Superbowl ads with purpose: Genius or Disingenuous?

Well, it seems the sophomore, or at least sophomoric curse of  Superbowl ads is finally over. After several years of silly gags in search of ideas, this year, much of the humor was intelligent and quite a few brands chose to connect emotionally via social purpose. So now the question is, how well did the social purpose connect to the advertised brands? Were these genuine efforts, or simply brands in search of social purpose?

Well, in this writer's opinion, some brands tried to stretch beyond their rightful boundaries, while others had a seamless connection between their message, their brand and their business. Interestingly, there were several common themes across brands that allow for some head to head comparisons:

Theme 1: Triumph over adversity

Microsoft and Toyota chose to tell stories of physically disabled people who didn't let their disabilities stop them. 

Toyota's 'How Great I Am' spot, featuring Muhammad Ali's voiceover, and Paralympian Amy Purdy, was a beautiful spot. That is, until it cut to the end frame with an in your face picture of the 'Bold New Camry'. 

Microsoft's 'Braylon O'Neil' showcased how the magic of Microsoft technology has enabled a six year old boy born without a tibia or fibula to thrive. 

The verdict: Microsoft 1- Toyota 0. 
Toyota's ending was such a jarring disconnect. However bold the styling of the new Camry might be, it bears little comparison to the truly bold individuals featured in the ad. Microsoft, on the other hand was telling a story in which it was integrally involved, paying off the brand idea of 'Empowering Us All' much better than any Windows demonstration could have done. Microsoft's other ad, 'Estella's Brilliant Bus' also showcased the impact that Microsoft technology has on human empowerment.

Theme 2: Love and Happiness

Two iconic American brands, Coke and McDonald's have taken their brands into this highly emotional, and difficult to own territory. 

Coke's 'Make it Happy' chose to extend their long running 'Happiness' theme by literally leaking a bit of Coke happiness into the internet, thus transforming hate messages to happy messages.

McDonald's 'Pay with Lovin'' played off it's new brand emphasis on 'lovin'' by exchangin' money for love for some of its lucky customers.

The verdict: Coke 1 - McDonald's 0. 
Coke has long stood for happiness and optimism. While this year's spot was not as anthemic and straightforward as previous efforts like last year's 'America the Beautiful', it was certainly consistent with Coke's long running brand theme. It would be nice to see Coke somehow extend this idea from a 60 second ad to a real initiative. Per my last post, I'm just not feelin' that McDonalds has the right to own 'love', and a limited time offer (from now until Valentine's Day), does little to convince me otherwise. It felt more gimmicky than genuine.

Theme 3: Dads

For some reason dads were popular this year, so this was a crowded field, with Toyota, Dove, and Nissan all paying tribute to the influence that fathers have on their kids lives. 

Toyota's 'My Bold Dad' once again told a charming, although a bit hackneyed, story and once again slammed on the emotional brakes by trying to connect 'bold' fathers to the 'bold new Camry'. 

Nissan's 'With Dad' featured the personal and professional conflicts of a Nissan race car driver who spends too much time away from his family. Nissan products, from Nismo race cars to the soon to be introduced Maxima, were integral to the story. 

Dove's 'Real Strength' presented a series of vignettes illustrating a caring bond between Dads and kids, ending with the line that 'care makes you stronger'. 

The verdict: Nissan .5 - Dove .5 - Toyota 0
First, the simple difference between Nissan and Toyota was that Nissan featured a human story, in which their vehicles played a supporting role, while Toyota was borrowing emotional capital to sell you a Camry. This difference made Nissan's effort seem much more genuine than Toyota's. It is however, interesting to note that the Nissan ad did not end with the 'Innovation that Excites' tagline--perhaps because this ad may have been a little off brand?

Dove's male version of its 'Real Beauty' series, which has  been highly acclaimed for contributing to building women's self esteem from the inside out. While I'm not sure that 'Real Strength' is as directly tied to Dove's core competency, the 'Real Beauty' equity  gave Dove permission to create this men's initiative. That said, the Dove Men+Care products tacked onto the end seemed distracting and detracting.

Wild Card: The 'One Off's'
Dodge's 'Wisdom', Nationwide's 'Make Safe Happen',  Always' 'Like a Girl', and of course  NFL's 'No More' also brought social purpose to the Superbowl. 

