The 3 dimensions of Lead generation

The 3 dimensions of Lead generation

Mar 28, 2016 | Branding, Customers, Marketing, Sales

Virtually any B2B business owner I talk to, one of their key challenges is lead generation.

When you dig a bit, often it is the case that lead generation  becomes a problem where there is a shortage of sales, then they react in a short term manner.

Lead generation is a long term proposition, B2B and B2C, the techniques may differ a bit,  but when working day to day the only effective tool to get another sale is price, so you lose.

So it seems to me there are three dimensions to effective lead generation:

  1. The means by which you generate the lead
  2. The conversation rates at various points  through the sales process
  3. The time taken in the sales process

Lets look at them in a little detail.

Means. This is the essence of marketing, the game is to identify who might be a buyer, why, when, and the means by which you can facilitate and support the transaction then build on it for a longer term. Digital has exploded the techniques available to us but the rules have not changed: Understand how you add value to who, and walk them through the relationship building and sales processes to a transaction. Brand building by another name.

Conversion rates.  How do you calculate your sales conversation rates? Digital is now awash with numbers, marketing has changed from the fluffy to the numerical and we are belted over the ears to get with the program.

Marketing Experiments is a shop flogging the notion that marketing experience, creativity and intuition can be turned into a mathematical formulas, and in doing so they have done a fair job of nailing the variables in a digital sale to the extent that they can be nailed:

Probability of conversion = Clarity of Value proposition + (incentive to action – friction associated with the action) – Anxiety.

Whilst a bit convoluted, it does make some sense, and you  can weight the factors according to your market, but the essential message is that marketing can be measured. To an extent  it can be, but losing sight of the emotion involved would be a mistake, and emotion will always be virtually impossible to measure with any certainty. As Gary Vaynerchuk asked, “what is the ROI of your mother?”

Time.  Every business and market is different, as is every potential customer situation so there are no rules in this except one: Only a small number of your prospects will be ready to buy right now.

However, if you extend the time frame to a month, or a year, and there will be many more ready. The challenge therefore is to be talking to them in terms that they are comfortable with at that particular point in their  journey to a transaction.  Given the reality of this journey, the worst thing to do is make the effort ‘stop-start’. It has to be a continuous marketing effort to ensure that there is a flow of leads into and through the sales process. Take the foot off the pedal and you will have a hole in the sales. Keep talking, build a relationship, guide them through the process. Demonstrate credibility and expertise, so that when they re in the buying mode, you get the call.

Too often we concentrate on finding the few who are ready to buy now, rather than playing the long game. Patience rewards the skilled fisherman, same with sales.

.

The secret sauce of marketing.

The secret sauce of marketing.

Mar 16, 2016 | Branding, Communication, Customers

 

The currency of marketing success starts these days with a simple word:

Attention.

How to get it, keep it and leverage it.

In the crowded world we are in, it is the secret sauce of marketing.

Every day we are assaulted by messages, millions of them, yet we actually ‘see’ just a tiny fraction.

In a world where our brains give us comprehensive and automatic filters, where even those that get through have a split second to make an impression and gain some of our attention, it pays to understand the means by which this process happens.

Automatic sensory cues.

When was the last time you completely ignored a gorgeous bird (if you are a bloke) wearing a short skirt and blazing red shirt?

Never happens right? That is because our brain is on automatic, it sifts the information coming at it in an unconscious manner. However, when something triggers one of the basic responses in our ‘reptile’ brain, the deepest most ancient part of the grey matter that controls just a few things, we notice. This automatic response was vital to the survival of a weak mammal being hunted by sabre tooth tigers, and thankfully survives to ensure we see the red shirt.

Reputation.

We often almost automatically trust things and people based on reputation. Tom Clancy brings out a new novel, and fans of the genre will buy it based on the experience and reputation of his previous books. In the past we also tended to trust authority, police and doctors for example, but the transparency of the last 25 years has almost seen that gone, we now make judgements on a wider base. Taking that one step further, we now put some weight on crowd sourced reviews as Amazon does with their rating and referral systems.

Recognition.

