The Product Color Matrix & Peripheral Cues

Today in class, we were given a set of commercials for a particular product. We then had to identify the color of the product (according to the Product Color Matrix), and then think of whether the product requires a central route to persuasion or a peripheral route.When we went over this concept in the beginning of the semester, I don't think I had a full understanding of it. I'm going to try to break it down right now.

To backtrack, the Product Color Matrix is a useful tool to classify products based on their level of risk and the consumer's objective for purchase. The product my group had was perfume, which is considered a "Red Good". These are products that give consumers an opportunity to feel good. When thinking about ELM and attitudes, consumers follow the "feel, learn, do" order when it comes to red products. Red products have a higher risk, and they are considered to be expressive toys.

The product my group was assigned was perfume- Chanel No. 5 in particular. Through watching a few of their recent commercials, we were able to get a better understanding about red products. This kind of product requires visual peripheral cues, as opposed to images (like many other peripheral cues). The peripheral visual cues used in the commercial were things like the attractive female, elegant and chic style, Paris (familiar, classy location). The overall idea for perfume is to feel good about what you are wearing- because it is your scent. That is why this kind of product starts with feeling.

The purpose of these peripheral cues is to keep consumers interested and engaged. With all of the distractions out there, it can be tough to retain your target market's attention. These peripheral cues are aimed at keeping consumers engaged and focused on what you are trying to tell them. Because this product is not a functional tool, these consumers need less of an "outer layer" explanation on the product attributes and features. They need more of an "inner layer" focus, relying on feelings and attitudes.

It's interesting to realize that peripheral routes of persuasion work better for particular products and particular consumers. I think that as a consumer, I connect easily with brands when there is a peripheral cue. For instance, I can recall Geico commercials because of the gecko- the peripheral cue. Like the Old Spice commercials we watched in class, there are various peripheral cues, including the shirtless man, that make me remember this commercial.

Can these peripheral cues also be considered touchpoints? For instance, if there is a celebrity endorser for a brand, and they use that same person across various marketing platforms, there is a stronger likelihood that consumers will interact with their brand. All of these touchpoints have consumers becoming aware and thinking about your product, service, or idea. Using peripheral cues seems like a good idea for brands, because they not only gain the attention of their target consumers, they can create an increased amount of touchpoints.

Social Media Marketing for Dummies

In class on Thursday, the presenting group discussed the importance of social media in a brand's marketing strategy. BUT- they made it very clear, as did the author of our Brand Media Strategy course trade book: Social media is NOT a strategy. It is wrong to refer to it as that.

Social media plays an important role in a brand's marketing strategy, but it is not THE strategy. Our professor accentuated this statement and made it very clear. No longer is social media considered a cutting-edge, new, trendy marketing strategy. It is just another necessary element of a company's regular communication mix. We also discussed how years ago, companies were fixated on web pages and that was the "hot" marketing tool. If a company had a website, they were ahead of the game. Then, it turned into social media being the marketing "fixation".

Our Professor said something that really stuck with me in class- "If you treat social media as a strategy, you're only focusing on the outer layer". Only focusing on your brand's outer layer will never allow you to emotionally involve your consumers. Standing out from other brands is important to be able to do, especially in today's day and age. By using social media as your main strategy, you aren't differentiating your brand.

Just having a presence on social media isn't enough- but having a strong and creative presence on social media? Now we're talking. Brands need to focus on the inner layer. Giving your consumers content and marketing that digs deep into the meaning and purpose of your brand is important. Don't just tell your consumers why your product is the best- make them believe it through creative copy (always going back to that Empirical Generalization).

Another social media marketing tip I gained from our course reading is this: "Instead of collecting additional new fans, brands had to think about how to keep them engaged and bring them back to their page" (156). When I thought about my interactions with brands on social media, I found this to be extremely true. How many brands do you "like" on Facebook once, and never interact with their page again? For me, the answer is a lot. Marketers can't judge their success on social media based on how many likes they are getting on their page- it has to be by how many of those "likers" are actually engaging with it. It's about quality, not quantity, and this holds true for social media as well.

                        

Big T vs. small-t Truths

In class today, we continued to talk about storybranding and its importance for marketing strategies. A group of my classmates gave a presentation about the most important concepts from this week's readings, but we never got around to talk about a concept I found both interesting and confusing. This is the Big T vs. Small-t Truth idea, which is talked about in chapter 20 of our Storybranding 2.0 book. To better help myself understand this, I thought I would blog about it.

This section of the chapter talked about how successful story writers go along with the principle that "truth is not what is said, but what is believed". This concept seems very valid for marketing and the whole concept of emotional involvement. Consumers believe brands that generate emotions from them. If a commercial makes you cry (like the Duracell one I blogged about last week), you're probably going to believe whatever message is being told. It's almost as if brands want to make consumers vulnerable. By generating these strong emotions, it seems like they're using that as a persuasive tactic.

