'Perhaps the seeds of the "objective" media's demise were sown in its very creation. Professionalism and a quest for objectivity made journalism a more attractive profession even as record profits made it a better paying one. The upshot was a generation of college educated reporters and editors, along with a set of cultural and political attitudes they brought with them from the nation's elite institutions of higher learning. In time, another technological innovation – broadcast – changed the historic role of newspapers and magazines. No longer deliverers of the news, print journalists became interpreters of events. That proved a slippery slope. As the elite denizens of newsrooms began to analyze the news instead of merely chronicling it, the confidence their audience had in the journalists' fairness and ideological balance began to wane.'
Objectivity doesn't exist. Perceptions about its existence exist. That is why Publicity scores over Advertising. Advertising brings with it no credibility as it emanates from the mouth of the marketer. Publicity on other hand is supposed to be piloted by 'neutral' media vehicles.
Main stream media around the world are as opinionated as we individuals are. Though they profess objectivity, people who give us news stories angle it in a manner that suits them. There's nothing we can do about it, except listen or refuse to, again, depending on our own personal slants.
It makes good sense for brands to have the media on their side. Brand attitudes which are closest to dictating sales can be contrived with the help of 'neutral' news media. If a brand can't have the media in its pocket (the way Barack Obama did), its even wise for it to get into the media business. A brand that's taken a lot of flak from media sources and yet has managed to thrive, because it uses its own media vehicles, is the Silvio Berlusconi brand.
The Silvio Berlusconi brand still survives the presidency. All thanks to the media. His media.
Saturday, 11 July, 2009
Media, neutral? Palin for President!
Friday, 10 July, 2009
What's smilar, what different?
What fashions our behaviour is the thought that precedes it. And that thought in turn is shaped by our cognitive abilities. That in turn, again, is partly fashioned by the context within which we operate.
What's interesting about what dictates our behaviour, the way I described it, is that, this is pretty much generic. I mean, its applicable to most of us, if not all of us. The implication on the marketer is that he can pretty much decipher how consumers would behave (read, generic behaviour) within a certain context. What differentiates a certain behaviour from another is the difference in our cognitive abilities and its usage, and the varied contexts within which we operate.
Note that our cognitive faculties get better (in general, I admit) as we grow older. And then our attitudes are shaped more by what we know, than what we feel. In branding terms, that means, brand attitudes are shaped by beliefs based on what we know, than what we feel. Not so when we are young. Brand attitudes are shaped more by what we feel, and what we feel 's got more to do with emotions rather than rational analysis.
The Steve McNair-Sahel Kazemi murder-suicide is a tragic case in question that illustrates generic behaviour (as against specific ones) driven by an overdose of emotions. Its about how cognition dims to minimal levels within certain contexts. The case also demonstrates how gender differences are wiped clean when people respond in an emotionally unstable state. On a specific note, it dispels our preconceived notions about women and crime.
Note what Louis B. Schlesinger, professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice states, 'Both men and women who commit murder-suicide are often motivated by jealousy, though often to a pathological or even psychotic degree. These cases are rarely committed in the heat of the moment; there’s a pre-homicidal context that leads to a homicidal break.'
Carol Oyster, professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin adds, 'Discussing women and crime might be a misnomer. Twenty-year-olds are not cognitive adults. The decision making isn’t fully mature until about 24.'
Variables are what's behind consumer segmentation. Generic behaviour on the other hand is what unites people in a manner we can bunch them in the same group. Its easy to assume that visible variables, like gender differences mean varied behaviour. It isn't necessarily so. Men and women can behave alike as much as behave differently. For the marketer the challenge is to know where the similarity starts and where it ends. Note, this is not just applicable to gender as a variable. Instead it cuts across all variables. For example, as much as young and the old behave differently, at times they are alike.
Successful products are ones that can tap into similarities as well as differences. Visible and invisible ones. The hard part however, is knowing when to bunch and when to segment. When to respond to similarities, and when to differences.
Thursday, 9 July, 2009
Spring a surprise or forewarn?
Having lived through the socialist (termed, mixed economy in India) era, I am used to lousy government services that have gotten better over the years but remain woefully inadequate. But what I can't come to terms still, is the surprise they continue to spring on hapless citizenry.
Take Load shedding (to tide over power shortages) for example. I am used to it. But what irks me is the irregular pattern they take. The day before, the state electricity board decided the load shedding's between 7 and 8 in the morning. Today it was 8 and 9. Tomorrow? Who knows? Its a surprise!
Invariably this surprise element throws life out of gear. You really don't know when to put the water heater on, so you have warm water to bathe with. When do you think I should do the ironing? Its always a guessing game.
Consumers love surprises. Only when they are pleasant ones. When the airline upgrades my seat without a warning, it puts a smile on my face. But when surprises get nasty, I ain't pleased. I'd rather be forewarned. It helps lessen displeasure. If I know when load shedding's going to be, I can rearrange my life to tide over those periods of power-outs. If the service personnel knows my repair's going to cost me a certain sum, its better he tells me in advance, rather than me finding it when I am delivered the repaired piece.
If surprises would bring on a grimace, prepare the consumer in advance. It lessens displeasure. If surprises can evoke smiles, spring it on consumers. The resultant radiant glow is worth keeping the surprise a secret.
Sphere: Related ContentThe cure to Consumer forgetfulness
The problem that Low Involvement category brands face is one of consumer forgetfulness. Frequent advertising or any other repeated communique campaigns may help the brand get into a consumer's long term memory, but that takes a long time. The fact is, consumers forget. The reason's simple. The brand either stays fleetingly in the consumer's sensory store and is then lost, or moves into the short term store and is then forgotten.
This morning I was trying to remember the name of the movie I saw last night so I could search for its soundtrack. In the future, I may even buy the CD with songs from the movie. My only problem; I can't remember the name of the movie.
The saviour to such forgetfulness for the brand is retail presence and great merchandising. The CD should be in the store I visit, and displayed in manner where I spot it. Then maybe I'll buy. No presence in the store, no smart merchandising, the brand loses out on a sale. The long and short? If you are a low involvement category brand, ensure you are in a store, merchandised, so you are visible.
Ensures that sale.
Wednesday, 8 July, 2009
Is America waking up?
'The bottom line is the iPhone and modern medicine came from democracy and the free market, not a government agency. Social programs should act as a trampoline, not a Velcro wall. The Velcro wall of government dependence only works for those in the Velcro business. We are all slowly having are boats docked and being sent to the wading pool. Guess who the lifeguard is?
The clever argument of “safety” and “fairness” has worked well for the left. They know that playbook well. We are Americans and we are compassionate. What is left out of that argument is the human need for self-responsibility and self-reliance. Both are essential ingredients for self respect. A man who blows his wages at the racetrack is not the same as the man who is mugged on payday. “Or is he?” asks the Democrats...
The men who started this country believed in God and liberty. Things like Cap and Tax have nothing to do with either. Fight back now or head over to the kiddie pool.'
- John Romano, 'Is America waking up?'
:) :) :) :)
Economist Blog: Do you want to be served by some of the biggest grins you've ever seen? Then get thee to Japan, where the Keihin Electric Express Railway Company has come up with a bizarre new customer-service ploy. To ensure they beam at passengers with real gusto, its staff must check their smiles every morning with a piece of computer software called Smile Scan, made by Omron Corp. Workers have their grins scored from 1 to 100, and are given advice on how to improve them. Later in the day they can refer for inspiration to a print-out of their best smile, which they carry around with them.
Tuesday, 7 July, 2009
What's love got to do with it?
Its no surprise to me that Namrat Joshi moans and wonders why we have forgotten the classic silver screen love stories of yore.
She wails, 'Our poll revealed an almost unnerving indifference to the great romances of the past. Mughal-E-Azam, Pakeezah and Kaagaz Ke Phool seemed to have faded from public memory. Raj Kapoor and Nargis are the only romantic pair from their generation that managed to make it to the top 10. What does that say about us? After all, love is not just another four-letter word. Love is also about sociology, history, economy and politics; it is a marker of changing times and generational shifts. From the idealistic 1950s to the materialistic 2000s, we have come a long way. So have our on screen romances.'
Namrata may have a hold of sociology, history, economy and politics, but she comes up short on understanding consumers. Because when we watch a movie, unlike the critics, we are in effect engaging in an act of consumption that's aimed at fulfilling a need. I know, the way I said it, its awful, but that's the boring truth.
For Namrata to understand movie viewing better, she needs to tune into what Seth Godin's said; (Quote) 'Every week the number one best selling DVD in America changes. It's never "The Godfather," it's never "Citizen Kane," It's always some third rate movie with some second rate star. But the reason it's number one is because that's the week it came out. Because it's new, because it's fresh. Because people saw it and said -- I didn't know that was there -- and they noticed it.'
What we do, we do to fulfill needs. We aren't interested in anything other than ourselves, though we may profess otherwise. I know Self-Actualised people exist, though I have this sneaky feeling there's still a need behind that state. So for us, it surely is about a love that fills a void of 'wanting to belong', and the answers to those yearnings don't lie in the nostalgia of the past that we forget, but in the mushy movies that run on sliver screens of the present.
How Mr. Finance Minister, pray tell?
'Instead, we had honey bees collecting nectar without harming plants. We had praise for the "vision" of former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, who 40 years ago nationalized India's banks as if in astute preparation for the very financial crisis we are now in. We had a new university in Chandigarh, capital of the Punjab and Haryana (hello, education reform?) We had Mahatma Gandhi. We had measures to put "a smile on the faces of the Green Brigade." We had the 73-year-old finance minister joking that he didn't want to dent his popularity with the ladies. (With all due respect, sir….)
And then, the piece de resistance, said with a dramatic flourish: The announcement, honorable ladies and gentlemen of the Lok Sabha, that for the first time the Indian government will spend more than 10 lakh crore rupees (about $208 billion) as if that was what counted the most, not how the money would be spent or how it would be raised. Sorry, but that's not a boast worthy of an aspiring global superpower (which India justifiably is) but of a second-tier developing nation.
Clearly, what all that cash will mostly be spent on is the kind of populist endeavors that you'd expect from a government that is running for re-election, not one that was just returned to office. The targets of returning to 9% growth, spending 9% of Gross Domestic Product on infrastructure development by 2014, and creating 12 million jobs a year for the nation's youth all are worthy goals. But the speech was woefully vague on how any of them would be achieved. Instead, it delivered a mind-numbing list of already-problematic government welfare programs that are now about to get massive injections of funds. But don't worry, the government is going to "strengthen and improve the regulatory framework for the effective delivery of services." How, pray tell?'
- Paul Beckett, 'A Budget for a Second-Tier Developing Nation'.
Sarah Palin's perfect STP
It ain't just me that roots for Sarah Palin. Its the marketer in me too. She's got what's termed in Marketing Strategy as STP, dot on. STP is Segmenting, Targeting and Positioning.
Sarah knows who her voter segment is. What she does positions her perfectly for this segment and this segment only. She couldn't care less what the rest of the voter community thinks. She's the darling to true Conservatives. With Gallup stating that 4 in 10 Americans have turned their views more conservative, Sarah's going after a segment that's substantial enough, should she take the national stage in a presidential election. Especially as this will follow the reign of the darling of the socialists.
Most brands try and be everything to everybody. Bad idea. You must instead be the 'only thing' that your target audience wants. And if you are that, stay on course. Don't bother what the naysayers say or predict.
Note Michael Wolff; 'A core band of loyalists does what a less passionate supporter base doesn’t, contribute early and often. She’s the most bankable conservative in the country.
The more red meat she throws the more money comes back. To become anathema to the left wing is to become the darling of the right wing. To become the darling of her party’s rebels and malcontents is the necessary step in amassing the credibility that the party establishment would never otherwise grant.
Sarah Palin’s career is, at this moment, the second most interesting in American politics. She’s gone from a local character to a national super nova to a major draw and wondrous wild card in less than a year.
This story has only just begun.'
Data Graphic: Gallup
Pennywise paper cup, pound foolish Coffee
This morning's coffee reminds me of marketers who in a bid to cut corners turn pennywise, but pound foolish. In a move aimed at cutting costs, the coffee guy's moved on to thinner paper cups. Only that the damn cup's turned too soft to hold hot coffee and to stop the hand holding it burning up. The result? People asking for an extra cup. So now the coffee gets served in a paper cup that's inside another, so its strong enough and the heat doesn't seep through.
Marketer's wanting to cut costs mustn't look to shortchanging consumers. The front end of a business must not be tampered with, as this erodes the value delivered to consumers. Instead its the backend that must be re-engineered for greater efficiency. For example the coffee guy can reconfigure coffee preparation to standardise the use of raw materials. Maybe some coffees are being made with extra powder because the preparer tips the spoon that bit more to pick a bit more of coffee powder. Or maybe he can revisit the amount of prepared coffee he makes and distributes across all offices to ensure there's no wastage. I mean, eliminate coffee that stays back in the flask, is brought back, and thrown away.
If you want to cut costs, thinning paper cup's not the way to go. Instead, its about doing what you do, with greater effeciency. Its isn't short-changing the consumer, its bettering what you do.
Saturday, 4 July, 2009
Oil pulling & Consumer Need Recognition
Prof. Ravi was talking about the discussion they had at home about Oil pulling and its medicinal effects. The discussion had followed a commercial on TV by the Sesame Oil brand, Idhayam, which was advocating its practice.