The Verdict: 'Like A Girl' Wins
While they all managed to have relevance to their brands and businesses, Always won the show. Let's face it, Always' core business is not one that lends itself to the Superbowl, but, due to the nature of their business, Always comes into its core customer's lives at a time when their confidence is most vulnerable. And the execution, while perhaps a little heavy handed, certainly demonstrated how society has shaped women's self perceptions during this vulnerable time. Of course, in order for this not to be a 'one off', it would be nice to see Always extend this idea by taking real action to instill confidence in young women.

All in all, this year's Superbowl brought new and welcome brand sensibilities to the game. Given the ever more important role that corporate social responsibility plays in driving business for brands, it is likely that next year's Super Bowl will again feature some ads with social purpose. And while not all will be home runs, or shall I say touchdowns, the brands that chose to connect their messages to their core business and brands will be the ones most likely to create real brand value through their media investment.

What’s Love Got to Do With It?

Why Brands Shouldn't Stray From the Truth When Seeking Deeper Engagement

During my entire career in marketing, I have espoused the idea that if brands owners are to reap true economic value from their brands, they must do so by establishing an emotional connection with their audiences. It’s what branding is all about. But lately, I've noticed a disturbing trend in which brands seem to be willing do anything to make that connection...regardless of whether it is related to their brand or their business.

The latest example that comes to mind is McDonalds. In the last few weeks there has been quite a bit of media attention directed at their 'Signs' ad, which attempts to show McDonald's deep connection to America and its local communities. The ad has been both praised and derided.

'Signs'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93KTpF9JDWo

Of course, the ad got my attention as well. It made me want to understand what drove McDonald's to deviate so far from its normal tone and message. And it turns out that this ad is just an execution under a broader brand refresh, in which McDonald's is shifting the emphasis in ‘I’m lovin’ it’ to focus more on the ‘lovin’’.

In a video laying out McDonald’s new emphasis on ‘lovin’’, CMO Deborah Wahl is quoted as saying,'We believe that a little more lovin' can change a lot, even the world we live in. Lately, the balance of lovin' and hatin' seems off. Who better to stand up for lovin' than McDonald's?'. And that's when I began to have my doubts about this new direction. Is 'standing up for lovin'' really McDonald's role in the world?

In another ad, McDonald's, ‘Archenemies’ takes on the idea of 'love' in a completely different, much lighter tone. Here, McDonald’s seemingly brings together every iconic pair of archenemies, including dog and mailman, Roadrunner and Wiley Coyote, even Democrats and Republicans. It certainly is a charming, warm and well-done ad. The idea has been extended repeatedly through engaging content in social media.Yet, while I love the content, it just seemed to reinforce my doubts about what it is doing for McDonald's. 

'Archenemies'https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EShRCWOtNJ4

And these doubts left me conflicted. After all, I’ve sat in meetings spewing accolades about Subaru’s ‘love’ campaign, and how it has strengthened their brand and more than doubled their business. Why didn’t I feel the same about McDonald's new 'love' direction?

Subaru 'Love'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXElwDlpoIk

So I decided to compare Subaru’s ‘love’ to McDonald’s ‘love’. 

Subaru uses the tagline, ‘Love, it’s what makes a Subaru, a Subaru.’ Subaru has always had a fiercely loyal, upscale owner base who eschewed more expensive brands for Subaru. Subaru's ‘love’ is between its car and their owners. Love that is sparked by all the life enriching experiences that their car, and its legendary 4 wheel drive capability has facilitated. Simply put, the emotional bond is directly rooted in Subaru’s core competency and genuine customer experiences. And that is why Subaru's product, service, CSR, and brand communications work seamlessly to credibly amplify this 'love'. 

But, unless I missed an important diplomatic shift, McDonald’s core competency is not world peace. While a lot has changed since ‘You deserve a break today’ was McDonald’s mantra, McDonald’s core competency has not--McDonald's continues to provide a welcome break from the daily routine of harried people from all walks of life. 

And that was precisely the way that McDonald’s portrayed itself in the original ‘I’m lovin’ it’ launch in 2003 ads. That welcome break forged the love between the brand and its audience. That break was the 'it' in 'I'm lovin' it.' And that's why McDonald's could tell seamless brand and product stories under this powerful, emotionally charged brand umbrella. 

Original 2003 'I'm Lovin' Ad

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dI-xHMM8wXE&spfreload=10

But it seems that this latest brand refresh, attempts to co-opt 'love' in a way that's bigger than McDonalds has the right to. And that is probably why, despite the fact that love can be so powerful, it is very difficult for McDonald's to drill the idea of love down to the ads most connected to its business... its product ads. Instead, under the new brand umbrella, the latest Big Mac ad takes on a mock confrontational tone,  goading 'vegetarians, foodies and gastronauts' to avert their eyes while they extol the classic virtues of the big Mac and dismiss healthy food trends. The only reminder of the new brand direction comes at the very end as McDonald's uses the same animated heart graphic that they use in Archenemies, to transition to the end slate with the tagline and new 'I'm loving it' graphic. Thus the graphic and tagline seem disconnected in tone and message from the body of the ad.

