Yet I recently watched a video of a “marketing guru” claiming differentiation and positioning had to do with making a unique offer  in a unique way. Those are tactics. They may arise from a strategic differentiation, but they do not drive the business. They are not a brand’s foundation.

Undoubtedly this speaker was steeped in the idea of a unique selling proposition (USP) being the key to successful marketing. But the USP is a tactic, usually a claim. Hopefully it will reflect the difference you have determined to call your own: a position you can own and defend. But that differentiation is more than a certain product quality and subsequent benefit.

The USP is a concept originally made famous within advertising circles by Rosser Reeves, then CEO of Ted Bates Advertising, in the late 1950’s. The agency was famous for driving home a USP with frequency, consistency and an in-your-face presentation. Most famous campaign was probably for Anacin. It featured a hammer banging on a cartoon head to dramatize the problem, then as the diagramed “head” took Anacin, the screen flashed “FAST, FAST, FAST” to demonstrate its USP.

But to really differentiate a company and their offerings from their competitors, a company must make that differentiation a core commitment of the company and the company’s employees. The company and/or its branded products come to stand for that particular differentiator in the minds of consumers. It must identify and adopt this unique, meaningful and desirable position, and keep it in mind with every strategic and tactical decision the company makes.
  
It is the measure for all activity: how will this activity we’re considering affect our market position, our differentiator?

Some who’ve set good examples include:

FedEx with overnight deliveries guaranteed…
Netflix with no-penalty movie rentals by mail…
Southwest Airlines with a fun, no-frills flight…
Target with good design combined with low prices.

All of these examples have their differentiation as a driving force for their respective organizations. Employees and consumers know what makes the companies unique.
  
One could define the differentiator as the “corporate culture” expressed through words, image and deed. It begins as the corporate vision and is then translated and transformed into the BRAND and the brand promise by keeping true to the position.
 
Martin Jelsema
303-242-5975

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. Positioning and unique selling proposition: two different concepts.
2. Differentiating Your Brand By Design
3. Branding with a USP is Short-Sighted
4. Brand Basics – Step 4
5. Branding Basics – Step 4

“Wall Street Journal’ glossy magazine renamed ‘WSJ.’
“Story posted: February 20, 2008 – 12:10 pm EDT

“New York—The name of The Wall Street Journal’s glossy magazine, slated to debut Sept. 6, has been changed from Pursuits to WSJ. WSJ., which will focus on luxury markets, will be delivered to 800,000 subscribers of the Journal as an insert in the newspaper’s “Weekend Edition.” A spokesman for Dow Jones & Co., which publishes the Journal, said the name WSJ. resonated with both readers and advertisers.”

Now producing and distributing an insert focusing on “luxury markets” may be a smart move on the part of Dow-Jones. But calling it WSJ. ? (Note the “distinguishing “.” That’s part of the name. Does that save the three initials without the “.” for the newspaper? I don’t think so.)

Their rationale: WSJ. “resonated with both readers and advertisers”. 

Of course it does! Anyone having performed any name preference studies knows people tend to prefer the familiar. That’s why most coined-word names perform poorly in research. So they’re going to dilute the Wall Street Journal brand with a “luxury market” insert with a name that means Wall Street Journal to most readers.  It may be aimed at the right market, but not the right mind-set.

This follows an announcement last month stating that the Journal was going to introduce a sports section to the paper. More unfocus. More grabbing ad revenues at the expense of the brand’s solid reputation as a business barometer and financial advisor.

If this is the direction the Journal is taking because of the Rupert Murdoch influence, then I’ll bet there are editors and reporters anguishing over the fate of the Wall Street Journal as I write this. And though I’ve never been a staff member, I can relate.

I mourn the death of another brand built to mean something significant to its stakeholders, but diluted and rendered impotent by attempting to become everything to everyone with the mistaken idea that growth by any and all means is vital. Greed reigns.

