That's a Wrap!

I can't believe it's the end of the semester, and more importantly, the end of my college career! It's been an amazing four years and I'm going to miss Western New England a lot. Although it's upsetting to see this chapter end, I am really excited to see what the future has in store. This is my final blogpost, as my semester in Marketing Seminar is coming to a close. I've learned a lot of valuable information about marketing in relation to my major this semester, and it was a nice wrap-up of all of my marketing courses here at WNE. Through our course articles and readings, the brand analytics assignment, marketing simulation, and these weekly blogposts, I feel that I've acquired a more well-rounded vision of marketing as a whole. Writing these weekly blogposts has helped me expand my thinking about different course concepts while connecting them to current day issues in today's marketing field. I think that the skills and concepts I've learned in this course have helped to prepare me as I enter the workforce after graduation. Now that I've finished all of my classes, I am one paper, one presentation, and one exam away from being done with my undergraduate career. That's a wrap!

Subway's Deja Vu Deal: Will it Work?

I read an article on Ad Age that discusses Subway's latest strategic move. They will be offering a buy-one-get-one deal all throughout May, and released their campaign on Sunday, May 1st. Through hearing this commercial on the radio and reading this article, I thought their strategy would be an interesting blog to write about.

According to the article, a lot of fast food chains are starting to shift their focus toward breakfast options. If you're on the go, or looking for a quick and inexpensive morning meal, stopping at your local fast food chain is a pretty good option. These chains have taken advantage of this growing opportunity by promoting their breakfast menus and giving deals. Subway's sales dropped about 3.4% to $11.5 billion last year, which is the second year they've seen a noticeable decline. They knew that a change in their marketing needed to occur in order to help boost these declining sales.To combat this issue, Subway decided to shift their marketing promotions to breakfast, to try and get people in their stores in the morning. Having a large focus on sandwiches, they tend to be busiest during lunchtime.

This new campaign features what they call a "Deja Vu" commercial. They are promoting their new deal; if you buy a 6-inch or footlong sub before 9am, you will get a free 6-inch breakfast sandwich. This is a clever promotion, because it tries to get people in the store earlier to grab their lunch food, while also encouraging them to try a free breakfast sandwich. Once people try the breakfast sandwich and realize they like it, they will start visiting Subway not just for lunch sandwiches, but hopefully for breakfast too! It uses repetition in order to catch consumers' attention and continuously remind them that they will be offering this deal all throughout May. This is a "Deja Vu" commercial because they offered a very similar promotion back in 2012.

I think that this move is really strategic and clever for Subway to try and increase sales and keep up with the fast food trends. Because they position themselves as a healthier fast food option, they might have difficulty competing with McDonald's or other "traditional" fast food chains. We'll see if this campaign helps Subway make a comeback!

JC Penney & Pinterest: Effective Partnership?

I found an interesting article on AdAge that discusses the use of Pinterest in a recent marketing campaign done by JC Penney. This article caught my attention because I feel like I rarely hear of companies using Pinterest. I know that it is a popular social media platform used by many companies (and I'm an avid user myself), but this is one of the first real examples I've found. This campaign is going to feature JC Penney putting up digital Pinterest boards in 10 different malls around the country. The target audience is "Pinterest-pinning moms", which is based around Mother's Day approaching on May 8.

I was surprised to see that JC Penney has had a partnership with Pinterest for quite some time now. Apparently, this is the first time they have worked to create a "mall activation". The purpose of this is to promote the JC Penney brand and let consumers interact and explore the new spring styles they have to offer. It was also interesting to read that Pinterest and JC Penney noticed a lot of similarities between their target audiences. Brad Spychalski, who works in the creative and brand strategy departments at Pinterest, discussed how their target audiences have interests such as parenting and saving money. Their logic behind this joint idea was that they "'were able to create an integrated marketing campaign that helps JC Penney customers save time, energy and money, while also fueling Pinners with inspiring and helpful ideas"'. JC Penney will also utilize geo-targeted emails and post frequently on social media.

The article mentioned how traffic in malls has decreased nationally, and I think JC Penney is a store that has suffered a lot. The Eastfield Mall nearby used to have a JC Penney, but it did not do well and had to shut down. I think that JC Penney might struggle because of their lack of focus. I know that they are a department store with many offerings, but I think that makes it difficult to reach a particular market of consumers. Focusing on mothers will be a good idea for JC Penney, and I think that partnering up with Pinterest will work well. Mothers look on Pinterest for ideas that they enjoy and trust. By showing off JC Penney fashions on Pinterest, mothers may view them differently than they would solely if they saw them hanging on a clothes rack in store.

I think that this article relates to many of the concepts we discuss in class, especially now that we are working on our simulation project. Our group recently faced the issue of determining which target to focus in on. It's easy to say that your product (in our case, cold medicine) is targeted at everyone, because it is something that people of all ages need/want. However, it is really difficult to try and create a marketing campaign without a central focus on what target audience you wish to reach. Think about it: marketing messages need to be enjoyed and understood by the target audience. How can you reach consumers on both ends of the age spectrum effectively? I think JC Penney has had this problem, and I think that partnering with Pinterest and targeting mothers will be extremely effective and enjoyable for consumers!