What Idhayam's looking for is takers to this practice. Its a way of piloting increase in sales. What makes such a consumer pitch interesting is that they have identified novel ways to increase consumption of their brand of oil by finding new uses, ones other than the traditional cooking one.
One of the most difficult of propositions faced by the marketer is trying to evoke recognition of a need or a problem in the consumer. Idhayam's tried to do the same with Oil pulling. What could be dangerous for them is the fact that this need recognition may not necessarily result in a consumer response in favour of their brand. I mean, if Oil pulling's good for my cavities, why should I only buy Idhayam? Won't other oil brands do? The answer is, of course, Yes; other brands may do. But my gut tells me, because Idhayam's now identified with the practice, in all probability, the consumer'll stick to the brand and not go with others around.
Smart going.
Happy Independence Day
'That capitalism is a prerequisite for freedom is neither a new idea nor one applicable only to America's. Nobel economist F. A. Hayek wrote in The Road to Serfdom in 1944: "It is now often said that democracy will not tolerate 'capitalism.' If 'capitalism' means here a competitive system based on free disposal over private property, it is far more important to realize that only within this system is democracy possible." As Milton Friedman echoed in the book's preface, "the free market is the only mechanism that has ever been discovered for achieving participatory democracy." Capitalism and democracy reinforce each other, but it is the former that is determinant.'
- J T Young, 'Free Men and Free Markets'.
'Independence Day has always been observed in the United States as a celebration of our freedom from rule of the United Kingdom.
Our Founding Fathers created a Constitution that insured that Americans would live freely, able to pursue their own happiness. They never could have imagined the realization that those freedoms would be threatened by the very government that their founding document created. In less than a year, we have witnessed a government takeover of banks and lending institutions, a presidential firing of an executive at a major corporation -- General Motors -- and the toppling of established U.S. bankruptcy laws to the benefit of the president's political allies.
But this breathtaking claim of power may pale in comparison to the impact Americans will feel from enactment of the so-called American Clean Energy and Security Law, which has been passed by the Democratic-controlled House.
The new bill -- ostensibly designed to save the planet from what alarmists claim is danger from the trace gas known as CO2 -- threatens the economy, jobs and American freedoms'.
- Frank Beckmann, 'Climate bill gives huge powers to government'.
Friday, 3 July, 2009
Mouthing mumbo-jumbo & Source credibility
What's worse than Nandan Nilekani talking about the greatest hoax of the 21st century, namely, 'Global Warming', is the fact that he's the one talking about it. In India, you rarely get to know anything other than the liberal leftist agenda being spewed around in the US. That's because there's no Fox News beaming into India, no conservative magazines on newsstands, no speeches in the public space other than ones by the likes of Thomas Friedman, Paul Krugman and their kind. Oh, by the way, did I mention that Nandan's pretty much the person who shaped Friedman's 'The World is Flat'?
I wonder if the Indian Greens ever read articles like this one, 'The EPA silences a climate skeptic'? I doubt it.
The problem of Nanadan being the one mouthing the Global Warming mumbo-jumbo is that his stature brings with it high levels of credibility that translates into the mumbo-jumbo being perceived as gospel truth. Of course, I can't advocate anyone to be silent about what they believe in, but what I can point to is that, should a credible source mouth mumbo-jumbo, there could be adverse reactions too. The source could lose some of that credibility. In this case, Nandan will remain credible, as not a lot of people are tuned into the Global Warming hoax, in India. As I mentioned before, you know why.
Note, should consumer audiences question and find that the source's message isn't one that's truthful, the source loses out on a perception of credibility. This can impact the source's ability in the future to mouth effective messages, especially if the communique requires consumers to believe. What I am stating has been researched by Rakesh and me where we found that Amitabh Bachchan being featured in a commercial where it was portrayed that UP was a state without crime, brought about reactions of disbelief that went on to erode Amitabh's equity as a credible celebrity brand.
Of course in India, Nandan's equity remains intact. Most people have already bought into the Global Warming mumbo-jumbo. But its only fair to note that the likes of me aren't impressed. Of course that again, shouldn't be worrisome, but it surely should be cause of some concern. More so, if my breed increase.
Though I doubt it.
Sphere: Related ContentThursday, 2 July, 2009
Consumers construct the Contrived & Real
Nothing could be devastating than to read about a child being killed in an accident on a Bangalore road. And nothing could hit home as bad as the mind contriving the tragic sequence in your head as you read the report in a newspaper. More so when you are a father to a child, yourself.
Bangalore roads like all Indian roads are killers and its only god's grace that keeps people alive on such roads. The kind of accident you read about everyday in India only makes you more cautious about any sort of travel. Though the event's a tragic one, it also demonstrates how our minds react. And those reactions have implications on us as consumers.
For a brand to craft its first purchase, it must be able to manage its communiques in a manner where the consumer mind forms a pleasurable sequence to experiencing it. In reality though, there's not yet been a real experience as there's been no purchase. Yet if the brand can get the consumer to live it in his mind even before its purchase, in all probability he would consider buying it. For such a consideration, brands got to create an experience for most, if not all of the consumer's senses. That is, a commercial could get the the consumer to see and hear the brand (for example, a newly launched brand of automobile) in action. A display could get the consumer to touch and feel the brand. Maybe even smell the leather interiors. And so on. Soon the consumer will construct a sequence of him driving the car in his mind. And if that contrived experience is pleasurable, the consumer may consider its purchase.
The 'mind experiences' don't just provoke the first buy. They act afterwards too. That is, should I buy the car and drive, and feel it the way I contrived it, my mind would record that 'pleasurable' reality and play it over again, even when I am not driving. So much so, I would then look forward to driving the car as much as possible. A similar such scene can play out with an eatery. If I have had an excellent dining experience at a restaurant, the next time I consider eating out, my previous dining experience is played over again. And then maybe I go back to the same dining place.
Our minds have the ability to construct both the contrived and the real. For the marketer, if the former, that is, the contrived experience with its brand's a good one, there's a consideration for purchase. If the latter, the real experience, is again a great one, a repurchase is guaranteed.
The ugly face of liberalism
'Yet, at the end of the day, liberals aren't any more beholden to popular will than to laws, as they scoff at it when it contradicts politically-correct will. And there is a good reason for this. Liberals don't view democracy as an absolute because there is no such thing in a relativistic world, but they at least view it. That is to say, they know popular will is real but believe God's will (Truth) is imaginary. And what exists takes precedence over what doesn't.
But in a world without absolutes, what takes precedence over all? Well, without any unchanging yardstick for making moral decisions -- without Truth to provide answers -- liberals have only one thing to refer to: Their mercurial master, feelings. But whose feelings shall hold sway? They may sometimes be those of the majority of people (expressed as "values"), especially insofar as their feelings influence liberals' feelings. But, then again, the feelings might also be those of most liberals' favorite people -- and the ones they fancy the smartest -- themselves. This is what engenders the elitism that justifies trumping popular will; after all, liberals' own feelings always feel more "right" to them than other people's.
Put simply, it's a question of whose will shall prevail, the popular, politically correct or personal? When man is the measure of all things, the man in the mirror usually trumps your fellow man.
Speaking of feelings, one that could be instrumental here is fear. What I mean is, we all understand the power of precedent. And along with Chavez, Obama seems to dislike the idea of a military upholding its nation's constitution and ousting a would-be tyrant. I wonder why?'
- Selwyn Duke, 'The ugly face of liberalism'.
Wednesday, 1 July, 2009
What's worth it & Who decides?
When the Editors at NY Times start a debate with the question, 'What is a Master's degree worth?', they are in effect opening up a larger consumer question, 'What's anything worth?' Taking it a bit ahead, 'Who then decides that worth?'
Lets tackle the first question. The worth of any product or service is dictated by the way its evaluated. And evaluations can either use a compensatory or a non-compensatory method. The latter results in a brand being eliminated as not being worth the price should it fail on just one critical parameter. The former method, on the other hand, does not ensure elimination should the brand not come up to the mark on one parameter, as its compensated by its better performance on another.
Let me illustrate. Should my non-compensatory evaluation of a Motor bike brand be dictated by one critical parameter (among a few) called 'Power' and should a brand not meet the minimum cut-off on Power, I would eliminate it from consideration. This despite the fact that it may have scored on 'Design'. On the other hand, if the evaluation method had been compensatory, a lack of power is compensated by great design, and therefore the brand's considered for purchase.
Evaluations are never completely done on rational lines, on objective parameters. That's almost an impossibility. Subjectivity creeps in. For example, my class is never completely evaluated on the learning that I impart. It can even, at times, be based on how well someone performs in it. A poor performance on the part of a student can have him evaluate my class less favorably. Not because I didn't teach well, but because he didn't score well. It takes a lot of character not to be influenced by such subjectivity and to keep the learning rigour going.
To the latter question, the answer is, a brand's worth is decided by its target consumer segment. Not by all sundry. That is, just because someone thinks a brand's not worth it, doesn't mean its not worth the money. That tag's in the hands of only its targeted customer. For instance, I think Bollywood movies are the heights to idiocy. But that evaluation doesn't deem them not worth it. Because they aren't made for the likes of me. To Bollywood fans, the movies are worth the time, money and effort spent in watching them. Of course that again doesn't mean all Bollywood movies are acceptable to its consumer segment. There are surely movies that aren't worth it.
I have seen consumers relegating certain brands to the blazes because they believe those brands aren't worth it. Yet these brands, still rule markets. That's because their intended consumer segments find them to be more than acceptable. And so they buy and even buy again. Like the movie 'Transformers II', panned by critics, its currently ruling the Box Office. Deadline Hollywood Daily's Nikki Finke reports that 'Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen' broke the Wednesday opening record previously held by 'Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix' in 2007: $55M to 44.2M.
Way to go, 'Transformers'! The critics can go watch a French movie.
Sphere: Related ContentTuesday, 30 June, 2009
Forget Social justice, Nano's about Marketing
'In the peculiar and self-serving vocabulary of our times, to the new middle class, the Nano represents ‘freedom’ and a ‘me-too’ model of consumer justice. At the same time, the Nano model of industrialisation is being presented as the only way to resuscitate our ailing agrarian economy that has been driven to desperation out of sheer neglect. However, we must see the Nano for what it truly represents. On the one hand it represents the Indian maturation of the seductive allure of the assembly line. On the other hand, it represents a particularly insidious coming together of state and market forces that greatly imperils the best of our values.
More than making the case against the Nano in economic and ecological terms, we must not accept the dangerous claim being put forth that automobile ownership must not remain an entitlement of the rich alone. We must not accept this specious notion of equity. Confronting the power of the global assembly line will require us to draw upon our deepest resources. Here, Gandhi offers us salutary lessons and some answers that will require us to look within and make some hard, serious choices.'
Of course, my first response is to call into question this peculiar phenomenon of academics in the best of institutions (in this case the IISc. & IIM) possessing a streak that borders on believing that socialism's got the answer to the mass' misery. That the industrial complex is out to fleece the poor man. But then I resist. Because I have heard this line of thought too many times. And though there isn't a whit of data to show that anything works better than market forces themselves, the oft repeated government driven social justice canard just goes on and on.
I think its high time we recognise that no one can plot our prosperity than we ourselves. And our definition of prosperity is ours alone. What Venu and Deepak don't realise is, the argument that the Nano can herald 'equity' is being presented only to counter another that says that its the harbinger to greater pollution in our cities. A social justice reason to counter an environmental one. The former in favour of the Nano, the latter against.
The truth, if I may call it that, is far beyond all these. The Nano's a product that's been created for a target set of consumers. That's pure marketing for you. Nothing more, nothing less. And we must leave it that. Why the Nano's garnered all the talk is because its the first one off the blocks to provide a transportation solution to a segment that's been neglected by all marketers. And that is indeed laudable. If the Nano works, you can surely expect other entrants into this space.
Bringing in catch terms like 'seductive allure of the assembly line' is all fine. But the harsh reality is, consumers evaluate brand on merits that they deem relevant. And if the brand doesn't match up, the consumer shows it no mercy. The consumer doesn't buy. And then the Assembly line comes to a grinding halt. No seductive allure, no nothing.
The Nano joins millions of brands around the globe in pitching its wares to target consumers. For the marketer's sake, I hope brands make it with consumers. I wish the Nano too the best of success with consumers. About ecological implications of the Nano I couldn't care less as long as its passed what's been legislated as an environmental standard. And from what I've heard, it has. As for the academics who are concerned, I guess they can walk or do whatever it is they think is good for whoever. For the rest, if you think the Nano works for you, I recommend a buy.
Monday, 29 June, 2009
Why I am commited to being irked
When Joe Sugarman taught the business world about 'consistency' being a great trigger in enhancing sales, he also helped me understand why when something irks me, in all probability I would take it further and be irked by issues that I wouldn't otherwise even bother about. I mean, if my psychological state of mind takes a commitment towards being irked, I would be hassled by almost everything. The 'bother' was started by something trivial at home. Soon it spread to the way I reacted to subsequent engagements. It was infectious. In normal times, such issues wouldn't have bothered me a bit.
Now, why is this important, especially in the present times? Simply because the recession has seen consumers not making too many purchase commitments. Therefore it becomes imperative that if they do, the marketer must capitalise on that mood of commitment and upsell as much as possible. Remember, it isn't easy to come by someone who wants to buy a lifestyle brand. But should he make that commitment inside you store, respond swiftly and ply related category brands and see if you can make an enhanced sale.
