The Power of Branding in Sports

Throughout the world, sports are one of the most popular of all industries. Fan of various sports create an almost romantic bond with their favorite teams/players. Fans labor for countless hours at their jobs, make tremendous sacrifices for the opportunity to don the same shirt as their favorite athlete/team and will pay upwards of their monthly salary for the opportunity to watch them in action. Sports create an almost euphoric feeling for their fans and when their team/player is successful, they are riding a high that is unrivaled to almost anything except child birth and marriage. Millions flock to stores to buy up any piece of memorabilia available that just dons their logo or player's name. The only thing that matters to them is their team. A fan could be sitting at dinner with his/her significant other and their favorite team/athlete comes on the TV and everything stops and focuses on that player. They become a fixture in our life and we name our dogs after that player or team and everything revolves around the happenings of that organization. In a time where everything of value to us is failing and the world around us is crumbling financially, we cling to the one thing we know will never let us down.... our sports team/athlete.

But what sports fans fail to realize is that sports are a business. They work no different then your top businesses in the world (i.e. walmart, target, ExxonMobil etc.) Their goal is to turn a profit, and as big of a profit as possible. Athletes are making obscene amounts of money, cities are basing their financial future on the decision of one athlete and organizations are lining up at the opportunity to throw tens of millions of dollars in the direction of an athlete just to place their name on their product. Some of the largest companies in the world have reached their current level of success through this exact practice. Nike would be nothing but a niche basketball apparel organization without the benefit of Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods. Adidas would be a niche soccer apparel company without the help of countless European soccer clubs. So the stakes are enormous. Athletes can create a brand that revolutionizes the way we live our lives. But with the enormous clammer that is caused by creating a global brand, the fragility of aforementioned brand exceeds their predetermined value.

All it takes is one decision, one ill fated incident, one failed heroic attempt and your brand will crash faster then the stock market in 1929. Branding is the ultimate risk/reward. This risk/rewards applies to more then just the athlete. During the infamous Tiger Woods scandal, advertisers were dropping his brand like flies and realized that anybody associated with his name, would be seen in a negative sense... This will also be felt in the wake of the LeBron James debacle that took place only a few days ago. Branding in athletes is the ultimate game of surfing in shark infested waters. While on the board, you are riding the waves and reaping the benefits of an untarnished image. But as you begin to fall off of the board, your image and brand suffers. Your only option is to get out of the water. Wash your hands of all association to that athlete/brand and find yourself the next "IT" star.

The Role of Small Business and the Double Standard of Corporate America...

The best and brightest....Bigger, stronger, faster.....everyone expects perfection. We expect the highest level candidates available. Nobody has an open position and look to have the mediocre candidate fill the vacancy? But what exactly is the 'best and brightest?'. Are they the life-long learners whose effort is unmistakable, who aim to continuously grow their knowledge base and skillset, but on a more organic level? Or is it the 'blue chip' from the top tier school, who possesses the 4.0 GPA and countless scholastic accolades? It is all open to interpretation but history shows that the ladder, isn't necessarily the correct choice. Ask any great sports coach, and they will tell you effort outweighs ability anyday. If you do not strive to be the greatest, you will always be second best. But the question continues.....who is the best and brightest?

Corporate America expects the best and brightest. Better yet, they demand it and depending upon the organization you speak of, it is an almost unattainable level of success one must achieve in order to be the "right candidate." The interesting thing is that every organization wants the best but everyone also doesn't want to provide that opportunity for the inexperienced candidate to showcase their talents. It is your basic game of risk vs. reward. Is this candidate who is very 'green' by industry standards worth the chance to showcase their abilities and potentially make an impact with our organization? or should we just go with the candidate with 'proven' success. There is another magical buzzword as it pertains to finding the right candidate.... proven. Is proven success in a specific field the recipe for success in another?? or would the 'green' candidate with high energy and a ton to learn, provide you the best avenue for the future? Does the proven experience outweigh the ability to develop?

