Fall/Early Winter 2009
Industry Insights
Copernican Exploration  
Discovery of the Month
What We're Reading Now
Coming Attractions
Industry Insights

Innovation....If Only It Wasn't Such a Scary Proposition


“Where are all the holiday must-haves?” asked a recent headline on AdAge.com. With retailers and manufacturers waiting in the wings for that big sales surge, industry observers believe there’s more than the economy keeping the numbers down. AdAge pointed fingers at the lack of innovation. “While manufacturers can shoulder some of the blame for cutting back on innovation, retailers are choosing to play it safe with items that have a proven sales track record.” Patricia Edwards, a retail analyst, understood the motivation behind playing it safe: "A lot of [retailers] are more interested in living another day than knocking it out of the park. This year is about survival. Some risk-taking is OK. ... But there just isn't room for error this year.”

She might as well have been speaking for every marketer in every industry out there, with her apt summation of their uneasy relationship with innovation these days.

Marketers know that they have to maintain a steady stream of new products and/or services to grow—or at least keep up with the competition. As circumstances, needs, wants, and trends change, marketers certainly don’t want to get left behind. The Marketing Executives Networking Group found that marketers view innovation as key to combating down economic and business cycles. Yet, marketers also know that the recession has only served to heighten senior management expectations for return on investment, especially from marketing and innovation.

It’s not a secret that many executives already felt disappointed by what they got for what they spent—the Boston Consulting Group reports that only one in two executives expressed satisfaction with the ROI of innovation efforts. According to the study, “over the last six years, the proportion of survey respondents who declared themselves satisfied has averaged less than 48%.” The soft state of the economy won’t make them any more forgiving of new products and services that don’t perform to expectations. Unfortunately for marketers, many, if not most, new products don’t.

Though estimates of new product and service failure rates vary widely by company, category, industry, and reporting agency, the best-case-scenario chances of introducing a successful new product or service don’t get much better than 50-50. Through our own work with companies across different industries, we found about 10%-20% of new products and services succeed, which by our definition means they remain in the market generating profits for the company three years after introduction.

No wonder retailers, manufacturers and a whole lot of everybody else treaded so carefully as far as innovation goes this year.

Of course marketers have taken steps to try to up the odds of introducing a market winner. For instance, most if not all understand the importance of nailing the configuration of a new product or service—including the price—to the prospects of success. Enthusiastic marketing managers will start brainstorming all the different variations of the elements that make-up an idea for a new product or service and often come up with thousands, millions, maybe even billions of possible combinations. Not that long ago, the mere suggestion of testing 100+ combinations to ferret out the ones most likely to inspire purchase could get a marketer fired, but today it’s becoming de rigueur.

“Technology is transforming innovation at its core, allowing companies to test new ideas at speeds and prices that were unimaginable even a decade ago,” wrote MIT Professor Erik Brynjolfsson in a recent Wall Street Journal article. “Companies are able to get a much better idea of how their customers behave and what they want. This gives new offerings and marketing efforts a better shot at success.”

As the ease of gauging consumer interest and response increase, however, marketers would do themselves a world of good by staying razor-focused on their ultimate end-goal: to introduce profitable new products and services. When reading something like the AdAge piece that focuses on the lack of exciting new products on store shelves to drive sales, it’s not hard to see how marketers might hone in on purchase interest as the key metric to consider. Just remember, though, that CEOs and CFOs are looking for the products and services that contribute to the bottom-line. No matter how sophisticated and fast web-based testing mechanisms, this basic marketing axiom holds true: the concept that generates the most interest is often the one most likely to lose the most money.

At the most simplistic level, the most appealing concept is a quarter-pound, free-range kobé beef burger on an organic multi-grain bun with fresh herbs imported from a country-side chateau in France all for $1. The product may have enormous appeal—what meat-eater wouldn’t jump at that deal!—but if you sell too many of them, your burger joint will go out of business. After 25 years’ work and more computer simulation runs than we’d like to count, we’ve learned that the most appealing concept is very often the least profitable.