Let me illustrate. Titan's a brand that's been hit by the consumer's refusal to spend on something like wrist watches. But lets assume their store gets a customer who's interested in buying a timepiece. Try and sell him shades too. His consistency towards engaging in a purchase, though primarily tuned towards the watch can now be used to sell him an eyepiece. He would surely exhibit a consistent behaviour, ie., consideration of a purchase, because the commitment's already there.
Its the only way to keep your toplines afloat.
Pitfalls of Public Options
Even if one accepts the president’s broader goals of wider access to health care and cost containment, his economic logic regarding the public option is hard to follow. Consumer choice and honest competition are indeed the foundation of a successful market system, but they are usually achieved without a public provider. We don’t need government-run grocery stores or government-run gas stations to ensure that Americans can buy food and fuel at reasonable prices.
An important question about any public provider of health insurance is whether it would have access to taxpayer funds. If not, the public plan would have to stand on its own financially, as private plans do, covering all expenses with premiums from those who signed up for it.
But if such a plan were desirable and feasible, nothing would stop someone from setting it up right now. In essence, a public plan without taxpayer support would be yet another nonprofit company offering health insurance. The fundamental viability of the enterprise does not depend on whether the employees are called “nonprofit administrators” or “civil servants.”
- Gregory Mankiw, 'The Pitfalls of Public Option'.
Saturday, 27 June, 2009
Friday, 26 June, 2009
The King Is Dead
Its rare to have someone whose music connects with people across the world. Yes, the language of music is eternal, but genres vary and and so don't find universal acceptance. Michael is one who beat those rules. His music connected and reverberated around the world.
Thursday, 25 June, 2009
Leave Trig alone
Leave Trig and Sarah alone. Its one thing for the liberals to be critical, its another to be downright crass.
Goes to show the kind of electrifying effect Sarah's had on 'thinking' Americans. Of course, liberals hate that.
No space for MySpace
Hollywood screenwriter William Goldman once famously remarked about the entertainment industry: “Nobody knows anything.” It turns out the axiom applies to the Internet, as well. The brief history of the World Wide Web—and mankind’s valiant efforts to wring profits out of same—is replete with confirming evidence of Goldman’s axiom, a kind of unified field theory of cluelessness that has yet to be disproved...
The latest proof of Goldman’s axiom is the sad story of MySpace. In 2005, it was acclaimed as the planet’s hottest social-networking site. Today it is widely considered an ailing property, having slashed overhead to confront the new reality in which it will no longer have Google to prop up cash flow: The search giant is pulling the plug on a reported $300 million in annual payments for the privilege of using MySpace as an advertising platform.
- Lloyd Grove, 'How MySpace Blew It'.
All I care about is me. Me, me, me!
Marketing's all about the consumer. Not about you or your products and services. Though this may sound rather simple, it isn't easily understood. No matter how many times you say it, the biggest mistake firms make is in trying to communicate product features, not benefits. Consumers couldn't care less about your features, till the time they deliver benefits. And for consumers, taking the position of seeking benefits comes naturally, as the only entity they are obsessed with, is themselves. This goes even for the 'altruistic' ones out there.
Take Obama's healthcare plan for a moment. Its interesting to note that a majority in the US. want an overhaul of the healthcare system as long as it doesn't affect their personal status. Sure, they say, fix the healthcare system so everyone benefits. But not at my cost. That is, I am not willing to pay more in taxes so my neighbour without healthcare can benefit. Find the money to fix his healthcare from elsewhere. Don't touch my coffers. I ain't giving.
Note research results on Healthcare reform in the US.;
'The NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll asked a series of questions probing just how far folks would go in lending a helping hand to those without coverage. Would they approve the concept of raising taxes on those making $250,000 or more? Sure. How about requiring everyone to have insurance but letting government help pick up the tab for people with "low and moderate incomes." Why not?
But when asked if they'd be willing to pay more in taxes, either on their current health care plan or in general, respondents quickly pull back. Just 33 percent agreed with the idea of taxing health care benefits for those with "generous" plans. The Diageo/Hotline poll found just 26 percent of voters supported a tax on health care plans. And a Kaiser poll reported that only 41 percent of Americans were willing to pay more either in taxes or health care premiums to cover the uninsured.
A CNN/Opinion Research survey and a poll taken for the Republican group Resurgent Republic both asked the question on taxes this way: "Would you prefer a health care reform plan that raises taxes in order to provide health insurance to all Americans, or a plan that does not provide health insurance to all Americans but keeps taxes at current levels?"
CNN's poll, conducted in mid-May, found the public split between the two at 47 percent. The Resurgent poll, released on Monday, showed stronger opposition to tax increases (39 percent) and more support for keeping taxes at the current levels (52 percent). Still, both suggest raising taxes to pay for health reform is not a popular position.'
Why am I not surprised?
Sphere: Related ContentWhy Textbooks matter
Talking to Anita yesterday, I was reminded of how Textbooks matter even outside classrooms. She uses her prescribed IMC textbook at times as a guide to the kind of work she does. Ditto for Rahul. A few weeks ago he told me how the Strategy textbook works for him at his place of work. Especially since his present responsibilities involve designing a growth strategy for the Banking firm he works at.
Seth's got a point. Surely, no textbook out there's complete and comprehensive. There are bound to be errors of omission. But textbooks help too. They act as a guide to structure your thoughts, till you practice the structured approach so many times, it almost becomes a way of life and then you don't have to refer to them anymore. Again, no textbooks say the approach they teach is gospel. Its just one smart way. At any time you are free to abandon the route advocated by a textbook and go with your gut feel. In fact as an academic I recommend you do that. At times.
Note why HBS professor, Greg Mankiw writes texbooks. My gut feel tells me, students tend to look at textbooks as irrelevant either because they can't work hard enough to read and master what's in there or they are intellectually challenged and so take the easy way. State the textbook is irrelevant in the real world.
How convenient.
Tuesday, 23 June, 2009
Will the real Shia Lebouf please stand up?
When I first read about what Shia LeBouf had said, I thought to myself, 'What a jerk!'. When saner sense prevailed, I realised that Shia had done what any brand would have, in his place. That is do whatever it is to connect with one's consumer audience. The irony is, the saner me still thinks he's a first class jerk for having talked the way he did. Is 'class' forever dead?
Shia's audience around the world, I bet, consists of the youth brigade. The kind who think Obama's god's gift to mankind. All emotion, not much of reason. (Ok, that's a tad unfair, I admit, young Conservatives may be part of that fan base.) Anyway when one's young, one tends to either be rebellious, or compliant and yet secretly desire rebellion. This is turn ensures that one's affinity towards brands that live that rebellion is pretty strong.
Shia's talk is one that builds an image of rebellion. An image that sees him being perceived as one who doesn't care too much for rules, has lived a life on the edge, has had brushes with the law and so on. Of course, for all you know, it may be true. But then again, his articulating what should be seen as irresponsible, in fact has the exact opposite effect with the youth brigade. Its instant connection, identification or maybe even deification.
Shia's done what marketers do or must do. That is, communicate an image that hits home. In other words, ensure purchases. No wonder Shia's asking rate's rumored to be a hefty $17 million. And note, that's when he is all of 23 years old.
Smart!
Sphere: Related ContentMonday, 22 June, 2009
Textbook rant
Seth opines 'assigning a textbook to your college class is academic malpractice'.
Should I risk agreement? (I am a Seth fan, so I plead lack of 'objective judgement'!)
Note the responses he got, to his view.
[Update: got more mail about this post than any other post ever. People pointed to Flatworld and to Quirk, and so far, more than 94% of the letters aggressively agree with me. Most of the people are either students, parents of students, former students or other disgruntled customers that are tired of being ripped off by a senseless, broken system. I also heard from a handful of people who said that I was jealous, that the union won't permit the system to change, that textbooks are really good, that professors are underpaid, that professors are too busy or (possibly and) that I'm delusional. I'll note that not one of these letters came from a textbook user.]
Sphere: Related ContentWhy Obama’s realpolitik is flawed
1) If the mullahs win, they will have greater contempt for our timidity; 2) if the dissidents win, they will not forget our realistic fence-sitting; 3) you can never believe (ever) anything the mullahs say or do. Negotiating with them is like signing a pact with Hitler. They are afraid of US voiced support for the dissidents, not the dissidents themselves who ask for our solidarity. If anything, the theocrats grasp that their own do not want a nuclear confrontation with Israel in which the people would be sacrificial pawns. Again and again, the dissidents have repeated that they are tired of being hated in the world as Ahmadinejad’s Iranians, not that they wanted Obama’s America to be less critical of Ahmadinejad.
-Victor Davis Hanson, 'Why Should Obama Speak Out on Iran? Let Me Count the Ways'
The 'Fatherless' personality
Rand O'Brien, a licensed social worker, says fatherlessness can lead to two personality types, both of which seem fairly well-suited for politics.
"When men lose a father early, two major things happen. First, they can be vaunted into the 'father' role early and looked to by the mother to make 'male' decisions and become parentified, thus taking on decision-making and 'cajoling' the leadership early on and therefore having a lot of practice in leadership. Becoming 'the man of the house.'
"Second, where there is not the model of maleness in the house, then the stereotypical images of being a man become the model,” he continues. “So the man becomes what is seen on the TV, movies, books: He becomes what the society wants as a man…When he gets ready to be the candidate, he is packaged ready to go as the 'man' society wants.
"Of course, today, this model applies to fatherless girls/women as well, in a different way,” O’Brien points out.
- Lisa Carver, 'Washington’s Fatherless Elite'.
The Myopia risk in Realpolitik
Taking my post on 'Realpolitik and Marketing' forward, note what courageous Iranian student activist Ahmad Betebi has to say about Obama's response to Iran.
"His (Obama) lack of response will not be regarded lightly. We will watch for how much his response will help the people or the regime. We will know more this week... Obama can hold talks with the regime in Iran if he wants. Is it morally correct for Obama to support the regime? Does he actually believe the people of Iran will appreciate that? The social movement requires support. If the world really wants the advent of terrorism to disappear in the Middle East, if they want peace with the Palestinians and Israel, if they want nuclear technology to be developed for peaceful things and not nuclear weapons... They only need to support the people of Iran right now. This regime has the most dangerous of ideologies. They're killing the opposition."
Listen to the complete Ahmad Betebi interview here.
Winning the Battle, Losing the War
I guess the Record labels that sued a 32-year-old mother who had willfully infringed on their copyrights by downloading and sharing 24 songs on the Kazaa peer-to-peer network, may have won the battle. The courts have awarded them $1.92 million in damages. But what they have lost, is the war. The war for consumer sentiment. They have lost it by alienating consumers who feel the record industry charges prices that simply are too high.
Can consumers retaliate, especially since there isn't any semblance of a mass movement against the 'overcharging' labels? I think they can. Especially by acquiring music through means other than a legal buy of songs and albums. Is that possible? With the Internet ensuring that anything that's digital's copied and made available on a tangible device, it's possible to get hold of music without having to pay.
But beyond the question of legality lies the question of perception that dictates consumer sentiment. For the record labels nothing could be worse that being perceived as greedy corporates. The ensuing negative sentiment may not have immediate fallouts in terms of reduced sales. But over time, it will. Maybe consumers won't stay away from buying, today, but surely they will, tomorrow.
Sunday, 21 June, 2009
The world of Marketing & Realpolitik
(Wikipedia) Realpolitik (German: real “realistic”, “practical” or “actual”; and Politik “politics”) refers to politics or diplomacy based primarily on practical considerations, rather than ideological notions. The term realpolitik is often used pejoratively to imply politics that are coercive, amoral, or Machiavellian. Realpolitik is a theory of politics that focuses on considerations of power, not ideals, morals, or principles. The term was coined by Ludwig von Rochau, a German writer and politician in the 19th century, following Klemens von Metternich's lead in finding ways to balance the power of European empires. Balancing power to keep the European pentarchy was the means for keeping the peace, and careful Realpolitik practitioners tried to avoid arms races.
The last time I heard the use of Realpolitik was when Shekhar Gupta on a political discussion program on TV advocated its use in dealing with the unrest in Myanmar. His view was for India to stay disengaged. Speaking on that very same program, a lady, a Burmese dissident, based out of the United Kingdom, expressed views in contrast to that of Shekhar's. She asked for India to intervene and said if it didn't, which meant tacit support to the Junta's actions, when one day Myanmar would be free, they would surely remember the nations that helped and that didn't.
The latest round to a call to an application of Realpolitik is the Iranian unrest. Obama, though has called for a stop to violence against civilians, is dithering to a dilemma. Wanting to engage Iran on the nuclear issue requires he not meddle in the current situation. Obama's stance on Iran is in direct contrast to that of Bush's, who termed Iran as part of the 'Axis of Evil'. If Obama intends to negotiate with Ahmedinejad on the nuclear issue, he has to stay clear of current events. Staying clear will definitely portray the President as a weakling who can't stand up to defending what's morally right, that is, Human rights. Of course, Obama's implied defence would be Realpolitik.
Now I think Realpolitik is smart. But its application is what's the difficult part. Most Realpolitik driven decisions seem to look only at the present, discounting what could emerge in the future. I agree, the future can't be predicted too well. But then does that mean, Myanmar will never be free? What I mean is, the way Realpolitik is practiced today, seems to remind me of the classic Marketing folly termed, 'Marketing Myopia'. 'Missing the wood for the trees'. Letting the present blind you to the implications of the future.