The inexperienced candidates passed over by big business are forced to retreat to the most influential segment in the world....small business. Small business gives candidates the opportunity to grow and learn without the repercussions of billion dollar budgets and teams of 200. They can develop their skills and find their niche into what is truly their calling. This is the period in which they showcase their true skillset and what they may bring to an organization. The truly successful candidates reward their small business with double digits gains and increased market share. When the candidate reaches the ceiling of their advancement in the organization, they are forced with a decision..stay on and continue the success or strive to achieve a higher level of success with another organization. If they choose to leave, they are equipped with proven success on a smaller scale and a passion for growing a business that radiates from every pore. They are then applying for roles in which they feel they can truly fit in and make a difference. Only to be met with the double standard of big business....You were successful at a smaller scale but are you worth the "risk". They are faced with the same scenario they were before entering into the small business...

How can one break through this double standard?? It requires something in which they are unable to control....and the same thing that allowed them the opportunity to get this far....a shot...a chance..an opportunity to show that they truly do belong in big business. The organizations that truly evaluate talent on the most organic level are the ones who will be rewarded by the candidate's heightened level of passion, energy and also met by the ideologies of success in small business and how they will parlay into success in big business. by taken a chance on a risky and unproven candidate, you have truly met the candidate in which you were looking for.... the best and the brightest. Although they do not possess the ivy league education and countless accolades, they do possess the one thing that separates the successful from the second best.... the ability to do everything in their power to work harder then anybody else to achieve the goal

The death of the DVR and the rise of Streaming...

Just a few years back, advertisers had to deal with the fact that TV advertising became a new challenge thanks to a wonderful piece of technology..... the DVR. No longer do consumers have to sit through the 30-60 second banter of a promotional hail mary in hopes of winning their ever valuable dollar. Advertising agencies and in-house marketing departments have spent countless hours in the conference room and in brainstorming sessions determining the next big pitch that will give them the upper hand over their competition.

Then came the DVR. Time thrifty viewers can catch their latest new episodes without having to sit through the commercials, completely wasting the high dollar investment put forth by the corporations, not to mention the loss of man hours associated with the development of the "new ad campaign." During a typical DVR commercial break, a 30 second commercial zips by at approx. 2 seconds. Leaving the marketer little time to impress their potential customers. What does this cause as a result?? More organizations taking their advertising dollars "off air" and to other mediums.

The DVR has seem to win the war of viewers attention. But the DVR has been dealt a significant blow.... online streaming of shows. Services similar to Hulu, and Fancast offer viewers access to first run shows from anywhere in the world. What does this mean for marketers?? A continued evolution of marketing strategies to incorporate advertising dollars to where your customers are located. Advertisers are trading in their 30 to 60 second advertisements for 5 to 15 second clips that focus on one thing.... brand recognition. Consumers favorite shows are interrupted only by 4-5 breaks in which marketers have the opportunity to hone in on their undeivided attention. This time is vital, viewers rarely want to move away from the computer screen as they are afraid to miss the upcoming moments of their favorite TV show. The brands who are currently advertising on this medium, have a very short period of time to reinforce their message to viewers. Successful advertisers showcase their products by showcasing large logos, quick product introductions and colorful, eye catching showcases.

This new form of marketing adapts perfectly into the emergence of social media in the fact that your quick showcase of product information can be coupled by directing viewers to your social media sites for further information and the most successful campaigns require user interaction in order to fulfill a question asked during the short segment. Users can then 'click' the advertisement and automatically be directed to your social media site or company webpage and then directed to a specific site in order to fulfill the inquiry begun during your short segment. This new page is opened up as a separate tab in their internet browser and can either be viewed immediately or viewed upon the completion of their favorite show. Now that they are on your site, you can drive sales of other products as well as the advertised product or service. this is a sharp contrast from the interaction that is required for consumers to go to your company website or social media website when they view your advertisement on TV. Making it easy for your consumer to get to your website, product or social media site will maximize the effectiveness of your advertising campaign and therefore drive traffic.

Coupling advertisements across various mediums to drive traffic to your website must be the number one concern for any marketing department or ad agency and the marketers who continue to embrace new technology and make it easier for their customers to find their products, will be the ones who reap the benefits of their untiring effort.

