Brand Story

The New PR

I had the opportunity to speak to the local chapter of PRSA this past week about how PR is changing from working with the press, to working with customers. After thinking about it in depth for the past couple of weeks, I am more and more convinced that the customer frontier is where most PR will happen in the future. Admittedly, there are others who are way out ahead of me on this—Ben McConnell and Jackie Huba are two. Still others have called this a "360 degree approach to PR."

One thought before I go on: today we are all in the PR business. So even if your title isn't PR specialist or something like it, if you engage with the public (press, customers, vendors, employees), the new PR applies to you too.

Here's it is in a nutshell: In the salad days, a public relations specialist spent most of their time working with the press—pitching story ideas, following up on requests for information, offering quotes for articles, etc. The really good PR people developed close relationships with reporters, in a true you-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours fashion. When the press did a story and needed a quote from a customer, the PR specialist vetted the best customers and forwarded their names to the reporter for an interview—knowing that they would say only positive things. The reporter also relied on the PR staff to provide information about the company, because resources for finding it on their own were limited.

Things have changed. While good PR people still pitch stories and develop good relationships with the press, they've lost the control they once had over the process. Reporters are less inclined to take what the company says at face value (you can blame Tyco, Enron, and WorldCom for that). And when they want to talk to customers, they don't ask PR for a list of people who will only say nice things about you, they hit the search engines and read what customers are saying online. Good and bad.

So PR is changing to engage customers. Today, the best PR people are getting involved in crafting the customer experience, in beta testing products, and in talking to customers so they understand what customers are thinking and saying about their company and products. They are engaging not just the happy customers, but the detractors as well. And while they may not be able to fix every problem (or make every customer completely happy), they do understand why some interactions go bad and are working to fix those processes to prevent them from ruining other customer's experiences.

Today, the press frames their questions based on what they learn about you online—so you better know what people are saying and be able to talk with the press about what you are doing to fix or improve your product. This is the new PR.

Fortunately there are a lot of resources on the subject. Ben and Jackie's book, Creating Customer Evangelists is a good start. The Ultimate Question by Fred Reicheld is also good. Neither is about PR in the traditional sense, but both are about what PR must become to be successful.

Thanks Noelle for the invitation to speak.

UPDATE: Thanks to Brian who requested I post the presentation at SlideShare. If you want to see the slides, you'll find them here: The New PR.

Other Links:

What happens when a hotel gives away a guaranteed room and treats the customer as if it's their fault? This: Yours is a Very Bad Hotel. It's been floating around the Internet for a few years, but it's worth reading. Favorite slide: the front desk employee's career path. Another classic is Vincent Ferrari's call to cancel his AOL account.
Some very sobering statistics here and here.
The Perfect Customer Experience Blog is here.
Brian Oberkirk offers some great advice for PR people interacting with new media, here.

Have other links or thoughts on this subject? Leave them in the comments.

Making Things Right = Customer Loyalty

Tom Fishburne shares an experience he recently had with an angry customer and what it took to make things right—a little human touch. He also notes a discussion he had with the head of Dyptique who said that "some of his best consumers were those who had a bad product experience, but then were overwhelmed by amazing customer service."

This is not an isolated experience. Angry customers who receive great service to fix their problem often become dedicated consumers. Why?

First, customers don't expect to companies to make things right. Billing problems, long hold times, lost information, forgotten call-backs, attention before the sale and neglect afterward. They all add up to very low expectations. Problems are seldom fixed. And when they are, it often requires so much effort on the part of the customer that the experience is still negative.

So when a company (or an attentive employee) fixes things, it is unexpected. And when the employee provides amazing service, it is so out of the ordinary that it makes a significant impact; in many cases, it makes a brand impression with lasting consequences.

Just as importantly, customers who go through these kinds of experiences now have a (brand) story to tell. (Thanks to the power of Word of Mouth, these micro stories can have a greater effect on the brand than the macro-stories companies tell in the advertising.) And if the brand is lucky, the newly happy customer will tell their story over and over. There are lots of examples of this. One of mine features RayBan sunglasses.

Risky Business and Tom Cruise made RayBan Wayfarers the "must-have" accessory back in the middle 80s. I had a pair that broke. This wasn't a case of losing a screw. I sat on them and they broke—in half—at the nose. The Sunglass Hut wouldn't take them back, so I sent them directly to RayBan with a note that simply said: "These broke. Please fix." I had no expectations of ever hearing from the company and started looking for some new glasses. Two weeks later I received a new pair of RayBans in the mail. I was thrilled. And 22 years later I'm a huge fan of RayBan and still telling the story.