In Marketing too, Realpolitik is called for. Albeit without the Myopia. For example, take a case of negative publicity. Should a Brand react and try and contain it or should it stay clear, stay silent? After all, isn't public memory short? Engaging or staying away from a bout of negative publicity would again, like politics, depend not just on the impact of the present but of the future too. Let me explain. Should bad publicity result in only negative perceptions (note, I said, perceptions) against the brand, I would advocate a disengaged policy. After all perceptions don't last. But if you predict that those perceptions will take a down-the-road journey to turning into negative 'attitudes' against the brand, I would recommend immediate engagement and a campaign to arrest the bad publicity. Attitudes are what comes closest to the formation of a particular consumption behaviour. Negative attitudes result in a decision to not buy. Negative perceptions, on the other hand, can only stop purchases for the present, till the time the perception stays. Over time, everything's forgotten. The brand can then start its campaign of communication after the period of lull, where it stayed quiet, so as to build positive attitudes towards it.
About Iran, should the US intervene? My call's a Yes. This is a watershed moment in History. America's actions will be remembered. And remembered for a long time to come.
I say, Stand up and be counted. Speak up and engage. After all, what's more important to anyone than FREEDOM? And now, it beckons.
Saturday, 20 June, 2009
Friday, 19 June, 2009
True Brand Loyalty's about Faith
According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, which recently published a study on the correlation between church attendance and economics, its been proven that there's no link between how an economy fares vis-a-vis church attendance. That is, if an economy is spiralling downwards, there still aren't any extra takers who think maybe God can help. And this finding's based on data for the past 20 years.
Sounds good. To me. And it also tells me something important about people who believe and those who don't. People of faith and those without. The former's faith in God isn't based on any notions of 'help'. That is, they don't frequent churches and worship because they believe God's someone who can help them better their lives. If it were that way, then during times of prosperity church attendance should have been down and the opposite would play out during times of recession. It isn't so. Church attendance stays steady. Note, the study's about Evangelicals. The non-believer too has stayed put. He hasn't rushed down a church aisle just because his job's in trouble. He too doesn't think God can help, albeit in a manner different from the believer. The believer knows God can help, but he isn't at a church because he wants that help.
The lesson here? The steadfastness of a believer and a non believer. Both either stay in churches or away despite the change in economic conditions. True Brand loyalty is something akin to that. In fact, I christen it 'Brand faith'. It wouldn't matter what's happening around, a consumer who stays put with a brand is a true loyalist. He's the one with faith. And that brand's almost god like.
Faith in brands is a result of a psychological connect that can't be dissected on lines of reason. Its like faith in God. If you were to ask why, you wouldn't really know what the reason is. Its almost impossible to decipher. Its like brand Rajnikanth in Tamil Nadu. The hysteria that he generates is not decipherable. Its a fallout of a psychological connect.
Crazy? You decide. I call it faith.
The mind of the Indian consumer
A survey conducted by IMRB among 2,440 households across urban and rural areas has revealed that consumers have cut expenditure on high-end products and entertainment in order to survive in the current crisis. The survey shows that consumers have a negative outlook on the future of the economy. However, most consumers feel that there is no change in their financial health so far. Though the current picture is gloomy, there is a ray of hope. But as things are expected to improve in future, the degree of improvement may be lesser.
Thursday, 18 June, 2009
Ugly? Sold!
'The nightmare for product managers is working for months on a new product launch only to see their brainchild fail because the market says, "Ew, are you kidding me? That's ugly!" I think this is the reason why so many things we buy are just 'nice': They are perfectly fine products that focus on their functional appeal while borrowing their aesthetic from some other successful thing on the market...
The real trick is to resist navigating consumer taste and understand the emotional sources for taste so that you can to them instead...
So ultimately, don't all these things sell by tapping into a person's sense of what is meaningful? I would suggest that they do. That's why some ugly stuff sells, and some beautiful stuff sells more.'
- John Edson, 'Why Ugly Sells'.
Building a windmill
When he was just 14 years old, Malawian inventor William Kamkwamba built his family an electricity-generating windmill from spare parts, working from rough plans he found in a library book. To power his family's home, young William Kamkwamba built an electricity-producing windmill from spare parts and scrap.
William's who you call a hero. An intellectual, too.
Judging Consumption
'When we try to understand the motivations of the Indian consumer, we realise that he is pulled in two directions and trying to satisfy seemingly conflicting motivations; his traditional Indian values are pulling him towards a safer, controlled outlook towards spending and life in general, while the other part of him is embracing consumerist and western values, of wanting MORE! So, while he is comfortable more with the fresh and homegrown, he needs convenience to meet his current lifestyle; while he talks the fashionable language of today's health aficionados, he actually gives in to his real desire for indulgences; and finally, while he wants to splurge on new experiences and products, he has not lost his traditional cautious thrifty behaviour.
He embraces money as a virtue but he knows that real value is knowledge, discernment and experiences that are worthy. He lives in an age of multi-income households, growing disposable incomes and easy finance schemes while maintaining that value is an intrinsic quality that betters the self.'
Punita Lal almost makes out the Indian consumer to be a one who's akin to an enlightened guru. The tragedy is there aren't any enlightened gurus around and if you think there's one you know, marvel at his marketing genius. Not at his enlightenment. Plus call seriously into question, your ability to judge.
What's problematic to me is the description of a western consumer (almost) as one who's the thrifty idiot and the Indian as the enlightened restrained one. Lets get two things straight.
One, much of what we are 's got to do with the circumstances of our past and our present. If I am cautious as a consumer, that's because that caution betters my personal future. Especially since my past and my present contexts can't afford a wayward lifestyle. Without any social security, with a hangover of a bankrupt socialist past that saw the government being the biggest job-giver, I am not easily prone to taking consumer risks. I'll keep my purchases driven by functional evaluations, and all the more because I save, and so the income I have in hand to spend gets even lesser.
Its not that the westerner is a wayward idiot. His wayward consumption's a result of higher incomes, cheaper products and greater social security. Just so you know, even the Westerner is turning cautious with his consumption. And for heaven's sake, don't call that 'turning an Indian'.
Two, the most important people to us are we ourselves. When we consume, we try and maximise our own payoffs. When Punita says, 'He embraces money as a virtue but he knows that real value is knowledge, discernment and experiences that are worthy. He lives in an age of multi-income households, growing disposable incomes and easy finance schemes while maintaining that value is an intrinsic quality that betters the self', I haven't a foggiest idea what she means. For example, what's 'experiences that are worthy?' Tell you the truth, when any consumer engages in a consumption act, that's because he thinks its a worthy act. Note what I said, 'He thinks'. You and I may not. But it isn't about us. Its about him. Its worthy enough for him.
Let me illustrate. The rich kid born with a golden spoon in his mouth buys the Nike sneaker at full premium prices. Then he walks down Brigade road as if he owns it. Am I thinking, that's so dumb? Oh yeah. Does he care what I think? Far from it. Does he think (that's if he can) his consumption act's a worthy one? You bet! Me? Isn't it obvious?
The long and short of what I am trying to say is that, its not just an Indian consumer who's seeking experiences that are 'worthy'. Its every consumer. Everywhere. Its just that it may not seem so to the one who isn't engaging in the act. The Indian consumer may not necessarily do what his western counterpart's doing. That doesn't make him any smarter. Vice-versa too. It just makes them different in the way they look at what's worth it. Are both justified in what they do?
Of course.
Hail consumption!
Sphere: Related ContentMoisturising creams & Narcissists
Last evening I go to pay my Electricity and Telephone charges at a store that's an authorised collection center. After I pay, I am presented with a 'free' jar of Nivea Visage moisturising cream. I am surprised. I ask why? And they tell me its because I paid both my bills together and this is reward for that. I am still surprised. A skin cream as a reward?
I go home. I tell Alphy a sudden rush of affection for her had me buying a jar of moisturising cream that I thought she would enjoy. Far from being impressed she's quizzical. She asks me to out with the truth. I tell her. She asks me to check the expiry date on the cream.
The damn thing's manufacture date shows the year 2007 and there's a another few months before expiry. The little sense of marketing wonder that I had for Nivea collapses like a punctured balloon. Its one thing to get a consumer to try a brand by giving it free. Its another to pack off a product that's about expire. The former elicits trial and probable further purchase. The latter results in the brand in a dustbin and a wariness towards it in the future. After all, didn't it try and pan off its trial in a sneaky manner?
I don't think Alphy's going anywhere close to the damn cream. I don't blame her. Tho' I am willing to give it a dab. My first time. My belief is its more experimental than anything else. Or am I just making it convenient for the vain me, who thinks maybe my skin's going to glow? Narcissism, eh?
Wednesday, 17 June, 2009
The Character of Nations
"The Character of Nations" is about far more than the fact that there are different behavior patterns in different countries-- that, for example, "it is unimaginable to do business in China without paying bribes" but "to offer one in Japan is the greatest of faux pas."
Tuesday, 16 June, 2009
What's behind Consumer habits?
Sumaa Tekur on being a 'Creature of Habit', 'I confess. I'm a creature of habit too. When I wake up, I sit still for a minute before getting out of bed. I always brush my teeth starting left bottom and then make my way to right top in very systematic, organised brush strokes.
I like my morning cuppa from the same mug. I wipe my wet hands with a towel starting, always, with the left hand in the same manner, in the same direction every single time. While driving to MG Road, I use only one route, not wanting to change or try, maybe, a faster way to get there. When I get to work, I draw the blinds, unlock my drawers and switch on the comp -- in the exact same order every workday morning with a scary lack of deviation.'
Habitual patterns of consumption that consumers form over a period of time is the best thing that can happen to a brand. But for habits to form there are two consumption conditions to be satisfied. One, the brand in question must fall into a product category that elicits a low level of involvement from the consumer. That is, the consumer engages in minimal cognition while considering purchase in that category. Two, the consumer should have, after minimal consideration, bought the brand in question and turn into a satisfied customer. That is, the brand should deliver on what was promised.
Let me illustrate. The first time around, one could look for a toothpaste that promises fresh breath. Then one buys a particular brand of toothpaste. And if the brand delivers, the first time around, in all probability, then on, the consumer buys that very same brand out of habit. Such habitual purchase of a low involvement category brand is termed 'inertia'.
Consumer habits are characterised thus because the consumption act is an outcome of inertia. The consumer falls into such a state of inertia because the cognitive activity he engages in whilst buying a second time around is close to zilch. For a brand to be part of a consumer's habit, the critical requirement is delivery of value on the first purchase. Repeat it a few more times, and you will have the consumer eating out your hands. Without a thought.
I mean, buying your brand out of habit.
Sphere: Related ContentMonday, 15 June, 2009
What is the truth?
At times I am flabbergasted at what I hear on TV talk shows in India. If its NDTV and the show's hosted by Barkha Dutt, in all probability Barack Obama would be mentioned. In glowing terms. I get to hear characterisations like 'transformational figure' and 'consensus builder'. Most Indian audiences seem to agree and join the paenic chorus. It irks me no end. But then I realise, just as I think Barack's a disgrace, the others think he's the saviour! And we are all steadfast in our beliefs.
Now, where does the truth lie? Or what is the truth?
The answer; for you, the truth is what you believe. Because in most contexts, there isn't anything called the truth. Of course, as usual there are exceptions. There exist unquestionable truths. But they are few and far in between. Most contexts fall into shades of grey. The 'black and white' scenarios are rare. Greys rule.
Marketing's where the characterisation of truth the way one believes it, applies. What's the truth about a brand? Its what the consumer believes. That's the gospel truth. Great marketers are ones who can either construct this truth for consumers or align it with what's by default already believed and can't be shaken. When Dove tells you that it 'creams' your skin, do you believe? Does the target segment believe? Of course, they did and they do. That's why Dove's one of the iconic brands around. Contrast that with a brand that tells you that it cares, and the only response to that is a smirk on your face.
Brands that win with consumers are brands that are believed. Consumers believe, not necessarily because its the truth that the marketer lays bare. Instead its a truth that's constructed keeping in mind the consumer. Its only a stroke of genius that can conjure up this truth for one who then turns a believer.
That's why despite what I feel about Barack and the disaster that he is, I marvel at his ability to have constructed a truth that a majority fell for, hook, line and sinker. After all, didn't he win the contest to the White house? Folks, that's what marketing genius is about.
But then again, is the 'real' truth dawning?
Saturday, 13 June, 2009
The all-important transition
Transitions are called for when there's a change in scenery. And there's always some change that hits any landscape. Politics included. The Bharatiya Janata Party is facing a torrid time trying to make a transition at a time when the Indian economic landscape's altered beyond recognition. Gone are the times when there was only misery around, a result of India's obsession with socialism.
Those were depressing times. When Amitabh Bachchan and his rants against the system on silver screen was lapped up by an eager audience wallowing in personal misery. No jobs. No future. The Hindutva card found takers amongst the masses who thought maybe that could change their fortunes for the better.
Then Liberalisation happened. The rotten government and the system didn't matter as much. The Global economy to which we opened up, brought in a promise for a better future. Almost overnight, firms like Infosys culled millionaires from the masses. The Middle Class cocked a snook at anyone who tried to play at the fears of the masses. Hindutva didn't work as much. Two elections and the BJP bit dust.
