Point of Vision : Think About Ithttp://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/Point of Vision's blog on brand, communications and designen-US2008-09-08T16:42:06ZSquarespace Site Server v5.0.0 (http://www.squarespace.com/)Once there was a brand…http://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2008/6/19/once-there-was-a-brand.htmlHolger Kappenstein2008-06-19T23:44:53Z1,000 Words

June 2008, Virginia Highlands neighborhood, Atlanta

]]>GEICO proves consistency doesn’t have to be boringhttp://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2008/6/3/geico-proves-consistency-doesnt-have-to-be-boring.htmlPoint of Vision2008-06-03T17:39:14ZThinkologyDon’t you love that GEICO commercial?

No, not the one with the NASCAR-wanna-be kid.

No, not the one with the offended cavemen.

You know ... the one with Mrs. Butterworth!

GEICO, whose advertising once was centered squarely on its animated gecko, now floods the airwaves with concurrent ad campaigns.

The strategy is working. From 1996 to 2006, the insurance company increased its total premiums from $3 billion to $11 billion, and increased its share of written auto insurance premiums from 4.61 percent to 6.25 percent.

Taking a closer look at GEICO’s multiple ads, we see four reasons why they’re successful:

1. GEICO is using a shotgun approach to hit different demographic groups. The cavemen ads appeal to young men. The celebrity-assisted testimonials bring in faded stars such as Joan Rivers and Peter Frampton, winning over baby-boomers and older audiences. And the old, reliable gecko tests well with middle-aged women. GEICO knows it has more than one target market, so it’s developed a campaign for each important audience.

2. Each campaign is entertaining. The Martin Agency, which creates GEICO’s ads, knows that insurance is boring. That’s why the ads “need to be funny and need to get noticed,” according to creative director Steve Bassett. Not only is each individual ad designed to be amusing, but the agency creates enough spots for each campaign that it doesn’t have to run the same spot over and over. The rotation keeps the ads fresh.

3. GEICO hasn’t been shy about pouring money into advertising. In 2005, GEICO spent $403 million on advertising. That’s more than the Coca-Cola Company spent that year. With that kind of investment, it’s no wonder they’ve become top of mind among consumers.

4. From a brand perspective, GEICO’s concurrent campaign strategy works because all the ads share the same message: GEICO can save you money without a lot of hassle. The cavemen campaign is centered on this message. In other campaigns, the core brand value is tidily summed up in GEICO’s ever-present tag line: “15 minutes can save you 15 percent.”

All things considered, GEICO is providing an excellent example of being consistent without being one-dimensional or boring. GEICO’s campaigns take many creative directions, but they are united by a similar, quirky personality, and by an unwavering message of value. That’s why they’re synergistic, not schizophrenic.

We don’t all have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on advertising, but we can all learn from GEICO’s success. Different audiences sometimes call for different creative approaches, and we can answer that need without creating brand chaos. If we remain faithful to our brand’s personality and message, we can build a unified brand ... no matter how diverse our creative directions may be.

]]>Bad design, supersizedhttp://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2008/6/3/bad-design-supersized.htmlPoint of Vision2008-06-03T17:33:50ZWhat were they thinking?It’s regrettable when an outdoor advertisement distracts drivers. But it’s plain incomprehensible when the offending billboard is one which urges drivers to pay attention to the road.

The subject of driver complaints is a billboard sponsored by the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Department. It features a photograph of a young woman on a cell phone and a mind-boggling 16 words of text – more than double the recommended number of words for an outdoor ad – cautioning drivers about distractions. [See the billboard.]

We imagine drivers lose their focus as they try to make out the small print at the top of the sign, which reads, “Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. reminds you...” Removing this phrase from the billboard would make the sign much more readable. Of course, that would never fly politically, since sheriffs typically like to see their names in 3-foot-high letters.

We just cringe when we see design that undermines the intended message. We’re reminded of another prime example of design clashing with the communication objective. A while back, the Atlanta Press Club held a meeting to discuss avian flu. The speaker was the deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. His message was simple: “Be prepared, but don’t panic.” Yet each guest received a press kit that included a surgical mask. It was, no doubt, intended to be clever, but it struck us as inciting just the sort of overreaction the speaker wanted to discourage.

It’s so important to remember that words can only do so much. If the words are in conflict with the way a piece is physically put together, most often it’s the tangible design that leaves the more lasting impression. A nonprofit organization trying to show good stewardship of funds shouldn’t print its annual report on vellum. And a sheriff trying to encourage safe driving shouldn’t put up a billboard that runs people off the road.

]]>Many views, one vision.http://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2008/4/18/many-views-one-vision.htmlPoint of Vision2008-04-18T14:57:53ZThinkologyWhen you sit down with a team from Point of Vision, you may think of us as a principal, a project manager and a designer. What you may not know is that you’re also sitting down with a magician, an adventure traveler and a punk rocker.

