Corporate Eye

...compare, compete, excel

Archives for 2013

The Battle for Mobile Advertising Standards

iphone mobile adsThere is no doubt that mobile advertising is a critical component of a brand’s integrated marketing plan, but developing mobile ads isn’t easy. With the proliferation of devices and multiple operating systems, mobile ads that look great to one consumer might look terrible to the next. As a result, mobile ad unit inventory is a jumbled mix that keeps growing, mobile ad CPM rates are very low, and mobile marketers aren’t happy.

Making matters worse is the inability to collect effective metrics for tracking the effectiveness of mobile ads. If an ad looks different from one device to another, performance data isn’t reliable because results will be skewed.

These are problems that the Mobile Marketing Association (MMA) and the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) are trying to change with new mobile ad standards. Together, the groups released the “Mobile Phone Creative Guidelines” for public comment today, which would supplement the Universal Mobile Ad Package and make it easier and more effective to buy and sell mobile ads.

The new Mobile Phone Creative Guidelines address multiple devices, mobile web and in-app ads, and specifications for both basic and rich media mobile ad units. The Mobile Phone Creative Guidelines include information related to:

  • The creative unit name
  • The maximum allowable expanded dimensions
  • The maximum allowable initial file load size
  • The maximum allowable animation length
  • The maximum allowable video length
  • The maximum percentage of CPU use
  • The minimum required controls
  • The labeling requirements, font sizes, etc.
  • The required submission lead time
  • The best practices for implementation
  • The supported creative types

You can download the complete Mobile Phone Creative Guidelines in Excel format. If you’d like to submit feedback on the guidelines, you can email your comments to mobile@iab.net. This is your chance to weigh in on mobile ad standards that could affect your brand for years to come, so be sure to speak up if you have input. Both mobile advertisers and publishers who display ads should review the guidelines and provide comments, so the final guidelines are the best that they can be.

Image: Matthew Pearce

The Social Media Release vs The Press Release

Press releases have been the main tool of the marketing and PR trade for as long as marketing and PR have existed. Originating from the early 1900s, the press release has undergone some superficial format changes but the underlying purpose remains almost unchanged.

However, in recent years the press release as we once knew it—a paper document sent to news publications in order to promote a company’s recent achievements—has undergone a major change. As the digital age has set in and many marketers have become eager to make the break into the world of internet marketing, SMRs or Social Media Releases have become the new way to spread the word leaving the power of the original press release questioned.

But what makes an SMR so special?

The main distinguishing feature that sets SMRs apart from traditional press releases is the array of multimedia elements that can be added to give the release more depth.  You can add images and slideshows, audio and video footage, graphics, even webinars and podcasts.  SMRs are designed to be easy to distribute and re-distribute as well as be more useful to the target audiences, all of which work online (bloggers, people on social media sites, online news sites and their journalists, industry websites, etc. ) As many industries and media outlets gravitate towards online it is increasingly important to be able to provide the extras they require in order for your release to not get left behind.

So the question remains, will charming SMRs replace the comparatively dull press release? 

In my opinion there will always be a need for the traditional press release just as digital will never completely replace the need for traditional marketing methods. There is something to be said for traditional methods that have been around for years, and although some of them may be out of date and need tweaking to be brought into this century the fundamentals at their core remain important.

The reality of the situation is that PR and marketing professionals need to have a balance of both traditional and digital in terms of their releases, as there will always be people from both traditional and digital audiences, both online and offline, interested in your industry and if you don’t have that balance you will lose the attention of one or the other.

To establish which would be more beneficial to your corporation you need to determine criteria and metrics that can be measured and understood.  A good general place to start is with measuring the number of follow-up queries received and editorial mentions.

Another good criterion that people often overlook is how many syndications your release achieved.  The term syndication refers to your release being published on another website (typically a portal) with all attached multimedia and links, with no editing to the text. Although it is not editorial coverage,  it can still be extremely valuable to your company as it extends the exposure of the information to further audiences.

The bottom line is that SMRs can be a beneficial accessory to your PR efforts if used with care as part of an integrated all-round strategy.