Martin Jelsema
303-242-5975

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. How will Murdoch Affect the WSJ Brand?
2. Get your Hyundai luxury car before they’re all gone.
3. Branding a trade publication: most do a poor job
4. How Can “Plus” Differentiate a Brand?
5. Sacking John Elway: the brand not the man

You can see the entire article by clicking “Hyundai Bets New Sedan
Is a Luxury It Can Afford”. But before you do, here are my comments.

First, I’d ask Hyundai if they think introducing a luxury car under their own name (instead of founding new divisions such as Toyota [Lexis], Nisson [Infiniti] and Honda [Acura] have done) won’t “taint” the new model, called Genesis? 

Hyundai is claiming comparison to BMW and Mercedes, but at a much lower price.

Is that an oxymoron? Is a luxury brand sold on value? And can anyone ever think of Hyundai as a luxury vehicle?

 The perception that Hyundai had been what my mechanic called a “throw-away” car when it first arrived in the U.S. still persists according to the WSJ article. People don’t know its quality rivals Toyota and Honda. I know because I drive a Hyundai Elantra and love it.

So how can Hyundai introduce a value-priced luxury competitor and have any credibility? Where’s the panache? Where’s the heritage? Where’s the prestige?

It takes a long time for perceptions of a brand to change. In this case there are two problems: the existing perception of Hyundai and the idea that a luxury car comes with a value price tag.

There’s another factor: their timing. Hyundai follows the Japanese “big three” by at least a decade. And the market is trending toward fuel efficiency and “thinking green”. For a company like Hyundai, that would be a better direction to take in today’s environment. There’s where they could make a difference sooner and with more impact and credibility.

Good luck, Hyundai. I love you, but I think you’ve taken a wrong turn.

Martin Jelsema

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. Brands that make me scoff – Toyota Matrix
2. Sacking John Elway: the brand not the man
3. Positioning Isn’t Dead, It’s Just Back Home
4. Wall Street Journal brand is losing focus
5. Brand Basics – Step 4

I’ve ranted about specific examples of meaningless and confusing taglines. My stance was that they should help differentiate a company or product from its competitors. In other words, it should strengthen the brand.

Now I see someone else has the same thoughts. Only he isn’t as negative as I’ve been.

John Moore, he blogs at BrandAutopsy.typepad.com, made a point recently that establishing a brand without using taglines at all will produce a stronger brand! In other words, let the other branding elements – name, logo, colors, ambiance, story, etc. – carry the message and set the tempo for your brand. Here’s a quote from his blog:

“A marketing world without taglines is about designing interesting customer experiences where people interact with the brand in order to better understand and appreciate the reasons why the brand deserves the right to exist. It’s about realizing a brand’s unique style is its best form of advertising.”

And here’s John’s author box: John Moore was formerly in marketing at Starbucks Coffee and Whole Foods Market; he now runs the Brand Autopsy Marketing Practice. Moore is also the author of the marketing book, Tribal Knowledge. His blog is BrandAutopsy.typepad.com

Note, too that BrandAutopsy is featured on my blogroll. He’s a pro and provides good insights and information.

Martin Jelsema
303-242-5975

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. Here’s a great definition of branding
2. Are You Kiddin’ Me?
3. Nonprofit taglines: no better than commercial slogans
4. BrandingWire Case Study: Opinions by the Dozen
5. More Fine Branding and Marketing Blogs

I believe it’s particularly vital for a small businesses to find a niche that they can own and focus their resources and attention on that niche exclusively.

Mostly people nod agreement, then ignore this advice.

There are two reasons, I think.

First, they aren’t patient enough. Understandably, they are cash poor in the beginning. We know the biggest concern of start-up businesses is cash flow. If you can help a business generate cash flow, you are considered an angel. Never mind where the customers come from or how they are acquired or how loyal they may be or how fragmented their needs may be, if they represent immediate cash they’re welcome.