Marketing Simulation: A Learning Experience

During the past few weeks, our course transitioned into the Simulation phase. We are working with Interpretive Simulations, which is an online simulation website geared to help students use active learning about business problems. This is the first time I have extensively used a simulation for a course, so it definitely has its challenges. We are put into teams of half Marketing majors, and half Marketing Communications/Advertising majors to bring different perspectives and thought processes together. My team members and I have created one marketing plan so far, and have advanced our simulation through two periods. Although we have been actively working hard to grasp the way this simulation works, we are still facing challenges.

The biggest challenge of this simulation, in my opinion, is all of the financials. As a Marketing Communications/Advertising major, I prefer and understand the more creative end of a marketing campaign. This simulation challenges me because I have to base the campaign off of the company's financial standpoint. Although it is difficult to grasp, it is definitely a useful skill to have as I am close to entering the marketing field upon graduation. It is important to understand where the financial resources are that support marketing efforts. A particular concept from the simulation is the Contribution after Marketing, which is something that I had not heard of prior to this experience. This contribution can give you an idea of how sales are affected after marketing strategies are implemented. The goal is that marketing will help increase sales and drive volume.

The simulation and marketing plan require us to also determine our strategy and tactics. As a Marketing Comm. major, I immediately think of generating brand awareness, strengthening brand image, etc. However, for this simulation we need to think more concretely, about measurable goals. For instance, instead of saying "increase profits as a result of marketing campaign", you would have to say, "increase sales revenue by x percent..." etc. Using the SMART objectives, Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Timely (there are also some other variations of this acronym), you can ensure that your proposed goals are able to be achieved and properly implemented/examined.

An additional challenge our group has faced while working with the simulation is entering our own decisions. Each period, we advance the simulation by making various decisions that are based off of our objectives. These decisions are aimed at helping the Allround brand (our simulation company name) succeed in the marketplace. Each time we advance the simulation, our decisions will impact company performance. Again, this can be challenging because we are dealing with all numbers here. Instead of thinking of how to improve brand equity, we are trying to improve brand performance based off of financial decisions.

Overall, working with the simulation has been tough so far. I think the biggest challenge for me personally, is the unfamiliarity of it. Hopefully, in time I will get the hang of it through working with my group each period advancing the simulation. It is interesting to see how big of an impact financials play on marketing strategy. It's not all about the creative aspect, that's for sure.

Kraft Mac & Cheese Targets New Consumers

I came across an interesting marketing story on AdAge about how Kraft Heinz is creating a new brand extension: Cracker Barrel brand Mac and Cheese! This article was interesting to me not only because I am interested in branding, but because I absolutely love mac and cheese. Prior to reading this article, I did not realize that Cracker Barrel was sold by the Kraft brand. Their new strategy to create a new mac and cheese product using Cracker Barrel cheese is extremely strategic and sounds delicious!

Through work created by their outsourced advertising agency, Kraft recently launched a new campaign to promote the new Cracker Barrel mac and cheese. Their commercial shows a man presenting an award at a spelling bee, making note of the fact that Cracker Barrel has won so many awards for their delicious cheeses in the past. Not only is this campaign funny and creative, the reason behind the brand extension is genius.

In many of the brand analytics assignment presentations, students discussed the consumer base that primarily purchases their brand. But, what if brands went so far as to target their less popular consumer base? This is exactly what Kraft did. Kraft found that they were lacking in sales from consumers that are in families with older children that prefer to buy prepared mac an cheese as opposed to shelf-stable packaged mac and cheese. To win over these consumers, Kraft decided to take their core competency of making mac and cheese, combine it with their Cracker Barrel cheese brand, and create a "premium" macaroni and cheese.

Mac and cheese is a staple in many people's childhoods, as it is an easy and fun meal to eat. Once people grow older, they often grow out of shelf-stable products like this, and turn to more "mature" foods, or pre-made dishes. By trying to influence consumer perception in creating a more high-end kind of mac and cheese made with quality cheese ingredients, Kraft can target those consumers who might have previously grown out of their mac and cheese phase. As stated in the article, Kraft is trying to reach out to consumers who are "looking for 'quality foods with more sophisticated flavors'". As for as in-store positioning, the product will be a premium to traditional boxed mac and cheese products, but will be below refrigerated or pre-made mac and cheeses. Although there are no artificial dyes or flavors, there are preservatives in this product.

Overall, I think that this is a really good move by Kraft. Because they're already so successful in their existing brands, it only makes sense that they will continue to grow their business through new products. I am curious to see if Kraft will be successful in trying to gain more consumers in the "older children/more mature families". I'm eager to get out and try this new mac and cheese!

Listerine: The Newest Lifestyle Brand?

In all of our class discussions, we seem to go back to one vital marketing concept: how does a brand achieve a deep connection with its consumers? Is it through emotional or humor appeals? How about cute babies and adorable puppies? Every brand seems to find its own unique way to evoke emotion out of consumers and build a strong bond. Listerine, the well-known mouthwash brand made by Johnson & Johnson, has recently been re-branding as a "lifestyle" brand to better appeal to consumers. Listerine has been stuck at a household penetration level of 16%, and is itching to try and increase the use of its products. An article I found on AdAge further explains what this brand has been up to.

