Search This Blog

Friday 27 September 2013

Established Banks should be ashamed of their current Social Media efforts

Does it surprise anyone that banks like HSBC have recently come out with some very public criticism of their own social media efforts?


You might struggle to believe that any brand in this day in age struggles to fully appreciate the importance of a one to one interaction with customers however it is clear the banks have yet to fully grasp the importance of this concept. And why should a customer service organization in the face of stiff competition from many competitors have any desire to listen to their customers? Crazy right?.

There are many excuses that the banks can, and have used to justify why brand engagement through direct channels just does not exist. Some of the more interesting examples can be found via the link below.


Regardless of fears and concerns the banks may have in relation to data regulations these concerns simply don’t cut the mustard. There should be no excuse for failing to keep customers happy and eradicating your brand of potential large scale issues by having an open communication strategy with them via your social media sites. How many times have we seen an online customer complaint quickly turn into a viral, PR disaster for brands? The real takeaway fact in the above article is that 2.8 billion use the internet and half of them are signed up to at least one social media site. Ignore this growth area if you will but do so at your own peril.

This isn’t to say that all banks have not fully appreciated the importance of social media. What a refreshing change to see India leading the way in innovation by fully realizing the potential of the Twitter’s and Facebook’s of the world while other companies in the more established, banking markets across the World continue to follow.


Whether it be through gamification or through such incentives like offering access to bank accounts on social media sites the examples included in the above link clearly demonstrate a desire to communicate to customers in new and exciting ways. This is exactly what your direct communication channels to your consumers should be used for. Not only can it allow you to differentiate your product or service against competitors but it can also allow you build an emotional engagement with your loyal following. And in this day in age there aren’t aint no saver long term investment than that!



Monday 23 September 2013

Be More Dog and Be More Rewarded

It’s very rare to find a brand so far ahead in consumer perception scores and satisfaction surveys than O2. If you are not aware of how much success the mobile phone provider has with winning long term brand equity with their consumers take a look at their brand perception scores from last year.


How does O2 ensure such a consistent and strong brand advocacy scoring? Well quite simply they reward their customers and give them incentive for staying loyal to the brand. O2 operates a customer centric strategy and has created a world where loyal, committed customers are treated with the best deals before others. In this model rewarding your longest serving customers with exclusive offers comes first before acquiring competitor customers.

Customer centricity is not a new concept however very few companies have truly grasped the concept and even fewer have chosen to embrace it. Think of the numerous companies The Brand Avenger have featured over the last 6 months and decide for yourself how many of these tragic brand stories have truly grasped the concept of putting the customer at the heart of your decision making.

Putting the customer at the heart of all major decisions has transformed a business, which experienced a traumatic and desperate re-launch following the transformation from BT Cellnet in 2002. Incredibly Accenture have predicted O2’s customer first approach has led to ROI of 80:1 for its marketing communications.  Whether it be through the priority event access given to O2 customers through the rewards scheme or the roll out of iPhone 4 for customers on long term contracts before new customers O2 appear to be practicing what they preach.


O2’s most recent campaign has been met with critical acclaim from many of the advertising industries harshest critics. ‘Be More Dog’ has been praised for doing something different in an industry littered with repetitive messages and copycat advertising regurgitated across multiple media platforms.



In many ways ‘Be More Dog’ could serve as a perfect eulogy for O2’s loyalty based strategy. In a world where many mobile phone operators are happy to treat customers as just another financial transaction O2 have taken a stand and have chosen to offer something extra. O2 are rewarding the very people who have taken the decision to spend their hard earned money on O2 products. Under this context perhaps we could all do with embracing the advertising slogan. So the question is how many of us are going to embrace O2’s strategy and  ‘Be More Dog?’

Monday 16 September 2013

Is MTV still twerking?

It’s 1981 in the middle of Summer and something new, different and unique has come to the attention of the teenagers and young adults of America. Although not necessarily new (The Beatles has mastered music video previously in A Hard Day’s Night) the concept of Music Television hit the small screen and took off in a big way, leaving the US buzzing about the brand and the birth of music video.

Fast-forward 30 years later and MTV continues to attract a young market audience communicating to them through new and exciting media channels. The young demographic has always been seen as fickle, promiscuous and insecure, thus notoriously difficult to please, however MTV has always maintained itself as a stable in the teenager’s media consumption diet.  When times are tough and the brand begins to fall under scrutiny MTV almost always finds a way of breaking through the controversy to once again return to a dominant state. Take for example the 2011success of Jersey Shore which returned MTV its highest ever ratings for a TV series at a time when many felt the brand had lost touch with its audience.