So business owners try a coupon mailing. If the first one “doesn’t work” in generating immediate customer activity, they abandon it and begin listening to the radio salesperson, or the list broker with a sure-fire traffic generator. Flitting from one medium to the next, from one message to a second, from one offer to another, whatever income is produced by unfocused promotions is funneled to another medium promising better results.

Thus, prospects may never hear more than one or two messages. And according to Jay Levinson of the Guerrilla Marketing empire, it will take an average of 17 exposures to your message before prospects will consider purchasing from you.
 
The second reason entrepreneurs won’t focus is because they might miss some business. Their attitude is that if they do not address “the masses”,  they will leave money on the table. It’s not greed so much as fear that they may be missing a great and on-going opportunity if they narrow their focus.

If you focus upon a specific market segment, fashion your product/service, your brand and your message to meet needs in that segment, you can build a brand and a business that will thrive long-term because it “means something” to your customers and to those they will refer to you.

Selecting the market segment(s) you will serve may be tricky. There are three criteria I believe a segment must meet to be viable
1.       Is it large enough to accommodate your business?
2.       Are the members of the segment willing and able to buy what you’re selling?
3.       Can you readily identify those populating the segment?

It’s worth exploring niche marketing as a major strategy. Just be patient and never fear.

Martin Jelsema
303-242-5975

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. Branding a Law Firm to Fill a Niche
2. Brand associations: be careful of the company you keep
3. Naming Tips – Number 30 in a Series
4. This IT company needs focus
5. Estes Park: a Resort with an Inferiority Complex

He had invented a term that was the touchstone for the type of advertising he and his agency produced. The term: unique selling proposition, USP for short.

The unique selling proposition was (and is) a single feature or benefit of a product hammered home through ads that focused powerfully and solely on the USP. You’d have to be at least 50 to remember the ads he conceived for Anacin. There was a cartoon arm wielding a hammer to the head of a headache sufferer. Then came a clock face with the hands moving very fast and the single word, FAST, flashed on the screen four times in succession. Then the head become a smiling face signifying the headache was gone – fast.

They were most annoying and very intrusive. But they sold product.

Now Mr. Reeve’s concept of USP has carried on to this day. The idea is still sound and effective in sales as well as advertising.

However, some people have attempted to use USP and positioning synonymously. Well, they are not the same. I hear some marketing people expressing a USP as their position in the marketplace. They treat the USP as if it were a genuine differentiator when in reality it is a benefit/feature plucked from the market research indicating why people have said they buy a product from the product category.

A USP is just what it says it is: a unique selling proposition. It is an advertising campaign theme. Or the canned sales pitch. It is predicated on making a claim before s competitor can establish that benefit as its own. In other words, Anacin was no faster than Bayer, its only competitor back in the 1950’s. But Anacin used speed of relief first and loudly, making it their own.

Promoting a product’s benefit does not differentiate the product in a significant way. If a particular campaign doesn’t work or gets stale, you ask the agency to come up with another USP. The USP is a device, not a strategy.

I once heard a sale trainer in a room of some 300 entrepreneurs claim that you differentiated your product with an USP such as a coupon offer or a two-for-one sale. These may be USP,s but they are not differentiators in the sense of defining a position a brand can occupy in the collective minds of a group of loyal customers.

Al Ries, one of the creators of the term positioning and co-author of the book, Positioning: the Battle for Your Mind, likes to say it’s the single word that comes to mind when the brand is mentioned. For Volvo it’s “safety”. For Whole Foods it’s “organic”. For Sierra Club it’s “environment”. These words come from the essence of the brand. It begins with the corporate mission and the vision for the product. It incorporates corporate values and culture. It’s the brand story, the brand platform, the brand presence. It’s the people associated with the brand at all levels of the supply chain. It’s the leadership of the company and of the brand champions within and outside the company. And it’s the word-of-mouth and status the brand enjoys.

The USP does not normally communicate a genuine product position. There needs to be more than a benefit at the root of the brand and its position.

Lets just sat that positioning is a strategic activity and developing a unique selling proposition is a sales or advertising tactic.

