"Buy the Way…" Insights on Integrated Marketing Communication

While the digital age and social media changed the game for advertising, it is the millennial generation that is continuing to be a major hurdle for marketers. According to Forbes article in 2017, there were 80 million millennial consumers with annual spending totaling around 600 billion dollars (Kestenbaum, 2017). There is great power in numbers, and millennials have just that! While older generations are known to be brand loyal, millennials do not fit this mold, they continue to put pressure on brands to get real and lose the empty promises. They are also known to ditch a brand if they see a better deal somewhere, or if the company does them wrong.

While Millennials are considered to be the most “educated and productive” (St. Louis, 2017) is this the reason they continue to put pressure on brands? We can argue that social media has created a desensitized population and this can be directly related to millennials, are they actually questioning the authenticity of a brand or just don’t care?  With options to follow/unfollow, hide and 24 hour expiration dates, do brands stand a chance?  What will the future be for advertising?

References

Kestenbaum, R. (2017, June 14). This Is How Millennials Shop. Retrieved March 26, 2018, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardkestenbaum/2017/06/14/this-is-how-millennials-shop/#77cce686244c

Louis, M. S. (2017, January 27). Here’s Why Millennials Are Ignoring Your Brand (And What to Do About It). Retrieved March 26, 2018, from https://www.inc.com/molly-reynolds/heres-why-millennials-are-ignoring-your-brand-and-what-to-do-about-it.html

I read an interesting article this morning about a series of layoffs this week of Whole Foods employees both at the store and regional levels. Many of these layoffs included graphic artists and other employees who assist with in-store and regional marketing events. While this is part of Amazon’s strategy to streamline in-store marketing after acquiring the company (Ortenberg, 2018), it does raise a bigger question. During this acquisition, will the new parent company impact the more memorable aspects of shopping at Whole Foods?

I think so.

Amazon’s Whole Foods Marketing isn’t thinking about the big picture – getting rid of these in-store marketers who create the memorable art that we see around stores may do more damage to the brand than is worth the cost savings of restructuring staff. If they replace the colorful, sometimes irreverent or pop culture-driven marketing with slick corporate design, have they misunderstood what shoppers appreciate? Yes, they have the right as the new parent company to make changes, but this change is one that could affect the customer’s shopping experience, which may lead to lower profits. Do you think it’s worth the risk? Do you like the current WFM marketing? Should in-store marketing be mass-produced and corporate or retain a quirky sense of style that customers are used to? Only time will tell if Amazon made th right decision.

References

Ortenberg, C. (2018, March 23). With layoffs, WFM erases more brand marketing tools. Nosh. Retrieved from https://www.projectnosh.com

Dyson, the British technology company who brought the world the bagless vacuum cleaner, is taking a leap into a new field – automotive industry. The company announced a £2bn project to develop and build electric cars from scratch. Dyson is confident that its audacious attempt can be achieved due to its ingenuity, engineering knowhow and strong technology. James Dyson said he was planning a “radically different” type of electric car than what was on the market, followed by two more models that target at a more mass market (Campbell & Pooler, 2018).

The automotive industry is notoriously brutal to newcomers. Even Apple scaled back its automotive ambitions and Google abandoned the plan to build its own cars. Not to mention that Tesla has been late to deliver every model and has yet to make any money (Griffith, 2017). As an outsider, will Dyson pull it off? “Most of the incumbent advantages in the car industry today become a disadvantage very quickly because you’re sitting on infrastructure and know-how for the cars of yesterday, not the cars of tomorrow,” Conze, the CEO, says (Griffith, 2017). Indeed, the company has a reputation for engineering smart. But is “knowledgeable enough”? How about the brand? The passion project may unlock the brand potential by reinforcing Dyson’s reputation as an inventor. The company also takes a huge risk in draining its resources.

The only company has a successful crossover branding I know of is Michelin. The premium, high-quality tire manufacturer also publishes destination travel guides – Michelin Guide, which awards Michelin stars to restaurants. They did an excellent job by balancing the two distinctive business expertise.