'Unapologetic Big Mac'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHKznhffxig

And interestingly, McDonald's has not chosen to use their new brand umbrella at all when it comes to yet a third communications initiative, called 'Our Food, Your Questions', which addresses food quality concerns through a series of documentary like vignettes on its website. While this initiative might be the most genuine effort of all to move McDonald's image forward, it is delivered in a completely different tone and makes no mention of 'love' at all!

So, in the end it what are we to believe about who McDonald's is? Champion for world peace ? Satisfier of indulgent food cravings? Or a brand devoted to food quality? I'm not sure.

And that's why, in a world of communication channel and format proliferation, brand owners must be more diligent than ever to ensure that every piece of content, every attempt to emotionally connect with their audience be driven by a strategy that is rooted in true audience experiences and delivered with consistent tone and messaging, so that in the end, every dollar spent creates real brand and business value.  

Advice for Hyundai's Next CMO: It's not a 'Model' Job

Hyundai has been an anomaly in US automotive market, a market that is generally driven by inertia. Over long periods of time, very little changes in the sales rankings. Very rarely does a brand gain or lose significant share. And that's because few automotive brands deviate from the tried and true automotive marketing playbook, where new model launches rule. Launches that generally drive unsustainable sales momentum as competitors answer with their new versions of facing models.

But from 2008 to 2011, Hyundai's US market share rose from 3.0 to 5.1, catapulting them to the number 6th ranked brand in the industry. But since 2011, their momentum has stalled, and their share has slipped well below 5%. And as is usually the fate of CMO's with sliding share, last month Hyundai's VP of Marketing abruptly departed. 

Most industry publications tend to blame the sales slide on a failed launch of the latest Sonata. But is that the problem? Or is the problem really that Hyundai has slipped back into playing by conventional marketing rules that rely solely on new product launches?

Looking back over the history of Hyundai, might help to answer this question, and give the new CMO some ideas for a turnaround.

When first launched in 1986, Hyundai quickly captured share from higher priced Japanese brands by promising remarkably cheaper 'Cars that Make Sense'. Hyundai sales topped out at over 263,000 units in 1987. But as buyers realized  that 'sense' did not equal quality, Hyundai's sales fell dramatically. In 1998, sales dipped below 100,000 units, and the Hyundai brand was better known as a Letterman punchline than a viable choice.

And that's when Hyundai ditched the playbook, and began to break automotive convention, by thinking brand first, and model second. 

In 1998 Hyundai launched the  'Hyundai Advantage' warranty program, with a ground breaking 10 year, 100,000 mile power train warranty--better than even any luxury brand offered at the time. That was the first step in which Hyundai, the brand, began to behave and be seen as a champion that any car buyer, buying any Hyundai model, could rely on. And in that role, they also dramatically improved every aspect of every product that they sold.

And, indeed the market was ready for such a champion. By 2001, Hyundai had doubled its market share from 1 to 2 %. By 2008, Hyundai had gained another point of market share.

And, at a time when more and more recession spooked customers stayed away from automotive showrooms, Hyundai again demonstrated that they were champions for all car buyers by launching the 'Hyundai Assurance' plan on the Super Bowl. This plan allowed new Hyundai buyers who subsequently lost their jobs to return their cars with no consequence.  Again, Hyundai struck a cord with customers and share continued to rise, even after the Great Recession was over.

So by 2012, it appeared that Hyundai, with sales exceeding 600,000 units, could indeed challenge Nissan and Honda and move into the number 5 spot in the industry. And that's when, riding on its success, and reflecting its spirit of recent innovations, Hyundai changed its tagline to 'New Thinking, New Possibilities'. But it was also at this time that Hyundai began to think and behave more like a conventional car brand, and share began to erode.

So what should the next CMO of Hyundai do stop the slide and regain momentum? 