Listerine's new "Bring Out the Bold" campaign was launched on April 4th in over 80 different countries. This campaign takes consumer and brand personality and brings it to the next level. In my opinion, this recent launch relates closely to our Brand Analytics Assignment, which we just completed a few weeks ago. The purpose of this assignment was to better understand a brand on a deep, emotional level through analyzing everything from their product attributes, all the way up to their brand essence. Through this project, we were able to gain a full understanding of what kind of people purchase our brand, from their demographic profile to their self-concepts and beliefs. That same kind of extensive analysis (obviously much more in-depth), was performed by Listerine when they went back and re-investigated their brand's consumers.

To investigate, Listerine spoke with 6,000 customers in a total of six countries, half being people who use the brand, and the other half were people who do not. I think it is really interesting that Listerine did a few focus-group like activities, as opposed to just surveying consumers. I wonder how our Brand Analytics Assignment would have been different if we were able to conduct this kind of research! They took the two groups of consumers (Listerine users and non-users), and offered them both spicy/odd foods. The Listerine users were more likely to select those foods, and they were also more likely to try new sports, or do adventurous activities.

Based off of the research findings, Listerine is able to conclude a great deal of information about their consumers, that will help them engage and connect with them on a deeper, more emotional level. This "Bring out the Bold" campaign is also predicted to better reach millennials, who are said to react favorably to the "bold" and adventurous brand personality. This new campaign also shows Listerine trying to personify their brand, and bring together the inner and outer layers of their brand and their consumer. I think that this campaign is giving personality and adding hedonic value to an extremely utilitarian, non-emotional product. I think these efforts by Listerine are extremely bold themselves, but they will produce bold results and strengthen brand value!

How will the Instagram Update Affect Marketing?

This week, I've heard a lot of my friends talking about the new Instagram update, and how it will supposedly "ruin" the social media photo sharing platform that we've all grown to love. Because I heard this update dramatically changes Instagram, I decided to turn off my automatic update settings on my iPhone to give myself time to decide if I want to get the update or not. The new update will no longer show photos on a person's news feed in chronological order. Now, the photos that will come up are going to be based off of who the user interacts with the most. This will be extremely similar to the way the Facebook news feed is set up.

After learning about this new update, I instantly thought of how this change will affect marketers. Instagram is one of the widely used social media platforms by brands, and I was curious to learn if it would help them or hurt them. I found an article online from Internet Marketing Inc. that discusses all of the details. Because the update will involve such a drastic change in the way photos appear on users' feeds, it is important that brands adjust their strategies accordingly. I'm going to discuss a few points and tips from the online article I read.

Because engagement is huge in all aspects of a brand's marketing strategy, post engagement will definitely be affected by the new update. Without the photos being shown in chronological order, marketers will no longer have a guarantee that their followers, or other consumers for that matter, will see their photos at a particular time. I remember at my internship, I would have to schedule various social media posts for clients. I wonder how this will affect post scheduling, since it seems like the order photos will be shown in is determined by each individual's use of the platform. The online article suggests that it is necessary for brands to continue engaging with their consumers, with the hope that they will engage with brand content. By engaging with consumers, hopefully it will increase the reach of the posts.

Another key issue the article discussed was regarding post frequency. Brands are now unable to tell stories to their consumers based off of a chronological time frame. This means that the time element of the Instagram posts is not as critical, but the content itself might be more important. I think to successfully avoid running into issues regarding this topic, brands should create posts that can be seen at a variety of times to accommodate different consumers using Instagram. Brands need to ensure that regardless of when consumers see their photos, that they have valuable content and are worth noticing.

Overall, it is interesting to look at different social media platforms and how their updates and changes will affect brands. This ties into the ongoing theme that marketing is always changing- especially because of its strong ties to social media. The best piece of advice I can give to brands regarding this topic is to constantly stay on top of the latest trends and updates. If your brand is using a social media platform to engage with consumers, be sure to check out updates frequently to see how they'll affect your marketing strategy

Will "1893" be a hit in 2016?

While I was working on my Brand Analytics Assignment on Coca-Cola, I was looking at competitors' websites. I was intrigued when I looked at Pepsi-Cola's home page, where they had a photo and short description of their newest product, "1893" cola. This interested me not only because it was relevant to my analysis of Coke's competition, but because it shows how a successful brand has to reinvent itself from time to time in order to have a competitive edge.

Although my research has shown that Coca-Cola is a stronger brand than Pepsi-Cola (and better tasting in my opinion!), Pepsi-Cola is extremely successful as well, and it looks like they are heading in the right direction with this new product. So, what exactly is this 1893 cola? The name sure is interesting.

I did a little research and found an article about 1893 and why Pepsi has decided to launch it. 1893 is made with a "bold combination" of real sugar, sparkling water, and kola nuts to try and give consumers a new and "unexpected" taste. The year 1893 is significant in Pepsi's history because it is the year that Caleb Bradham, a drugstore owner in North Carolina, started selling his own drink known as "Brad's drink", that eventually became Pepsi.