What do you think of Dyson’s new ambition? Will your next car be Dyson?

References:
Campbell, P., & Pooler, M., (2018, Feb. 13). Dyson bets on electric cars to shake up industry. Financial Times. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/564aa742-0cac-11e8-8eb7-42f857ea9f09
Griffith, E., (2017, Oct. 4). In building an electric car, Dyson goes its own way. WIRED. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/story/in-building-an-electric-car-dyson-goes-its-own-way/

Social media has been in the spotlight more than usual lately, and not for positive reasons. Snapchat saw stocks tumble multiple times in recent weeks, while Facebook is taking heat following news that it essentially gave away users’ personal data. This has spawned numerous discussions about social media, including several on this blog. Privacy is at the forefront of people’s concerns, as well as how much we are or aren’t controlled by social media. In the midst of this turmoil, you have to wonder – are people ready for a digital detox and what does that mean for communicators?

In the wake of Facebook’s recent news, some sources have suggested alternatives to Facebook. Twitter is an obvious choice, but there are also a host of up-and-coming platforms, like Path, Raftr, and Vero (Broida, 2018). At the same time, the WhatsApp co-founder tweeted this week that it’s time to delete Facebook, which got the #deletefacebook hashtag trending (Newton, 2018).

Millennials and Generation Z are commonly viewed as the most ubiquitous social media users, always glued to their phones. But even this may be changing. In a recent editorial, one blogger interviewed several teenage girls who decided to put their phones down and take a break from social media (Kourkounis, 2018). Kourkounis (2018) goes on to cite a 2017 poll conducted by a nonprofit that found that over fifty percent of teens have started to step back from their digital lives, particularly social media. Reasons vary, from wanting to avoid drama or hoping to focus on non-digital activities (Kourkounis, 2018).

Image from http://www.truworthwellness.com/blog/digital-detox-for-improving-your-health.html

Social media is hard to leave. Whether you still use it frequently or not, you likely have a Facebook page, and you probably use Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, or any of the other social media networks out there. But let’s say people truly do hop on board the #deletefacebook bandwagon, or more teens decide to put their phones down. That disconnect is a detriment to communicators, who thrive on using digital sources to market their brands.

As Statt (2018) notes, Facebook—and all social media, really—is a living, breathing ecosystem. Businesses rely on social media to drive awareness, advertise, and connect with consumers. Facebook is an established mainstay of online marketing (whether Facebook has remained relevant to younger audiences over recent years is another debate). If consumers turn away from Facebook and focus on new platforms, communicators must evolve with the changing marketing landscape. If we ever hit a tipping point and more people put away their phones and detach from being plugged in 24/7, communicators and marketers will need to look ahead to find the next big idea, whatever that may be.

What do you think? Is Facebook in any real danger? Has social media passed its peak? Would you do a social media (or smartphone) detox?

References

Broida, R. (2018, March 22). Social-media alternatives to Facebook [Blog post}. Retrieved from https://www.cnet.com/how-to/social-media-alternatives-to-facebook/

Kourkounis, J. (2018, March 22). On a break: Teens ghost social media [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://whyy.org/segments/on-a-break-teens-ghost-social-media/

Newton, C. (2018, March 20). WhatsApp co-founder tells everyone to delete Facebook [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/20/17145200/brian-acton-delete-facebook-whatsapp

Statt, N. (2018, March 22). Boycotting digital monopolies like Facebook is harder than it seems [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/22/17152922/delete-facebook-boycott-cambridge-analytica-tech-monopoly-data-privacy

