Is this the most effective brand destruction strategy you have ever seen?

Is this the most effective brand destruction strategy you have ever seen?

Apr 13, 2017 | Branding

I know the United Airlines debacle  a few days ago has received a lot of exposure, but at the risk of adding to it, have you ever seen anything that even approaches the level of corporate stupidity displayed?

You might think  that after the lesson of breaking Dave Carrolls guitar, which he has turned into an industry, they would have done a little bit of introspection, but it seems not.

Instead, they overbook a flight, pretty standard practice to maximise bums on seats, but then when all the passengers inconveniently turn up, they resort to aggressively dragging some poor buggar, nominated by an unlucky dip, off the plane.

Then to make it worse, they set out to brush it aside in their public statements.

‘Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation. Further details on the removed customer should be directed to authorities.”

What they should have said was something like: ‘if you are dumb enough to try and fly with us, you get what you  deserve.’  At least it would have been honest.

Of course, the headline assumes United has a brand that means something of value to some, which is perhaps a brave assumption. It is probable that already the only reason you would book with them in the hope that they might get you to a destination safely, and on time, was because they were the cheapest. This is the only way I can conceive they could sell a seat.

If there is a bright side for travellers it is that should you choose to book a seat on a United flight from here on, it is pretty certain that the one next to you will be unoccupied.

As another piece of good news, the bloke they removed probably has a huge retirement pack on the way, assuming there is any left after the lawyers picnic.

 

Competition for attention creates Opportunity

Competition for attention creates Opportunity

Apr 12, 2017 | Customers, Demand chains, Marketing

The nature of competition has changed dramatically in the last decade.

We no longer live in a world where information is limited and controlled, where the old truism that information is power  gave the few power over the rest of us applies.

It is no longer a competition amongst a few cashed up suppliers to use the power of advertising in a few tightly controlled communication channels to stuff the supply chain to limit our choices.

It is no longer a supply chain controlled by a very few of those who are able to supply, it is a demand chain, under the personal control of those who have a need.

It is now a competition for our attention.

Those with the money in their pockets, or at least access to it, have all the power, as there are literally millions of channels by which we can be reached.

I love the work of Hugh McLeod, have been following him for a long time, as those regular readers of StrategyAudit will know from the numerous times I have used his images as headers. It is because he is able to do with a few squiggles, what Albert Einstein recommended when he said ‘everything should be made as simple as possible, no simpler‘.

This post, and the borrowed header,  I felt really reduced the marketing task down to its simplest form. Gain the attention of people who care, those to whom your value proposition is relevant, and you have a chance to make a difference.

 

Will your O-ring kill you?

Will your O-ring kill you?

Apr 10, 2017 | Governance, Leadership

We are all familiar with the notion that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, it makes absolute sense.

However, not a lot of us have ever considered the idea that our weakest link could kill us, and yet, it can.

On January 28, 1986, the spaceshuttle ‘Challenger‘ exploded 73 seconds into its flight, killing the 7 aboard.

Challenger exploded due to a known fault, something that engineers had been warning about for some time, a faulty O-ring design. What is in effect a cheap rubber piece, a simple part of a hugely complex design proved to be the weakest link, and caused the catastrophic failure.

Everything else in the launch worked absolutely as per expectations and specifications.

The simple known problem, a cheap part, was the weakest link and  brought it all undone.

As you remove potential sources of variation from a process, the average level of reliability and repeatability of increases, and the tension in the system increases as a result. Therefore, when one link fails, the failure becomes more painful, obvious, and sometimes hard to fix. The management task is to identify the potential problem before it becomes one, and remove it.

That is why, at the core of the Toyota Production System, you have an ‘Andon‘ system, which enables anyone to bring a halt to a production process to fix a potential problem before it becomes a failure.

The Rogers commission set up to investigate the Challenger disaster, amongst a raft of findings was highly critical of the NASA culture that prevented the well known and documented concerns with the performance of the O-rings being addressed. Of particular concern was the performance of the O-rings in the cold weather that occurred during the night before the launch. The temperatures experienced on the night of January 27 were way below specifications, and there had been no testing done to gather data on what might happen under those conditions, and serious concerns had been formally expressed.

Had there been a simple Andon system in place, rather than a Byzantine hierarchical culture, the launch would not have proceeded, and the disaster been averted.

Your production processes may not be as life defining as those  in the NASA space program, but the principals remain the same.

Identify the weak points in the chain, and ensure there is explicit go/no go, or Andon points, that enable the inevitable process failures to be caught before they do any real damage. It may cost you some time in the short term, but will pay huge dividends in your ability to reliably and cost effectively deliver to your stakeholders.

The tragedy of ‘doing a Fairfax’

The tragedy of ‘doing a Fairfax’

Apr 7, 2017 | Leadership, rant, Strategy

The once great Fairfax media empire, once a fearless protector of our democracy, on Wednesday announced a further rationalisation in an effort to save $30 million.