How does MTV continue to come up with material that consistently appeals to the younger audience? Is it by chance that they just so happen to know what the market want to see and when they want to see it? And why has the target audience seemingly shifted from 18 to 25 to 14-17 year olds resulting in content in which some people feel displays the downfall of civilization?


Of course none of this is by chance! For years MTV have been tailoring content around a firm and fundamental understanding of not only their target audience but also the changing demographics, trends and habits of the market at a whole to understand exactly whom they should be targeting and what the message should be. Put simply MTV put insights and data at the heart of decision-making that influence creative content and strategic direction. Generational studies are key to the process and help MTV marry up the all-important need for art with the science that helps everyone make sense of it all.


 This science is partly the reason why the MTV Video Music Awards managed to pull in an increased audience this year leading to positive impacts not just to MTV but also the artists who appeared at the event. It is the reason why MTV have successfully ploughed through the generations of teenagers and pre-teens maximizing as much of their disposal income as they can and it should be the reason why they continue to grow.


So a little different from The Brand Avenger this week in the sense that this is not an attack for poor decision making but rather a demonstration of how doing customer insight right can impact a brand. So what’s next for MTV to ensure they can keep up with today’s audience? Well clearly the biggest challenge will come in the form of Youtube and the relationship with this platform as it continues to grow in influence. If MTV can continue to adapt its media platform to relate over multiple levels it will continue to grow, meaning we might not have seen the last of Miley Cirus’s twerking for some time. If you thought it was bad now wait until 

Thursday 12 September 2013

Are Microsoft getting a good deal with the purchase of Nokia?

My favourite stat to come from the Microsoft takeover of Nokia has to be the increase in share value of 30% for Nokia and the decline in share value of Microsoft of 5% on the same day the purchase was announced. But does this stat demonstrate a flawed strategy for Microsoft in looking to purchase the Finnish brand?


Nokia has suffered a long, drawn out and deflating battle against the other mobile phone providers ever since 2003. In the last ten years its market share in the UK alone has declined from 35 % to 14%. In a world where the mobile phone transformed into a camera, MP3 player, Internet provider and lifestyle icon Nokia’s approach was just too slow and too responsive to protect its position. The decline should be a stark warning to all other brands of the dangers of taking your eye off the ball. Brands like Nokia who once enjoyed such a dominant position in the market should not experience such a dramatic and rapid fall from grace. There is a clear worldwide trend of switching from mobile to smartphone technology and Nokia just couldn’t keep up with this in the US, Europe and UK.


A lot has been said about the impact Apple had on the US and UK market and how their love of disruptive innovation led to a decline in sales for all the big players in the market. No one will ever be able to deny the success Apple had in this field and the competitive advantage they built through creating such a strong and transferable brand image. However at the same time I hope that the ones who made the choices and decisions in Nokia towers do not use this as an excuse for their rapid decline. When the going got tough Nokia pure and simply had no answer to combat the entrance of Apple into the mobile market and no protection strategy to fend off the technology monster.

It may surprise some to know that up until 2011 Nokia was still one of the most popular brands in the UK. Brand index scores suggest that there was still value to be seen in the brand especially in the Western World whereas the US has tended to remain rather indifferent.


Why is this important? Well first of all it demonstrates exactly why Microsoft are willing to spend billions of dollars in purchasing the brand. Microsoft clearly see the value in acquiring a company which can still boast of being the second largest mobile phone provider in the world. Nokia’s position in the mobile market also provides a clear indicator of Nokia’s strength in the ever-expanding Chinese market. Add this to the fact that Microsoft worked closely with Nokia on the Lumia and all of a sudden a number of possibilities for future growth and brand prosperity once again seem possible for a mobile phone arm of Microsoft’s business.



So is Microsoft making the right decision with the acquisition of Nokia and does this purchase spell the end of the best thing to come out of Finland? Well on one hand Nokia have experienced significant market decline and have done little to strengthen their product offering or brand perception. However we must also consider that the brand still enjoys a dominant position in the mobile market and a strong market position in China. If Microsoft can leverage the value left in the brand name and focus growth around dominance in China we may not have seen the last of Nokia and ‘snake’ yet.