When we recognise something or someone, it grabs our attention. Walking through Sydney’s CBD a few weeks ago, paying no particular attention to anything, I unexpectedly recognised someone I had not seen for many years, walking the opposite way on the opposite side of Pitt Street. The sudden and unexpected recognition riveted my attention, I had to race across the road and accost him. (luckily my recognition was accurate or it would have been embarrassing). This also works inside businesses, the recognition of the familiar, weather it be people, processes or existing patterns of behaviour are powerful motivators of future behaviour.

Think like a customer.

It often surprises how little marketers actually look at their output from the perspective of those they are trying to influence. Stepping across and putting yourself into the shoes of the receiver in a way that enables you to see the material you are producing through their eyes, recognise and respond to the emotional hooks, feel urge to ‘connect’ that you are trying to build, recognise the  relevance and power of the offer or call to action. To some this capacity to jump into your customers persona comes as naturally as breathing, to others it remains a bridge too far no matter how hard they try, how much research they read. Finding someone in your team who has this capacity can mean a quantum step in the effectiveness of your efforts.   Thinking like a customer makes gathering attention much easier as you can see the cues your customer will respond to, and deliver them in a manner that creates and drives the attention.

This task, the drive to gather and leverage attention is one of the foundations of marketing success, understanding the triggers is essential.

How to Design a winner by staying out of the way.

How to Design a winner by staying out of the way.

Mar 9, 2016 | Branding, Marketing, Small business

 

Few of us are designers, although most would like to think the contrary

Few things get stuffed up more than design, and it is normally because a good designer was nowhere near the project.

You did it yourself, or had the intern do it, the boss’s wife, or you went on line and got 55 alternatives for $99.97 and picked one with a pin.

Does not work, does it!

While running large marketing departments long ago  in my corporate dark ages, there were two simple rules:

  1. There was a rigorous process of the product managers doing what they were supposed to be good at, building a design brief based on the strategies, product value proposition, and profile of the target audience, and it was followed.
  2. Nothing went out without me seeing it, and if there were several options, the one I favoured least was normally the one that was chosen.

I am a very good and widely experienced marketer, but a crap designer. Fortunately for the many successful projects over the years I know my own limitations.

So, to the design brief, the heart of any design project.  Here is a short list of do’s and don’ts

Do:

  • Offer the designer a range of emotional words you would like the designer to communicate. If the product is a healthy food product, words such as “nutritious,” “fresh,” and “natural” are likely words, but if the product is a body building supplement, they are more likely to be “Bold” “aggressive” and   “masculine”
  • Ensure the designer knows as much as it is possible to know how the customer will select, interact with, use and dispose of the product when it is finished. The more the designer can put themselves in the mind of the primary customer the better.
  • Make sure you take a mock up or two into the typical outlet to see how it fares in its competitive habitat if it is a product that must compete for retail display space.
  • Leave the graphical elements to the designer, that is their skill, so don’t box them in by specifying fonts, colours, layout ideas, or any of your  preconceptions. However, if there are elements that are mandatory, such as a brand colour guide, or that will cause the rejection of a design such as using your photograph, it would be wise to ensure they were aware of the boundaries.
  • Test where possible. Digital products can be subjected to all sorts of A/B tests and they often throw up amazing results, but in any event, be prepared to experiment, and improve with the benefit of the insights gained.
  •  First impressions matter, particularly when the impression is by someone with some empathy for the category. When running those large marketing departments of FMCG manufacturers, I used to ensure that all the women in the place were exposed to the designs, as they were more representative of the typical buyer than the men in the department.
  • Finally, and most importantly, the design has to tell a story to the buyer, it must communicate what the product does in a split second, and why they should buy it.

Do Not:

  • ‘Crowdsource’ the preferences of friends, co-workers, and particularly your partner beyond the “which do you like” question. Going one more and seeking advice on how to fix the shortcoming they see is asking for trouble.
  • Stick with a design that once in the market is clearly not working. We all make mistakes, the skill is in recognising them early, acknowledging, fixing, and moving on.

 

As a final word, do not do the design yourself, it will most times be rubbish. Design is a fundamentally important and often abused part of the process of delivering value to a customer. Short cuts almost never pay off, they end up costing heaps in rework and lost opportunity, and keep the list of Do’s handy.

5 ways to avoid brand prostitution in FMCG

5 ways to avoid brand prostitution in FMCG

Mar 8, 2016 | Branding, Category, Customers, Marketing

The primary tool used by retailers to attract customers is the discount prices that they offer on their suppliers products, largely funded by those suppliers.