All of this called for a transition that the Congress Party handled better. Rahul Gandhi became the face of that transition. The BJP still flounders. Their last two defeats has opened up dissensions and the party doesn't know how to make this all important transition, though it knows it must.
Marketing Landscapes too call for transitions. Some marketers respond well and handle it with aplomb. Take an image like Betty Crocker's for example. She changed with the times. Her attire. The way she wore her hair. And so she made sense to consumer audiences across the years. The trick here is to alter in a manner where the core identity remains intact, but the image makes transitions.
For the BJP, the question is, should the core identity remain intact while the image alters? Something tells me their identity is no longer relevant. In a changed India that cares more for progress than resolutions to real or imaginary 'wounds', its difficult to connect with a theme centred on fear. So making cosmetic changes (read image transitions) just wont do.
That's the way I feel. BJP listening?
Note: Images courtesy of Susan Marks.
Dear Great Comic Genius
'Tell us, great comic genius, how tacking on four years to the target daughter makes it funny? We unenlightened dim bulbs who live outside of Manhattan's boundaries don't get the joke.
Will you be able to explain it to your son?
Face it: David Letterman, late-night entertainer turned partisan hack and hit man, has a deranged obsession with Palin and her family that has crossed into rank bigotry and hatred. If the CBS network cares about basic standards of decency on public airwaves and if it cares at all about bolstering its shrinking audience, the network honchos will get Letterman a therapist pronto.'
- Michelle Malkin, 'Dear David Letterman'.
Friday, 12 June, 2009
The wisdom of 'Balance'
Having Jaden with us is amazing. He's now nearing three and its so much fun watching him grow and take on new attitudes that just pop up overnight. He's grown more perceptive, seems to exhibit a greater streak of independence and has a mind of his own. Our old tricks fall flat.
Parenting is such a responsibility and I know I will mess up at times. What I know will get the act right is steeped in what I call the 'wisdom of balance'. The act of getting the 'proportion' right. Let me explain. As a parent the question that will pose difficulty is not one where I have to choose between a Yes or a No. That dichotomy is easy to handle. For example, if the question is, 'Should Jaden learn to be disciplined, say in his sleep habits?, the answer is pretty easy. Its a Yes. 'Should he learn his thank yous and pleases?', again, its a Yes. So, on an issue of discipline, the answer is always a Yes. But the more difficult question, that calls for what I call the wisdom of balance is, 'How much of discipline?' In what proportion?
'Should he always be bound by rules?' The answer is No. Therefore the difficult issue is to find a balance between letting him 'free' vis-a-vis subjecting him to 'restrictions'. 'How much of restriction, how much of freedom?' If I can get that proportion right, I can get parenting right.
Its the wisdom of balance.
In Marketing too, the difficult question is not, 'Should I or shouldn't I?'. Its 'How much?'
'Should I advertise?' Yes. But how much of my communication budget should go into advertising? Fifty percent? Forty, perhaps? Should I automate my service delivery? Yes. How much of it should be automated and how much should retain the personal touch? Difficult one. If there's a mess up on the shop floor, should I address the issue? Of course, yes. But how harsh must I be? Too harsh, and I affect employee morale, too lenient, and I am setting the place up for another mess up.
So you see, the 'balance' is the key. Its the wisdom of balance that's behind every successful decision.
Get the 'balance' right, you get the act right!
The Liberal tragedy
Liberals are truly pathetic.
They can make and laugh at the crudest of jokes about a young girl, yet go bonkers when they hear the likes of Carrie Prejean say that marriage's between a man and woman.
Note J Robert Smith; 'Letterman's trashy, ham-handed humor at Palin's expense demonstrates again the unabated contempt and fear that liberals have for a woman who established an immediate, powerful rapport with voters last year. His subsequent disingenuous apology to Palin only adds an exclamation point.
Intriguingly, Letterman's jabs, and the continuous stream of invective and ridicule aimed at Palin, speaks volumes about what the left thinks about America's Joes and Janes.
Evidently, not much. Not much beyond harvesting their votes.
East and left coast elites have a beau ideal, and that's President Barack Obama, the elegant, cosmopolitan, smooth apologist for America's foibles and mortal sins. The Big Spender and soon-to-be Debaser of the Dollar. The Savior of Detroit who's Amtraking automakers. The compassionate fellow who wants to ration healthcare. And the man who claimed he'd deny Miranda rights to terrorists, only to, well...
Thursday, 11 June, 2009
What agendas to suspend for Marketing success
Great organisations have cohesive and competent teams within that ride together to take it to success. Teams within a firm not just need to operate cohesively as individual units, but also need to perfect cross-functional unity. And that's a possibility only if members within teams suspend personal agendas to keep the team agenda as priority. Similarly, at a macro level, teams need to suspend their own agendas to give the organisational objective utmost priority. Once the organisation succeeds, teams get rewarded, and so do members within.
I have seen firms trip, because teams refuse to forsake their agendas for the firms'. I've seen teams go down as members refuse to put the team ahead of their own personal desires. I've sat at team meetings where I watch in horror members present initiatives that further their own selves in the guise of furthering the team's fortunes.
Marketing success too is a result of teams working together with just one agenda in mind. That of the consumer's. Any marketing chain could consist of Manufacturers, Channel partners, Retailers, Advertising agencies, Market research firms and so on. If a product needs work as a solution for the customer, every entity in the chain must suspend their personal agendas to give the customer agenda its primary due. For example, a channel partner mustn't push for unreasonable margins, because that means higher prices to customers that may then make the product impotent against competition. Channel players together must cull out any entity in the chain that isn't focused on the customer. Letting them be, can spell doom for the product in question.
Just like, if you were to know someone on a team's furthering his own self, ease him out. Else the team's going down. If a Marketing chain entity doesn't have the customer as the focal point, I bet, the outcome to that chain (read product or service) would be rejected. By the customer.
Wednesday, 10 June, 2009
Is a Rose is a Rose is a Rose?
Alphy's always inclined to pick the Smith & Jones Ginger-Garlic paste over Dabur Hommade. And its got nothing to do with the paste and everything to do with the name.
Smith & Jones works for her. Neither Dabur nor the Hommade name is strong enough an allure. Having lived most of her life in Dubai, she's grown up with Western brands. And so Smith & Jones rings a familiar bell. It fits into her world. She was pretty disappointed to note that Smith & Jones is made by an Indian company called Capital Foods. And she got to know that because I told her. I couldn't conceal the grin that followed. On my face.
Consumers look to brands that are in tune with the world that they know. Brands that fit in. If one's lived an anglicized life, if I can call it that, one seeks anglicized brands. Local ones won't do. So if you want the Alphy-kinda consumers, you better get the name right. Of course, the visible identity too.
Tuesday, 9 June, 2009
The 'context' dicates the 'decision'
Dale's got a great blog on Context-Driven Qualitative Research which he believes is the best way to understand "consumer decision-making," or why people buy certain products and services.
I quote, 'Context-Research is disgusted with both Rational and Conspicuous. He says, “If we are going to catch Consumer Behavior we need to get him where he lives - - then we can trap him with his own words.” He continues:
Here’s how to set the trap. Forget about traits and profiling, this is not a problem for psychology, it’s a matter of context. Find out what Consumer Behavior wants and how he goes about getting it. In short, picture the scene. Draw it up in a series of pictographs and let him explain himself as he goes through them. He might get emotional. So much the better. Keep your yap shut because he knows and you don’t.'
Here's where you can read about it.
Sphere: Related ContentMonday, 8 June, 2009
Government's the problem & the solution?
Amidst the expose on malpractices and misuse of autonomy by medical colleges in Tamil Nadu, its interesting to note that government is trying to act tough. The HRD ministry has now issued notices to errant colleges asking why their deemed university status should not be withdrawn and action be taken under law.
But what most people miss out on, is the fact that 'selling' of seats, though an unlawful act, is actually a result of government policies. Anything can only sell for a premium only if there exists a demand in the marketplace for whatever it is that's selling at those prices. A medical seat can sell at such an exorbitant rate because there are buyers out there ready to pay the price. And such prices are sustainable because the supply of 'education' is scarce. Guess who's responsible for that scarcity? The Government!
I remember talking to a friend of mine who tried to start and run a school. The government virtually ran him out of this endeavour by ensuring that he faced hurdles in everything that he did, while trying to set up and run the school. The government-dictated policies out there virtually dashed his hopes of operating a school. And the man in question, was honourable, ethical and truly believed in education as a noble service.
Of course, the institutions who 'sold' their seats have violated the law. But what's more important to note is that the problem of 'selling seats' is a creation of the government itself. And now that very same government is trying to find a solution. I'll bet there's none. Such scams will continue unabated. The only way to stop such rackets is by easing governmental control on the sale of any product or service, education included, and by letting market forces dictate the supply of solutions to consumer demands. Of course, this doesn't sound well, especially when it comes to services such as education. Plus the transition from government control to letting market forces dictate, initially, will throw up problems. But tell, you what, that's the only way to plug the flow of 'scams'.
Take it or leave it.
Sphere: Related ContentSunday, 7 June, 2009
Has the recession changed consumers?
P&G and Home Depot fret that recession has forever changed consumer spending patterns. Is their fear real or unfounded?
Yes and No, to either.
Anita and I had worked on a research which attempted to find answers to this very same question, and what we uncovered is a must-know for all marketers. Our study was restricted to three categories, namely, Apparel, Leisure travel and Entertainment/Eating out. The study was restricted to Bangalore and quizzed three sets of consumers; ones who have had a drop in their salary, ones who haven't, and ones who haven't but speculate a dip. The study focused on whether consumer spending behaviour had altered since recession.
Summing up, these were the findings. Consumers across the board have cut down on their purchase quantum. That is, if they ate out once a week, now its once in two weeks. If they travelled for leisure every six months, now they do so only once a year. The most interesting finding that should bring cheer to the likes of P&G and Home Depot or any other brand out there is that, consumers still haven't switched to a 'cheaper' brand to save money. That is, if one were used to wearing Levi Strauss denims, one still buys the brand, albeit in lesser quantities.
The study also found that consumers stayed true to those brands that they believed delivered value for the money spent. It didn't matter if it were a mass or a premium brand. Enhanced value delivery through price cuts and discounts were welcome. In fact consumers looked forward to the same.
The Adage article too paints a similar picture, at least when it comes to describing the consumer as having turned frugal. Its important to note, based on our study, that frugality is a not result of brand switching, instead of lessened consumption, in categories where it was possible for the consumer to do so.
The future of consumption has not been altered dramatically when it comes to brand landscapes. What's happened is, consumers have turned into beings who more careful with their money, and therefore are looking for better bang for the same buck. Brands that deliver, stay.
Sphere: Related ContentSaturday, 6 June, 2009
The Gladwell effect
'By proving methodically that ideas spread from the ground up and are transmitted by peers one trusts — rather than being dictated top-down by pundits and ad men to be passively received — he switched the locus of power to the absorber or consumer of ideas and products (and inaugurated a vast trend for marketers to “seed” a product with “influencers” in a way that would hopefully “go viral”. He also anticipated the community-building and opinion-making power of the internet.) Adieu, unquestioned authority of newspapers, historians and Madison Avenue.
In Blink, to my mind his least successful book, he nonetheless proved that there is no such thing as a human being without bias. So long, myths of a post-racial, post-feminist, post-class-structure society. And in his most important book, the new Outliers — which could actually be called “Inliers” because it is about how perfectly ordinary people or garden-variety geniuses either do or do not get the breaks that will catapult them to the heights — he gives a sweeping, scorched-earth annihilation of the Western world’s delusion that there is such a thing as a functioning meritocracy; and he punctures for good America’s favourite fairytale, that anyone with grit and pluck can haul him or herself up by the bootstraps and succeed.'
- Naomi Wolf, 'Malcolm Gladwell: 'I was an outsider many times over'.
Why Yahoo extensions work
The latest hit wise News and Media category weekly report on the top 10 News and Media category websites ranked by US market share of visits puts Yahoo news above Google, CNN, MSNBC and the Drudge Report.
Now that's good news for Yahoo, enduring a rough time in its combat with Google on searches. In fact, tell you what, it isn't easy for consumers to associate Google with news as much as they can, with Yahoo. That's because Google's identity as a search engine is deep and enduring. That makes it harder for Google, when it comes associating with news as a category with the same name.
This demonstrates the relevance of stimulus and its generalisation or discrimination, depending on associations. Any brand that's an iconic one, with a certain association that's strong will find that extending the brand name (read, stimuli) into another category may not work for it. And so instead of an extension, its better to move into a diffrent category with a completely new name. Like what Google did with Social Networking, calling it Orkut (after its creator), rather than having it christened with a Google related named.
The fact that Yahoo's more a portal with no strong associations is why the brand name (read, stimuli) can be generalised. Yahoo News works better for consumers in terms of identity than Google News. It shows. Yahoo News' No. 1.
Thursday, 4 June, 2009
It isn't soap, its the soap story
President Barack Obama called for a new beginning. With nothing new. Except for some rhetorical babble. Which by the way went down well with all those in awe. And didn't go down well with the likes of me. That's because he reminds me of brands that win awards with their advertising but give the consumer a deal that's worth zilch. So there's always the first buy and none after. Just like there's always the first term and none after.