This soda is targeted at millennials, who are said to care about "really long, legally worded brand names". With that in mind, Pepsi is including "from the Makers of PepsiCola" on the packaging below the product name. I think that this is creative and definitely appealing to millennials, especially with the hipster/rustic packaging look. The main reason for the creation and launch of this new product has to do with the long-term decline in soda consumption. I think it is important for Pepsi to consider these social factors, and use them as fuel to come up with new products that will appeal to consumers who are more health conscious, Not only are the ingredients of this new cola appealing to millennials and health-conscious individuals, the packaging has an "earthy" vibe to it. To me, that screams healthy (well in this case, healthier).

This topic reminded me of our constant discussion in class about how brands need to always keep up with the times and change themselves according to what consumers want and need. If consumers shift toward healthier livings, brands need to adjust accordingly. Moving to this new line of soda helps Pepsi stay true to their historical roots and classic nature, while appealing to millennials and working with societal trends. This would have been an interesting element to add to my Brand Analytics Assignment if I weren't writing about their competitor!

Worker Experience > Customer Experience?

In a recent article on the American Marketing Association website, Nick Romano, a marketing news writer, discussed how "worker experience" is becoming increasingly important within companies. In class, we are constantly talking about the consumer experience. Even yesterday, my group determined that if we could say one thing about marketing in today's society and how it's evolving, we would say, "consumer". It is so drilled in our minds that as marketers, we must constantly cater to our consumers. What are their wants, needs, and desires? Now, this article is making me question that thinking, and wonder if the worker's experience is just as, or even more important.

So, what exactly is the "worker experience"? The article discusses how millennials are taking over the workforce, accounting for the largest percentage of the U.S. workforce. In addition, "research shows that the majority of millennials want to work in a place where they can make a difference, and that they prefer a collaborative work culture". This is really interesting to me, but not extremely surprising. As a millennial, I agree that a company's work culture is extremely important. At my internship last semester, I worked with individuals who were hardworking, passionate, and enthusiastic about their jobs. Their positive energy made working in the office even better, and inspired me to always do my best work. They also try to do an "office fun night" every few months, to get together with one another and enjoy drinks and appetizers. This company culture is really important because it improves relationships among co-workers and makes working at the company more enjoyable.

I agree with the article regarding the importance of the worker experience. Although the consumer experience has an overwhelming affect on brand equity and value, I can see why worker experience also does. Think about Google. Google is not only a well-known, well-respected brand because of what it offers consumers. Google is also known to be one of the top places in the world to work, having great programs and opportunities for their employees. If a brand pleases both its workers and its consumers, it seems to have it all. This ties back to our discussions about a brand's inner and outer layer matching up with consumers'. In order for a brand to successfully target their consumers and understand their inner and outer layer, they need to improve and understand their own. And, what better way to do so than improving company culture and their work environment.

I found it interesting when the article mentioned the influence that the worker experience has on customer communication. Giving employees more freedom and leeway when it comes to customer communications could in fact lead to positive results. I think that this article was a good read, and it opened my eyes to the fact that there is a lot more to a brand's evaluation than just their ability to provide a memorable and valuable consumer experience. As a soon to be college graduate looking to enter the marketing field, I am happy to see that there is also a strong emphasis on the worker experience as well!

Will Consumers Ever Stop Fixating on Price?

This week, we've done a lot of discussion about how pricing can influence marketing strategies. People have varying perspectives on how pricing plays a role in consumers' likelihood to purchase items and re-purchase. We discussed EDLP (everyday low pricing), as opposed to Hi-Lo pricing. Which is more effective? I'd have to say that is subjective, as well as dependent on the particular company enabling the strategy. One of the articles we read was entitled How to Stop Customers from Fixating on price, by Marco Bertini and Luc Wathieu. This article had a lot of interesting information about how marketers can utilize pricing strategies to gain an advantage, and stimulate interest from their consumers.

The article discussed four pricing moves that are perceived to be ways to diminish the salience of price in a purchase transaction. The four moves are; use price structure to clarify your advantage, willfully overprice to stimulate curiosity, partition prices to highlight overlooked benefits, and equalize price points to crystallize personal relevance. Of these four points, I think that the first two are extremely relevant and interesting. In our discussions about marketing strategy, it is always stressed that brands clearly let consumers know what their advantage is. What is your brand's USP that will help gain an edge over competition? Not only is it important to understand it as a brand, it is important that consumers understand it. By using price structure to do this, consumers may get a better understanding about why your brand has an advantage that justifies paying more than what you would pay for a competitor's product.

"Willfully overprice to stimulate curiosity": immediately when I read this, I thought of materialism. Although a lot of consumers are price sensitive, many are also materialistic. Why buy a plain black fleece at the store for $30 if you can pay over $100 to have the North Face label? I'm not really sure. Although I am definitely guilty of leaning toward name brand products, it's kind of silly when you think about it. You are paying a significantly larger amount for a product that might be almost the same. This goes for low-involvement products as well as high involvement products. But, even though "materialistic purchases" could be wasting consumers' money, it is putting a lot of money in the hands of these companies.

