentiator” and then owning that differentiator in consumers’ mind. The ownership of the differentiator creates a lasting impression and becomes the driver of business in a wider sense of term.

The concept of positioning was created in a world where communication was just about taking off. It was necessary to differentiate one communication message from another. It was necessary to make it distinctive and build on salience. Things have changed since. We now live in over manufactured world. Today the production cycles have come down to minimum. You don’t even need to own a factory, there are factories that would gladly produce it for you and stamp your name on it. If you are in service business, you don’t even need a factory, just an idea! In an over produced world, is it still relevant to own a fixed position in consumers’ mind. Is it possible to own one, and make the distinction when the consumer is bombarded with overflowing shelves and choices?

The world of branding is witnessing something really strange. A search engine on web is world leader in digital maps. A telecom operator in India is among the largest seller of digital music. A cellphone brand is world’s largest brand of cameras. Even iconic Apple is no longer just a brand of cutting edge computers that takes on PC in an irreverent way.

The whole concept of positioning is built on a simple premise.  It starts with the product. Every product has functions, every product appeals to emotions. Every product delivers functional benefits and also delivers emotional benefits. The synthesis of this functional and emotional benefits leads to brands’ position. The brands job is to keep building on this factor.

Today, life has dramatically changed. Every brand has a context to operate in, and the contexts are rapidly changing. Is the consumer really seeking one benefit out of brand? In this over produced world is that not a recipe for disaster? After all there is always someone waiting to deliver the same benefit as your brand in better, cheaper, faster or cooler way. Even the delivery models of brands are changing. The linear old world model is not applicable to all brands any longer. So would the 70s theory work any longer?

If the old theories are not working, what is the way of making brands iconic? If we look at some of the greatest brands of our times, the answer is obvious

I believe great brands have to be about Good Karma. Good Karma not in religious sense, but in sense of action. Brands need to ensure that their actions today, impact overall wellbeing of its wider franchise. This simply means brands have to be focused on inherent beliefs and have a wider philosophy. This wider belief and philosophy of brand should be translated into a coherent action plan that propels the brand forward. This means brands need to have belief in what they are doing, and have a strong point of view on how they want to impact consumers’ lives.

There is one thing in common since the concept was propounded in early seventies; consumers need brands as much as brands need consumers. This relationship in the twenty first century needs a new charter.

It needs Good Karma

Road Ahead For Media Planners

Posted on by
1

The Original Article

Future is always complex. Predicting future is fraught with danger. Chances of getting future wrong are bright. However future is always built on contexts that are current. Future is always shaped by the challenges faced in present.

There is a lot happening in our world at this time. Technology is progressing at a pace that is hard to keep track of. Just for example in last three years the mobile penetration has doubled, homes with digital TV subscription have gone up exponentially; the FM stations have moved from metros to class one and class two towns. The changes are not just tech driven.  The demographic changes are re-crafting the entire society. The rapid urbanization is throwing up challenges not faced before. There are no indicators suggesting that the speed of change will slow down or the transformation is eased off.

Here are three challenges that we are likely to face in coming years. First is the challenge of nomadic audiences.  Second the challenge of contexts. Last is the challenge of measurement.

Challenge of Nomadic Audiences

Media planning and buying is dependent on a set of audience being available to receive the message. The process of enumeration assumes that the audience is stationary, and once counted is always available. In today’s technology empowered scenario, the audience is not stationary. Rapid adoption of net enabled personal devices like tablets is making media portable. This has serious implications. It means that mass media will get empowered by personal media. It means that that notion of fixed audience will have to shelved. It means that media buyers will have to find a way of synthesizing the broadcast media with new age portable media. Nomadic audiences and personal portable media are forces that have will permanently change the media landscape

Challenge of contexts

Let’s take this rise of portable personal media and the possible stagnation of traditional mass media forward. Till now the media planning was built on increasing salience, so that it impacted interest in brand so that it lead to positive action on retail point. This is straight forward and linear in approach. This has delivered great results for brands. Today, the entire context of brand consumption is changing. Salience matters and salience impacts the interest in a brand, but from here on two new forces comes into play. The personal portable media is the transformational force. It makes Search and Share more important than mere Action of the traditional AIDA theory. Today everything is searchable, and people share everything. We know that this peer to peer network has an amazing power to influence brand choices. This change in context is already a reality and will only grow in future.