Building and fostering an authentic brand relationship with consumers has been a running theme throughout our course materials this semester.  Not only have Heath & Heath (2007), Young (2014), and Vaynerchuck (2013) all discussed the importance of connecting with consumers, but it has also been a central tenet found throughout Brandon Rochon’s remarks.  In light of this prevailing concept, I figured it would be both informative and thought-provoking to present a cautionary tale of a company that did everything wrong in terms of consumer relationship building and clearly did not pay any attention to any of the literature about successful advertising.  Nearly 40 years after going public, Toys R Us recently announced plans to liquidate, a move that signals the ultimate demise of a company that once cornered the market on toy sales (Hirsch, 2018).  In its prime, Toys R Us was essentially heaven for children of all ages, the preeminent destination for all toys from Lego sets to race cars to video games (Hirsch, 2018).  Much of the company’s success was built on the fact it forged strong brand loyalty with a targeted audience—parents who wanted to make their children happy.  This strategy worked for most of the 1980s and 1990s, however, a string of ownership changes combined with institutional arrogance led to a fractured relationship between the company and its top demographic (Hirsch, 2018).

Apparently, many key decision makers felt that Toys R Us would always maintain its spot as leader in the toy industry and as a result, never felt the urge to evolve by keeping up with consumer trends, investing in stores that were financially successful, and reallocating resources in those that were not performing as well (Hirsch, 2018). This lack of engagement also manifested itself in the form of actual physical deterioration since Toys R Us ignored opportunities to either renovate its stores or make them look cleaner.  Perhaps the company’s most damning mistake is that it never adapted to changing technologies.  In the late 1990s, online merchants like Amazon and EToys started popping up in the market and not only threatened Toys R Us’ prime positioning, but supplanted the company as a sales leader.  By the time Toys R Us tried to move online, it was already too late and the company had wasted millions of dollars trying to secure exclusive merchandising rights with Amazon.

Ultimately, this is a picture-perfect example of a company that never grew in its brand cycle and its evolution came to a screeching halt (Hollingshead, 2018).  Rather than taking inventory on how its brand is perceived and focusing on new ways to either strengthen orreinvent its relationship with consumers, the company neglected its customers and by the time it realized there was a problem, it lost its place in the industry (Hollingshead, 2018; Heath & Heath, 2007).  It is so appropriate that many of our materials compare the consumer-business dynamic to personal relationships because in this instance Toys R Us is the husband that let himself go, stopped buying flowers, and thinking of creative romantic dates. Then, 10 years later, he has no clue why his wife files for divorce.  Unfortunately, it does not look like Toys R Us will have a chance to win back its consumers.

References

Heath, C. & Heath, D.  (2007).  Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die [Kindle version].  Retrieved from Amazon.com

Hirsch, L.  (2018, March 16).  Toys R Us built a kingdom and the world’s biggest toy store.  Then, they lost it.  CNBC.  Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/26/toys-r-us-built-a-kingdom-and-the-worlds-biggest-toy-store-then-they-lost-it.html

Hollingshead, A.  (2018).  The 6 M’s of IMC plans [PowerPoint slides].  Retrieved from https://lmscontent.embanet.com/USC/CMGT541/CMGT541_w07_alt.pdf

Vaynerchuck, G.  (2013).  Jab, jab, jab, right hook: How to tell your story in a noisy social world [Kindle version].  Retrieved from Amazon.com

Young, A.  (2014).  Brand media strategy: Integrated communications planning in the digital era.  New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Right now in the news is the issue of Facebook’s use of user data and possible privacy violations.

Part of the concern, noted in this New York Times article is third parties being able to also use and mis-use that data for their own private gains, as in the case of the Trump campaign.

This issue brings to mind how safe it is to have your livelihood and identity as well as cookie information such as online shopping done, political views, or even just your favorite TV shows made available online through Facebook.

I know in my recent research for our group project on Toms, I now see Toms ads in my Facebook feed in multitudes.

I also visit the Aerie clothing brand website regularly but not their Facebook, yet what should appear in my feed but this? Additionally telling me one of my friends also likes this company.

I personally don’t like the idea of corporations for brands or entities like Facebook being able to shape my reality (or that of other people, especially politically) through advertising based on the data they gather about me. It will be interesting to see how Facebook responds to these latest allegations. As of yet, officials have made no public statement, but there are calls for Mark Zuckerberg to appear to testify into this latest possible user data violation. Perhaps fears have been heightened since the Russia hacking/ voter influence topic has come to light since the presidential election.