What exactly is a materialistic purchase? I'd say, it is when a consumer buys a brand over its competitors because their higher pricing because they think it means it has higher value. This is genius for marketers. Why do you think Apple is so successful? Yes, I think that their products work very well for my personal technological needs, but are they REALLY worth the amount of money I pay? Maybe not. I might just be one of those consumers looking to have the "trendiest" and well-known technology, made by the most popular brand in the industry. This reminds me of groupthink. This is a concept I've learned in a number of marketing courses as well as communication courses. People often make decisions, including purchase decisions (in this case), based on what the group of people around them do. If one person buys the most expensive brand because they think it has the highest quality, their friend might do the same thing. This high price will stimulate curiosity, as stated in the article, and lead to another purchase. That curiosity may lead to extensive W.O.M. among consumers. "Why do you pay so much for Apple products?", might lead to a conversation about why Apple products are so great.

So, I don't think consumers will ever stop "fixating" on price. In a world where people often make money to spend money, it's tough to say that prices won't have a large influence on purchase decisions. But, marketers can use this to their advantage and let pricing aid their marketing strategies.

 

What's a "PepsiMoji"?

I came across an interesting article on AdAge.com that talks about Pepsi's campaign that will launch globally in the summer of 2016. Consumers will be able to communicate with "PepsiMojis", which are specifically designed emoji cans/bottles.  These will be used to re-design Pepsi's packaging and hopefully increase consumer engagement by encouraging consumers to "Share it with Pepsi". Their competitor, Coca-Cola, was extremely successful with their "Share-A-Coke" packaging campaign this past summer. Pepsi realized that they needed to do something innovative and big to remain at the top of their industry, competing closely with Coca-Cola.

So what are these "PepsiMojis" all about? Pepsi used Canada last summer as a test market, and consumers loved them. They encouraged consumers to tweet pictures of their Pepsi bottle and used the hashtag #Pepsimoji. They even released a keyboard through the Apple App Store to celebrate "World Emoji Day" on July 17th. Pepsi used Canada as their test market because they are a nation that has multiple official languages- which allowed them to really test to see whether or not emojis are a "universal language". According to a presentation done by Pepsi's CEO Indra Nooyi, "more than 2 billion smartphone users globally send 6 billion emojis daily". This shows that Pepsi is following consumer trends and tapping into an area of smartphone technology that not a lot of brands have.

Pepsi also is segmenting consumers in this campaign, as they created emojis specifically for individual markets. For instance, they created one with a "traditional Thai costume" as well as a soccer-inspired emoji. I think this is a creative way of appealing to a wide range of consumers with different cultures and interests. In addition to the new packaging, they also teamed up with a designer named Jeremy Scott to create "PepsiMoji-inspired sunglasses" (photo is below). I think this is really unique and allows consumers to have another touchpoint with the brand and this new campaign.

Not only did I find this article interesting, I am able to make a connection to our course discussions. We have been talking a lot about differentiation, and the debate over how effective or ineffective it actually is. Coca-Cola was the innovator in this situation, as they decided to re-package their cans last summer with different names during their Share-A-Coke campaign. This was a way of differentiating themselves from other competitors within the industry. Now, Pepsi is trying to keep up with the leader in the industry, Coca-Cola, by following suit and doing a similar kind of campaign. This shows that to some extent, you must imitate your competitors' strategies in order to remain competitive. This relates directly to our class discussions from the past few weeks, and shows how it is often important to have points of similarity in addition to the points of difference.


  

Points of Differentiation and Parity: A Balancing Act

In class this week, we had a lot of discussion about points of differentiation and points of parity. Differentiation is often thought of as the "typical" key to achieving a competitive advantage. However, there is a lot of debate about whether or not differentiation is actually the key to a company's success. It's interesting that we have been discussing this in Marketing Seminar, because in my Business Strategy course we've also been talking about different business strategies and how they yield a competitive advantage. After all of this discussion on the topic, I've come to the realization that businesses must be able to balance points of difference as well as points of parity in order to succeed in today's marketplace. 

One of the articles we had to read for this week was called Three Questions You Need to Ask About Your Brand, by Kevin Lane Keller, Brian Sternthal, and Alice Tybout. This article opened my eyes to the fact that brands really need both differentiation and parity to succeed. Prior to all of these discussions, I always thought that to succeed in the marketplace, you need to have an extremely unique idea- something that no one's thought of before. Think about it, shows like Shark Tank are all about entrepreneurship and coming up with that "genius" idea that will make someone's life so much easier. But, is it really about that? Is coming up with some unheard of product going to create a large profit and business success? After reading this article and discussing it in class, I'm going to have to say no.

In the article, the authors say "conventional wisdom says creating a brand is about differentiating your product. Think again" (81). I thought it was interesting how the word conventional was used, because I do agree that this is the conventional way of thinking. Why would a brand want to enter a market where there are a lot of fierce competitors already? I think the answer is this: consumers buy products they are familiar with. Imagine not only having to create brand awareness and recognition, but having to completely educate consumers on your new product innovation. Personally, I'm the kind of person who isn't fond of change. I stick to products and services I'm comfortable with and fully understand. I'm the kind of consumer that takes some convincing to try a new product. So, how can brands use this to their advantage? They need to figure out what industry they want to enter, and thoroughly investigate their competition.