Challenge of measurement

The concept of fixed audience is ingrained in the existing media measurement systems. With the nomadic audience and the rise of personal portable medium will require a new type of measurement system to be created. Media agencies have tended to merge TV with online TV, press with Digital media and events with outdoors. Tomorrow they will have to find a system of one composite measurement that merges the traditional with new. The search and share impact on brands health will have a far greater bearing than mere rise or drop in reach and salience

Future is complex, and it is often not possible to predict it with certainty, but the present has a way of showing the impending challenges. We need to be prepared

Published in 4Ps of Business and Marketing, November 4th, 2011 Issue

7 things research will never tell a marketer

Posted on by
2

No self respecting marketing executive can live without market research. Market Research offers purposeful information to make plans, policies, programmes and procedures of any marketing activity. Market Research industry is as old as communication industry and many would argue more important than the mainstream communication industry. Yet there are pitfalls, and things that MR can never tell. Here are seven things MR can rarely tell

1. Reflect reality

Market research is a post facto measurement of what had happened. The common belief is that research data reflects the current reality and hence can be used as a basis for predicting future. If that was the case then well researched brands would have never failed

2. Predict future

Research means placing human beings together in one place ask them their opinions and form that as a basis of predicting future. This is like saying that if you watch a lion in zoo, you will learn all about lions. Human zoo is no different from animal zoo, and is rarely the right basis of prediction.

3. Is never free of bias

Any form of research suffers from investigator bias and statistical errors. Research too is a classical case of stimulous response. The answers depend on what you ask, and that define the findings. Can research ever be free of bias?

4.Right answers depend on right questions

The new Coke is the stuff that is now a case study. While the new formulation tested well, scored on blind taste and passed every test the research industry threw at it, it failed when launched. The consumer was not asked the most obvious question; will the formulation change the brand they love? Do they want the brand to change? The result was a massacre in market

5. No guaranty of success

Testing a new commercial for predicting its success in market is a common practice. It is easy to score a commercial on emotional appeal, on message comprehension, on ability to create perception. Yet more commercials fail then succeed. We all know that, yet are slaves to practice

6. Does not replace experience and gut

We need to remember that research is a tool, and not the decision. A marketers gut, experience, market reality are far more important than any amount of research data. Yet the tendency is to live more by research data and less by collective experience.

7. Quality matters

We all know this.

Right?

Yet an average marketer rarely spends time on figuring out who will administer the stimulus for research. Will an average field executive be up to scratch? Will the average investigator strike the right balance of objectivity and expertise? Most researches are spoilt by simple overlooking of this crucial aspect. Next time pay attention to field investigators.

As a simple test try this, ban MR for a while, live by what you know as a marketer, trust your experience, trust your market feel, trust the hours you have spent in field. Take the decisions that need to be taken, and use research almost as the last step to check gross negative. You might speed up the process, learn a great deal more from mistakes, and possibly be more successful.

Experience always triumphs over data

Erosion of trust and new emerging paradigm

Posted on by
1

Trust is a very important parameter in every brand’s arsenal.

Trust is a basic human emotion. Trust is the foundation of sociability, and in any culture it’s the level of trust that defines the level of bonding. The brands operate in similar ways; they build on propositions that the consumers trust. The consumers treat trust as buying shorthand and often shorten their evaluation. Trust allows a brand to become the preferred brand as the consumers believe they will experience the same emotional benefits that the brands’ promise.

However the crisis in economy fundamentally alters this trust equation. For instance today more governments are likely to default on loans then large corporate. Traditionally the governments were the safest to lend a loan to, now that seems to be under a cloud. Today trust in government, institutions and people is being eroded. I am not putting politicians here, as they were never trusted. The erosion of trust then leads to an erosion of optimism and the feeling of brighter future.

Take for instance Nokia, which is India’s most ‘trusted’ brand for last 4 years in the Brand Equity Survey. This is a remarkable feat in itself, as the brands that lag Nokia are really a generation old brands, where as Nokia is new age. This stamp of trust should result in a disproportionately larger consumer bonding and therefore a larger market share. But what is happening with Nokia’s market share is not hidden from anyone, but significantly it is losing to brands that are less trusted than Nokia!

Brands build on trust by building on social acceptability, sense of achievement or as a symbol of success. In an upwardly mobile world that is what the consumer is constantly seeking. Recognition, my impact on the world, my influence on the world around me, are symbols of optimism and success.

Erosion of trust alters human behavior. People reduce their social circle, they become more inward looking, they seek greater assurance, they move from being future oriented to present state. The context of living changes significantly, trust replaces anxiety; approval from others replaces approval from me, and need for status replaces need for acceptance.

This impacts the behavior of the consumers and possibly alters their behavior. It’s not that the need for trust disappears, it stays and is very important, but possibly the need for relevance becomes dominant. In the new paradigm the performance and the price paid takes a dominant position and the need for getting the right value for what they pay becomes more important. For example Honda is the most trusted car brand, but that does not mean ever car that Honda places in market will not be critically evaluated with the filter of relevance, value and price.

This means brands in post crisis world will have to work harder. They will need to get a newer understanding of behavior. The propositions will have to move beyond status, standard, success and power to being right, consistent, honest and transparent.

We haven’t done this in a long while, the time is now.