The only lesson Marketers can learn from the American President is the lesson of superlative communication. Its one of the Ps of Marketing, Promotion. The American president can quite hold an audience. Especially if that audience consists of people with a low degree of 'need for cognition'. Its like selling soap to idiots. It isn't soap, stupid, its the way you tell the soap story. You can have them hanging on every word, and then they buy the soap.
Don't believe me? They lapped up every word the messiah spoke. And then they voted him in. What's changed? When you figure that out, do let me know. I am waiting, all ears.
By the way, how can you characterise the Obama babble?
'He talked and talked and talked and talked.
And then kept talking.
Vacillating between a lecture-some professor and a talk show therapist, Obama started out numbering the grave and important issues he wanted to discuss. After a half-dozen, he junked the whole numbering system.
Or, lost count.
The problem with talking so much is that you eventually just start babbling and saying a bunch of stuff that makes no sense.'
Sphere: Related ContentCan India be Donut country?
I don't know about South Korea, but if Dunkin' Donuts wants to take on India it has to get its target consumer segment right. And that segment in India must not include consumers who have been conditioned to a taste that's savoury and hot. That then totally excludes a populace above, lets say, the age of thirty five. Because any one who's that old has had his tongue used to a taste that's hot and savoury. Dunkin' Donuts don't fit in.
If DD's got to make it big in India, it must go after the crowd Cafe' Coffee Day's mesmerised. Because that crowd's already into coffee. CCD has brilliantly got them hooked. Now its a combination of Coffee and Donuts that must connect with them. My bet is, it will, assuming the rest of the P's are managed well. Especially pricing and lifestyle based Cafe' format hangouts.
What I'd like to dwell on is why Dunkin' mustn't go after the 'older generation' in India. Its got everything to do with the concept of 'Consumer Learning'. The theory of Instrumental Conditioning driven learning is based on consumer responses to stimuli that result in the most satisfactory response. The greater the satisfaction with a certain stimuli, the better the response in terms of repetitions with that very stimuli. The stronger the subsequent learning. The level of conditioning is enhanced as one ages. Take food habits for example. The older you are the more fixated you are on certain kinds of food. That's because your tongue's conditioned to a certain taste, that you liked, accepted and repeated. Not so when you are young. That's the age at which one 'tries' different cuisines, is more open to tastes that are alien. For the older generation in India, a snack's supposed to be hot and savoury. At least for most of them. The Donut taste's alien. So is the Cafe' format. That's a direct contrast to the younger uns. Donuts will do fine. Cafe hangout's most welcome.
for Dunkin' Donuts, Korea's the company's top foreign growth market. Something tells me, there too, its the youngster they're after. Korea's going to be easier than India, due to a history of American influence. In India, it will tougher. For now, the only crowd that will take to Donuts in India will be the young uns, who live in cities, are from upper middle class families, and are the kind that can be seen lounging at Cafes.
Wednesday, 3 June, 2009
The more I can't have, the more I want
Amidst the consumption gloom, the weekend launch of Palm Pre should brighten things up. Both for Palm and Sprint Nextel, its exclusive provider. The Palm Pre's been attracting a lot of attention since its its debut at the Consumer Electronics show in January. Analysts are now warning of Palm Pre shortages post launch.
The Palm Pre may not be the iPhone and so may not witness the kind of frenzy the Apple phone generated. Yet, it surely is good enough, with its touchscreen control, a slide-out keyboard and an operating system designed for trendy Web services such as social networks, to pull the crowd in. Plus the fact that a stock out's expected, will only add to the lure.
One of the best things to happen to a newly launched brand is stock outs, engineered at times, especially if it piles on the 'pull'. After all, if something runs out, maybe its because everyone's after it. The desire to possess can thus be strenghthened. But it also must be seen that sufficient stocks make way to shelves, so waiting consumers can buy. Push the wait a tad too much, and you may come to rue the brand's unavailability, as by then, consumers walk off, disgusted.
The 'enhanced' desirability reminds of me of the 'girl scenario' that I see play out so many times. The more she can't be charmed, the greater the lure. The more the boy tries. It makes lovesick loonies out of many.
Funny. To me. :)
From the vast business mind of President Obama
'The President is lying thorugh his teeth. And because he has a nice smile and a charming manner…we overlook this? We give him a pass? Has Bush Derangement Syndrome gripped the American populace into some sort of mass hypnotic psychosis?
But the GM CEO took to the cameras today and reassured that the restructuring plan will work. It will be hard. It will require ‘sacrifices’. . But it will be dedicated to making smaller cars. It will innovate ‘green’ technology to make better-mileage, more environment-friendly cars. It will make cars that provide high wages and provide comprehensive health and retirement benefits to union employees. It will make cars that the President has told us we need to be making to help save the planet.
You know…cars that people don’t want to buy.
But if you don’t want to buy the cars they’re making, the government is going to Change your mind. You see…you need to get your mind right. You need to be convinced that it’s in your best interest to let the government make the important decisions for you. Decisions like deciding which sort of car to drive. What sort of light bulb you use. What extent you must go to by recycling and, hence, save Planet Earth. What sort of health care they think you should have. What food you can buy. Where you can travel. What school you’re allowed to attend. What sort of profession you may ‘choose’ for yourself.
Oh, I’m sorry. I apologize again. I was thinking of Communist China. '
- Gray Graham, 'From the Vast Business Mind of President Obama'.
Tuesday, 2 June, 2009
One half America voted Government Motors
I guess a part of my nightmare is over. Though I will only breathe a sigh of relief when my nimble fingers run over my new passport. For the past two days I have spent the greater part of the day at the Bangalore passport office moving from one counter to another applying for a fresh passport as my older one runs out on its validity.
Sample this. The first day, I reach the office at eight, stand in a queue for almost an hour and a half because the damn counter opens only at nine thirty and I have to be there early enough to get a token that reads a sufficiently lower number. Because that means at the next counter where they verify my documents I would be somewhere up front. I reach the second counter only to know some document isn't in order. I have already spent three hours at the office. I leave, then go back today. They tell me yesterday's token's good enough. I reach the first counter only to be told it isn't, so I am told to wait my turn based on what the number was the previous day, and that's at 71. So much for reaching early. I go through the blessed counters that number five, yeah, five counters that I have to go to, so I can submit my documents and pay the charges for a new passport. Let me tell you what these five counters do. One gives a token, the other verifies documents, the next scrutinises and okays the documents, the fourth one decides the payment and fifth one collects it. And almost all of this is done by government servants, who take home a paycheck that comes out of my tax remittances, with an attitude that makes me feel as if they've almost granted me the goddamn moon.
Two days wasted for something that could have been completely done online and through snail mail. Welcome to government systems and their functioning.
I think one half of Americans must really have been on something to have voted Barack in. Barack, the messiah who believes government's got the answer to consumer problems. General Motors is now Government Motors. And what's Barack predicted? 'The humbled corporate titan will emerge from Chapter 11 "a stronger and more competitive" company within months.' This from someone, the only time he's come any close to understanding organisations was when he played the role of a community organiser. Imagine, one half America voted for a community organiser who's now going to decide what kind of cars must be built and sold.
God save America.
But then, knowing the crafty methods he uses, for all you know, Barack's going to engineer things in a manner where consumers will be forced to buy small cars that GM now plans to make. He will ensure the SUVs can't be made, or if they are, they turn so pricey, it wont be affordable to the masses.
I can't for the life of me understand why a tax paying citizen would want to give more money into government hands or support government deciding what's good for consumers? If you really want to know how unproductive the government is or what a mess it makes with running companies, you just have to visit a passport office in India, or buy an Ambassador car. As the Indian government runs clear off making cars, the American one decides its time to make them.
Pity.
Monday, 1 June, 2009
Why Star Bazaar's lost my patronage
The last time I went to Star Bazaar, they charged me a parking fee. And so I said, I wouldn't go back. Its more than a year now. I went back yesterday. I was still charged a parking fee, but that was then refunded at the payment counter.
But it wasn't all hunky dory. The place was packed to the hilt. I couldn't find an empty trolley amidst all the din. When I did find one, it was being pushed across the store floor by an employee. With Jaden at my shoulder, I asked the shop floor guy if I could take it from him. He refused. He said he needed it for some work. I was polite and so walked away to find another. I did, outside the store. I had to wait for shoppers to empty theirs after their purchases.
Star Bazaar seems to be doing well. I know it was a Sunday evening, so the crowd was expected. I spent almost close to half an hour at the check out counter. That was pretty hassling. Add to that, my not being given a trolley by an employee who should have been more concerned about me than whatever it is he needed the trolley for, plus no apology for not parting with the trolley, you think I am going back?
Fat chance.
Sphere: Related ContentIt isn't the economy, its the customer, stupid!
Joel hits the nail right on the head when he states, 'So it was no surprise to me that Circuit City failed. The chain's CEO, in an e-mail, blamed the demise on "poor macroeconomic conditions" -- an assertion that was repeated by The Associated Press, which cited "the expanding financial crisis" for the liquidation. You know what? I don't buy the argument that the economy caused Circuit City's failure. Take one look at its competitors, and you know that the market for consumer electronics and computer equipment remains strong, even in this economy. You can walk into any Apple Store and see large crowds of people lining up to buy computers and iPods.'
Dead on right. If business firms are folding up, its because their customer patronage has dried up. And if patronage's down, they only have themselves to blame. Remember, as much as there are firms closing down, there are others that are doing just fine. And that's because the latter made customers their central priority.
Bailing out firms that are folding up, is akin to watering a plant with dead roots. Its wouldn't matter how much of water you're going to flush down. The plant's as good as dead.
Its important that business firms don't get complacent when consumer consumption is at its peak. In fact, what's witnessed at such times is the arrogance with which these firms treat customers. The deal then is, 'take it or leave it'! I am not the one to shed tears for such firms as I see them folding up. In fact its a shame to see these very firms traipsing around with begging bowl that's been filled to brim by the political establishment. A bowl that will empty soon. My bet then is, you'll still see no branches and leaves. Remember, no root!
Sphere: Related ContentSunday, 31 May, 2009
The Dera divide & Brand communities
The Dera divide that's witnessed in the state of Punjab, and replicated elsewhere around the world amidst the Sikh community, points to the desire of people to form communities of their 'own kind'. These communities help people face and counter atrocities that their caste identities bring. On their own, the Dalits in India know they have no chance. And so they congregate.
The phenomenon of congregations is seen around the world. Built to protect, enhance and propagate identities, they give their followers the chance to be a part of something that's got a place in society.
The best of brands go beyond just a sale to build communities. Brand driven communities get built either by the marketer who's behind the brand or at the behest of consumers themselves. The latter, though not in control of the marketer, is the better and the more enduring community. Like biker communities. There's one in India, made of Enfield Bullet riders. In fact, now the brand itself has taken on the task of adding on to that community. A Marketer built community would be one like the 'Sunsilk Gang of Girls'.
Marketers whilst designing, building and propagating brands must keep the community phenomenon in mind. Of course, it isn't easy to have the consumer take up the task of building a community on your brand. But if he does, you've got your branding dead on. If he doesn't, its still worthwhile for you try and cobble up one and hope consumers join in.
Brand communities ensure consumers stay loyal, spread the message, bring more into the fold and ensure the brand's around for a long time.
Saturday, 30 May, 2009
American capitalism gone with a whimper
'Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish...
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.'
-Stanislav Mishin, 'American capitalism gone with a whimper'.
Children walk to school, and run back home
Something I noticed. Every morning riding the bus to work I seem to be more concerned about the driving quality than on my way back, when I don't seem to be as concerned. Speeding in the morning, which is a concern, isn't, when I am on my way home. I guess the explanation's a simple one. My desire to be back home is greater than to get to work. Don't get me wrong, I love my work. But I guess I am eager to get back to my darlings at home, and so the speeding doesn't bother me as much. In fact its something I even wish for. Because I get back home quicker.
Difference in contexts dictate responses that are different. Consumers too, according to contexts, can either turn eager, looking forward to the act of consumption, or reluctant, with an eye on things other than the actual consumption act. Let me explain. Were I to be taking a holiday trip, the ride to the airport, even if its an exacting one wouldn't bother me as much as, if I were to be taking a trip to my dentist. Then everything turns bothersome. The roads, traffic, everything that I can complain about.
What's the implication of these varying contexts and response to the service provider? If you are a healthcare provider and if you know the trip to your premises is not a welcome one, remember, you will have a 'hassled, on the edge' kind of customer on your hands. Be careful and ensure he gets the best of care. Else he'll complain. On the other hand, if you work at a holiday resort, in all probability you would have cheerful customers at your doorstep (of course, there are exceptions). Just add on the good times and you will spread happiness around.
Friday, 29 May, 2009
Should you consult the expert?
'The rejection of classical expertise assumes a second form on the internet. If everyone can have a say, but accreditations are banned, how will the digital wheat be distinguished from the chaff? For free software aficionados on the Slashdot community weblog, as for the users of commercial powerhouses Amazon and eBay, the solution is to calculate the average opinion of participants regarding the reputation of posters and commenters on Slashdot, and of reviewers and sellers on Amazon and eBay. The same goes for the popularity of shared information or links in “social media” such as Reddit and Digg, as well as for the PageRank algorithm which generates Google’s search results (1). The “wisdom of the crowd” – the automated aggregation of multiple individual choices – will quasi-magically produce an ideal result. That’s how things are supposed to happen, at any rate.'