The article also gave a great example about Motorola failing to launch a new product into the marketplace back in 1994. They created the "Envoy", a personal digital assistant that was supposed to act similarly to a pager. However, this product failed because it "lacked sufficient points of parity to belong to any existing category. Without a clear frame of reference, consumers weren't sure why they should purchase the product" (82).  This example shows how consumers aren't always likely to go outside of their comfort zone.  By understanding an industry and why competitors are succeeding, I think that companies can generate ideas on their product ideas and how they can market them in a way that makes sense to consumers.

The authors suggest that brands ask themselves two important questions when determining whether or not their points of difference are sufficient: "Are they desirable to customers, and can you deliver them?". When you have some genius idea you need to make sure that it is one that customers need and want, and that you're able to follow through with them.

Overall, I thought this article was really interesting and it opened my eyes to the "dangers" of differentiation. It isn't all about being 100% unique in today's marketplace, and brands need to understand that. Being the best doesn't necessarily mean being different or being similar, it takes a balancing act of the two. 

The Superbowl is for Advertisements, Right?

I know I'm a few days late, but I wanted to talk about this past Sunday's Superbowl. Because I'm not an avid sports fan and the Patriots didn't make it to the game, watching the Superbowl this year was not thrilling for me. Channeling my inner marketing geek, I always enjoy watching the commercials. I would focus more on the TV when the game was off rather than when it was on (and halftime of course- can't get enough of Beyonce).

There were some pretty good commercials this year, and a few in particular caught my eye. The Doritos Commercial with the puppies going into the grocery store was hilarious, and it used one of the "stereotypical" advertising ideas that we've talked about in class. It seems like brands can always get consumers to interact with their ad if it has a dog or a baby in it. Even though this idea is definitely overdone, it works. At the Superbowl party I was at, everyone was engaged in that commercial and laughing because of the dogs!

This wasn't the only commercial with dogs in it that caught my eye, the Heinz Ketchup commercial was definitely my favorite. The commercial also used cute puppies to get viewers attention, and then had both humor and emotional appeals to it. Using Mini Dachshund puppies, also known as "weiner dogs" to advertise for Ketchup and Mustard is genius to me. I don't know if this is something that has already been done before, but it was new to me. I was laughing at the commercial, and the humor appeal definitely worked. Ketchup and Mustard products are extremely utilitarian in my opinion, and I think that Heinz has to think outside of the box while creating promotional materials. This is an example of a well-established brand having to still engage with consumers, despite their large and loyal following. As we've discussed in class, managing both passive and active loyalists is a key part of a brand's success in marketing. Passive loyalists are useful to a brand because they continuously buy products, but they aren't advocating. Active loyalists not only buy from a brand, they tell other people to do so and are passionate about the brand. By creating this kind of commercial, a passive loyalist of Heinz products, like myself, will start talking about the brand. "Hey, did you see that Heinz commercial with the weiner dogs"? I specifically asked my best friend that, because she has a dog like that and loves them. Next time either of us are in the store shopping for ketchup, Heinz will have top of mind awareness because we will be thinking of their funny Superbowl commercial.

In addition, I referred to the commercial as emotional because although it was humor based, there was some sentiment to it if you are a passionate Mini Dachshund owner. My friend also told me that this commercial made her cry, because it reminded her of her puppy that passed away a few years ago. Although she got sad, she became emotional because of a Heinz commercial- which shows that even very utilitarian products can make you feel something.

I also found it smart that the commercial featured different products within the Heinz brand. I noticed they were promoting regular ketchup, organic ketchup, siracha, and mustard. This was a good way to show that the brand offers a variety of products within the condiment industry. Incorporating the hashtag #MeetTheKetchups was clever and funny. They are creating another touchpoint to social media by using this hashtag. Overall, the Heinz commercial definitely did it for me this year. I know that marketing is the major for me because I care more about Superbowl commercials than I do about the Superbowl itself!

Are Traditional Marketing Concepts Outdated?

This past week in class, we have read a series of articles that examine the traditional marketing concepts people have always gone by. We spent a lot of time questioning how valid these concepts are, and whether or not they should be adjusted. We've talked about what marketing is, and what marketing isn't. I came across this article that discusses how the constantly changing market place in today's day and age leaves some of the "most sacred" marketing concepts out of place.

The article states that "the continued use of antiquated marketing concepts is more of a hazard to managers than a benefit". Wow- is this really true? The "outdated" tool discussed in the article is STP- which is segmentation, targeting, and positioning. These three concepts are important in any company's marketing strategy, which we have learned since Principles of Marketing. So- what makes them so hazardous? The author of this article seems to think that media is developed for mass markets, and that targeting isn't a realistic concept. It also mentions how media focuses on having high reach as opposed to targeting, which I don't necessarily agree with. In our course, we always talk about how marketers need to have high frequency by having many touchpoints throughout the Consumer Decision Journey. In my opinion, I think it is more valuable for a firm to reach a smaller, more targeted group of consumers many times, as opposed to a larger group of less-targeted consumers just once. If marketing is all about developing and maintaining relationships with consumers, why wouldn't targeting continue to help that?