For a good example of how a company integrated profitability considerations into their research, consider the case of Dunkin’ Donuts, the largest coffee shop chain in the world. With an eye towards national expansion, Dunkin’ wondered whether the current store concept in its New England home work would appeal to customers across the U.S. or should it rollout something completely new. Dunkin' took advantage of advancing technology in the form of computer-aided product design—to test hundreds, thousands, even millions of variations, used in conjunction with marketing mix models—to sort through more than two billion different configurations of product, service, and price and calculate the impact of each individual item on visits and spending.

The chain considered different options for every element—from store type to portion size to music to exterior experience and more. All the possible restaurant and menu combinations were reassembled to forecast visits, spending, and ultimately sales. Finally, the costs associated with different items were subtracted from estimated sales to provide a profitability assessment. In the end, Dunkin’ came away with clear direction on which new store concepts had the biggest profit potential. Currently, Dunkin' is building and test marketing these stores.

Interestingly, the chain also used computer-aided design to determine what they could also do in the short-term to introduce some innovation to existing stores to boost profits. There’s something to be said for incremental innovation—it could be the next big opportunity in terms of profits AND competitive advantage—and the availability of technology-enabled testing and experimentation would seem to support finding profitable additive options. Indeed, Dunkin’s recharged configuration of its current stores has opened up more resources to expand nationally and take on the 800-pound gorillas in coffee, Starbucks and McDonald's.

While there’s no research technique that takes all the risk out of the innovation process, at the same time, by seeking the most profitable opportunities, rather than the most appealing, marketers could at least breathe a little easier that they were heading in the right direction.  

Back to top

 
Copernican Exploration
 

Get More Out of Your Marketing Research
Thoughts on Tracking Research From Copernicus' Kevin Clancy


Marketers spent much of 2009 trying to figure out how to get more—more sales, more profits, more growth, more new products, more GRPs, you get the picture—with less of a budget with which to work. Even as the year closes and signs seem to point to some easing of budget constraints, asking the question, “how do I get more out of what we’re doing and what we're spending?” remains as relevant as ever. As our readers might expect, we have a few thoughts on this subject, particularly where it comes to marketing research, so we’ve decided to devote some editorial space to some of the more frequently done types of marketing research.

First up, tracking research.

In this age of accountability, pretty much every large-sized company, and a good portion of medium-sized ones, keep running tabs on different programs to gauge how campaigns and programs are working. As far as monitoring performance goes, big areas of importance include brand equity, customer satisfaction/loyalty, and advertising. We sat down with Kevin Clancy, chairman of Copernicus, to get his ideas and perspectives on what marketers might do to generate additional insights out of the tracking work they currently have running.

Kevin has more than three decades of experience working with some of the best known and most loved consumer and B2B brands. He’s the co-author of seven business books and his work to push the envelope of marketing research in order to advance the practice of marketing recently earned him an induction into the prestigious Marketing Research Hall of Fame.

Here’s what he had to say:

Mzine: Can you start by giving us a sense of what most marketers do with their tracking research efforts? What specifically are most marketers looking at? How do the majority typically use the information?

Kevin: Unfortunately tracking studies hardly get used at all. For starters, the numbers don’t change significantly from one time period to the next (which is typically quarterly) and this happens irrespective of whether sales numbers are going up or down. Worse, even when they do change they provide little insight into what needs to be done to fix the problem or improve the situation. No wonder so many CMOs regard tracking studies as not particularly actionable.

Mzine: Let’s focus on advertising tracking for a moment. What works well about current research—in other words, why should marketers feel good about what they’re very likely getting? And on the flip side, what do you think might be missing?

Kevin: One thing I like is that marketers collect data on so many different measures. Unaided and aided brand awareness, unaided and aided ad awareness, unaided and aided message registration, etc. There are so many numbers that the ad agency can always point to something, one thing, that they like. “Look, Kev, aided ad awareness really jumped this quarter.” Of couse, this comment comes even though a bunch of the other numbers stayed the same and a few dropped.

