Real Engagement Is Sweet

The technical details of engagement metrics notwithstanding (see our website, www.brandkeys.com for details), real engagement is (or should be) a positive behavioral outcome for the brand that is making the effort.

In other words, if a brand does something in the marketplace – a commercial, or product placement, or a sponsorship, for example – real engagement would be proven by increased sales. Or seeing people go out and look for the product. Some positive behavior toward the brand.

A prime example of that was the product placement for Apollo chocolate bars on the hit show, “Lost.” A few seconds on screen last season, and lots of people went out looking for them. Can’t say that about Hershey or Cadbury no matter how much they advertise and no matter how well known they are.

In fact, it’s been reported that Apollo chocolate bars will again have a big presence on ABC's hit this coming season, which only proves that the only thing sweeter for a brand than engagement itself is the sound of a cash register ringing up sales!

If It Looks Like Engagement, And It Sounds Like Engagement...

Many brands have tried to expand their engagement influence by correspondingly expanding their retail presence, and have found it a devil of a task. But here’s one European effort that consumers found hard to duck.

Adidas, launching a new store in Pilestraede, Copenhagen, tried to engage consumers using the fountain pool at Enhave Plads filled with small blue rubber ducks.

On the side of the ducks was the message, "I've swum too far, help me get back home!" On the bottom of the duck it read "Reward for my return at Adidas Original store." Those who showed up with the off-course duck earned themselves a tour of the new store and a tee-shirt for their efforts.

No word on how many ducks were returned, but it was a brilliant reminder of one of the old sayings about what you have to do to optimize engagement efforts: “Always behave like a duck. Keep calm and unruffled on the surface but paddle like the devil underneath.”

A Rush To Branding

A very senior journalist at a very prestigious business magazine passed along an announcement that was being "push e-mailed" to reporters regarding brands/branding. As this is a sweet spot for us, we were of course interested. The journalist appended a comment along the lines of, “Why are marketers wasting their time on this kind of drivel! Aren’t there more important branding issues than this?” That’s the polite version, but you get the point.

The brand issue that raised his ire was an offer from an ad exec to discuss a major branding issue in the news, to wit, the brand of Katie Couric. Ms. Couric, as virtually every TV-viewing sentient being knows, has moved from her chair on the Today show on NBC to the coveted news anchor spot at CBS. And, as a media and casting event, holds some interest and import within the broadcast industry. Questions abound: What will happen to Today show ratings now that Katie’s not there? Will people who got up at 7 in the morning to watch the Today show now watch the evening news on CBS? Will Katie’s occupation of the anchor’s chair revitalize the CBS Evening News? Which hairstyle will she have when she premiers in September?

All interesting and, some might say, critical marketing and casting questions in one particular medium – especially in light of flagging ratings for news shows generally and TV’s increasing difficulty in engaging viewers. But branding à la “The Donald”? We don’t think so. One’s a brand, the other a celebrity and there’s a big difference.

Marketers and advertisers have fallen into the very bad habit of calling anything that has broad awareness and gets media attention a “brand.” “Standing out,” as the email indicated, “like great brands do” really isn’t a good enough reason to call someone or something a brand. It makes them famous, even notorious, but not a brand. Being famous for just being famous may satisfy some advertisers and may even imbue a product or service with instant recognition but it neither means you have a “brand,” nor does it guarantee success.

Brands are important to build and nurture, but taking anyone or anything and calling it a “brand” represents the kind of boundless folly that earned the Donnor party their place in history!

Double (Creative) Toil And Trouble, Clients Burn, And Consumers Bubble

Online advertising archive, ihaveanidea, despondent about the state of creativity in the advertising industry and feeling that ads just “haven’t been that inspiring lately,” commissioned a witch to create a potion to enhance the creative abilities of advertising agencies around the world.

The potion is a combination of topaz, a yellow candle, and Frankincense incense and was created under a full moon, which, according to the witch herself, is the “phase during which vast sources of spiritual power may be harnessed’.

Now all they need is a potion to keep consumers from ‘zapping’ commercials, however creative they are, and they’ll be set!

Returning To Their Roots

About 5 years ago, “customization” revealed itself as one of the most leveragable engagement values a marketer could capitalize upon. The percent-of-contribution that it makes to loyalty is nearly six times what it was in 2001. So the lesson here appears to be that marketers should customize where they can. Even when it comes to side dishes.

Carrot growers in England say they have dug up the vegetable's original color and will revert to the new hue for the first time in five centuries: purple! Shoppers will also be able to buy black-and-white and rainbow-colored carrots by next year. And, it’s all-natural.