The next idea that the author of the article criticizes is positioning. Traditionally, positioning assumed that marketers' products had to fit in some kind of systematic grid. But, like the article said, "human brains don't have niches of compartments". I agree with this, because I think that the idea of positioning is a bit too generalized. It assumes that a product has to fit in a specific and particular box in order to find a valuable place in the market. This reminded me of our term project last semester working with Marketing Management students. Our group had an extremely different idea of what positioning meant- and their idea of it was extremely systematic.

The article also criticizes how STP "assumes inherently that all product and usage knowledge comes from the product or brand, ignoring such currently important factors as product/service experience... word-of-mouth.." I thought that this statement was spot on. We are continuously taught that marketing products or services is about the experience. This ties into the constantly sought-after idea of emotional connection with consumers. By creating a valuable experience for consumers, they can think positively about your brand, advocate for it, and emotionally connect with it: isn't that the goal here?

Listening to your consumers is a crucial part of being successful in marketing- which I think the article illustrated nicely. It is crazy to think that brands don't listen to their consumers, because how can they effectively reach them that way? Like the article said, "customers and prospects are continuously talking about their needs wants and desires". What better way for marketers to understand these needs, wants, and desires than by simply listening?

Overall, this article related to our course material nicely, and it got me thinking about whether or not traditional marketing concepts are outdated. I think that many of these concepts should be altered or re-looked at as time goes on, but the traditional framework of what marketing is seems to hold true even years later.

Marketing: Unethical and Irrelevant?

In this year's Campaign Planning & Management course, I found myself questioning a lot of marketing theory I learned in prior courses. The journals and articles we read in class had very strong points that contradicted a lot of what I thought about marketing. Today, in seminar, I once again found myself questioning everything I had learned. We read a series of extremely controversial articles that claimed marketing to be irrelevant, unethical, and essentially useless. Was it difficult to thoroughly read these articles without wanting to argue every single claim that was made? Yes. Absolutely- after all, I have been interested in marketing since I was a high schooler..

After we read these articles that contradicted almost everything I know (or thought I knew) about marketing, we had a debate. Half of our class was assigned to defend the statement that "marketing is irrelevant and unethical", and half of the class had to argue against them. With my luck, I was put on the side that had to argue for marketing being unethical. This was an extremely difficult debate, because I am completely against this statement!

While my team gathered our supporting claims and information to back up our argument, I realized that there are probably a lot of people out there who disagree with the overall idea of being a marketer. But on the flip side, marketing is EVERYWHERE! How can the world exist without marketing? During the debate, one of our opponents mentioned how a bunch of students in our class were wearing name brand clothing. That is marketing! A cashier standing by their register greeting you, that is marketing! There was a particular statement in the Would You Want Your Daughter to Marry a Marketing Man? article that I took offense to; "...perhaps marketing men have sold everybody everything, except themselves and the significance of marketing".  That is like a stab to the heart, after being passionate about this topic for so long.

Do people question other industries this much? I know that people will always need doctors, teachers, etc- but are there other careers that people question the validity of? How can people doubt the importance of marketing if it helps consumers emotionally engage with your brand? It doesn't get much deeper than that. Think about it, as a result of seeing the Duracell Commercial where a father is in the military and records his voice (using a Duracell battery) to comfort his daughter while he is gone, people are emotionally connecting to a highly utilitarian product. In our debate today, students mentioned how for basic life necessities, marketing might not be necessary. But, marketing enhances the purchases of even basic necessities like batteries. Marketing not only helps businesses succeed, it creates value and enhances consumer experiences all the time!

Creating Value > Making a Profit ?

We've talked about a wide variety of topics during the first three discussions of our Marketing Seminar course. Because this semester's class has more students than our previous course, it makes for a more interesting discussion with brand new ideas and insight. I am excited to see where our class discussions will go from here! Yesterday, we discussed some of the bold and interesting statements of Peter Drucker, a management consultant, author, and educator. His insights on the marketing industry were out of the ordinary and gave my classmates and I a lot to think about.

In the beginning of yesterday's class, Professor Spotts had each student write a quote from Drucker's article on the board that he or she found interesting or surprising. Doing this activity not only improved my understanding of the Ascendancy of Marketing reading by Peter Drucker, it forced me to look at the quotes from a different point of view. The quote that I put on the board stimulated a lot of discussion and I'd say debate- because the statement was quite controversial. The quote I chose was "...profit is not the purpose of business and that the concept of profit maximization is not only meaningless but dangerous". WOW- that is quite the controversial statement in my opinion.

As I'm nearing the end of my undergraduate business education, it seems like all of my professors have constantly stressed the importance of making a profit in a business. What's the goal of a business (I thought)? To make money. How can a business succeed? If it has money. I began to re-evaulate my thoughts on these questions that I previously thought had such simple answers. If the goal of a business isn't to make a profit, then what is it? Our class discussed how the main goal of a business must be to create value. Based on what I know about marketing, this makes a whole lot of sense.