Guess which brand of sunglasses I look for first when a need a new pair?

Have you had a great customer experience that you share over and over? Leave it in the comments.

Almost In-N-Out

There's been a fun little trademark controversy brewing here near BrandStory HQ. (News reports here, here, and here.)

It seems that a former California resident who grew tired of traveling back to California for a Double Double and Coke took matters into his own hands and opened up a new drive-through, called Chadder's, patterned on In-N-Out. Patterned may be an understatement. On opening day the decor, uniforms, and menu were exactly the same. Lines were out the door for hours and the restaurant ran out of food. Word spread very quickly that this was as close to In-N-Out as you could get outside of California.

That's when In-N-Out got wind of it and filed suit to protect its trade dress. In-N-Out won a restraining order and Chadder's has had to make changes to the restaurant and uniforms (more blue, less red). The food is still the same, but the "secret menu" is different. Animal style is stubby style. A double double is a stubby double. And so on.

A couple of (somewhat contradictory) thoughts:

1. While I can't (and don't) fault In-N-Out for filing a lawsuit to protect its brand image, I have to wonder if there isn't a better way to shut down Chadder's? Why not open an In-N-Out across the street? Let's face it, no one is going to Chadder's for the stubby double. They're going because they can get a taste of In-N-Out. My guess is that most of Chadder's customers would prefer the original, not the copy. And they don't want to wait years for the real thing to arrive.

2. In-N-Out uses its packaging brilliantly to reinforce their brand. Each wrapper is printed with information about the freshness of the meat and potatoes. Chadder's food is also fresh, but they don't do anything to drive that message home. In-N-Out understands the power of their brand. Today, Chadder's is little more than a knock-off (though this can and probably will change over time).

3. There is a massive demand for In-N-Out outside of California. But one of the things that drives the demand is scarcity. As In-N-Out expands, it becomes less unique. This is exactly what happened to Kripsy Kreme. Once you could purchase a (cold) Krispy Kreme in every gas station in town, the magic disappeared. (I'm not the first to write about this. See this too.) Few people think of McDonald's as special—partly because when you have more than 10,000 stores, you're common, not special. When In-N-Out becomes just another choice for lunch, will it still drive the passion that it does today?

4. Culture matters. In my experience the staff at In-N-Out love what they do—or they are very good at faking it. As of today, Chadder's staff appear to be just working a job. In fact, many look tired and overworked, due probably to the crowds. I can't imagine anyone working there for 20 years as In-N-Out claims to have working at their stores.

5. Nothing beats word of mouth. Chadder's hasn't done any advertising. But they've had great word of mouth and PR. They've got a great core idea: it's almost In-N-Out. And word has spread. Chadder's owner is now turning down requests for interviews because the word of mouth has brought more customers than they can handle. The Wendy's around the corner would kill for that kind of attention.

 

Now we just need someone to knock off Tommy's. Or maybe the Cheesecake Factory.

Sharing A Brand Story—How Stacy's Pita Chips Did It

Over the past few years, Word of Mouth or buzz marketing has had it's share of promoters and detractors. The rise of WOM marketing has prompted the creation of buzz agencies, a professional trade organization, conferences, books (here, here, and here too), and much more.

So if you're looking for advice on how to get people talking about your brand story, there are plenty of resources.

Or you can do what Stacy's Pita Chips (part of Frito Lay) did, and just send a product sample to everyone in the United States. At least, that's what they wanted to do. But mailing chips to nearly 300 million people, well that's a little much for even this spunky little division of the snack company to bite off.

So instead, they mailed a sample pack to everyone in the country named Stacy. 133,000 people, most of whom hadn't heard of the product before. The package included the Stacy brand story and on the back of the enclosed card, said:

"We hope you enjoyed getting your free box of Stacy's Pita Chips as much as we enjoyed sending them to you. If you did, why not share the joy by sending a FREE gift box to a friend? Since we've already sent them to every Stacy, you're free to send them to Bill or Mary or Cheryl or John—or whoever you think would enjoy Stacy's chips the most."

So has it worked? It looks like it. Here are a few Stacys who are now spreading the word: here, here, here, here, and here. Think how many people have mentioned this to friends and coworkers. And how many Stacys have tried, liked, and now regularly buy Stacy's chips.

That's not all that Stacy's does to promote great customer experiences/brand stories that are easy for customers to share with others. Check out what Art Steiber at The Diff has to say about Stacy's when he wrote to complain about a half-empty bag of chips. Not content to leave him with a negative impression, they went well beyond and sent him a case of pita chips.

This is a brand I like, and I've yet to taste the chips.
 