For a small company, Point of Vision has an impressive cast of players with diverse backgrounds.

Some of us have lived all over the world. Others are native Atlantans.

Some of us are single. Others are married. A few of us have kids.

Some of us love living in the city. Others have found our homes in suburbia – and beyond.

Our interests range from hockey ... to dancing ... to knitting.

We think differently, too. Some of us have technical minds, others think visually, and others express ourselves best through the written word.

We have big idea people with a knack for imaginative, inspiring concepts. We also have detail-oriented people whose creativity is geared more towards finding a clever way to bring a brilliant concept to reality.

All this diversity isn’t the result of random luck. We’ve made a point to hire people with varied backgrounds, experiences, working styles and lifestyles. We think it helps us do a better job.

When we put together a client team, we know we’re going to have someone whose perspective matches up well with the way the client perceives things. We also like to have someone on the team whose perspective is different. We believe that the interplay of various viewpoints yields the clearest, most thorough thinking and the best outcomes.

In some workplaces, individual differences are tolerated. At Point of Vision, they are truly cherished.

And in the end, we respect every viewpoint because we know that no matter how differently we may see the pathway, we are all working toward one goal: the advancement of your brand.

]]>Does your brand need a Second Life?http://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2008/2/20/does-your-brand-need-a-second-life.htmlPoint of Vision2008-02-20T13:15:04ZThinkologyWe like to think we’re on the ball. We’re always looking for new ways to communicate our clients’ brands that will enable them to grow and prosper.

Yet we’ve never asked a client, “Have you thought about a strategy for marketing in virtual worlds?”

Virtual worlds, where people interact via 3-D images on the Web, have exploded in popularity. The site Second Life alone boasts “millions of residents from around the globe.” Some companies, seeing this new opportunity for exposure, are stepping into alternate universes with storefronts, events and even one-to-one marketing.

So why aren’t we recommending virtual marketing to anyone?

It’s not that we don’t appreciate the cool factor. We love cool. But in our advice to clients, we’ve never been about cool. We’ve always been about smart. And we think the smart move here is to wait, watch and learn.

Today, virtual marketing has too many unknowns. What return on investment can it deliver? Do participants in virtual worlds welcome or resent companies coming into their alternate universes? How do the demographics differ among the various virtual world sites, and which “metaverse” is the best fit for a given company or organization? We just don’t have the answers.

Some niche agencies are pushing their clients into this new world, despite the unknowns, saying that now is the time to jump in and start learning ahead of others.

We disagree. We say, now is the time to watch closely and learn from what others are doing.

So we are watching. We’ve seen the American Cancer Society organize a Relay for Life on Second Life that raised more than $100,000. We know that companies are using virtual worlds as focus groups, asking people to give them feedback on new products.

As we watch, we’re thinking about how our clients could benefit from the unique aspects of virtual marketing. At the same time, we’re asking tough questions, like, “How would we know who’s really in a virtual world focus group? Would we trust the opinions of alter egos as key informants in refining a product or service?”

Until we see the right fit, we’re not going to encourage anyone to take the leap into a virtual world. The way we see it, being one of the first settlers on a new marketing frontier is an ego boost. But from a business perspective, it’s not that important to be among the first to enter a new realm.

We don’t buy the hype that trailblazers are guaranteed to be the biggest winners. Later arrivals who offer something better can be as successful – or more. Alta Vista developed the first Web index, but today Google is the undisputed champion of Web search.

Of course, there are scenarios where early experimentation might make sense. A company whose target market is online gamers would find a captive audience in a virtual world. A company whose brand is centered on being a pioneer, especially a technology pioneer, also might benefit from jumping in ahead of the mainstream. In such a case, we wouldn’t be concerned with the direct return on their investment. For that pioneering client, riding the first wave in the tide of virtual marketing would be a brand-building move, not a sales move. Any revenue they generated through their virtual presence would just be gravy.

For most companies, we think there’s more to lose in investing in a medium that’s still a mystery than there is to gain from being a pioneer. So for now, we’re keeping our clients in the real world.

What do you think? Do you spend time in a virtual world? What kind of marketing do you think could work there? And when is the right time to experiment with virtual marketing?

]]>night_shifthttp://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2008/2/1/night_shift.htmlHolger Kappenstein2008-02-01T21:58:29Z1,000 Words

Outside the Blue Horse building, January 28, 2008

]]>Branding goes to the dogshttp://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2008/1/11/branding-goes-to-the-dogs.htmlDave Greenberg2008-01-11T14:46:28ZWhat were they thinking?

This is a full-color ad that appears on the back cover of a 70-page technology magazine. Ok, I'm all for unexpected or even mildly shocking imagery to grab one's attention, but the image should at least communicate the desired concept, convey positive brand attributes, speak to a targeted audience or make a point that supports the copy.

