15.846 Branding

[marialenass-blog]

Share your happy :)

Kashi’s latest twitter campaign uses the hashtag #ShareYourHappy as an invitation to its followers to share positive stories that centers or remind them of happiness. The hashtag is also used to communicate Kashi’s mission as shown on the example below. The tag allows both to communicate their value proposition and to receive stories from followers. 

By inviting people to share what makes them happy, Kashi needs to make sure that they can reply when needed. In the example below Monica mentions how much she is enjoying a type of cereal while missing another type which was discontinued. She goes further by expressing the attachment the cereal has not just because of the cereal itself but because of the memories from when consuming it. Kashi’s response is brilliant in that it deflects the pseudo-complaint by asking Monica to tell them how much she misses the cereal in question.

There are innumerable examples of brands that are using twitter to effectively communicate with their customers, followers and both. Because corporations can be considered to be soulless entities, social media can bring back the idea that the brand is something/somebody we can interact with by means of speech. In this sense, by Kashi Foods replying directly to twits, retweeting or ignoring comments all together can speak about the brand’s identity and the image they want people to perceive them by. In the example here described, Kashi Foods creates a 2 way communication channel that allows to share information but also to clarify misinformation. On the second reply for example Kashi’s reply as to why a certain cereal was discontinued enlighten the reader that in fact it is possible the stores are not carrying it and thus invites the reader to find stores carrying that particular cereal by sharing a cereal locator link.

In this example, we can see how Kashi Foods uses a hashtag that is designed to convey positivity and positive messages, when thinking about happy words like cheerful, cheery, merry, joyful, jovial... come to mind. By engineering or framing the campaign this way Kashi is attempting to protect itself from appropriation of the hashtag by people that may turn it around and use it to complain or to bash the brand.  

Finally some additional replies to the twitter campaign using the #ShareYourHappy tag

[marialenass-blog]

Branding culture

This week we read about Fair & Lovely and the use of culture and beliefs of the target market to sell more. In the case we learn how Fair & Lovely is branded to continue the believe that fair skin is best and how it can translate in happiness and success. The ads campaign is not tailored to bring consumers to the debate table, but rather is built to perpetuate the notion of fairness as an attainable goal. By perpetuating this message, the brand can make sure their perpetuity is also assured. The more people believe fairness is not only a goal worth obtaining but that it is also within reach, the more people will continue to buy the product.

Last week I wrote about AirFrance, and how it latest campaign “France is in the Air” evoques what people could imagine or know that France is. The campaign depicts can-can inspired models, french patisserie, fashion and even the Tour de France.

The AirFrance ads  deliver the message in a very consistent and clear way. In another example we can see how with AirFrance 1st class is rendered equivalent to having a Palace with wings.

It is easy to see why a company would want to use culture, it allows in many cases to piggyback on themes that unites many people. People can have different socio-economic, religious, education levels where culture can be a uniting factor. Thus easy to be used as a means to communicating, influencing and promoting the sale of a product. The question that remains for me is the ethical aspect of these campaigns and perhaps the generalization that using culture could bring. In the case of Fair & Lovely, similar to the cases of anti-wrinkle creams in the US (and their heavy use of photoshop), one could argue that companies take advantage of people’s insecurities and desired, and that as opposed to working towards overcoming such issues they get exacerbated by the different campaigns that aim at continuing selling more and more products.  In the case of AirFrance, I particular think the campaign captures for the person who is not french what France likes to export, however, I also find it amusing knowing that the French people cut their king’s heads and that as a country they do not really promote this “living in palaces” aspiration. In this sense the campaign is using culture to sell out of France whereas Fair & Lovely is using culture to sell inside of india.

I don’t have a real conclusion after reading this case other than the understanding that companies will do whatever is required to gather notoriety and to be able to capture the market’s attention, the question on ethics will have to be tied to the companies identity and the way they want to present themselves. In closing, this case also reminded me about the Cheerios ad that showed during the superbowl in 2014, where the company reflected the reality that more and more is lived in America which is that there are interracial marriages and that is not only normal but completely ok. The campaign initially stirred many conversations with people showing support for and against. Cheerios did not back down and later on issued another campaign ad featuring the same family, since then more and more companies are following suit by presenting the reality of America in terms of how society is (slowly but surely) changing. 