Wikipedia, which runs on a premise that collaborative effort on any subject would cancel out falsifications, should they creep in, is believable. But a total rejection of what's termed 'classical expertise' would do us all a disservice. In fact, I believe it wouldn't be possible to exist without such expertise.
Even in the consumer world.
Take brand endorsements for example. The extent of acceptance of an endorser, if the product were 'technical' in nature, would depend on credibility the endorser carries. And that in turn is dictated by the endorser's perceived expertise in that product category. For instance, if you wanted me to listen to an endorser when he talks about, lets say a toothpaste that's supposed to be good for my gums, he better look, talk and act the dentist.
Its great that Internet's allowed for people to collaborate in a manner never seen before. Its truly transferred to an extent, power into the hands of people. In many ways its cut out the overbearing influence of 'classical expertise' that almost always dictated what the right answers to anything was and could be. But then again, the experts have their place too. If you wanted know more about economics and its applications where would go, in cyberspace? Of course not to any mass collaborators, but to some one who you think is an expert.
In fact should you want to do that, I would recommend Prof. Greg Mankiw or Prof. Mark Perry. And if you wanted, wisdom on consumer psyches, you know where to go. Don't you? :)
Thursday, 28 May, 2009
Everyone's not DiCaprio
I know this for sure. Every time the Government decides what's to be made and in what quantity, the consumer's going to get a raw deal. In India, years ago that raw deal was called a Bajaj Chetak scooter or an Ambassador car. Lousy to say the least, the damn things were only affordable to a few. And even if you could afford the 'running disasters' you still, had to wait months to get a hand on one. All that changed when the Indian government decided that private citizens must be allowed to make whatever it is they wanted to. And if the consumer decided not to buy whatever was made, that was the private citizens' problem. If they did buy, the money was theirs.
In the US, it almost seems as if its going back to the days that we Indians endured two decades ago. The reason for doing that? Its the environment, they say.
Note Stephen Green quoting the anonymous "Mechanic"; 'If you think I’m exaggerating, think again. The anonymous “Mechanic,” writing for Edmunds, worries that the new CAFE standards won’t save much fuel and won’t save the planet, but they will crush the life out of the car business. From here on out, cars are going to shrink in size, shrivel in power and grow more expensive.
With a goal of a corporate fleet average of 39 mpg for cars by 2016 model year it’s not just V8s that are dead, but V6s and decent-size fours. Of course all the SUVs and the Camaro, Mustang and Corvette as we know them are doomed, that’s obvious, but so are reasonably size minivans, midsize sedans like the Accord and Camry, and anything fun.'
The likes of DiCaprio may wanna ride the hybrid. But there are many out there who wanna ride something that's 'bigger than a penalty box, or more powerful than a moped'. And they are being denied the ride, because the government wants to supposedly save the planet. The government is the last one I would trust if I wanted to save the planet. We all know who they truly wanna save.
It ain't the planet, stupid!
Wednesday, 27 May, 2009
The talent for Politics & Catastrophe
'One of the most important talents for success in politics is the ability to make utter nonsense sound not only plausible but inspiring. Barack Obama has that talent. We will be lucky if we escape the catastrophes into which other countries have been led by leaders with that same charismatic talent.
When I think of the people with serious physical or mental handicaps who nevertheless work, I find it hard to sympathize with able-bodied men who stand on the streets and beg. Nor can I sympathize with those who give them money that subsidizes a parasitic lifestyle which allows such men to be a constant nuisance, or even a danger, to others.
How surprising is it that Barack Obama, who spent decades hanging out with people who spewed out their hatred of America, did not say anything in the presence of foreign rulers like Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega, when they spewed out their hatred of America?'
- Thomas Sowell, 'Random Thoughts'.
Tuesday, 26 May, 2009
'Attribution' helps manage emotions
'Mostly, though, liberals know conclusions, which they erroneously identify as facts. For example, they know that huge numbers of Americans have no medical care; they know that Obama was a top student at every school he attended; and despite their support for the military, they know that most American troops are ill-educated, violent hicks. As it happens, each of these statements is factually wrong (see here, here and here) and, instead, reflects only an emotional conclusion.'
I have had my fair share of making such emotional conclusions, as much as facing such conclusions either in classrooms, at home, at my workplace, almost everywhere, by parties other than me. At such times, as Bookworm says, trying to factually correct whats been emotionally concluded is a bad idea. Unless its done with the right 'attribution'. Attribute what you say to a source that's acceptable. Someone who the other party identifies with. As Bookworm shows, the truth about Obama, for instance, shouldn't be attributed to Rush Limbaugh, instead to New York Times. NYT is acceptable, Rush isn't.
At times customer service scenarios call for recovery. And some such recovery scenarios develop at the behest of the customer himself, who's at fault. But don't dare point that out to him. Acceptance and repentance by a customer is as rare as Haley's comet. Instead attribute the mess to what's acceptable. Something like the fact that the Executive chef himself was out there preparing the damn dish and that's why the delay, and that the last time the chef did it himself was when Lady Di had come visiting. That should shut the customer up. If you were to look keenly, you may even spy the customer swelling up with pride. Be careful not to let your grin show.
Service recovered! Satisfaction guaranteed!
The skeptic as the consumer
If there should someone who's termed a 'healthy' consumer, then he must be one who brings a fair amount of belief and skepticism when faced with a purchase. A steep inclination to either belief or skepticism can be termed 'unhealthy'. Its the balance that's critical to consumer purchases.
Let me illustrate. When faced with an advertising claim, its healthy to be a bit skeptical. That provokes enquiry. Which helps in bettering purchase decision making. Extreme skepticism on the other hand is what spawns the likes of Naomi Klein and 'No Logo'. The converse illustration is the almost reverential submission by followers to con artists in the guise of god men. These are the 'extreme' believers who don't tolerate any contradiction to their blind beliefs.
The believer is a marketer's delight. The skeptic poses a dilemma. In fact its the extreme skeptics I want to talk about. Immune to any belief, they question everything that requires faith. They need reasons to believe. Marketers must give them that. And in a manner that suits their psyche.
Skeptics may in all probability be rationalists who seek evidence. If it isn't there, they wouldn't subscribe. In fact its interesting the way Scott Peck talks about them (read, secularists) when he describes the issue of dreams, of God and of grace and revelation. He states;
'Why are so many immune to the evidence-that still small voice and our dreams, among other things-of grace and revelation? I believe there are two primary reasons. One is that people are threatened by change. Most with either a fundamentalist or secular mindset are simply not likely to be open to the evidence that could call their mindset into question. The other is that there is something particularly frightening about seriously acknowledging God for the first time. With the dethronement of one's ego involved in favor of putting God in the lead of our lives, there is a distinct loss of control (as there was in coming to terms with my own recounted "big dream" of God doing the driving).
For many secularists, the rejection of any evidence of God is not simply a neutral or passive sort of phenomenon. It is common these days to speak, for example, of addicts and others who reject massive evidence of their problem as being "in denial". Such denial is a fiercely active psychological process. In this respect, I believe we can think of some secularists as being addicted to their secularism. No amount of challenging evidence is going to change their minds. It isn't simply that they don't have the same access to God as everyone else has' it is that they have chosen to avoid and deny it'
Sphere: Related ContentSunday, 24 May, 2009
Genders differ, so?
Sometimes I see research from supposedly the smartest of firms around, that form interpretations that are so simplistic, I feel they misguide more than help facilitate decisions. Take for example the recent study by eMarketer on differences across genders when it comes to online behaviour.
The study tells companies that 'they should be aware that not all Internet tendencies mirror offline generalizations.' Now whats that supposed to mean? The study says that stereotypes that we have about genders in the offline world should not be transplanted online. Surely we didn't need a survey to figure that out.
Anyway, lets look at the stereotypes that don't apply.
'For example, women are often dubbed the more verbally adept sex. However they are no more likely to use online communication tools like e-mail, blogging, or social networks than men are.'
Now who in world thinks that verbal exchanges are similar to written ones? Of course they are different. You didn't a survey to tell you that women who talk aren't necessarily the ones who blog, e-mail or are on social networks. What the survey should have tried to see is whether a lady into 'writing offline' has taken to 'writing online'. And has that lady taken the pains to understand and get adept at technology so she can continue to do what she did offline, online?
'And although women are sometimes pegged as more avid shoppers, men are just as keen as women to make online purchases. But their shopping behavior may differ. "Men generally have the attitude, I'm going to go there, I've got to get it and get out," says Phillips. "Females like to go online and socialize and shop around - much like going into a store." Furthermore, Phillips says fathers are just as voracious as mothers about finding online information to improve their children's health or education. Like Web-savvy moms, they also tend to buy products with their families in mind.'
Does that mean men have changed, online? The answer, I'm sure isn't an easy one.
Do I dislike shopping? I do. Do I take that dislike online and therefore not take time to browse products listed on online stores? The answer is No! Why? Because when I face a computer screen, and the only part of my body that needs to move is my wrist, my shopping world's a totally different one. Have I 'changed' therefore? Big chance! About 'fathers being just as voracious as mothers about finding online information to improve their children's health or education', is it a dichotomy that we face when we compare the desire for information offline with that exhibited online? I don't think so. Take 'us' for example. We just picked a school to put our son into. Now, me, I cared as much offline about this choice as I did online. That is, I visited the schools myself, and also checked information on them, online.
What I am trying to say is that fundamentally men or women don't 'change' when they go about their 'offline lives' vis-a-vis the lives they live in the online world. Yes, they do different things in either of these worlds. Not because they 'change', but because what they can't afford to do in a certain offline world, can be done, online. And vice-versa. Between them, of course, they differ. I mean, gender behaviour is different. Offline; Online too.
Men with a 'nurturing nature' care. Doesn't matter if they are online or offline. Men who exhibit loutish behaviour in the real world, I bet, are jerks online.
Sphere: Related ContentSaturday, 23 May, 2009
Who's objective, who biased?
Liberals think that Kris Allen is American Idol because the mass voted away from Adam Lambert and his sexuality, which they were not comfortable with. This despite the fact that they think Adam's a better singer. I must add that Clay Aiken doesn't think so. The liberals even think its the Christian vote that did Adam in.
One things for sure. The mass voted Kris. Its obvious, isn't it? That's why he won. Note that the margin of victory was supposed to have been pretty big. The mass voted Kris because they judged Kris as the better one. As to what parameters they used is up to them. Of course, its about the music. But then again, who says the liberals are the musically inclined ones and so are better at judging? In fact biases that creep into any one's judgement can creep into liberals too.
Consumers make judgements based on all the stimuli they are exposed to. Surely a few among those stimuli may have a greater impact. Like when it comes to judging a singer what one hears is bound to be subject to judgements. Again, what one sees surely will also form part of that judgement, albeit to a lesser extent. For you see, our sense of sight provokes judgments based on what we see. Add to that the rest of senses too, as and when they are called into action.
Conservative or liberal, judgements are based on stimuli that our senses react to. Maybe the Christian in America liked what he saw in Kris. But then that applies to the heathen too. Their 'different' sense of the world takes better to someone like Adam. That's perfectly all right with me. Its just that, it gets my goat when the liberal blames conservatives for biases. Its time they took a good look at themselves.
Yeah, its about time.
Friday, 22 May, 2009
The genius of Democracy
'The genius of democracy is that the rotation of power forces the opposition to come to its senses when it takes over. When the new guys, brought to power by popular will, then adopt the policies of the old guys, a national consensus is forged and a new legitimacy established.
That's happening before our eyes. The Bush policies in the war on terror won't have to await vindication by historians. Obama is doing it day by day. His denials mean nothing. Look at his deeds.'
- Charles Krauthammer, 'Obama's Deeds Vindicate Bush'.
Sphere: Related ContentWhy Self-Preservation's natural
I share the sense of outrage, if there's one, at the way DMK's haranguing the Congress party for Cabinet and ministerial berths in the to-be formed Indian government.
But on closer analysis I can see why they're doing what they're doing. Its called 'self-preservation'. The DMK knows it can never be a national party with an appeal across the country. Its life lies down south in Tamil Nadu. That's where their existence is decided. So they do what comes natural to them. That is, try and get as many berths, and use that leverage to shower their own state with goodies. That would help them garner seats in the next election so they can rule their state and also have enough numbers in the Parliament to start another round of haggling.
Of course, there's no condoning what they're doing, but I wonder who's out there doing a service to anybody, who's willing to sacrifice for a greater good? Even consumers are the 'selfishest' kind.
Cynical? Me? Just so you know, Mother Teresa's a saint! Big time. For me. That's a beacon of sacrifice, though few and far in between, that keeps the cynicism away.
Sphere: Related ContentWhy I am confused and that's bad
I stand even more confused. With the launch of the Ritz its become even more harder for me to know how's it any different from the A-Star or the i10. Again, its the same when I think of the Getz and the i20. Damn, all of them look and seem like they're the other.
Wanna call me an ignoramus? Sure, be my guest, but call me a consumer too. And that's when I start to be a problem to you. For you see, if I don't see a difference, then all of them must turn candidates of probable purchase, should I consider it. That doesn't bode well for any of them. And again, remember when I engage in that purchase, I am going to drive a hard bargain, pitching one against the other, demanding for better payoffs to me (read, discounts, offers).
How can that be good for any brand?
Differentiating on enduring characteristics is a must for a brand. Helps it stand out of the pack. Its like Indian politics. The Congress Party differentiated itself as the non-communal, inclusive, pro-poor, good-governance, young blood party. And that stood out. Especially with the BJP around. Worked for them. The last I heard they were on the way to a government formation. Of course, despite the DMKs of the world.