1. Stop focusing solely on new model launches. Hyundai's portfolio range spans perhaps the widest territory in the market, from the entry level Accent to the $61,500 Equus. Focusing on individual model launches will leave no buyer with a clear image of what Hyundai stands for. 
2. Behave your brand slogan by injecting new thinking and possibilities into the market. Tap into your DNA as a champion for all buyers to pioneer new marketing initiatives that eliminate the biggest pain points in the car buying process. How about working with your dealer body to offer a 20 minute transaction time guarantee? How about developing a viable on line purchase procedure?
3. Develop new ways for customers to experience your entire brand, perhaps developing a combination purchase/car sharing model that allows owners to trade out their vehicles for other Hyundai offerings for a number of times during the year.
4. Keep Hyundai buyers in the family with cutting edge loyalty programs that reward repeat buyers with value added perks and re-purchase discounts, like the airline industry does.
5. Utilize all of the above to inform a new kind of brand led marketing message, to highlights the unique virtues of Hyundai that come with the purchase of any model.

For it will be innovative, brand led initiatives like this that will drive sustainable market share growth and brand preference in every segment for Hyundai in the future.

  

The Next Automotive Reckoning: Why China Won't Save Every Premium Car Brand From Extinction

In the classic movie, 'The Graduate', all the adults are giving Dustin Hoffman's character, Ben advice for the future at his graduation party. One of the guests pulls Ben aside and whispers a coveted secret to him, 'I just want to say one word to you, just one word....plastics....there's a great future in plastics' Knowing he has ensured a bright future for Ben, the guest winks and walks away.

                                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSxihhBzCjk

In today's premium automotive landscape, there is also seemingly one word that is driving every manufacturer's business strategy...'China'. Virtually every premium and near premium car brand from Cadillac to Acura to Infiniti to Lexus to Mercedes has set their sights on the Chinese market. And there is good reason to do so. The premium end of the Chinese automotive market is outpacing the total market, with Jan - Jun 2014 premium brand sales up 30% over 2013.  And according to projections by McKinsey and others this growth is expected to continue for the better part of the decade. China is predicted to leapfrog the US to become be largest premium car market in the world by 2020.

But will every brand succeed? Some evidence suggests that the premium automotive battle has already been fought and won on other fronts, and that the premium Chinese market will look a lot like the American and European markets when it's all said and done. And the one word that will separate the winners from the losers is the same word that separates them in every other market...'brand'. Because more and more, premium brands are managed globally and they behave and perform consistently across markets. 

The fact is that in Europe, Mercedes, BMW and Audi combined command more than an 80% share of the premium car market.  And the US post great recession market structure has changed significantly. Since 2007, German brands have captured 12 share points, while Japanese and US brands have lost significant share. The Germans now command 45% of the US premium market.

Why is this? The fact is, that above certain price points, gorgeous sheet metal and state of the art electronics are not enough. Premium customers are buying into so much more than the hardware. They are buying into a brand vision, provenance and story. They are buying into a unique brand experience that defines a style of life. And the German automotive brands have been unwavering in telling and delivering on their brand stories. And that's why many car companies will fall short...they will fail to tie the enormous business opportunity to a compelling brand idea. Instead, they will continue to play a 'me too' game, searching for their brand's flavor of the month, and falling behind in volume and price points as they do.

So are all non-German premium automotive brands doomed?  Not necessarily.  But they will need to think differently. They will need to look inside themselves and search for their special DNA.  The DNA that allows them to do what no other premium brand does.  The DNA that helps them architect a unique and valuable customer experience. And then they need to be relentless in consistently delivering that experience at every touchpoint, for every customer, in every market. Thus far, the only non-German brand that appears to be doing this in China today is Tesla. And in doing so, they may very well be establishing a new standard for all premium automotive brands.

What If? Shaping a New Automotive Marketing Model

I was lucky enough to be invited by my friends at PointRoll (pointroll.com) to moderate a panel at the JD Power Automotive Marketing Roundtable yesterday.  As anyone who has ever read any of my blog posts knows, the topic 'Is the three tiered automotive marketing model obsolete?' was near and dear to my heart.

From left: Scot Cottick, Mike Dillon, Kristi VandenBosch, Ciaran Bossom,  Michael Brennan

The awesome panel (pictured above), while not agreeing on everything, seemed to agree that the three tiered model creates a painful disconnect between the brand and the customer that is most apparent at the dealership level.  They identified a need for greater collaboration in content development and data and platform sharing as the building blocks for a new model. 

After the discussion was over, PointRoll asked me to answer an open ended question...'What if?'. My answer was so lame that I've already forgotten it.