As you read all the literature and case studies on brand building, and reflecting on my own experience, the last thing you want to do is indiscriminate price cutting to build volumes. Deep and regular discounting is a sure way to murder any long term position of the brand as anything other than cheap and nasty.

I have yet to see “Develop the brand to  be cheap and nasty” in a strategy document.

However, promoting your product, as distinct from stand alone price cutting is a potent way to get trial, and any brand building exercise  contains measures that  encourage and reward trial; setting out to turn trial into habit.

It is a delicate balance, generating trial and confirming to customers that  the product is delivering value for the non promotion price, when the discounted price rolls around every few weeks.

So how do you combat it, when  you  have so little control over the retail interface with consumers?

Not easy, particularly when to retain shelf space, discounting is mandatory, and often the  suppliers have ceded control of their promotion timing and type via  trading term agreements.

In effect the retailers do what they want, when they want, with your products to build their revenues and margins, and charge you for it.

In other words, they are able to prostitute your brand in their battle for market share and margin.

How do you break this cycle?

Not easy, and not without risks, as retailers can always delete your products and put  something else in the space, and increasingly this is a housebrand.

The answer is in several parts.

Make the CEO the senior  product manager. Too often, the boss is too busy to attend to the details of the sales and marketing programs, and conventional management wisdom  is that you leave the detail to those responsible for the outcomes.  However, abrogating responsibility is very different from leaving the details to the functional management. The boss must be engaged in the battles with retailers. Such engagement delivers certainty that you are serious to the retailers, and assures your people that the boss has their back if it goes pear-shaped.

Have a plan to manage the customer as well as the consumer.  It is essential that you have a plan actively supported by the CEO around the supply chain challenges of building of a brand. This means that the CEO needs to support the sales and marketing management in the implementation in the face of retailer pressure, removing the retailers opportunity to play the  ‘go to your boss’ card.  Obviously, any marketing plan needs to address the consumer  you are talking to, what they are looking for, and how you are delivering that value to them, or they will fail, but most in my experience miss the explicit references to those who control the choke points in the distribution chain.

Regain some control over trading terms. This is easy to say, but enormously hard to do, and is impossible in one negotiation round.  To the extent that sales success requires distribution in the two gorillas, you need to be very aggressive and smart about wresting back some of the control of the on shelf promotional and price decisions. Branding success requires that you deliver consumer trial in a competitive environment, followed up and consolidated by the reward of great value, which is way more than a cheap pick-up price. Just going along with a retailer delivering a low price to consumers only rewards brand prostitution by the retailer.

Manage your data. You need data on which to base all your decisions, as debating challenging questions with a retailer on the basis of what you think is not good enough.  Assembling data that demonstrates the ROI on promotional activity across a variety of time frames and consumer centric parameters is essential. This requires both scan data and external consumer and social data to be combined and analysed. Not an easy task, and certainly not without cost. However, if your volumes are dependent on promotional pricing without the ROI knowledge offered by data analysis, you have already lost.

Consumers need to be engaged. Outside the price, you need to be communicating with your consumers, supporting the value proposition in every way possible. This is now possible through a multitude of channels and tools not dreamed of just a few years ago, and these need to be used. However, if  you have the budgets, old fashioned advertising, so long as it is good advertising that communicate clearly the value of the brand, still works.

Yeas ago as a young product manager, I was a (minor) part of the team that built Meadow Lea margarine into the dominating market leader in margarine. Meadow Lea peaked above 20% market share, well over 3 times its nearest competitor, in a crowded market, at premium prices. It was just margarine, a great product, but hardly worth that sort of dominance until you remember that we were busy congratulating mothers for using it for the benefit of their families health and  happiness. I have not seen any numbers in a long time, but I have also not seen advertising for a long time, so I bet Meadow Lea is back with the pack, only selling on promotion, at discounted prices, and the parent company, which took a short term view of marketing, went from being a successful large company to an unsuccessful way smaller one until it was flogged off to a Singaporean group.

Sad that.

We built a brand powerhouse, only to have it squandered.

As a final groan, just pre Christmas I went into Woolworths to buy the family Christmas ham. The only choice was one of a number of Woolworths house brands.  I went elsewhere, and found a really good ham from a specialist retailer, probably cost an extra $5, but was worth every cent.