2009 Brand Winners...as per the Fortune 500

As outlined in the Fortune 500 as well as the Interbrand Design Forum "Most Valuable U.S. Retail Brands" shows that despite being in the heart of a recession and us being fed the fact consumers are scared to spend, various retailers are yielding great successes as a result of this "contracted" market. More now then ever brands must find out what drives their consumer to purchase and what they find most valuable in their shopping. Is price the main factor?? Is brand confidence important?? Is differentiation vital to brand success?? These are all questions that retailers are trying to determine when it comes to forecasting their consumers decision making. The brands that typically are at the pulse of their consumer trends continue to yield success. The brands that are flexible and can adapt to the ever changing climate are able to continue to flourish.

Walmart jumps back to No. 1 in the Fortune 500 and to no surprise. Anybody who wants to run to their local Walmart for a gallon of milk is always greeted by about 300 of their peers all seeking the attractive prices Walmart continues to provide. When it comes to sheer volume of sales, it is hard pressed to find someone who does it better then the Waltons. With everyone pinching their pennies, they turn to brands they know can provide them with the best value and the most options. Walmart's store remodeling project to reduce inventory and widen store aisles showed great promise. the massive expansion of the "great value" brand in their grocery department proved to pay huge dividends in terms of sales. Everyone is looking to purchase more store brands as opposed to the national brands. Walmart realized this and provided their customers with quality products at a fraction of the cost. National brands continued to have troubles in the fact they receive less space on Walmarts "highly sought after shelves" as well as decreased demand.

this proved to be the case with clothing retailers Abercrombie and Fitch and GAP realized just how fragile the value of a brand is when consumers do not have the high amount of disposable income. According to Interbrand Design Forum's A&F brand plummetted 82%!! that is massive and shown in their sharp decline in sales for 2009. This could be that consumers found the same quality in other brands such as American Eagle and those offered at large retailers such as Kohls (both shown increased sales in 2009). This also could be the fact the "novelty" period for A&F has come and passed and they need to "rebrand" their product to meet the changing customer climate. American Eagle is very in tune with their customer base and continue to utilize Social Media and a "rewards" program to entice their patrons into the store. As someone who receives email marketing from A&F as well as American Eagle and Aeropostale, it is obvious that organizations that just get it. This is shown in the Fortune 500 and the Interbrand report.

All retailers are under the impression that price is the main determinant as it pertains to the purchasing decision. This couldn't be more false. Now more then ever, retailers need to stay on top of what their consumers actually want from a brand. Quality product still maintains high importance. Price is important but consumers want a product they can trust. They want a product they can count on for value, not just affordability. Consumers also want a product that "gets them." This brand will understand their needs and offer products within the scope of these needs. This "custom-tailoring" of products is what increases same store sales and further catapults the convenience aspect. With superstores such as Walmart and Target, it is increasingly important to provide customers with convenience along with quality products.

Speaking of Target, what a great story 2009 provided. While their sales decreased, their profitabilty increased greatly!! Streamlining process and efficiency were vital to get Target back to its core products. Instead of adding product lines and diving into businesses in which they are not the industry leaders can lead to consumers lacking confidence in other areas of your business. Target getting back to their core products in which they are far superior to their competition has proved to increase customer loyalty and therefore allow more accurate forecasting, which in turn allows them to remain efficient.

Retailers that are willing to put in the work and hire individuals who are in turn with the customer climate will be the ones who continue to reap the benefits of the evolving market. The products that live on "reputation" alone and feel the customers will come regardless of aforementioned determining factors, will continue to see double digit brand value.

Personalization in an Impersonal World...

Technology has obviously changed the way that we live our life and has for 15 years now, but no more then ever has it effected the way that we interact more then it does now. Just about everyone in the world has at least 1 e-mail address (heck I have 3 that I use on a daily basis.) But our dependence upon the non-verbal communication has reached its height. We base our marketing efforts, advertising campaigns, sales calls, and new product unveiling on our non-verbal communication. While there are some businesses who are reluctant to change and still maintain the practice of a personal phone call or visit to each sales meeting but those particular businesses are lacking in the evolution of marketing and hence their bottom line suffers as a result. We are programmed to come into work every morning and check our e-mail without hesitation. Our phones are strapped to our bodies like our newest organs but not necessarily for the use of phone calls, but for the use of our non-verbal communication such as Text Messages, Twitter Updates, Facebook Status Updates, Google Buzz Updates, Blogs, etc. Our phones have morphed from the replacement to the Landlines, to the replacement of verbal communication.