5 Examples of How Twitter Affects Brand Building

twitter marketingThe effect that Twitter can have on a brand in terms of building brand awareness, brand recognition, brand loyalty, and brand advocacy through word-of-mouth marketing cannot be disputed. There are countless examples of brands generating massive tangible and intangible success through increased sales and brand value thanks to time and efforts invested into Twitter marketing, listening, content, and conversations.

Brands that do all four of the key activities that make Twitter an essential marketing tool — marketing (i.e., promotions), listening (i.e., researching), content (i.e., publishing), and conversations (i.e., relationship-building) are reaping the rewards. Wishpond shared the quantifiable results of five specific promotions launched by five brands on Twitter, and the results are inspiring. You can check out the complete infographic below, but first, here are some highlights:

  • LG launched a treasure hunt promotion through a Promoted Trend on Twitter and got 20 million impressions overall and 5,000 tweets per hour from it.
  • Virgin America used both Promoted Trends and Promoted Tweets to announce a cause marketing promotion which offered low fares and gave back to Stand Up To Cancer. The promotion gave Virgin America one of its top five sales days in its history, a 25% increase in sign-ups, and $50,000 in charitable donations.
  • Cadbury used a Promoted Trend to increase positive mentions for a specific product which generated a 25% engagement rate and a 1,800% increase in positive mentions of the brand.
  • Cirque du Soleil used Twitter’s Promoted Accounts in an attempt to increase followers to its Twitter account and ended up getting 360 new followers per day directly from the Promoted Accounts as well as 340 new organic followers per day.
  • Porsche used a Promoted Trend and Promoted Tweets campaign to launch a new product in the United States. Porsche experienced an 87% increase in engagement rate, a 594% increase in follows, and a 300% increase in positive brand sentiment.

Click the image to view the full-size infographic at the source.

twitter marketing infographic

(Source: Wishpond)

Twitter marketing efforts that focus on increasing positive brand sentiment, engagement, awareness, and recognition can deliver quantifiable results as the five brands in the infographic above have proven. Next time an executive argues against giving your marketing team the budget dollars needed to develop Twitter campaigns to positively promote your brand, show them this infographic. It’s just one more piece of evidence that could help you get the money you need to drive brand equity and sales through Twitter.

Image: Bernard Goldbach

The Importance of Knowing When It’s Not the Right Time to Rebrand

Rebranding can turn a misaligned brand into a powerhouse. It can breathe new life into a stagnant brand. Rebranding can even help to save a tarnished brand. However, there are times when it’s not right to rebrand. The trick for brand marketers and executives is to know when it’s one of those times.

This is a lesson that American Airlines is now learning with the negative backlash that has surrounded its launch of a new logo. It’s not the new design that’s causing the problem (although there is the typical criticisms following a new logo launch). It’s the timing of the rebranding initiative that’s causing the problem.

Robert Klara of AdWeek sums up the problem quite succinctly with a single quote from Bob Herbst of AirlineFinancials.com who said, “All American Airlines labor groups have taken pay and benefits concessions, including thousands of furloughs and layoffs, so management can—somehow—justify spending tens of millions of dollars to take aircraft out of service and paint them.”

It’s that opinion that’s causing the most problems for American Airlines right now, and it’s a very common opinion.

Matthias Mencke, a creative director at Siegel+Gale, shared his thoughts on the new American Airlines logo with Laura Stampler of Business Insider, who explains that the new logo, “Leads to criticisms from labor groups for doing a complete branding overhaul while it was in debt and implementing extreme employee cutbacks. [Mencke notes], ‘I find it quite insensitive and would argue that it appears to be an effort to distract from the airline’s larger problems.’”

Keep in mind, this is a company that is suffering from financial problems and brand reputation problems. American Airlines appears on the 2012 list of the 10 most hated companies in America from 24/7 Wall St. and appeared on the list in 2011, too. Reasons include: “bankruptcy filings, cutting financial obligations, failing to meet pilot demands, laying off a huge number of employees, and having the ‘rudest employees.’”