I wonder if this experience is a portent of things to come, or just me being cranky.

Why did Thomas Dux really fail?

Why did Thomas Dux really fail?

Feb 10, 2016 | Branding, Marketing, retail

There is a whole lot of discussion around the progressive closure of Thomas Dux stores by owner Woolworths, and the assumption that it will be closed down if a trade sale does not evolve.

Maybe there is a plan to save it, but I cannot see it, and having bought some rubbish grapes at an inflated price in the Lane Cove store during the week,  I do not know what it might be.

Not a lot of the discussion actually addresses the strategic failure that is the foundation of the commercial failure, just its superficial symptoms.

Strategic failure seems to have found its way into Woolies DNA over the past 15 years or so. They became so financially dominant in supermarkets that they forgot that they still have consumers to keep loyal, suppliers to keep in business, and competitors very keen to eat their lunch. They have done OK in petrol, well in liquor, absolutely bombed in hardware, poorly in general merchandise , and missed office supplies, electrical and furnishings completely, and are fiddling around with odd things like pet health insurance. Not a lot of logic in that mix.

I have watched Dux closely since the launch,  had a number of clients products listed, and visited all the Sydney stores multiple times since the first Lane Cove store opened. Until a short while ago, I really thought they would defy the corporate odds, and make it work.

The apparent failure is a sad day for the specialty end of the Australian food manufacturing industry, what is left of it, one less way to reach consumers.

So, with the clarity of (almost) hindsight, where did they go wrong?

 

Confused business model.

Whilst Dux had separate management, they operated out of the Woolworths warehouse, using the WW back office systems and presumably KPI’s which are all focussed on mass merchandise, stock turn and margin. This makes sense to the accountants who seek efficiencies but in the end forces the big brother behaviour on the upstart sibling who needs to do things differently to survive and prosper.

They forgot their “Why“.

Perhaps they never had it beyond a kneejerk response to an upstart competitor. The slogan “Inspiring your passion for food” is at least a half way decent one, until you see packets of mass market products available in the Woolies and Coles stores next door at lower prices. As a consumer, going into Dux , the presence of such items is inconsistent and diminishes any claim to a differentiated and valuable consumer value proposition.

Value delivery.

Consumers are not stupid, there is a limit to the price they will pay for something with a fancy name, fuzzy claim and benefit, and not much else. Pushing the prices beyond that limit in order to boost the GM% is pretty silly, because you do not bank percentages, just dollars. It is a fine line, but by observation, they got it wrong as much as they got it right, which is not enough.

Discounters are not the competition.

Giving in to the accepted wisdom that discounters are winning and that Dux is competing for the same consumer dollar is nonsense.  Consumers are looking for an experience, for specialist products not available in mass retailers.  They started well with their “foodies”, in store chefs available to give advice and recommendations, but the enthusiasm for this potentially differentiating strategy seems to have waned over time. Behaving like a discounter in some Sku’s but like a high end, fancy pants deli in others just confuses consumers, and I suspect their own staff.

What you will not do.

Strategy is, amongst other things, about what you will not do, as much as it is about what you will do. Thomas Dux seems to have forgotten this lesson and succumbed to the temptation to stock SKU’s that did not add to the positioning of Dux as a retailer on whom you could rely on to deliver quality and differentiated specialist food products along with a level of service well beyond the usual expectation. This confuses and devalues the brand. Thomas Dux is like any other brand in a development phase, it requires absolute focus on what makes you different and better. So why can I buy Kelloggs Corn flakes and Blend 43 coffee there?

It takes time.

Dux has been around for a while now, perhaps 10 years? That should have been enough time to establish a defensible place in consumers minds when it is clear there is a segment looking for an alternative to the mass market supermarkets. I suspect that the financial pressure has increased markedly over the last few years as Woolies excursion into hardware drained group profitability. The net result was that the quarterly numbers mattered more than the long term, so savings were made by management, the sort of savings that delivered me the rubbish grapes the other day. If the grapes were not good enough to justify the price, they should not have been on the shelf. That sort of challenging culture requires time and continual effort to reinforce, and a reversion to a quarterly focus removes the management incentive to not sell grapes this week because they are not good enough, they need the margin today at the expense of tomorrow.