The non verbal communications does have a multitude of benefits though, as the way of the economy has us doing more with less so at work, our days are busier, our workload is through the roof, and our available free time has shrunken to an all time low. The advantage of e-mail, texts, Facebook, Twitter and Buzz is that it doesn't require an instantaneous response. We are left to respond at our leisure which opens up a great realm of possibility to contact a person who would typically be unavailable if it weren't for non-verbal communications. It also provides us a way to broaden our inner circle of friends and colleagues as we are able to stay up to date with their ever evolving busy lives as well.

What is lost in the non-verbal communications are the interactions that provide us with a strong sense of security as a result of the face to face or phone conversation. When you meet with someone and have an uninterrupted conversation in which you can response using body cues and voice fluxuation, it will either drive home a point more efficiently or allow you to convey a message in which would seem foolish if not presented personally.

The challenge us marketing professionals face is the fact that we are required to engage the consumer using the non-verbal cues and gain a moment of their uninterrupted time to view our particular product or service. Our window of opportunity has decreased to such a minimal amount of time, that our impact needs to be stronger then ever. We need to reach our particular target market utilizing the method that will provide us with the most uninterrupted focus. Hence the beginning of non-verbal communication. Personalization of advertising is marketing's 3.0. Finding consumer trends and what a particular audience is more inclined to buy and then present those products to them in a convenient and "lightweight" method is how success will be measured in the upcoming markets. Existing non-verbal communication will spearhead this operation but will give way to its future operatives such as Mobile Marketing. The goal is to get in, gain their attention, trigger a positive response and then get out. Whether they are interested in said product or not is not the main goal, brand awareness is the key. If Store XYZ advertises men's body wash to a 30 year old single man on his mobile phone, he may look and say no I am fine on deodorant right now but the next time he is interested in deodorant, his mind thinks instantly, I need to make a run to Store XYZ. You have just solidified your brand. Need not roll out a multi network television campaign that might miss most of your market due to the increased use of DVR and online streaming of television shows. A non-verbal marketing campaign would raise your viewership significantly.

Organizations willing to stay ahead of the marketing movement and utilize these cost effective methods of personalizing their campaigns for their target market will be the ones who generate the most buzz and yield the most positive results.... Marketing 3.0 is right around the corner...

The Employee Experience Dilemma...

Lets set the stage...
There are 2 employees, John who has been with XYZ corporation for 23 years and then you have Steve who has been an employee for 3 years. Both are Middle level managers who possess a parallel job description, pay grade, and skill level.

Suddenly, due to economic hardship, XYZ corporation decides to lay off both employees. After the initial thought of disbelief and sadness, both employees go home and contemplate their next move. John is taking the news harder then Steve. XYZ Corporation is all that John has known his entire professional career. He knows their system inside and out and has been there through the very prosperous time in 1998 and the troublesome time in the late 1980s. Steve on the other hand has held several positions in his career and possesses the experience utilizing several different systems.

Now it is time for these 2 laid off employees to find work at another organization. Both are applying for the same position with LMN Corporation. Here is a few lines from the meeting between hiring managers... "John has been with the organization for 23 years, he has incredibly company loyalty and retention." "Steve has been with several organizations and doesn't necessarily show that he has the ability to remain loyal to an organization."

This is a common conversation happening across America in some of the largest organizations in the world. But is this the correct argument to make??

You have heard it all of your professional life, get a job and stay with that company for your entire career. That is what we are all trained to do. Employees who have been with organizations for 10, 20, even 30 years are held in the highest regard. They are looked up to by every employee and praised by every senior level manager in the establishment.

But the real question is why? The name of the game in this economy/marketplace is flexibility. We are all asked to do more, know more, and jump into any situation and succeed.