[marialenass-blog]

Paris-Amsterdam

The AirFrance-KLM group is the parent/holding company of two major airlines, as its name indicate, AirFrance and KLM, the group was founded after its namesake companies merged in 2004. Since its creation the group has kept the two airlines’ names, brands and overall images separate -  where each one of them has its own identity and specific value proposition. The group operates from two major airports Paris–Charles de Gaulle Airport and Amsterdam Airport Schiphol. 

This division or separation, allows the group to taylor their messages for very specific markets, we can say that the group has adopted a House of Brand approach, which allows them to clearly communicate to different niche or smaller market or segments. Although the two markets served by the two airlines are by no means niche, it is important to highlight that when looking at the two large segments as divided by geography  - with AirFrance having a strong presence in France while KML having a stronger presence in the Netherlands- the group thus is able to prevent brand dilution, had they adopted one name after the merger. Cultural differences between the two countries (and a bit of national sentiment too) in addition to the expectations in terms of culture, language and even food, that consumers have made it a priority to keep the two brands separately. 

This separation is clearly exemplified with another benefit of a House of Brand approach, which is that of “avoiding an association that would be incompatible with an offering” this is particularly true for AirFrance, whose advertisement campaigns have always evoque being chic, classy and simply French.

France is in the air... or how to experience glamour in the clouds

A great example is the comparison between the France is in the Air campaign from AirFrance with the Moving your World campaign from KLM.

The France is in the Air campaign is a very powerful example on the advantages of keeping the brand names separate. The campaign was “conceived to convey the airline’s unique French travel experience” and delivers that message in a colorful, tasteful and incredible way.  The airline is considered “a flying embassy of the art de vivre that France stands for”, therefore such a message, being so specific about France and its history and culture or about what France is famous for. would have have no impact or meaning for travellers or customers of KLM, more so if said travellers are not even visiting France.

While AirFrance is glamour, KLM is efficiently moving... your world.

Just to highlight how different is the communication within these two airlines is, the KLM Moving your World campaign which contrary to the AirFrance campaign (which as discussed simply put evoques France), evoques flying with family, kids, friends, the campaign shows actual airplanes and airports. It is possible to see that although the two airlines may cater to the same type of traveller (tourists, business) they do so by calling to different things, whereas AirFrance calls to the travellers imagination and expectation of refinement and glamour, KLM does the same by calling to efficiency and ease of travel.

In all this example highlights one of the importances of brand architecture and the understanding that brand identity and consequent brand management, that is required in order to protect not just the brand’s value but also to guarantee that the brand can be consistent across all channels and communications and target customer segment.

Sources

https://www.fastcompany.com/3043168/france-is-really-swinging-in-air-frances-beautifully-crazy-new-campaign

https://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2018/03/19/air-france-new-ad-campaign/

https://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2018/03/19/air-france-new-ad-campaign/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France%E2%80%93KLM

[marialenass-blog]

Starbucks app: no time? no line!

While studying the adoption of new ideas or technology I immediately thought of the Starbucks app. Although I am not a coffee drinker I have heard numerous times about the love and loyalty people have for Starbucks and more so after they adopted the Starbucks app. 

The Starbucks app has been praised for its design, introduction and implementation of their branded app - more importantly because of the quick adoption by Starbucks customers and the increase in brand loyalty - let alone sales - from using the app. In general the app is designed with emphasis on simplicity, straightforwardness and ease of use from signing up to the on-boarding and getting your favorite latte.

As shown below the number of transactions processed by the coffee giant is nothing but growing steadily quarter after quarter.