Instead of looking at 50 different metrics which appear to be hopping around randomly, we recommend developing a single measure that we call campaign penetration which incorporates most of the traditional measures into a single metric.

Mzine: How can marketers get more out of their tracking research? What should marketers start thinking about in terms of how to use it, data to collect, when to do it, its place in the research process?

Kevin: Researchers need to focus on collecting insights that will help change a brand’s trajectory. As an illustration, I like asking respondents media exposure questions and then using the answers to produce estimates of individual-level GRPs. Using this novel approach, you can break out respondents who were highly exposed to the campaign, moderately exposed, and hardly exposed at all. This kind of analysis gives you hard data that would usually only come from in–market experimentation.

Mzine: Do you have a sense of how firms are tracking digital campaigns or what they might be doing in terms of monitoring on-line sentiment? How well are they integrated with other tracking efforts?

Kevin: We just completed a survey on this and discovered to our surprise that most marketers aren’t tracking digital at all, or if they are, only in a very superficial manner. Some of our clients who invest heavily in econometric modeling of marketing programs say that the dollars spent on digital (about 10% of the ad budget) are too small to produce an observable response.

Other clients are using blog analysis to track what consumers are saying and how they’re feeling about a brand, but all too often they discover that bloggers aren’t saying or feeling much. And this work isn’t integrated with conventional tracking because the traditional trackers and digital trackers don’t even know one another. They might not even be working in the same building.

Mzine: If you had the ear of every CMO in the U.S. for five minutes, what suggestion would you give them about getting more out of tracking research?

Kevin: I’d ask them to tell me what they’d like to know, in what time frame, and what kind of information they need in order to make the tracking actionable—a “wish list” more or less. Armed with that insight, I’d help them develop a tracking research program that would help them sleep better at night.  

Recommended reading:
50+ Marketing Metrics: 50+ Metrics Every Executive Should Master
Chapter 9: Advertising Media and Web Metrics

Search Now:
 
In Association with Amazon.com

Back to top

 

 
Discovery of the Month
 

Don't Kill Positioning!
Our Plea to Spare the Life of this Marketing Strategy Fundamental


Because “marketers don’t control enough of brand communication to develop a ‘market position,’ and certainly not enough resources to maintain a viable position once it is in the marketplace,” to even try to put a value proposition out there has become an exercise in futility, laments Don Schultz in his piece, “Transformational Branding,” for a recent edition of Marketing Management. Among other ideas Schultz puts forth in the article is this one: positioning, “the most important marketing concept of the twentieth century, is probably no longer relevant.”

He’s by no means the first person to make this contention. When he was CMO of McDonald’s a few years ago, marketing genius Larry Light made the pronouncement that “identifying one brand position, and communicating it in a repetitive manner is old-fashioned, out of date, out of touch.” Much better, he says, to “explain a brand to consumers by telling targeted stories,” based on the demographics and other preferences of different groups. To think there’s such a thing as a single message marketer’s can use to make a case for their brand to his way of thinking is “brand suicide.”

In the case of a giant global brand like McDonald’s, we could see that there could—and we emphasize could—be inherent difficulties with having one multinational reason-to-buy message. Certainly there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that the way many brands have been positioned isn’t working too well for them. A recent McKinsey and Ernst & Young study found the number of branding failures, many based on "positioning," exceeds 90%.

Most people are hard-pressed to name what could be considered a positioning even in the loosest definition of the term. One study we did in the last few years found only about 8% of brands had one. Besides, adds Don Schultz, these days, current and potential customers, “through social networks, blogs, and Twittering—tools marketers have yet to understand, much less master” will define what a brand means no matter how much marketers try to put other messages out there.