Furthermore, American Airlines was included in the 24/7 Wall St. list of 10 brands that will die in 2013. A rebranding might be a last ditch effort to re-energize the brand, but given the company’s existing problems, is it the right time to invest in a new identity? It seems hard to justify from the outside looking in, which is why the negative online buzz is loud and growing louder.

According to the new logo announcement on the American Airlines website, the company has been working on its new identity for two years. Below, you can see the announcement video featuring CEO Tom Horton as well as a video about how the new design was created and applied to the American Airlines livery below.
 

 

The lesson to learn is simple. A big part of branding and marketing is exercising restraint and using common sense. It’s not always the right time to rebrand.

What do you think?

How to Avoid 6 Common Annual Report Mistakes

I invited Richard Ketchen to write a post for us about creating annual reports. Richard advises on stakeholder communication, with a particular interest in the annual report, so I thought you’d find his suggestions helpful.

Over to you, Richard…

Common annual report mistakes, and how to avoid them

pile of annual reportsFacts, figures and fluff. You’ll find all three in an annual report. Readers expect a little of each. For companies, though, finding the right balance is the key. Why? Because with more and more information sources available to investors and other stakeholders, the editorial quality of the annual report is increasingly important.

Originally a periodic and soon-forgotten filing with shareholders, the report now lives 24/7 online, where it reaches an extended audience for years. So it should say what you want it to say, and be as readable online as it is in print.

With that in mind, here are a few ideas for preventing or resolving some common editorial mistakes in annual reports.

1. Removing all personality

If there’s one section that’s likely to be read by all readers, it’s the shareholder letter, especially if it’s the CEO’s letter. The first few sentences can set the tone for the entire report, while the remainder of the letter can add a distinct voice and life to an otherwise dreary dialogue. Unfortunately, by the time final copy emerges from the usual gauntlet of executive and committee reviews, it may have lost any hint of personality.

A better approach

Every CEO has a distinct “voice.” Finding it is up to the writer, whether that writer is the CEO or a ghostwriter. Keeping it is up to the CEO and the owner of the annual report. Don’t give in to the nitpickers. Make sure the shareholder letter reflects the personality of the CEO and the company, not the person hired to write it or those who review it.

2. Failing to answer the “so-what” question

Despite the growing frequency of integrating sustainability, operational and financial reporting into the annual report, there’s still a lot of “box ticking” to meet reporting requirements and not enough thinking about the relevance of some narrative. Indeed, one of the most difficult decisions that arises in annual report production is what to leave out. There’s rarely a shortage of material. Much of it, however, is of questionable value to the reader. More importantly, too much narrative makes it difficult for the reader to read and understand the report.

A better approach

Don’t assume your topic is important just because you think it is, and don’t assume everyone automatically recognizes its relevance. Always ask, so what? Be clear about establishing why your topic is important and why your readers should care.

3. Failing to target messaging

Changes in the audience for the annual report and how that audience consumes information, plus the rising focus on governance and sustainability, have brought welcome changes to corporate reporting and broadened the audience. Employees, retirees, suppliers, partners, community members, analysts and investment advisors are now part of a growing list of stakeholders interested in at least some of the report’s content. Each of these audiences is seeking different information, something that’s often overlooked.

A better approach

You can’t speak to everybody, but you must speak convincingly to your most important audiences. Consider their relationship to your company, their degree of interaction with the organization and their relationship to business strategy. Then, tailor your messaging to the audiences you value most.

4. Expecting the entire report to be read

Of course the report will be read, just not word for word. Most readers are pressed for time, so they skim and scan the copy. Plus, the front end of the report may be taken less seriously than the financials because it is often fluff-ridden. That not only discourages readers, but also adds unnecessary length.

A better approach

Focus on the needs of a reader with limited time and attention, who doesn’t have time to dwell on every word. Write and layout the content in reader-friendly formats. Use best practice in information design – and plain language – to make the report easier to read and understand. Short sentences, vertical lists, headings and subheadings (even in the shareholder letter), boxed or highlighted text, memorable and informative quotations and captions, all help. Make sure charts are easy to understand and avoid repeating that information.