So how this came about? there are several ways to analyze and answer this question, for this I will use the Roger’s Five Factors framework. The analysis will focus on the app itself and the adoption of the Starbucks app and not on the technology of mobile app in general... in order to study why this app is so popular, it is important to understand what functionalities it offer to its users, in general app users can:

Access the entire Starbucks menu

Order and prepay

Customize their orders

Skip the lines

Link their Spotify accounts to listen to music played at Starbucks

Share with social media

Buy gift cards for them or for others

Receive points and be rewarded in the future

Going back to  Roger’s Five Factors framework we can then study:

Relative advantage—the degree to which a product is better than the product it replaces 

What was the option before this app came about?.... the coffee experience has not changed (although the famous pink drink “Strawberry Acai Refresher with coconut milk” is kind of new)... if you remember well: the long lines for ordering and for getting your coffee.

All of this goes away with the app, you can enter exactly what you want to order, customize your order with flavors, more milk, ice... etc. If you have location services enabled the app can calculate the time between your current location and the store both if the person is walking or driving. The result is a hot coffee delivered just in time, to your specifications and  with your name spelled correctly. It is possible to save the order so that future ordering is made even easier.

Compatibility—the degree to which a product is consistent with existing values and experiences 

The introduction of the app coincide with the massive adoption of apps by people who were adopting the smartphone phenomenon. This was not the first app ever developed or introduced not the last one. Because the app is free and there is no friction to download and install the app there is actually no reason why not to download it - specially if a person is already a loyal Starbucks customer. What is the worst that could happen? Tried it and din’t like it? Just delete the app. Simple.

People are more and more using their phones for online shopping, sharing content, finding information, etc. Trying the app (if it doesn't get you a free coffee) will potentially cost less than $5 dollars, so the price is quite small for the numerous benefits it promises. It is almost free to try so people try it, like it and continue to use it Venti after Venti.

Complexity—the degree to which a product is difficult to understand and use

The Starbucks app is very intuitive and easy to use. The signup process is quite easy and subtle in the sense that Starbucks is not aggressively prompting you to sign up, they offer the option to “sign in” (if you are an existing user) or to “join rewards” (in case of potential new users)... subtle! you are joining a reward program that will give you stars based on your purchase history.

Once signed in to order drinks or food is extremely simple, specially if you know what you are ordering. Drinks are classified by hot coffees, teas, hot drinks, frappuccinos, cold coffees, etc., food is classified by hot breakfast, bakery, lunch, etc. Once a selection is made and within the same screen, it is then possible to customize the order. The selection is added, the user reviews its order, selects the pick up location (defines if it will go walking or by car), pays using the app (either using apple pay, app card balance or a gift card) and then goes to the store to get its order.

Trialability—the degree to which a product may be experimented with on a limited basis

This one can be related, for Starbucks, with the previous two factors. The app is easy to download and to sign up to as well as to use in trial mode. The cost of the item being purchase is relatively low (around $5) so trying and experimenting with the app is quite straightforward and with low risk.

Observability—the degree to which product usage and impact are visible to others

“Excuse me... sorry, that is my coffee”... you know it! it feels good when you go to a Starbucks filled with people, waiting and waiting and you can get your coffee right away. I know you have been there - you trendsetter app user!!

Besides the obvious impact and observation when it seems like somebody is cutting in the line because they pre-ordered (duh!) there is also the option to share in social media about your latest and greatest drink. People would probably not share their daily cup of joe, but chances are people will share in social media if visiting in another city or country or perhaps if trying a new type of roast or coffee origin.

In all is is possible to see why, from a Roger’s Five Factors framework perspective, the adoption of this app has been so successful and why more and more people are getting their coffees while skipping the lines.

sources:

Note on Innovation Diffusion: Rogers' Five Factors, Harvard Business Review, 2006

https://www.leanplum.com/blog/starbucks-app-ux/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2014/06/13/why-is-the-starbucks-mobile-payments-app-so-successful/#216465893957

http://www.unscrambled.sg/2017/03/09/15-of-the-best-starbucks-around-the-world-like-no-other/