Hey, hold on there! Let’s not write off the whole concept just yet. There's more to this story. The anecdotes and stats above don't necessarily indicate that the concept itself isn’t pertinent to marketing anymore. Even Schultz agrees that brands should still stand for something. In fact, there are other explanations for poorly performing positionings, problems with solutions that could get the concept back into working order.

Many positioning detractors point out that the very notion of marketers dictating to current and potential customers what a brand could and should mean to them won't fly in this day and age. We suppose if a company did run with a reason-to-buy message they’ve come up with themselves with little input from actual customers, there's a good chance it won't fly. If the message marketers put out there doesn’t resonate with the intended target, well of course they aren’t going to pay attention to it! They’ll go on about their business and talk about something else.

This reaction has nothing to do with whether it makes sense any more to try to have a positioning—it has to do with whether the positioning message the marketer chose is relevant, compelling, and motivating to customers.

One way to find out what is relevant, compelling, and motivating is to ask customers about what problems or unmet needs they have with products and services currently offered in the category or industry. Start with customers in the first place, figure out if your brand can deliver a solution consistently and profitably, and marketers will give themselves a much better shot at hitting the right spot.

Another problem marketers often have is effectively communicating a positioning. It could be the media and promotional weight put behind a campaign, the different media and promotions, and/or the creative executions themselves aren’t getting the positioning message across. If the message marketers put out there doesn’t get through to the intended target, they aren’t going to know anything about it. And they’ll go on about their business and talk about something else.

Again, this reaction has nothing to do with whether it makes sense any more to try to have a positioning. Nor does it have to do with consumers revolting saying, “you can't tell us what to think about your brand!” It has to do with how well the positioning message itself gets through.

As for the "control" marketers may or may not have over what people think about their brands, customers do talk about and share a lot of opinions and information on-line. That's true. It spreads a lot further, a lot faster than it used to when folks were just chatting up an ad or sharing a poor customer service experience around the water cooler. Certainly analyzing search data and listening in on the online buzz on social networks, blogs, and Twitter to get a sense of the problems and issues people are having with products and services in a particular category or industry could be a good thing to do.

Here's a case in point. According to a recent piece in the Wall Street Journal, a handful of marketers including IBM and Microsoft “scan the web for key words to find out what consumers are—and aren't—saying about their brands.” Importantly, these companies then incorporate this information “into their more-conventional research” for further guidance on branding strategy decisions, including positioning.

IBM, for example, discovered that promoting its technologies in and of itself wasn’t helping the brand’s products stand out from competitors. Potential customers wanted to know what the technologies could do for them. [If we didn’t know better, we might say these folks were asking for a positioning—“What problem will your brand solve for me?”] IBM switched directions and shifted to more solutions-oriented reason-to-buy messages.

To us, these sound like efforts to understand what customers need and want and try to influence what people think about a brand, rather than further evidence of the irrelevancy of positioning.

We’re just not sure at this point marketers could or should conclude that they’ve pretty much lost any and all control over how people talk and think about their brands, so it’s not worth even trying. Yes, if a brand doesn’t consistently deliver on the value proposition it has put out there, it’s anybody’s game. Yet given all that we’ve said before about how firms sometimes develop a positioning without much in the way of customer input and/or under-communicate what the brand stands for, we think there’s a lot more marketers could be doing to give some guidance and direction to what people know about what their brand stands for.  

For more insightful marketing discoveries, visit http://www.copernicusmarketing.com/discover/index.htm

Have a hot discovery for our next release? Contact us at ami.bowen@copernicusmarketing.com

Back to top

 

 
What We're Reading Now
 

At the Top of Our Reading List....


Your Gut Is Still Not Smarter Than Your Head
By Kevin Clancy and Peter Krieg (Wiley, April 2007)

Looking for a good book to read over the holidays? Your Gut Is Still Not Smarter Than Your Head is full of ideas for infusing research in to marketing decision-making to ensure your marketing efforts focus on the people most responsive and valuable to your brand.  