Martin Jelsema
303-242-5975
 

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. Branding with a USP is Short-Sighted
2. Differentiating your brand is strategic, developing an USP is tactical
3. Positioning Isn’t Dead, It’s Just Back Home
4. Tagline Panic Setting in at American Airlines?
5. Back to Basics – 3

That triggered my memory of an idea Tom Peters advocates in his book, Re-Imagine. He devotes a chapter and a lot of passion to DESIGN. He begins by speaking to product design but then expands his “rant” to cover design in all its aspects.

I agree with his passion and his all-encompassing approach to design. To me design is a definite differentiator of a brand, or at least it can be. Certainly the design of the Dyson vacuum cleaner is the thing that differentiates that brand and demands a premium price. And I’m not just addressing the exterior design and color, I’m writing about the inherent product design here.

When Jack Trout (with Steve Rivkin) wrote the book, Differentiate or Die, he (they) did not allude to design as a differentiator. They did identify “new” as a differentiator, but not design per se. Yet today design has become probably the single best and most appreciated differentiator fore consumers.

Look at two obvious examples: Target has embraced design as their major reason to be. People have come to associate Target with fine design at an affordable price. The furniture maker, Ikea, not only designs unique products, this Swedish company has also designed a unique shopping experience. I’ve not personally shopped an Ikea store, but I’ve heard that it is a unique activity that is memorable and stimulating.

Now in its broadest sense design can be interpreted much broader than product, logo, and store layout. As Mr. Peters declares, design is present in almost all functions of a company. It can be good or bad design, even unconscious design. It can be more than visual, too. Service companies design their offerings. A Wolfgang Puck’s recipe soup is designed. A DVD player’s manual is designed. The financing of a new plasma HD-TV is designed.

Tom Peters advocates that the chief designer within a company should have a seat at the director’s table, or at least participate at the chief executive level. The designer’s input is a strategic activity as much as a tactical one. She or he will help shape the design approach, establish standards, educate employees at all levels and functions, and police the environment to make sure the standards are met consistently.

I for one would like to hear about an insurance company putting a design advocate in a position to influence the various products as well as the way the company communicates, administers, sells and finances their brands.

I’m all for a new mantra – DESIGN DIFFERENTIATES DRAMATICALLY

Martin Jelsema
303-242-5975

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. Differentiating your brand is strategic, developing an USP is tactical
2. Brand Basics – Step 4
3. Branding Basics – Step 9
4. Beware of Complicated Logo Designs
5. Good logo design means legibility first.

But I’m not sure I’m serving  readers as effectively as I could be. I’d like to grow the readership of this blog> I guess everyone that blogs has the same goal, but with all the years I’ve been around, I’ve accumulated quite a bit of knowledgeSo I’d like some feedback.

Here are five branding subjects. They’re numbered 1 thru 5.

Please review the list and then find the tiny “comments” link below the blog. After signing in, just give me your feedback. Either rank the five numbers representing the topics or list the first one or two you’d like me to address.

• 1 – naming tips
• 2- branding strategies
• 3 – brand management issues
• 4 – positioning
• 5 – graphic brand representations

Of course, if there’s another topic you’d like addressed that’s not covered above, just write it down in your comment.

Helping me with this will help you and future readers get the most out of coming back for more.

Martin Jelsema
303-242-5975

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. Naming tips – Number 14 in a series
2. Branding Basics: Step 1
3. Naming Tip: Number 47 in a Series
4. Naming Tips: Number 33 in a Series
5. Back to Basics – 2

I watch commercials with half an eye. When they’re on I’m usually doing the Sunday suduku.

So I’m not really clear about what I saw today. I know it was a hotel/motel chain called “Choice”. I never did get what they’re USP was if they had one.

But the thing that really confused me and caused me to make a note to write this blog – they signed off with the names and logos of four or five different

chains. They said something like “be sure to stop at one of our facilities and then named “Clarian”, “Quality Inn” and others I couldn’t remember even though by now I was fully attentive to their ad.

