Mar 18, 2021 | Branding, Marketing
Covid has created an unexpected brand building bonanza for big Pharma.
All around us we hear animated conversation about the relative merits of the Astra-Zeneca, J&J, Pfizer, Moderna, and other Covid ‘vaccines’.
Each has its own proponents who seem to be across the detail of the latest research emerging from around the world as we participate in the biggest drug trial in history.
Pfizer and Astra-Zeneca took most of the brand building honours at this early stage, but there are many others in the race. The Chinese and Russian versions, while cloaked in mystery were deemed ‘potentials’ but they carried little weight, at least in the ‘western’ world. The only common ground is the general dismissal of the Trumpian favourite hydroxychloroquine as a viable vaccine. Even if it was a genuine option, I suspect the celebrity endorsement of the former President would have seen it flushed down the loo.
This is a brand building opportunity the like of which I have never seen before.
The winner will have a huge position in the market for many years. The R&D has been funded and facilitated by unprecedented public funding, the usual clinical trialling time frames shattered by necessity, billions of dollars of free publicity, and an assured market into the foreseeable future, as well as the pole position in further publicly funded R&D.
Marketing nirvana.
Mar 16, 2021 | Branding, Communication, Marketing
Is it wider distribution, provocative headline on a Facebook ad, play with price, or find a celebrity to endorse it for free???
It is not any of these, or many other options that probably sprang to mind.
The answer is both simpler, and way harder than any of these, and very few do it well
It is defining the problem you are solving in a way that adds value for a customer.
Unless you define the problem, how can you propose/define a solution that someone is prepared to pay for?
People buy solutions to the problems they see and feel, but often go unrecognised before they are pointed out. Those solutions to unrecognised consumer problems are always the outcome of deep research, creativity, and usually experimentation by the marketer.
Who knew we needed a better MP3 player before Apple produced one?
Often the challenges we face as marketers are hidden deep in our psychology
There are the functional problems we solve, which is where most of us stop.
Then there are the deeper psychological needs that are met in some way by the stuff we buy, that do not receive the same consideration, but they are the real drivers.
It is in that intersection of the functional and psychological that the gold lies hidden.
Who really needs a Rolls Royce to get from point A to point B?
Nobody.
Functionally we do not need the Roller, a battered up Hyundai will do the job. However, arriving in a Roller says something about us, it sets a frame by which many others will judge us, which fulfils deep psychological needs.
Food, shelter, community, reproduction, safety, status, these things all play a role in the things we surround ourselves with.
You go out and buy a Harley Davidson, you are making a statement, not buying a bike for transport.
Does the person who joins Weight watchers join just to lose weight, to fit into last year’s dress, or to feel better about themselves, to attract a mate, impress their friends and peers with the great new bod?
Untangling this can lead you to your value proposition, but it is a tough road, and not often travelled well.
How do you define the hidden problem that has your product as the only solution?
Combine the ideal customer profiling, the typical ‘who, what, where, and why’ analysis, with a ‘Pains, Gains, Jobs to be done’ analysis.
Then work, test, research, iterate, and with patience, you may end up with the profile of a customer that when they hear your pitch immediately thinks: ‘they are talking to me’.
2 examples from my personal experience.
Meadow Lea margarine. Meadow Lea was one of many margarine brands launched after the regulations dictating what could and could not be added to vegetable oils to make a spread, and production quotas, were finally removed in 1975. Initially the brands concentrated on the obvious benefits of margarine: spread-ability, price, and a healthy low cholesterol alternative to butter, and the market expanded rapidly. Meadow Lea marketing management spent a lot of time and effort really understanding the drivers of the choice of brand, while competing with everyone else. In the mid 70’s, women were entering the workforce in large numbers for the first time, combining the paid work with the traditional roles of housewife, cook, cleaner and mother. The result was an exhausted and frustrated cohort of younger women wanting their effort to be recognised. ‘You ought to be congratulated’ expressed that psychological need exactly. It resulted in Meadow Lea rapidly going to market leadership by a very wide margin at premium prices.
Local bookkeeper. An acquaintance who ran a local bookkeeping service for small businesses was having real trouble gaining clients. He tried all sorts of tactics from local advertising, networking at every opportunity, to bashing the shoe leather door to door. Nothing worked. Over a coffee one day reflecting on this, we arrived at the conclusion that his service was not about book-keeping, but about saving the owners of small businesses the time and frustration they were expending on their books, that could be better used elsewhere. To him, this seemed like a revelation. The next time I saw him was at a local networking event, at which, when his turn came to spend 30 seconds spruiking his business, his opening line was ‘My job as a book keeper is to help my clients get more sex’. Once the laughter died down, he explained that owners of SME’s had much better things to do with their time than book-keeping, so why not let him do that for them while they spent their time in other ways. He remains successful, although, sensibly, there is no reference to sex on his website.
When you need assistance digging down to the real motivators of activity, call someone who has done it before, successfully.
Mar 15, 2021 | Analytics, Management
We are all familiar with the Pareto Principal: the 80/20 rule, first articulated by Italian mathematician Vilfredo Pareto in 1906. Pareto saw this unequal distribution in all sorts of unexpected places, after first noticing that 20% of the pea pods in his garden produce 80% of the peas. (what is it about peas and scientific insight?) At the time, he was studying the distribution of wealth in Italy, and noticed that 80% of the land was owned by 20% of the people. Further study confirmed the ratio of roughly 80/20 held firm across just about everything he looked at.
In the years since, the ratio holds, and has become a point of ‘first principal’ in every field of endeavour from science to sport, nature, and our personal lives.