Even if we allow room for disagreement over the visual and the message, is it too much to ask for some adherence to good design principles? Or is bad design part of the creative strategy as well? I can't figure out if this ad is trying to be so wrong as to prove a point (although I'm not sure what that point is), or if it's just one big hot mess from start to finish.

If I have to ask myself these questions, then my guess is the only thing this ad accomplished was to confuse others who had the misfortune of viewing it as well. Would it have cost any more, or been any less effective to create a more positive message? At the very least, the ad could have been more purposefully designed as "tongue-in-cheek" as I suspect was the goal.

Instead, not only did I lose my taste for this company, I lost my appetite too.

]]>One hotel chain can rest easy with their markhttp://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2008/1/2/one-hotel-chain-can-rest-easy-with-their-mark.htmlMarcy Pett2008-01-02T22:45:41ZRandom thoughtMy husband and I were traveling in the wee hours of the morning through Dayton, Ohio on Christmas Eve when we realized we weren’t going to make it to Detroit without one of us falling asleep at the wheel. It was 4:00 in the morning so for safety reasons we took the next exit determined to get a motel room to rest.

uploaded-file-62736

We had three choices: A Motel 6, Knights Inn and a Red Roof Inn. The Motel 6 was on the opposite side of the road and down a ways so our options became Knights Inn or Red Roof Inn. After looking at both their marks I said to Jim, “I gravitate toward the Red Roof Inn for some reason.” He agreed and said, “Yea, it looks like Knights Inn hasn’t updated their purple and white logo since the 1960s.” I quickly added that if they hadn’t bothered to update their logo in 40 years I wondered what else they haven’t changed. We didn’t have to sleep on it… right then and there our decision was made, solely based on the revised look of a brand mark.

This trip confirms my belief in the importance of a service or hospitality industries brand mark, especially in it’s most critical application: the big, high sign you see from a distance — before you even see the building, experience their customer service or see a room.

We had no problems sleeping.

]]>Bye, Netscape…http://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2008/1/2/bye-netscape.htmlHolger Kappenstein2008-01-02T21:27:13ZRandom thought

*December 1994 — † February 2008

My Last Regards to the browser that changed how people saw the Internet.

]]>Brand marketing and the educated customerhttp://pointofvision.squarespace.com/think-about-it/2007/12/11/brand-marketing-and-the-educated-customer.htmlPoint of Vision2007-12-11T17:46:40ZThinkologyAs customers have become savvier about marketing, some critics have suggested that brands don’t matter anymore. The modern customer supposedly sees brand marketing as mere hype pushing one product that’s really no different from another.

But in these days of toxic toys and poisonous peanut butter, we see that yes, brand does still matter.

Beneath the slick campaigns, a brand – a well-developed one anyway – really is a promise. That’s how brands were born in the first place, as a quick reference point for quality and reliability.

And no matter how sophisticated customers become, they still want promises they can count on. In some cases, they want those assurances more than ever. For example, the typical Generation Y consumer is deeply concerned about how products are grown and manufactured, how a company treats its employees and so on. (Read more about marketing to Generation Y in a previous post.)

The critics say it isn’t so, pointing to the increased popularity of store brands. But look deeper into this growth area and you’ll see another story. Store brands are succeeding because they’ve shed the old generic image. We no longer find big white boxes emblazoned with “CORN FLAKES” on the grocery shelf. Instead, we see the emergence of private labels such as Target’s Archer Farms. The current Archer Farms ad campaign, complete with bucolic farm scenes and poetic copy (“a masterpiece made for every palate“), is proof that even the store brands are building true brands, brands with promises that go beyond the traditional “lower price” position.

If customers do think that brand marketing is just fluff – and yes, sometimes they do think that – then as the brand stewards, we have to do a better job. We have to communicate our brands in a way that shows we are different.

How do we do that? We go back to the three key building blocks of Point of Vision's Brand Framework

Define the brand position. Who are we? What does our brand stand for?
Pinpoint the brand promise. What can a customer can count on us to do or provide? Ideally, our promise is different from our competition’s.
Back it up with brand proof. Give the customer a reason to believe you can deliver on your promise. Examples of proof are a unique business process, the talent and training of your human resources, or quality control measures. This is where you build credibility, and that’s invaluable. Even if your brand promise isn’t too different from a competitor’s, if you have the proof and they don’t, you can win the brand battle.

We find that when our clients nail down their brand position, promise and proof, they discover a new clarity in how to communicate the brand to others. And with this new perspective, they can show their customers, beyond a doubt, that the brand they choose really does matter.

What do you think? Post a response to this entry – or any previous Think About It item – by December 31, 2007, and we’ll enter you into a drawing for one of two pairs of tickets to see the Atlanta Thrashers in Blueland (that’s Philips Arena for the uninitiated).

For more reading, download our Brand Framework Brief (48k PDF)

]]>