The small-t truth, according to our book, is objective, a provable fact or arguable opinion, that is explicitly stated and directly communicated. I connect this to the brand's outer layer. This could be a commercial explicitly stating a product's features or benefits. It's what is "obviously" stated or told to you as a consumer, and not much thought is needed to process it or understand it. The Big T truth, on the other hand, appeals to the non-rational side of consumers. It is also said that we know these kinds of truths based on personal perceptions and beliefs. I connect this kind of truth with a brand's inner layer. These truths are not explicitly stated, instead they are to  be interpreted by consumers based on their inner values and beliefs.

So, what I think this means, is that the Big T truth is the more important truth for consumers to understand. By having to interpret and analyze it (without it being explicitly stated), consumers are engaging and getting more emotionally involved with the product or brand. For a company like Nike, the small-t truth might be that their shoes are the best for athletes' needs. The Big T truth could be that Nike focuses on inspiring every athlete in the world to be their best. It's a deeper, more emotional kind of message than simply stating the product's unique attributes and features. This relates back to Unique Value Proposition vs. Unique Selling Proposition.

Overall, I found these concepts to be a little confusing when I first read them, but breaking them down was very helpful. I think I've gained a better understanding of them, and I hope my explanations were helpful for you readers as well!

The Importance of Storybranding

In the past couple weeks, we have been learning about storybranding and its importance in marketing. My group members and I led a class discussion on Thursday focusing on the second half of the book "Storybranding 2.0". The main concepts we touched upon were the inner and outer layers of both brands and prospects. Prior to reading this book, I had no idea that brands try to tell stories when marketing to consumers. However, I now understand that "storybranding gets to the heart of why your brand exists", as stated in the book.

Storytelling is a tactic, but storybranding is where the brand itself takes on a character. In order for a brand to successfully appeal to consumers, they need to have a thorough, deep understanding of their values and beliefs. This is known as the brand's inner layer. The ideal target market is one that has similar values and beliefs as the brand itself. This concept is interesting to me- is it always true though? Think about it. Every purchase decision you make, is it based on your beliefs and values? Does this concept hold true for low involvement, utilitarian products? For instance, when you go to the store to buy toothpaste, are you really thinking about your personal values and beliefs and lining those up with the beliefs of the brand you're thinking of buying?

I understand the general scope of the inner and outer layers, but I think this concept is a bit exaggerated in some cases. I think the idea of inner layers of the brand and consumers lining up is obviously ideal, but I can't imagine that this would happen with all kinds of products. I can imagine that with a high value product or service, such as a college education, prospective consumers (or in this case, students) look deeper into the brand's values and beliefs (the college's). For example, Catholic students with strong religious beliefs may choose to go to a Catholic college.

The concepts from the Storybranding 2.0 book make a lot of sense and are extremely strategic. However, I just don't know how realistic they are for certain brands. Even though consumers might not necessarily look deep into a brand's beliefs or values, it is a good starting point for a brand to accurately define itself and thoroughly understand where it stands in the marketplace.

Get your Tissues Ready!

Over the weekend, I saw a Duracell commercial that brought tears to my eyes. Last week, I was questioning whether or not a utilitarian product can offer emotional or hedonic benefits, especially through advertising. This commercial shows a young girl going through the hardship of having a parent deployed at war. Because of Duracell batteries, she was able to listen to her dad's voice when she missed him. This is the perfect example of an advertisement that is for a utilitarian product, but can still generate an emotional response from consumers.

Check out the video here:

Another Connection to the Consumer Decision Journey

In the beginning of the semester, we studied the consumer decision journey in depth. We have learned that it is important for marketers to influence consumers at every phase of the consumer decision journey. This consumer decision journey is always referred to during class, and it seems like any marketing concept or topic connects back to it.

Since we started reading Storybranding 2.0, we are starting to learn about the importance that storytelling has on marketing. Storybranding allows marketers to connect with consumers and empathize with them. Many storybranding concepts can be connected to the consumer decision journey. The consumer decision journey begins with a consumer having an initial consideration set. Brands might be part of a consumer's consideration set based on their outer layer or inner layer. The outer layer is composed of the brand's physical attributes, and the inner layer is a deeper level, and it focuses on values or beliefs the brand is associated with. These are attributes of the brand that will carry over into the second step of the decision journey, which is where information gathering and shopping occurs. The story that is told to the consumer, whether it be in a commercial, or print ad, can have a big impact on this part of the journey as well. If the story "hits home" or triggers an emotional connection with consumers, they are likely to choose your brand.

The next part of the consumer decision journey is the moment of purchase, which is where the consumer decides which brand is right for them. This can also connect to storybranding because if the inner/outer layer of the prospect (the consumer making the purchase decision) line up with the inner/outer layer of the brand, they will use that to make their purchase decision.