Why is it so?
The reason is simple when you think about it.
‘Accumulative advantage’ and the 1 percent rule.
We all understand that a dominating force in our lives is that the winner takes all. Nobody remembers who came second! To win, you only must be fractionally better, 1 percent, than the next best, but you get to take all the advantages. You win once, collect the advantages, which facilitates winning again tomorrow, and again taking all the advantages, and moving away just a little more from those that come in second. Over repeated cycles, the accumulated advantage of being just a fraction better means you take the lion’s share of the rewards.
The rich get richer!
As a kid I was a reasonable tennis player. The club at which I played held regular ‘social’ tournaments broken down into age groups. In my age group, there was a bloke who was marginally better than me, based on results. He beat me almost every time, it was always close, always hard to pick which of us was the better player while playing, but the results spoke for themselves. 1 percent (maybe in this case, 2 percent) made the difference, and I was the forgotten runner up almost every time. Since 2000, there has been 77 grand slam tournaments played, 2020 had only one, the US Open for the obvious reason. Of those tournaments, 3 players have dominated the men’s singles: Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic. Between them they have won 60 times. A spread of 77.9%, and hardly anyone could name more than 1 of the other winners over those years. Within those numbers, if you just look at the French Open, played 15 times since 2005, when Nadal won for the first time, he has won 13 times.
In a memo dated October 2, 2002, then Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer wrote to staff ”
“About 20 percent of the bugs causes 80 percent of all errors, and–this is stunning to me–1 percent of bugs caused half of all errors.”
Both are just more of the examples of accumulated advantage, the tiny ‘1 percenters’ that add up to a dominating number.
It is this tiny 1 % advantage that drives the 80/20 rule, the accumulated advantage that goes to those who have a tiny advantage, in a winner takes all environment.
In my work with clients, I use the Pareto principal as a core of the investigation into the sources of ‘baggage’ all businesses accumulate that can be eliminated. Then go a step further and encourage them to ‘Pareto the Pareto’. In other words, take Steve Ballmer’s insight, when you have identified the 20% that cause the 80%, go looking for the 1% that cause the 50%.
Mar 11, 2021 | Change, Leadership, Marketing
Every successful strategy I have seen, heard of, read about, or imagined, has three common factors. The first is obvious, the second and third less so.
-
-
- The strategy is implemented.
- The strategy is communicated widely as a story, that draws stakeholders in, giving them an emotional stake in the outcome. It is backed by research facts and figures, speculation, and opinion, but at its core, it tells a story.
- The strategy is modular, evolved from the bottom up, not delivered intact in final form by the hand of some commercial demi-god. One section builds on, and in turn relies on other parts of the strategy, for the wider impact. Each part is interdependent of all other parts, to some extent.
This organic structure enables strategic evolution in response to the changing external environment and internal learning as the strategy implementation evolves, without losing sight of the objective. The path to the end has many possible sub paths, but the end is clear.
A successful story has a beat, a rhythm to it that responds to some sort of incident, observation, or crisis, and a resolution, all built up in a series of ‘beats’ each of which has each of these elements escalating into sequences and a climax of some sort.
The emergent strategy, like an organic structure, has a range of base materials organised as self-contained units that combine to form an ever increasingly complex and interdependent system.
Developing a strategic model that has the potential and opportunity to evolve is not something that comes easily from a template, or ‘packaged’ advice. It is extremely context sensitive, fragile in early stages, requiring constant expert attention and nurturing.
Call me when you need some of this ‘strategic gardening’ to enhance your performance.
Header cartoon is once again courtesy of Scott Adams and Dilbert
Mar 8, 2021 | Analytics, Governance, Operations
One of the significant problems in making any change is the articulation of the need to change, and the outcomes that are expected as a result.
Overcome those two, and change is suddenly easier, albeit still really hard.
The first hurdle is the articulation.
In order to communicate and have complex ideas generally understood, you do not use technical, academic jargon backed by data, you use stories and metaphors in a way that connects with the audience.
Communicating industry 4.0 is such a complex challenge.
What is it, how will it affect me, why should I be interested?
Answering these questions is a core foundation of gaining acceptance, followed by action that becomes automatic as it gets buried in the auto-response system.
Remember the last time you put your hand onto a hot stove.
Before you felt anything, you had reacted by pulling your hand away, a totally unconscious, instantaneous, action then, it started to hurt like hell.
Think about the processes involved in this.
First: the ‘data’ that indicated the stove was hot was collected by the nerves in your fingers and hand.
Second: the ‘data’ is sent for processing to your brain, the CPU between your ears. This processing concludes your hand is in danger of being burnt.
Third: That conclusion is sent to the muscles that control where your hand is, with firm instructions to remove it immediately.
Fourth: Your hand is pulled back out of danger.
Fifth: It starts to hurt like hell, and the memory of that hurt is stored deep in your personal CPU for future reference should your hand stray again.
The astonishing thing is that the first four happen without thought, instantaneously, and the fifth is a long term ‘frame’ through which you unconsciously ‘feel’ the hurt and approach the stove warily. It is a neural network that collaborates, communicates, drives action, and learns.
Industry, or more specifically, Factory 4.0 is, similarly, a set of tools that collects, analyses and acts on data without direction, and learns from the experience, adding to the auto-response ‘memory bank’ and adjusted based on the ‘learning’ that occurs as data on outcomes is collected. The system becomes more Automatic than Artificial.
Header cartoon credit: Tom Gauld in ‘New Scientist’ magazine.