References:

Kang, C. (2018, March 21). Facebook Faces Growing Pressure Over Data and Privacy
Inquiries. The New York Times, retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/business/ftc-facebook-privacy-investigation.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Have you ever been annoyed by ads of an item that you saw on Amazon or another online store that you added to your cart or wishlist didn’t quite purchase yet? I’m sure all of us have been in this situation where we were browsing and spend some time looking at a particular item that we like and go on our social media or other websites only to see it again through text or images. It’s creepy, disturbing, but at the same at the same time fuels the desire to get it. As consumers, we may find it irritating, but for marketers, they call it a successful tactic. It’s called “remarketing” and is a smart way for marketers to re-connect visitors to a company’s website that had their interest but haven’t made that final purchase. We live in a digital world where marketers are always looking to try innovative ways to tap into the consumer’s interest. They may hit the jackpot on this one. The tactics of remarketing have helped big brands increase their ROI. Remarketing works by placing cookies on the website of the visitor’s computer or device that they visit. Each cookie has an ID that is added to the list of the audience to be marketed. A marketer can arrange different lists that can be utilized in various ways such as to reach different goals and criteria or various types of consumers.

Why is remarking so important? It’s important because as consumers you’re brought back to the item, product or brand that you’re interested in. It’s not just some random ad that pops up and jumps at you. On top of that, 96% of people that shop online are not ready to purchase and checkout of their cart. From a marketer perspective, remarketing allows the company to target visitors to their website that has been established consumers of the brand. It’s smart marketing by directly targeting the audience. It’s definitely a win for marketers since it has one of the most impactful tactics in digital marketing. According to data from SEJ (Search Engine Journal) on the State of Digital Marketing, there’s a data that reported  91 % of SEJ expert believe it is an effective method. Another data from SEJ also shows that remarketing decrease advertisement fatigue on consumers by half. The ads provided a personalized experience for the user and it is also relevant to his or her interest.

Like I mentioned before, marketers are always looking to find a way to get the audience attention on various platforms, and as consumers no ones to be flooded with ads that they don’t want. As creepy as it sounds, it may not be exactly a win-win situation on both sides, but can we call it close?

References:

Vrountas, T. (2018, March 15). The 7 Biggest Digital Advertising Trends Taking Place Right Now. Retrieved March 18, 2018, from https://instapage.com/blog/digital-advertising-trends

What is Google Remarketing and How it Works. (2018, February 6). Retrieved March 19, 2018, from https://www.adhesion.co.nz/blog/google-remarketing-how-it-works/

Gary Vaynerchuk (2013) in his book, “Jab, Jab, Jab, Right Hook: How to Tell Your Story in a Noisy, Social World” argued that brands and their marketers cannot continue to ignore social media and he urged them to understand how to effectively use it. Social media platforms such as Facebook is able to gather data from its users to understand what their interests are based on the posts they like (among other data they track) and tailor information that appears in the user’s newsfeed based on these interests.

Some appreciate the use of these algorithms as they see things they would like to see in their feed, but recent news about the use of Facebook and possible manipulation of users’ information trigger some serious concerns.

A developing story in the news revolves around Cambridge Analytica, the political data firm that allegedly gained access to private information on 50 million Facebook users. Cambridge Analytica suspended its chief executive, Alexander Nix, following a television broadcast where Nix was recorded suggesting that the company “had used seduction and bribery to entrap politicians and influence foreign elections”.

Cambridge Analytica offered tools that analyze personalities of American voters and influence their behaviors. Facebook argues that this is not data breach as it routinely allows access to user data for academic purposes. However, Facebook “prohibits this kind of data to be sold to any ad network, data broker or other advertising or monetization-related service.” 

How much of social media can we really control — and how far would we allow it to control us?

Continue reading →