 

Meanwhile  Harris Farm, the original target of Dux appears to be powering along. Perhaps Woolies will rue the day they did not buy Harris Farm when they were still young and vulnerable. I understand they tried, but were given the finger by the venerable Mr Harris.  Perhaps they should have tried again, it would have been less costly to both their coffers and their reputation.

What do you think?

 

 

The (almost) impossible task of brand building momentum. A personal story.

The (almost) impossible task of brand building momentum. A personal story.

Jan 29, 2016 | Branding, Customers, Innovation, Leadership, Marketing

What is  a brand?

When you think about it, a brand is a just a promise embodied in a product.

A promise of performance, and delivery of value.

It survives and grows, retains and builds relevance and attraction only when the promise is delivered.

Finding the promise that can be delivered in a way that is sufficiently different to make an impact is really difficult.  Making a promise that is the same as everyone else’s promise, and the brand becomes indistinguishable, just another label on the shelf.

30 years ago I was heading a marketing group that amongst other successes, relaunched ‘Ski’ yoghurt in Australia. The relaunch was a huge success, and over the following 3 years, our national market share went from single figures to well over 35% in a market growing at double digit rates.

There is a lot of patronising bullshit around about the way to build a brand, advice that sounds nice but is usually just a template that promises an outcome, a bit like the paint by numbers paintings an old aunt had adorning her walls. Not very good, and certainly not original.

So, I thought that the hindsight afforded by the almost 25 years since that  Ski relaunch might be valuable as you consider your own brand building exercise.

Following are the lessons I took away, often with the enlightenment that comes with hindsight, as the appearance of organisation and planning is a bit of a fiction, the real situation was considerably more chaotic as we juggled competing priorities, competitive and financial pressure, and all the jostling and risk mitigation that goes on inside big businesses.

 

Be different.

At the time conventional wisdom was that the fruit in yoghurt had to be mashed, the product homogeneous, that lumps of fruit were not good. All the research told us that consumers wanted their fruit yoghurt to be consistent with the fruit mashed and evenly distributed, and the launch of Yoplait a few years earlier had kick started a genuinely competitive race and significant market growth.

We relaunched Ski on the proposition  of taste. The best tasting yogurt, the only one with pieces of fruit. It completely distinguished us from the then market leader, Yoplait, and all other brands, and gave consumers who liked or did not mind whole fruit in their yogurt a real reason to buy Ski. Of course, some rejected it, but many did realise after trying that they did prefer it, and whilst there was a lot of supporting activity and pack changes, the market share of Ski zoomed. A few of the small producers copied us, but the market leader could not, as their whole manufacturing process was designed to deliver a homogeneous product.

The value of true differentiation backed by a brand promise that was carried out and of value to at least some consumers was clear.

Across the range Ski was so different that  it created new segments within  the yoghurt category, segments we owned because we created and named them, and which made competition hard and expensive for our opposition.

 

Get onto a roll.

When you have a line-up of innovations that do add value, you can roll them out progressively and the competitive impact is cumulative, you leave the competition struggling to catch up with your first one, and spending valuable marketing resources to stay in the game while you roll out the second, and third iteration. I would not claim that Steve Jobs knew anything about Ski, but that is the exact strategy that Apple used from the launch of the original iPod on.

In our case, we relaunched Ski with the different product as noted, but we also changed the naming conventions that had prevailed. For example, the low fat version changed from Ski Low Fat to Ski DeLite. Worked a treat, and went some way to redefining the low fat category. The next ‘roll’ of the dice was to relaunch the 1kg size into the now common rectangular packs. To that time all 1kg Packs had been round, as they were operationally easier and the packs were much cheaper. However, we noted that most female buyers, and they made up 90+%  of purchasers, could not easily handle the product in one hand, they did not fit on most refrigerator door racks, and were less than optimal on the retail shelves.

When we changed all this, sales of 1kg exploded, and gave us new retail distribution. We then followed up with Ski Double-Up, a product that had a range of ‘toppings’ in a separate compartment  of the pack, and a completely different yoghurt that emerged from the combination of new strains of culture and operational process innovation,  that revolutionised the market again, creating an entirely new category.

Your customers may not be who you think they are.

Innovation is a powerful way to attract fringe, lapsed or just reluctant buyers into a market. When we launched Ski Double-up the typical consumer was young, educated, and female.  Consumption by men of yoghurt was only about 20% of female. Ski Double-Up changed all that. Not only did it attract more men, they were significantly older in profile, those who would not touch ‘yoghurt’ as it has been with a barge-pole. They tried Double-Up, liked it, tried other versions, and became regular and loyal consumers, adding significantly to the scope and scale of the Ski brand.