5. Failing to explain the basics

You don’t need to provide a full history of your company or describe production processes or markets in exhaustive detail. But you do need to provide insight into how the company creates value. Unfortunately, not all companies provide this information, or enough of it, to help readers understand how value is created.

A better approach

Be sure your report answers the following questions: Why does the company exist? What is the vision or objective? What is the strategy? How does the company make money? Answers to questions like these are important to stakeholders, but there may be resistance among management to providing full details. You’ll improve the effectiveness of the annual report if you overcome them.

6. Not measuring effectiveness

Like many forms of communication, measuring the effectiveness of an annual report isn’t always straightforward. If your annual report really matters, though, you must set communication objectives and measure its effectiveness.

A better approach

Take stock of your annual report with a reader survey or by asking for feedback directly from key stakeholders. Benchmarking your report against peer groups or annual report awards, such as the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants’ corporate reporting awards, can also be effective. Whatever you do, be sure you receive honest feedback.

Fresh thinking and change are required to prevent the annual report from becoming a repository of boilerplate and historical information that is of little value to stakeholders. However, the annual report is a work-in-progress, so don’t try to change everything in one year.

Thanks, Richard!

Richard Ketchen helps clients plan, write and produce communication that informs and engages audiences. His more than 20 years of experience includes work with start-ups and multinationals in a variety of industries and on award-winning annual reports. Based in Vancouver, Canada, Richard can be reached through his website.

The Danger of Celebrity Endorsements of Brands

nike lance armstrong ad 2001Paying celebrities to endorse a brand is dangerous territory. This isn’t a new revelation, but brands still shell out massive amounts of money to have the “it” celebrity of the moment appear in ads and say how great the brand is.

The latest celebrity brand endorsement gone wrong story (Lance Armstrong admitting to Oprah Winfrey that he used doping to win all of his Tour de France titles) reminds us once again how risky it is to pay to attach a celebrity name to a brand name.

The list of celebrity endorsements of brands that have gone terribly wrong for the brands is long. Here are a few:

  • Tiger Woods and multiple brands
  • Madonna and Pepsi
  • Kobe Bryant and McDonald’s and Coca-Cola
  • Michael Vick and Nike
  • Michael Phelps and Kellogg’s
  • Kate Moss and Chanel and H&M
  • O.J. Simpson and Hertz

Two years ago, I wrote an article for Corporate Eye that discussed research about celebrity endorsements from Ace Metrix. The data showed that showing celebrities in ads does not drive a lift in sales. In fact, brand ads that featured celebrities showed a negative lift. I wrote:

The report was based on a study of every nationally televised ad during the first 11 months of 2010 and included extensive efforts to present fair and balanced statistical analysis of the results.  The study found that regardless of age or gender, ads without celebrities performed better than ads with celebrities.

Most consumers cited reasons they found celebrity ads to be ineffective as: being confused by what product the celebrity was endorsing and simply not liking the celebrity in the ad.

Ace Metrix concludes from its findings that consumers today are not as easily influenced as they once were.  With quick access to massive amounts of information on the Internet, they want equally quick and instantly relevant messages in ads.  Celebrities affect them far less than relevant messages.

Of course, there are times when a celebrity brand endorsement has a positive effect on the brand’s reputation and sales, but it’s a risky initiative that can go wrong in an instant. The risk is even greater today, because of the immediate and broad reach of the social web. A photo snapped that happens as part of a celebrity’s private life can be tweeted, shared, and seen by millions faster than you can imagine. Today, brands have far less control over the effects celebrity behaviors (even in their personal lives) can have on the brand’s reputation. Guilt by association can be extremely damaging to a brand.

The safest bet is to stay away from celebrity endorsements of your brand, but if celebrity endorsements must be part of your marketing plan, consider shortened contract time periods which can reduce the potential risk.

What do you think is the best answer? Leave a comment and share your thoughts.

Image: Nike Ad