Positioning: How to Test, Validate, and Bring Your Idea to Market
By Sramana Mitra (BookSurge Publishing, September 2009)

entrepreneurs journey

Positioning is Volume 3 in Entrepreneur Journeys, a series of monographs that transcribe the author's interviews with entrepreneurs to discover new ways to make high-technology businesses more successful. The book includes about 20 interviews and in each case, we learn something about positioning and new product introductions.

This fast-paced book opens with a peek at some companies that have made solid progress building real businesses that validate the vertical movement of the web, a.k.a., the “verticalization thesis.” We found the author’s discussion of TheFind, a vertical product search-engine company in Mountain View, CA, focused on the fashion and lifestyle segment, particularly intriguing.

We felt like we were sitting in on a series of intimate conversations with people who have done it, telling others how to do it. We highly recommend to anyone contemplating starting a new business, particularly if the business is grounded in web applications.


Back to top

 

Coming Attractions  
 

Re-Build Marketing's Credibility Through Accountability at IIR's MEASURE UP! Marketing Conference


Businesses may have refocused on generating growth, but they still remain extremely budget conscious. Now more than ever, marketers must embrace numbers and prove their worth by quantifying the financial benefits of their efforts to the bottom-line.

Next year, IIR brings you Measure Up!, the world’s most comprehensive cross-dimensional view of marketing measurement best practices. Practitioners, consultants, and academics doing pioneering ROI work will help B2B and B2C professionals across multiple industries become well-versed on calculating and improving the ROI on every facet of marketing.

Copernicus’-own Kevin Clancy will join the line-up of speakers. In a special keynote address, Kevin give a talk on five ways to determine the impact of marketing investments in 30 Days or less and participate in a panel discussion with fellow marketing author Michael Dunn.

The Measure UP! Marketing Conference will take place on March 10-12, 2010, in Chicago. As an exclusive to Mzine subscribers, we can offer you a 20% discount on standard and on-site registration. Use discount code: SPKRM2208KC when registering for the conference at www.MeasureUpEvent.com.

Tune in to the Copernicus Webcast Channel!

We’ve launched our very own webcasting channel via BrightTALK where you can register to attend events live or view them on-demand at your leisure. Our goal with the channel is to bring you helpful and practical advice on ways to get more out of your marketing programs and research efforts.

To kick things off, Kevin Clancy gave a two-part seminar on improving the ROI of your innovation efforts. In part I, he focused on tools to use to identify and configure profitable concepts. In part II, he offered tips and examples of how marketers have kept the rollout of a new product on strategy and on plan.

Next Henry Gamse tackled segmentation and what marketers can do to ensure their research efforts don’t end in frustration. In part I, he walked through an approach that anyone can use to integrate measures of profitability into segmentation work. Coming up in January, he’ll give part II in his series, with steps to take to make sure media planners and creatives can use the segmentation to guide their work.

For more on what we have coming up on the schedule or to take a look at a past webcast on demand, visit http://www.copernicusmarketing.com/consult/webcasts.shtml.

For Our Latest News and Views.....

Jump on in to the Marketing Fray!

marketing-fray-blog

It's our blog and includes thoughts and perspectives on marketing hot topics, tips on new and interesting studies, and links to new articles and webcasts from Copernicus.

And follow us on....

twitter-logo

 

 

Back to top

 

 
Copernicus-Marketing Consulting and Research  
 

Click here to subscribe to The Copernicus Mzine: http://www.copernicusmarketing.com/univers/copernicus_marketing_newsletter.php

The subscription is absolutely free.

For an archive of past editions, visit: http://www.copernicusmarketing.com/univers/backissues.shtml.

Copernicus is in the business of transforming companies. We offer state-of-the-science consulting, research, and modeling tools to help clients develop, plan, and implement the kind of marketing strategies that change brand trajectories, career paths, even entire companies and industries. For more about Copernicus, visit our award-winning website, www.copernicusmarketing.com.