But, being around so many smart people yesterday gave me so much food for thought, that after feeding my brain with their inspiration, I've created a 'what if list' that begins to imagine how automakers can work with their dealer networks to accelerate innovation and develop cutting edge retail experiences:

1. What if dealer associations repurposed their advertising budgets to fund the development of common platforms and customer interfaces to facilitate a seamless, end to end brand experience across all geographies?
2. What if automakers redirected dealer incentive dollars to only support online transactions?
3. What if automakers and dealers looked outside the category to brands like Uber and Apple for ideas to inspire them to seamlessly move customers between digital and physical points of experience? 
4. What if automakers used technology to innovate their manufacturing processes to allow customers to pre-order and customize their vehicles at a guaranteed price and dealer margin?
5. What if automakers looked to travel and hospitality brands to develop programs that reward customers loyalty and tiers of vehicle usage with special perks and guaranteed trade in values?

While this list may not have all the answers, it seems that there is so much potential for technology to drive innovation in automotive marketing and experiences.  All it takes is a willingness to let go of obsolete practices, and take a leap of faith into the future.

What's In a Name? Why 'i' stands for 'we' at Apple.

Prior to today's Apple reveal, everyone was anticipating an iWatch...and nobody got one.  Instead, Apple introduced the 'Apple Watch'. They also introduced 'Apple Pay'.  Why move away from the 'i'? Why the shift?

A cynical point of view could be that Apple is trying to reassert the equity of their master brand into their new offerings, as the 'i' prefix has begun to overshadow the master brand.  But Apple rarely puts ego first and purpose second. So what is it?

Let's go back to the original 'i' prefix.   It first appeared in the iPod. Which was quickly followed by iTunes. iTunes became the hub for iPod, iPhone, iPhoto and iMovie.  Essentially an ecosystem built for sharing.  Music, Pictures, Video, and Conversation...in a word, content.  The enhancements announced for iPhone6 are all about this.  Larger screen, better camera and video capabilities....all about sharing content.

Now let's look at Apple Pay and Apple Watch.  These products extend Apple's footprint into two much more personal categories...finance and health.  Categories where sharing is not necessarily embraced.  Categories that might require a new, more private ecosystem.

So, perhaps the Apple prefix has a real purpose.  During the course of the event today, Tim Cook kept talking about enriching people's lives.  He also put quite a bit of emphasis on security and privacy.  

Last, let's look at the invitation itself...'We wish we could tell you more'.  This all points to Apple being a trusted confidant in your life.  

So, clearly, i is for we, and Apple is for me.

Establishing the New Automotive Marketing Ecosystem. A 'No More Tiers' Formula?

As digital channels fundamentally change the way customers make purchase decisions, is the traditional three tiered automotive model obsolete? Probably yes.  Will the three tiered model be going away anytime soon?  Probably not.

Why? It might help to go back to the beginning.

In 1898, E. St Elmo Lewis, an American marketer created the concept of the purchase funnel. It is based on the assumption that customers make decisions in a linear fashion through a process of elimination, from awareness to a consideration set to a single preference and purchase. Automotive marketers have used the funnel as the foundation for the conventional 3-tiered automotive marketing model in which manufacturers, dealer associations and individual dealers each have discrete 'buy this, 'buy now' and 'buy here' roles. A tier to tier 'hand-off' occurs as customers move down the funnel. 

And these tiers go hand and hand with a franchised dealer system, in which dealers and manufacturers sometimes see each other as necessary evils. Thus, while originally modeled on customer behavior, the tiers now serve to 'protect' individual interests, ostensibly allowing each entity to do what they do best.

And thus, as more and more automotive marketing activities move to digital channels, they move in tiered silos. But numerous studies have confirmed that customers are no longer behaving in such an orderly fashion; that, from the customers perspective, there are no more tiers. Rather, customers re-considering their 'upper funnel' 'buy this' decision right up until the moment they sign on the dotted line. And there is a strong possibility that the brand they ultimately purchase was not even on their original shopping list.  

And so, we have a system deeply rooted in comfortable conventions, supported by  profoundly entrenched institutions that evidence suggests is out of synch with today's reality. Not only does this create incredible inefficiency, but it also begs asking a fundamental question:  What if we started from scratch?

From there, a cascade of new questions arise.  A few:

• Would we create a collaborate ecosystem void of an 'us' and 'them' mentality?
• Would we be able to fundamentally change the customer experience?
• How would we fund the capital investments required to build a data engine to drive all marketing decisions?
• Who knows the customer best, and who, if anyone should owns the customer relationship?
• How can we optimize the total spend, regardless of source of budget?
• How would our media choices change?
• What role, should dealer associations have?

I don't have all the answers, but the brand who figures it out will define a new customer experience. 

I will be moderating a panel at the JD Power Automotive Marketing Roundtable on this subject next month.  The answers should be interesting.