The Consumer Pathway can also be directly connected with the Consumer Decision Journey. Both of these models show phases that consumers go through while making purchases/thinking about making them. The Consumer Pathway begins with product news and awareness, then goes along to emotional engagement and involvement made with the brand, followed by active consideration. These correlate with the first two steps of the Consumer Decision Journey, where consumers are considering brands and evaluating them. These are critical points for marketers to influence consumers' opinions. Emotional engagement is a big part of this, because it can relate to storybranding. By giving consumers' messages in the form of a story, they are likely to have stronger emotional engagement with them.  The "convert to action" stage of the Pathway lines up with the moment of purchase stage of the Consumer Decision Journey. The final stages of the consumer pathway; improve the experience, reward brand users (relationship building), and enabling WOM are part of the post-purchase experience that takes place in the Consumer Decision Journey. This is where opinions about brands and relationships are formed based on the purchase decision that took place.

..and More Oreos!

Today in class, we continued to dig deeper into our investigation about Oreo cookies. I can't say I minded this- because food is fun to talk about in class (and eat!). I find that I enjoy talking about products I have a personal interest in or connection with. I've always loved oreos, so I have a lot to say about the product.

Our assignment over the weekend was to pass along the Oreo survey to three people. I was surprised to see that most of the answers to the associated words portion were the same/similar to what I had put. This goes to show that people have similar thoughts about the product in general. I would be curious to see if consumers thought of Oreos when I named some of the words mentioned such as "cream filling" or "cookie sandwich". Oreo does seem to have achieved top of mind awareness with many consumers.

I think our activities these past few days with Oreos can relate to the marketing concept of consumer motivations. We did some in-depth research on what consumers' needs and motivations are for purchasing Oreo cookies. It's interesting to me that consumers have such specific motivations for buying/using a product even if it is one that you would consider to  be low involvement. I would typically associate a cookie as being a low involvement product, but our discussions show how much hedonic and emotional value Oreos actually provide.

We also looked at the Hierarchy of benefits and determined the product attributes, functional benefits, and emotional benefits are for Oreo. I thought the Hierarchy of Benefits was interesting and I don't remember that concept from previous marketing courses. I was curious to see if the Hierarchy of Benefits is applicable for all consumer goods? After doing our investigation about Oreos, we know that they provide both hedonic and utilitarian value to consumers. Are other food items considered to have emotional benefits like oreos do? Or, is it because they are a dessert? Our activity has triggered some questions like these, and I would be curious to see what our class activity would be like if we did it for less of a "special" product or food item. It would be cool to see the activity done with a basic snack product- like chips or popcorn. I think that because people get excited about Oreos and desserts, it makes for an interesting product to research and investigate further.

           

Oreos!

Today in class, we did a fun activity. Our professor had us each put on a blindfold, and then gave us a plastic bag with an unknown object in it. When it was placed in front of us, we had to use our senses of touch, feel, and taste to identify it. In about 10 seconds, many of us knew that it was in fact, an oreo!

Oreo is an instantly recognizable brand to many. I was excited when an oreo was placed in front of me, because it brings back so many childhood memories (not to mention it is delicious). Oreo, one of the Nabisco brands, has successfully created a product that has such a strong hedonic value. When people see, think of, or eat oreos, they are brought back to that childhood moment of eating oreos around the kitchen table. Oreo has successfully found a way to bring out people's emotional and nostalgic side, all from one little cookie!

So how does Oreo do this? I'm not quite sure. People have their own products that they used as a kid that become a part of their regular adult life as well. But, oreos are different- and I think this is because they are more of a product that people want, as opposed to what they need. They are dessert snack item, not by any means a necessity. Oreos have a special place for people because as young kids, they may have served as a reward. "If you eat all of your vegetables, you'll get dessert"- this is a common line my parents told my sisters and I over and over again. In many cases, that dessert was oreos with glass of milk.

There are many products that I had in my childhood that bring back memories. Juicy Juice, Hoodsie cups, both are things I loved having as a kid. What I think makes oreos so special is that they are a delicious treat for people at any age. I don't have any urge to drink Juicy Juice (it's obviously a beverage for children), but I still love a good oreo. This product doesn't just have one distinct target market. Although Oreo may try to market specific demographics for certain campaigns, I think the general target market is "oreo lovers".

When trying to relate this activity to a marketing concept, I think right to emotional appeals. This kind of emotional appeal seems different. Without seeing any sort of advertisement or promotional piece, I had an emotional connection with this brand. Their product is able to evoke emotion in people without even doing much. This makes me wonder, do brands have to continuously try and provide hedonic value and generate emotional responses, or is one time enough? If I feel nostalgia from this product one time, will I always feel that way about it?