I think that businesses need profits to get started. Until they can get a strong customer base and figure out how to really get engaged with their customers, they'll need the backing of a good profit to stay in business. One of our classmates mentioned small businesses when talking about this topic, and how they are very customer-oriented, as opposed to profit oriented. I can definitely attest to this, because I work in a family owned jewelry store in Wilbraham. The owners are extremely generous and care much more about pleasing customers and creating a valuable experience than they do about making a profit. For instance, they will often give away jewelry cleaner to people when they visit for the first time, or do a jewelry repair for free. This not only shows that the store cares about its customers, it creates a positive experience and will create repeat customers. These value creating situations will cause people to come back in the store and buy things, which will in turn create a profit. I think profit maximization can come naturally if you are customer driven and create value for people who do business with you.

"Taste the Feeling"

As I mentioned in my first blog post, I recently followed Marketing Dive, a Twitter account that provides daily marketing news on various topics. One of their recent tweets about Coca-Cola interested me and reminded me of a few marketing concepts. The article discusses how Coca-Cola is recently trying to unify all of their different products to enable a "one brand" approach. Their new tagline for this campaign is "Taste the Feeling", which I think is clever and intriguing. Coca-Cola has always geared their marketing efforts to show that drinking their soda can be a hedonic, valuable experience. Focusing on the experience that comes from drinking the soda helps them establish a connection with consumers, and also allows consumers to connect with the brand.

The campaign will be released all through 2016 on an international level. The CMO of Coca-Cola, arcos de Quinto, expressed that their previous campaign called "Open Happiness" didn't capture the simple pleasures of drinking cola. Although I found this campaign to be creative and interactive, the brand has experienced a decline in revenue growth in recent quarters. Personally, I think the decline may be due to the fact that consumers are moving toward healthier lifestyles. I know that for myself personally, I have completely cut out soda from my diet because of how unhealthy it is. If Coca-Cola brings back the simple, old-fashioned idea of drinking soda on a hot day (as mentioned in the article), they might increase their revenue. Like we have learned in prior marketing courses, brands have to have a story behind all of their marketing strategies, because that will ultimately lead to consumer engagement and brand equity.

The "anthem" for this new campaign connects Coca-Cola with a variety of words/activities, such as "stories with Coca-Cola", and "Coca-Cola with smiles". I think this is very clever because it ties into the overall campaign idea of tasting the feeling and connects back to the emotional and hedonic value of the product. I think by also showing these phrases, it will generate a lot of brand association. For instance, people will think of Coca-Cola when they hear or experience certain words/things.

I think it is very smart of Coke to have this campaign represent all of their products, as opposed to having separate marketing strategies for Diet Coke, Coke Zero, etc. This will prevent product cannibalism, because no one Coke product is being marketed more than another. In addition, it will strengthen the overall brand name. Although Coca-Cola is a well-known, international brand with a strong reputation, they need to continue to reinforce it. Bringing all of their products together and promoting them as one brand will strengthen brand equity and brand value.

Overall, this new campaign seems like it will be successful in the months to come. I can't say that I will go out and start drinking soda again as a result of this campaign, but it definitely makes me view the Coca-Cola brand in a positive light.

The Beginning of the End

Hello readers! For those of you who don't know me, my name is Katie Farrell and I am finishing my degree in Marketing Communications/Advertising this semester. I am the Co-President of the Western New England University Marketing Association, member of the Class of 2016 Council, member of the Mortar Board Senior Honor Society, and a Student Assistant in the Marketing & External Affairs Department on campus. Off campus, I work part time at Quinn's Fine Jewelry, located in Wilbraham, MA. I help with marketing efforts at the store as well as sell jewelry. My marketing perspective and knowledge comes in handy while I work in this retail environment. 

I can't believe today marks the beginning of my last semester of college. The past few years have flown by. I can remember when I took my very first marketing course, and here I am in one of my last. Marketing Seminar is a course aimed to tie together different marketing concepts we've learned in the past few years and help prepare us to enter the workforce. This blog will be maintained throughout the semester during my time in Marketing Seminar. My posts will be about a variety of marketing topics, stemming from our class journal readings, class discussions, or everyday life! I am looking forward to this course and seeing what the semester has in store. 

Over winter break, I followed a Twitter account called "Marketing Dive", which provides daily marketing news on social media, digital strategy, online content, video, advertising, branding, mobile, location, targeting, SEO, and more! Now that I am beginning to apply for jobs in the marketing field, and will potentially have one in the near future, I think it is important to stay up to date with marketing news. Marketing is a field that's constantly changing, and I'm interested in keeping up with the latest stories and topics. This Twitter account will definitely provide me with ideas and insight for future blog posts. I think it's also important to utilize social networking platforms for business purposes in addition to personal use, especially because they are so prevalent in today's business world. 

I will be blogging on a weekly basis, and I will try to do so twice a week. Maintaining a blog has been a requirement for two of my previous courses here at WNE, so I am beginning to get the hang of it all. Blogging has been an interesting experience for me, especially because it helps me generate my thoughts and ideas for different topics. Stay tuned for my next blog post!