An individual who has worked with several systems, a myriad of personalities and situations and has flourished through all of them is considered to be a risk and someone not as highly regarded as someone who only knows one system and one set of methods? To me the math doesn't add up.

Common sense would conclude the most valuable employees are those who have a broad range of experience as they are typically quick thinkers and can adapt to any environment they are thrown into.

A good analogy would be a chef that has been making lasagna for 30 years and when someone has a request for fettuccini alfredo, he can not produce a quality product because all he knows is lasagna.

To argue for the other side of the story, salaries are by far the largest expense in any organization and a large portion of that expense is dedicated to employee hiring, training and retention. With that being said, the value is high for employees who stay with the organization because they require the least amount of money in training and retention.

Now this blog is about marketing so I will refocus on that avenue. If you are a large organization looking for the "best" employee available, who would be a better candidate?? John is highly skilled in system A but your organization runs system B. When John is thrown into this mix, he will not flourish and require even additional time training which in turn digs deeper into your ever-shrinking budget. Steve has had experience with System A, System B and System C but for not nearly as long a time dedicated to one system as John. Steve would be the best candidate as he is familiar with the basics of System B and could jump into his role with less training as a result. Organizations are looking to decrease the amount of time and money it takes for a new marketing employee to start making them money, so with this being said, the employee with the broader knowledge is more accustomed to being thrown into foreign atmospheres and therefore would flourish more quickly as a result.

But still you have some large organizations still weighing heavily on the tenure of an employee in selecting who is brought in for interviews. Leaving out the employee who possibly has succeeding greatly in various atmospheres and has become bored with the current situation and is seeking one which will provide the room for improvement that could lead to a long term position. If the employee provides to be successful and your organization is one that would challenge this candidate greatly, it is an obvious conclusion that the employee will remain with the organization. Those who remain stagnant and do not want to further challenge their brains are the ones who are held in the highest regards but are often not the most successful choice... it is a debate that will continue...

The Super Marketing Bowl...

The "Big Game", The Super Bowl, the biggest marketing showcase of the year.... All are words to describe the last Professional Football game of the year. The teams have 2 weeks to prepare, and the media has 2 weeks to reiterate the same points over and over. Every pass, run or mistake is broken down and the players involved are scrutinized for their inability to make a split second decision correctly.

The marketers have 364 days to prepare for marketing's biggest stage with hopes of being named "top commercial of the year." The idea behind achieving this hallowed distinction isn't necessarily the impact your commercial has on brand recognition or definition, but the fact that you want people to remember your ad. Little does the actual return on investment weigh in your decision to have dancing animals or people injuring themselves in order to create that "shock value" that everyone will remember. That is who the "true" winners are, the ones that spend 2+ million dollars to have over 100 million people laughing for 30 seconds and then 2 months later, completely forget the product associated with the moments of laughter. The companies who Really win on the big day are the usual hitters that have been flat out producing wonderful brand empowering ads for years... i.e. Pepsi, Budweiser, Frito Lay. and one of the newer succeeding companies that has created an empire in their particular industry as a result of their super bowl ads.... GoDaddy.com. Although their ads are risque and push the envelope of censorship, their product name is always predominantly displayed and allows for unmistakable brand recognition.

This is one day out of the year where the major marketing companies in the United States push to develop that new "big thing" that will project their business as the "It" company to hire. Millions tune in, not to watch the game, but to view the advertisements. When it is time for a beverage refill or another plateful of wings, big game viewers go during the action of the football game, and not during the commercial breaks. The greatest show on turf has become... the greatest Return on Investment.

As marketers, sports have become our greatest medium for promotion. It is one thing the world has in common....sports. Sports encompass our day to day lives and we are surrounded by their impact. For years, marketers have been trying to convey their product during sporting events based upon predetermined demographics and have yielded countless success as a result. The 'Year 2010' marketer need not lie within the boundaries of these predetermined demographics but impact those non-traditional sports viewers. In there lies the greatest untapped market in advertising. Diehard sports fans have their loyalties to various products depending upon their favorite players associating with a particular product. (Nascar fans especially). It is whether the marketers can impact the viewer who is watching the event as an unbiased onlooker and score their uncommitted dollar which truly yields success...