 

Start with ‘Why’.

Defining the ‘Why’ of your brand is a foundation of all branding activity. The best articulation of “Why’ is the now famous TED talk by Simon Sinek.  A brand without a clear and distinctive ‘Why’ is just a label. Sinek uses Apple as an example several times, because as he says, ‘everyone gets it’ and they do. Apple is a branding icon, but not the only one. Recently I stumbled across a new brand from a start-up, one that is breaking new ground on a number of fronts, competing against some of the biggest and best marketers in the world, but will (I suspect) succeed on the strength of their “Why’. It is whogivesacrap toilet paper, purchased by consumers  direct rather than via retailers, with a very clear ‘Why’. Many, almost certainly most will not buy into the why, but enough will to make the brand and business a success, and they will do some good in the process.

The corporate benefit of ‘Why’ is that everyone in the business can buy into it, and the resulting culture can become a very powerful motivator and driver of performance. In our case, the ‘why’ was that we were producing a natural, healthy product, our workforce has all been taken into our confidence, and they were our market research as we ran taste group after taste group in the factory during the development process to get the variables right. When the products became very successful, those people  saw what their contribution had resulted in, and took great pride in it, making a huge contribution to improving the production efficiencies .

 

Sweat the small stuff.

Details matter, a lot. Steve Job’s obsession with the experience of opening a shipper containing an Apple product contributed  a core part to the brand identity of Apple. With Ski we pioneered amongst other things a  process that used a new and expensive printing process that both accommodated the square shape of the 1kg tub, and delivered crystal clear graphics. It was expensive and difficult, but  the attention to the detail that could have been dismissed for cheaper more utilitarian solutions paid huge dividends in volume, and profitability albeit at skinnier margins.

 

Be brave & committed.

Nothing really useful will evolve from just doing the same thing as others, but just a bit better. Being different means taking risks, being brave, pushing the envelope, all those clichés that mean someone has to be brave enough to open the door to the unchartered. That takes guts, rare in todays corporate world,  but around aplenty in small and medium sized businesses.

When we changed Ski 1kg to the rectangular tub, there was no way back. Over a week long factory shutdown, the old machinery for  filling the round tubs was removed, and the new rectangular filling machines installed. Had the change failed, there was no way back.

The steps we took with Ski were all brave at the time. We changed the dynamics and shape of the market, a seemingly obvious step,  but at the time it was sweaty palms all around.

 

You have to be smart.

The marketing group had some very smart people, but more than that, it was a collectively smart group. There was great collaboration and support, and the longevity of the group was substantial, which had offered the opportunity to make a few mistakes and learn from them. At a time when the average tenure of marketing personnel was about 18 months, we averaged 6 years, giving us a significant depth of market understanding and intelligence. Just as important, or perhaps more so, we had the support of the CEO of the division who was prepared to support and encourage the things we did, and I am sure his palms were sweatier than any others, although at the time it never showed. His confidence in us, and support in keeping the corporate drones at bay never wavered. Innovation is impossible without that sort of support from the top.

 

It is really hard to continue to succeed.

This is a warning.

If you succeed, when the applause is over and the credit appropriated, the corporate gnomes come out to play, those who do not understand the dynamics of a brand. If you go into a supermarket today, Ski is an also ran, it looks like it is back to single figure market share, a shadow of its former self we had built. The brand we developed was raped by the accountants and sycophants who killed the golden goose by greed, short ‘termism’ and stupidity, rather than continuing to nurture and invest. The temptation to do so will be strong, and it takes a CEO with brass ones to resist the siren call of the throngs and maintain the investment required.

That rot had started a year or so before I was toddled off. By that time the corporate structure had changed a couple of times, and I was unable to keep the support that had enabled the success in the first place in the face of the changed structure and personnel. Unable to stay quiet in the face of the short term lure of the margins instead of continuing the investment for the long haul, I insisted on being the resident ‘Cassandra’  and ended up paying the price.

As I wrote this post I had to shake myself that it was 25 years ago.

Seems like yesterday.

A lot has changed in the marketing landscape, but the essentials remain the same.