Clif Bar—I Brand Story I Love

I recently completed my third LOTOJA, the longest one-day, USCF sanctioned bike race in the United States. One of the event sponsors is Clif Bar. Not only do they have great products, they have a great brand story.

While on a long 175-mile bike ride, Clif Bar founder, Gary Erickson, was trying to keep his energy up by eating Powerbars. At some point, he couldn't stomach the idea of another bite of the sticky, hard-to-digest bars. And the thought occurred to him that he could make a better bar with natural ingredients. Two years (and who knows how many failed attempts) later, he had a better tasting energy bar and began selling them in local bike shops.

As people discovered his bars, their popularity spread, and Clif Bar grew quickly. It's all word-of-mouth and PR, they don't do much advertising. There was a brief flirtation with selling the company before Gary decided he could better fulfill his vision by keeping the company private. Today there are a dozen Clif Bar flavors, gels, a bar formulated for women, energy and recovery drinks and more. All are made from natural (mostly organic) ingredients. Importantly, the company is about more than making a profit or simply making food. They live their mission. Each year employees and other friends of the company gather for the epiphany ride to commemorate that first bike ride when Gary had the idea to create the Clif Bar.

Great tasting, all-natural energy foods made by active people who believe in making a difference for their customers, the community, and the world. That's a great brand story.

Destination "Brands". Again.

More news on the destination slogan front.

Last week Utah announced it's new slogan for use in tourism advertising is "Life Elevated." As others have noted, the slogan is not without its critics. Personally, I don't think it's all that bad (we've had worse, like "Utah, Where Ideas Converge"). But I also don't think it will make a bit of difference in attracting new tourists to Utah. Hopefully the media plan will include a few surprises that might engage potential travelers, but none of that is sexy enough to make the news.

Utah's slogan may not be all that great, but it sure beats Washington's new slogan: "SayWA." What does that mean? In fact, how is it pronounced? Is it Say Wah, or Say Double You Ay? Why would anyone choose to visit the state because they hear this phrase? Where's the story?

And what of Palm Spring's new slogan: Give in to the desert, you're surrounded? Will that make you feel welcome or will you walk out with your hands in the air?

I could go on about the pointlessness of every place trying to brand itself in order to compete with every other place. If everywhere has a catchy slogan and a few beauty shots in their ads, how do you stand out? You don't. Chances are travelers will make their next vacation plans based on a recommendation from a friend or travel agent, rather than an ad with a slogan. Maybe some of the money spent on slogan development and advertising would be better spent improving the tourism experience while a visitor is in your place. Give them a story to tell. Just a thought...

Thanks to AdFreak for the links.

WOM and Brand Stories

John Moore over at Brand Autopsy has joined an interesting conversation about Jack Trout's recent article in Forbes which discusses the value of Word of Mouth as a marketing tool. Jack takes a decidedly old-school approach and gets taken to task for it by John, George Silverman, Olivier Blanchard, and others. I won't deconstruct the article, others have done that already. But I do think that Jack's column represents a fundamental misunderstanding about the way brand stories are created and shared.

Jack is a big believer in Macro-stories. These are the stories brand managers tell about their brands. They use company controlled marketing tactics like advertising, corporate websites, catalogs, direct mail, and so on to tell the story. Macro-stories are vital to communicating brand positioning and brand values to a huge number of potential and current customers. These are the stories a company can (to some extent) control. They are generally expensive to produce and distribute. And they are often ignored or distrusted by jaded consumers.

Where Jack misses the boat is Micro-stories. These are the stories consumers tell about the brands they love and hate. These are stories that are influenced by Macro-stories, but also include other elements like experience and satisfaction. They are created on an individual basis, one by one. These are stories that companies can only influence, not control.

Take the restaurant chain, Olive Garden, for example. Their brand story (reflected in their television advertising) is one about (large, loving) families gathering for great food, great conversation, and the kind of hospitality you would have received from your Italian grandmother. The company controls the advertising, from where it is placed, to how it is filmed, from the food that is shared, to the attractive people shown eating it. This is the Macro-story.

The Micro-story may or may not reflect this experience played out on TV. If a customer has to wait to be seated, is served cold food, receives poor service, or has mistakes made on his bill, her Micro-story isn't likely to share many characteristics of the Macro-story. On the other hand, if this customer's experience is similar (within reason) to the brand story told on the advertisements, her Micro-story will reflect the brand values the company wants to communicate. When she shares her experience, she won't be talking about the handsome Italian family from the television ads, she'll talk about her experience at the restaurant.