The hope is that the ‘not-orange’ color will engage children to such a degree that they’ll eat more vegetables. And parents can customize their veggie side dishes to compliment the main course.

On the other hand, some things never change, so we’re pretty sure that you can dramatically increase the percent-contribution if your black-and-white carrots are accompanied by a really good cut of meat!

Making Money From Real Insights

Here's this month's basket of excellent answers to meaningless questions:

It takes 90 seconds for a combine to harvest enough wheat to make 70 loves of bread.

Pool is one of the safest sports in the world.

Popcorn is an American indian invention.

The number of product placements on US prime-time network TV shows in 2005 was
101,212. (Can you name 10?)

65% is the number of Ford Mustang components that come from the US or Canada.
90% is the number of components of a Toyota Sienna coming from the same regions.

Further proof that if you want to make dough you need better insights.

Do I Hear $22.50? Will Anyone Give Me $22.50?

Executives and planners are unhappy with a plan to sell television ad time via an eBay-enabled online auction, saying that the e-commerce-based system won't be able to deliver the multifaceted marketing packages that today’s advertisers demand.

Marketers, they say, want initiatives that go beyond the purchase of traditional TV spots and want branded entertainment and/or product placement, mobile extensions, and sponsorships included in their buys. All of which require negotiations and strategic planning, and not just an electronic bidding paddle.

Supporters of the auction, on the other hand, say the system will allow both buyers and sellers to benefit from improved "operating efficiencies," which sounds an awful lot like a polite way of saying “commodity.”

Engagement – real engagement – means initiating marketing plans that result in increased brand equity for the advertiser. Do that and you see results. But getting to that point is a lot more complex than one-ups-manship bidding!

Those Who Are Ignorant Of History Are Neither Rich Nor Robust

McKinsey & Co. just issued a report forecasting that by 2010, traditional TV advertising will be one-third as effective as it was in 1990. And that it's no longer good enough for advertisers to take standard reach metrics at face value.

This is not new news. In fact, it’s ancient history to any marketer who has been paying attention to the conversations that have been taking place in organizations like P&G, the ARF, the ANA, or the 4A’s, all of whom have been recommending that marketers – and media planners – shift to an engagement approach from which to plan.

McKinsey & Co. further advised clients to consider evaluating media on an "adjusted reach" basis, and recommend that marketers “have to continue to build rich, robust and proprietary customer insights, but they have to do it from a bunch more sources."

Well, finally something we can agree upon! For a number of years we’ve had clients who have used Brand Keys engagement metrics to assess media options based upon their ability to engage customers. Do that and you’ll see your profits rise. Some clients have using a form of Brand Engagement-Effective CPM’s as a way of calculating “real” costs, optimizing media effectiveness by over 20%.

Sounds pretty “rich and robust” to us even if it is 4 years early!

To Answer Our Own Question of June 23rd, "No, They Wouldn't Buy A New Car From This Man!"

Mid-last month Chrysler, faced with considerable back inventory, announced that they were bringing back deep discounting plus a “groundbreaking” 30-day money back satisfaction guarantee that they guaranteed would engage the car-buying public.

At the time we were of the opinion that A) all this was not as “groundbreaking” as they thought, B) we predicted that sales would not increase based on a German-engineering positioning, and C) the 30-day satisfaction guarantee would work only if there was a chance that customers might be disappointed.

(How precisely churlish would it be to point out that it’s not so terribly leveragable if consumers are going into a transaction already disappointed with the brand with cost savings as the key motivator?)

Anyway, the administrator of all this ad activity was to be no other than DaimlerChrysler chairman, Dr. Dieter Zetsche, who they ‘friendlied” up by giving the moniker “Dr. Z.” They spent $225 million in advertising (that’s $225 with 8 zeros if you account for the cents), and the result?

Sales are down 17%! To add to the fiscal affront, an overwhelming number of consumers believed “Dr. Z” to be a fictional character who was only whipped up for the campaign!

On the basis of such confusion and a lack of material consumer engagement, we are compelled to wonder if Dr. Zetsche had a money-back guarantee from his ad agency?

All The World's A Stage, And All The Men & Women Merely Respondents

It was announced today that one of the big research suppliers that usually measure TV audiences was going to take a seat on the aisle and add measuring Broadway audiences to its list of offerings. That way, Broadway producers could market more efficiently.

Even if there is no real empirical test for taste, having more information about your prospective audiences is better than none, we always say. But not content to rest there, the company is also going to offer a monthly service tracking the names of celebrities so that produces will know which stars will better engage Broadway audiences, talent and appropriateness notwithstanding.

On that basis we guess next season we’ll be seeing Julia Roberts, Usher, Hugh Jackman, and Mario Cantone starring in, well, everything.