Sphere: Related ContentThursday, 21 May, 2009
How to turn a lie into a truth
Every time someone tells you they're doing it out of their concern for you, be concerned about their concern. In all probability they don't care.
Its a similar concern that I have about the concern that the Al Gore brigand has about the future of MY world. I am talking environment. The climate change canard is way the Gores of the world make money for themselves. Al Gore is a politician, a campaigner and the chair of a green private-equity firm invested in products that a climate-scared world would buy.
About running cost savings that's been promised if cars were to turn fuel efficient, under tough new national standards to cut emissions and increased gas mileage, look to the real costs behind the 'green' initiative. Spain has been proclaimed a global example in providing financial aid to renewable energy companies to create green jobs. But research shows that each new job cost Spain 571,138 euros, with subsidies of more than one million euros required to create each new job in the uncompetitive wind industry. Moreover, the programs resulted in the destruction of nearly 110,000 jobs elsewhere in the economy, or 2.2 jobs for every job created.
In spite of such dissenting information, its easy to wonder why the global warming lie got told and told so many times, it turned into an accepted truth? The answer lies in publicity. Publicity driven information carried by the media brought with it credibility. And it got carried so many times, it turned the gospel truth.
To build brand beliefs, marketers have to rely more on publicity, as what gets carried by supposedly neutral media publications, gets believed. Advertising keeps doubts lingering in consumer minds. After all, who's the marketer out there who'd own up to anything? But when its a 'neutral' media vehicle, the consumer believes it as if it were the truth.
Global Warming's a lie. But who'd believe that? Today its an accepted 'truth'! To be a naysayer is to put yourself in peril.
Pity.
Wednesday, 20 May, 2009
Products, Controllables; Consumers, Uncontrollables
Last evening on our way back home, the bus got stranded in a jam on Hosur road. The jam partly was the making of commuters scattered across bus stops, creating their own little 'islands' over a large stretch. Seeing them, buses tended to stop right where they were. The solitary traffic policeman stationed on the road tried in vain to herd all the commuters together to a place further away so buses wouldn't block the road up. In spite of the policeman's efforts commuters wouldn't budge.
Tuesday, 19 May, 2009
What maketh a Manager?
The latest BW Business School survey reveals that the top 10 schools in India have 82 percent engineering graduates as students. That must of course therefore say something about the kind of evaluation methodology they have designed to admit students in. It must also point to the kind of managers they must send out there into the business world.
The question is, is this the kind of managerial talent that must be nurtured within business schools or should the mix be more eclectic with backgrounds in studies that straddle a wide spectrum?
Note Sir Ken Robinson talking about the education system; 'But something strikes you when you move to America and when you travel round the world; every education system on earth has the same hierarchy of subjects, everyone. It doesn’t matter where you go. You think it would be otherwise, but it isn’t. At the top are Mathematics and Languages, then the Humanities, and at the bottom are the Arts, everywhere on earth. And in pretty much every system too. There’s a hierarchy within the Arts; Art and Music are normally given a higher status in schools than Drama and Dance. There isn’t an education system on the planet that teaches Dance everyday to children the way we teach them Mathematics. Why? Why not? I think this is rather important. I think Maths is very important, but so is dance. Children dance all the time if they are allowed to, will do. We all have bodies, don’t we? Did I miss a meeting? Truthfully what happens is as children grow up we start to educate them progressively from the waist up and then we focus on their heads and slightly to one side.....
We need to radically rethink our view of intelligence. We know three things about intelligence, one it is diverse; we think about the world in all the ways that we experience it. We think visually, we think in sound, we think kinaesthetically, we think in abstract terms, we think in movement. Secondly intelligence is dynamic. If you look at the interactions of a human brain, as we heard yesterday from a number of presentations, intelligence is wonderfully interactive. The brain isn’t divided into compartments, in fact, creativity, which I define as the process of having original ideas that have value, more often than not, comes about through the interaction of different disciplinary ways of seeing things...
And the third thing about intelligence is, it’s distinct. I’m doing a new book at the moment called, Epiphany, which is based on a series of interviews with people about how they discovered their talent. I’m fascinated about how people got to be there...'
Its a pity that Indian Business schools are prejudiced in a manner where its a taken that engineers are better suited to turn managers. Its time the entry requirements into these schools are radically altered to accommodate those who may not be great at number crunching, but have the ability to move to music like they are possessed. Of course the latter again is no guarantee to a great manager, but the least it will do is throw up classroom environments that accomodate diversity, with a slew of thoughts that will surely be a harbinger to original ideas. And those ideas can then translate into innovative consumer solutions.
After all, isn't business finally about that, product and services that are solutions to consumer needs?
Sphere: Related ContentWhy the obsession?
It just blows me away to think that some people have been able to conjure up a cult like following. It happens across the world. These are but a few who can command a stupendous following. Count among them movie stars, spiritual gurus and even politicians.
Every time I see people (mostly on TV) in trance, rocking back and forth to a guru's 'words of wisdom' backed up by music at a spiritual gathering, I wonder how's it possible. How's it possible to cast a spell over a multitude? And if the rules to casting such spells can be articulated, can it then be used in the branding arena?
Someone who's had a multitude hanging on to his every word, in recent times has been Barack Obama. And according to Austin Hill, this is why he could craft such an obsession;
I tend to think that it’s three very important elements which, having been combined together all at the same time, have produced this current obsession. For one, many Americans are genuinely frightened by present economic conditions, and are unnerved about the prospects for their future. The idea that somebody greater than ourselves could take away our pain, remove all the obstacles in our path, and make sure that all our needs are met - - that idea is, apparently, very appealing to many Americans right now.
There is also President Obama’s phenomenal communicative abilities. Sure, many of us would prefer less “teleprompter” and more “candor.” Yet, when the President talks, he makes many Americans “feel” - - feel good about himself and his intentions, and feel bad about his specified objects of wrath (“rich executives,” “torturous interrogation tactics,” “greed on Wall Street,” “George W. Bush” - - you get the idea).
And then there is the stark reality that we live in an era of what I call “historical and Constitutional illiteracy.” Most Americans, I am convinced, know very little about world history or American history, and the lessons entailed therein. Likewise, I’m pretty certain that most Americans have no clue about the Constitutional limits on the powers of the government, and the idea that there should be any limits at all on the Executive Branch is unthinkable.
In many ways, it’s a sad state of affairs. Americans are scared and want their President to be an omniscient, omnipotent savior, and the man we elected knows with certainty that he is that savior.....
Sphere: Related ContentMonday, 18 May, 2009
Move over, Google?
Time Online: A revolutionary new search engine that computes answers rather than pointing to websites will be launched officially today amid heated talk that it could challenge the might of Google.
WolframAlpha, named after Stephen Wolfram, the British-born computer scientist and inventor behind the project, takes a query and uses computational power to crunch through huge databases.
The service can compute the distance between two cities, the population of a country at a specific date and the position of the Space Shuttle at a given moment. The user does not have to search through links provided by the engine; the answer comes immediately and, if appropriate, is accompanied by charts or graphs. What it does that Google, at the moment, cannot do is provide answers to questions that have not been answered already.
Sphere: Related ContentThe 'positioning' lesson in Indian elections
I have written in the past about whether 'fear' can be used to appeal to the senses. The answer is, it can, but must be used wisely and within a relevant context.
The BJP's use of fear to lure the voter didn't work because of two critical reasons. One, as an appeal it didn't carry as much weight as a 'non-fear positive' lure that the Congress Party used. Two, the context wasn't right.
Before I get into explanations, note when 'fear' works. One approach to the curvilinear explanation of fear is the protection motivation model. According to this theory, four cognitive appraisal processes mediate the individual's response to the threat: appraising (1) the information available regarding the severity of the perceived threat, (2) the perceived probability that the threat will occur, (3) the perceived ability of a coping behaviour to remove the threat, (4) the individual's perceived ability to carry out the coping behaviour.
At a time when the average Indian voter cares more about his physiological needs, the fear lure is superseded by a more 'down-to-earth' lure. The lure of fulfillment of basic needs. Surely one's security matters, but not as much when one's more worried about food to satiate hunger and a shelter to live in. The present Indian context is one where the need for security isn't as strong as the need for basic building blocks of life. Yes, India does face the threat of cross border terrorism. But that threat doesn't have pan-Indian appeal. Its more localised to certain regions that have been susceptible. In fact, its interesting to note that despite 26/11, Mumbai overwhelmingly voted for the Congress party. Also remember the threat of communal violence too is real one. And that's something that people associate the BJP with. So any gains made on the cross border terrorism based fear front is neutralised by the fact that the BJP is associated with internal strife.
The Congress party with its 'positive' message ended up with an appeal that was stronger than the 'fear' one used by the BJP. I admit, this wasn't the only factor that counted in these elections. Surely there were more issues that were far more complex. But it would be well to note that 'appeals' that political parties conjure up largely dictate the way they position themselves. The positive positioning plank adopted by the Congress worked for the them. For the BJP on the other hand, their fear factor, and a position based on that, fell flat.
Sunday, 17 May, 2009
Good Morning, Mr. Prime Minister
Its a pleasure to wake to a morning knowing that the honourable Dr. Manmohan Singh will remain the Prime Minister of India.
Good Morning, Mr. Prime Minister.
Saturday, 16 May, 2009
The benefits that matter to consumers
If the BJP wisened up, they would dump Hindutva and the likes of Varun and Modi. Because that's not what the average man on the street wants. He craves a better life. And that's about 'Roti, Kapda and Makaan'.
Just like brands must wisen up and dump benefits consumers do not care for. A mass consumer brand trying to woo consumers with psychological benefits at the cost of lower prices is akin to the BJP trying to woo the voter with Hindutva at the cost of Roti, Kapda and Makaan.
Either won't work! Aren't working!
Sphere: Related ContentSwedish Capitalism Ahoy!
If President Obama should look somewhere it should be towards Sweden. When Obama's busy turning America into a Socialist bastion, Sweden's shedding its incompetent Socialist system and adopting Capitalism with great speed.
CSR reports that last week, the country’s center-right government began selling off state-owned pharmacies, one of the country’s few remaining nationalized companies, as part of an ambitious program of liberal economic reforms started in 2006. In the same week, a study by the Swedish Unemployment Insurance Board revealed that almost half of the country’s jobless lacked full unemployment benefits. Many opted out of the state scheme when the cost of membership was raised last year; others were ineligible.
State pensions, schools, healthcare, public transport, and post offices have been fully or partly privatized over the last decade, making Sweden one of the most free market orientated economies in the world, analysts say.
Way to go, Sweden!
Reinventing the Magazine
WSJ: But today, at a particularly tough time for magazines, a number of publications are again looking beyond the standard glossy format, experimenting with different manifestations of what a magazine can be. In doing so, they are offering their readers special experiences that Web sites and other free-content digital distractions can't match.
These are publications that revel in their 3D-ness, special objects that demand deeper interaction from their readers than the average print magazine. Taking advantage of recent advances in printing technology, these publications are determinedly nonconformist in everything they do. But they are, in essence, magazines -- curated, regular compilations of content with clear selection criteria, consistent design and an individual voice.
What's behind the early numbers?
Dr. Manmohan Singh.
I know its early days. But if you want to point to one of the factors that's swinging the pendulum, the Congress way, its the honourable Dr. Manmohan Singh. His honesty and decency has made its mark with the polity.
Add to that the organisational and managerial capabilities of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. Add again, the Young turks in the party. Rahul Gandhi and his honesty has been welcomed.
Like I said, early days. Lets wait and watch.
Brands must change as masses change
When I was younger and the only channel on TV was Doordarshan, Prannoy Roy and his show the 'World this Week' seemed manna from heaven.
Listening to him now, on NDTV is torture. I mean, his long drawn drawls are no longer a treat to listen to. The change in me can be blamed on my having listened to anchors across various news channels, both Indian and American. One of my favourite anchors now is Sean Hannity on Fox News. He's crisp, insightful and conservative. And speaks quick. If Sean's on one end of a continuum, Prannoy's at the other.
Brands once operated in the kind of isolation that presented Prannoy as the best thing on TV. Today the landscape pockmarked with various players that consumers can choose from. It makes sense therefore for brands to change and adapt to what's acceptable to the 'changed' masses. Else, they would present the kind of exasperation I have to endure everytime I tune into NDTV. Which is often (you see, its a choice between the devil and the deep sea), but not as often as before.
Sphere: Related ContentWhy the system and the brand must matter
The count will soon begin, in India.
Its interesting to note that as much as there were places where the voting turnout was low, there were others where the turnout was quite high. Where it was the low, it can be construed that the voter believed his life would go on, despite the system. It wouldn't matter who won. Where the voter came out and voted, the thought was the system could make a difference to his life.
Marketers on their part must make consumers believe that brands can make a difference to their lives. Apathy towards brands turn consumers switchers. Take retail shopping for example. The difference between the believing consumer and the apathetic one is, the former goes into the store with a list that has brand names put down on it, the latter goes in with no brands on the list, only products. The former tries to find a shelf that houses the brand he's looking for, the latter scans to shelf to locate the brand that's got the better offer.
Remember, for the politician and for the marketer, it pays to get the voter and the consumer to believe the system and the brand matter. To their lives.
Posts