In other words, once a brand is experienced, the experience, not the advertising or positioning, is the biggest part of the brand story for that consumer. If the experience is compelling, she will share her Micro-story with others at work, at church, at the club, on her blog, and so on. It used to be enough to share the Macro-story and hope for the best, but times have changed.

The biggest difference, of course, is that consumers have so many more ways to share their Micro-stories now that they did just a few years ago. And, thanks to brand experiences disconnected from Macro-stories, more and more consumers no longer believe the brand stories companies "sell" them with traditional advertising. Jack (and hundreds others like him) may always favor the tactics they can control. But their clients will suffer as the power of Micro-stories grows.

That's why word of mouth matters.

"Branding" and Brand Loyalty

Every once in a while I hear criticism of "branding" like this from Bob Bly, suggesting that it doesn't create loyalty. By branding, I believe Bob is mostly referring to "image" advertising.

He's right. Image ads don't make customers loyal. But done properly, they can create desire and establish reasons to buy. This ad by DDBLondon for VolksWagon comes close. Notice the product focus.

Much of the image advertising from Madison Avenue deserves criticism and closer scrutiny. But Bob's anecdote doesn't prove his point. Bob's friend Richard was loyal to a particular shoe (we're not told why, but are led to assume it was because of "branding"). Another friend recommended a new brand. After trying the new shoes, Richard switched brands. Is this a failure of "branding"? No. It's a success for word-of-mouth and a compelling brand experience (both vital components of brand building).

Richard says, "I have brands that I prefer among just about everything I buy… but virtually every single one of them is negotiable. Show me that your product is cheaper and/or better than my current brand, and I’ll switch in a heartbeat." The fact that Richard has brand preferences in the first place shows that branding does indeed work. He believes his brands are better than others and he's loyal to them until he has a reason to switch.

The problem is most advertising doesn't communicate a good reason to switch or demonstrate a compelling reason not to switch when a competitor comes along. But don't blame "branding", blame the marketers and creatives who don't understand how to sell products effectively.

In a previous, related post, Bob Bly wrote: "As a copywriter, I don’t get paid to 'build great brands.' I get paid to generate greater ROI from my clients' marketing. In other words, to make the cash register ring."

Frankly, I don't see the difference.

NetFlix Throttles Its Best Customers

Lately, I have been thinking a lot about how customer experiences impact brand perceptions. Businesses spend a lot of money to identify customers who purchase more frequently or spend more money. The idea is, these are your most profitable customers, so they deserve a better experience. And conversely, a better customer experience will translate to more frequent and profitable customers.

But for a company like NetFlix, frequent customers are less-profitable than other users. NetFlix customers who return their movies more quickly, require more service, and incur additional shipping costs, reducing profitability. Each DVD mailed and returned costs the company 78¢ in postage alone. There are other processing, handling, and breakage costs as well.

So what does NetFlix do? They use a poorly named "fairness algorithm" to slow down deliveries to heavy users, preventing them from watching, returning, and ordering even more movies. By reducing interactions with these customers, NetFlix reduces its costs and increases its profits. This is the kind of bottom line thinking that makes accountants proud.

Here's the problem: NetFlix's heavy users are also their most likely heavy promoters. Meaning in addition to the $20 a month they pay NetFlix for unlimited movie rentals, they also evangelize new members, all of whom also pay $20 a month (many of these are significantly more profitable than the heavy users). 85% of NetFlix customers say a friend recommended NetFlix before they joined.

By delaying (or throttling as some users call it) shipments to its biggest fans, NetFlix changes their customer experience. Instead of loving the service, these customers feel like they're being taken advantage of. They know the NetFlix experience isn't the same for all customers, especially them. And they begin to feel like a transaction, rather than a valued customer.

How long will these less-than-thrilled members evangelize NetFlix? I'm not sure. But if I were NetFlix CMO, Leslie Kilgore, I'd be worried.

If your brand story promises unlimited rentals, that's exactly what you should deliver. If the profit model doesn't allow it, change the promise before your customer evangelists lose their enthusiasm for your brand.

Read more about NetFlix's throttling policy here or here.

WOMBAT in Orlando

Last week I spent a little time in DisneyWorld. And I wasn't the only one—it was the place to be if you are a marketer interested in Word of Mouth. But while I was having a blast with my family in the Magic Kingdom, everyone else was at the WOMBAT conference.

Want to see what you missed? There are pretty good round-ups here, here, and here.

And you can download most of the presentations here. Don't miss the ones given by Jackie Huba, John Moore, and Douglas Atkin (this last one has great points about the importance of story telling).

I'm sorry I missed the conference. But given the fun I had with four kids awed by the magic of Disney, I was happy just to be in the same town as everyone else.