I had to go to the Choice Hotel web site to identify the other players, and to find out they had another five chains in their stable that weren’t advertised. But even on the website each brand was not differentiated from the next. Each web page was almost exactly the same for each brand.

Here’s the point: advertising five different brand names in the same commercial is really confusing. Does each brand have an identity of its own? Is this a case of egos in an acquisition orgy where the old names had to be retained to enable sales to go through? Did Choice think by retaining five chain names and advertising all five together would somehow help people think of Choice?

Or were they thinking, “If Marriott can have a stable of chains, so can we, and we can retain the unique identities of each of our acquisitions by advertising five at a time.” But Marriott differentiates between their chains. And they use the unifying Marriott name with each. And I’m not sure the way Marriott is doing it is the correct approach to differentiating one from another.

There’s a whole body of work concerning brand architecture and internal brand organizations. Because I’ve mostly concerned myself with smaller businesses, I’m not an expert on brand families and the tensions occurring within companies with multiple brand managers. But it does seem to me that what Choice Hotels is doing is not aiding any of their brands, including the Choice brand.

In fact, I’d say there really isn’t a Choice brand, just as there isn’t a prominent Proctor and Gamble brand. But Choice doesn’t understand that if you have brands in your stable, each should have its own identity differentiated from its siblings. You don’t see Proctor and Gamble promoting Tide, Era, Gain, Dreft and Cheer in the same ad.

I have a hunch that Choice is in this predicament because it’s very costly to convert the diverse facilities to a single brand, and they haven’t the budgets to advertise them separately. I would hope that in the long run they’ll convert facilities to a single nameplate, that within four or five years there’ll be a single brand that’s meaningful to their market members. I hope consumers will still give them a chance when they’ve finally gotten their act together.

Martin Jelsema
303-242-5975

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. Branding a motel chain
2. Packaging your brand: do you give it the attention it deserves?
3. Brand the Business or Brand Its Offerings?
4. Positioning and unique selling proposition: two different concepts.
5. Is Your Tagline a Platitude?

Well, I’ve run into another blue-chip advertiser whose adopted a tagline at least as useless as the example I gave last week: “American Airlines: We know why you fly”.

This time it’s MasterCard in the barrel.

I’m not sure how long they’ve been using “MasterCard – the card that won’t hold you back”.

But I can tell you it’s not a very strong competitive position, nor does it resonate with customers (at least with the six or seven I asked about the slogan). It’s not relevant as far as I can tell. Unless one of their competitors isn’t living up to promises they’ve made to customers. I own Visa, MasterCard, American Express and Discover cards and none of them have held me back, except that all of them rise interest rates, and I’m pretty sure that’s a function of the bank, not of the credit card provider.  In fact, I don’t know how any card provider could hold me back. It seems to me they’re addressing a phantom issue.

So, what’s the point? It’s a tagline that doesn’t…

Differentiate the advertiser…
Isn’t relevant…
Is not engaging…
Help make MasterCard more competitive…
Seem to increase MasterCard awareness or preference…
And finally, definitely falls into the platitude classification…

Isn’t your reaction to this slogan, “well, I should hope so”?

I’m at a loss. I speculated last week that desperation was the cause of American adopting its lame slogan. Is this the case here?

Or am I missing something.

I’d like to know what you think.

Am I so far out of sync with Mad Ave’s latest thinking that I’ve missed the point? Please let me know.

And if you’ve run in to taglines you’ve found dumb, please share them here. Also I’d like your candidates for great, differentiating taglines, too.
Just click “comments” below.

Martin Jelsema
303-242-5975

Post from:

Source of info and strongly-held opinions about branding and positioning

Branding related posts:

1. MasterCard: I’m sorry
2. A tagline that actually differentiates the brand
3. Tagline Panic Setting in at American Airlines?
4. Three Tagline Traps You’ll Want to Avoid
5. Why taglines go astray