This is another in a long list of ‘Adjustments’ and programs which have  become code for making editorial staff redundant.

The Fairfax announcement of 30 million in cost savings, promises to turn the Fairfax publications into  ‘genuine digital businesses with the capabilities and cost base to best operate in the current media environment’.

This is code for no more news that we should be hearing, and more mindless nonsense about footballers hammies, bar brawls, and steamy affairs with soapie stars.

How do such stories give us the intellectual depth and investigative rigour needed to keep the forces of greed, self indulgence, neglect, corruption, and sheer criminality  at bay?

From a commercial perspective, it is reasonable that a private organisation follow the market that it needs to service in order to survive, but that survival, assuming it happens in this case, comes at a long term cost to the community it serves.

Lord Beaverbrook, amongst many colourful quotes is credited with something like ‘my papers give the public what they want, which is not necessarily what they need’.  At this time, never has a truer word been said.

In 2016 Fairfax saved $15 million by cutting 120 editorial jobs, on top of the 1200 saved in 2012, which included the closure of a number of its printing operations. Saving another $30 million will see the cleaner writing the editorials.

If this was just another business going broke, and struggling for its identity and survival in a disrupted industry, it would be one thing, but this is Fairfax, a group that for 180 years has kept those who seek to govern us honest, or as honest as they can be, and has exposed the corrupt and venal amongst us to fearless scrutiny.

It has been clear for decades that people bought newspapers for the classified advertising, the cars, jobs and houses being sold turned into a ‘river of gold’ for the newspaper proprietors, who invested a bit of the river back into the public good.

Now the rivers have dried up, the public good is being left to fend for itself.

Therein lies the tragedy, it can’t without help.

In the absence of an accountable and fearless press, we are all in trouble.

Without Fairfax, and the determination and commitment of Kate McClymont and others like her, we would not have the current  Royal Commission into the Institutional abuse of our kids, and Eddie Obeid and his cronies, like Sir Lunchalot would still be running the state for their personal benefit, to our collective cost.

The lesson for the rest of us is that you ignore the tsunami of change that is coming at you at your peril, and collectively unless we find ways to replace that which is lost in some way, our children will pay a very big price indeed.

 

Communication: Making it personal multiplies effectiveness.

Communication: Making it personal multiplies effectiveness.

Apr 5, 2017 | Governance, Marketing

Two weeks ago I received a piece of junk mail.

Not unusual, my letterbox seems to be the local junk repository despite a polite sign saying go away. However, as it was addressed specifically to me, with no mistakes in the spelling of my name, the  address was complete, and it was not a windowed envelope but one that was obviously not just a standard cheapie from Officeworks, so I opened it.

Open rates on old fashioned snail mail are very high, not the junk ‘To the Householder’ stuff,  the letters addressed to individuals.

By contrast, email open rates, the second best alternative for unsolicited mail vary from miniscule to around 10%, and  higher, depending on a host of factors with the common theme that the  better you know the recipient, and can direct the email to an individual, the higher the open rate.

Back to my story.

The note inside was short, printed on high quality paper,  and focussed laser-like on a specific pain point currently on my plate. The result is that they now have what their marketing person would probably call a marketing qualified hot prospect for the sales people to convert.

So what is the point of the story?

The process of building a brand, the conversion of awareness and of the value proposition of the brand takes a long time. It is a 10,000 piece jigsaw of individual actions by the marketers and reactions from those both in the target market and in the supply chain that delivers the product. At the end of it is an individual, in every case.

When selling a small value consumer item, you do so to an individual who makes a selection where there is little risk so some level of ‘autopilot’ decision making takes place.  Selling a power station is entirely different.  The transaction is at the end of a long process of selling to a series of individuals and probably committees of some sort , but at the end, there will always be someone with the right of veto.

A key part of the process is the impact the marketer has on the neural systems of the intended buyer, how the branding and selling efforts impact on their senses.

Human beings evolved over millions of years depending for survival on our 5 physical senses, and the 6th one, the ‘gut’ feel that comes from the experience of the individual, and of the ‘tribes’ in which the individual lives and works.

Logically, the more of the senses you can engage in a positive way when marketing to a prospect, the better your chances.

Back again to the direct mail piece.

All my senses had been successfully engaged by this piece of direct, unsolicited mail.

It engaged my eyes, as somebody had put a lot of thought into the visual appearance of the piece. It engaged my brain, as the headline and copy were clearly directed specifically a me, and to engaged me physically, as the stock on which it was printed was, like the envelope, clearly not a standard low cost stock, it was a premium quality  parchment type stock.

In the 30 seconds it took me to open, read, and understand this piece of unsolicited direct mail, the only option for me was to believe that somebody who knew me very well had specifically sent it to me in order to ensure I did not miss this opportunity to address the current pain point.

Depth of marketing to an individual prospect, building on years of building a brand with claims to quality and integrity, which is breadth, works.

The only point left to consider before I sign up is how  the hell they got so much detail in advance of sending the mailer.