We think, therefore, we are. What do you think?

Archive for December, 2009

Dec 29th, 2009 by Fred Burt

As good as your word in 2010

Language has become slippery, tricky, legally grey, politically charged, deliberately unclear.

Which is exactly why the word, written and spoken, is a huge opportunity for brands. The world is crying out for clarity in language. No hiding, no wiggle room, no deliberate grey. Black and white, please.

2010 has to be the year when businesses, private and public, big and small, look to re-establish trust. Clarity will be key, and the word will be the means to deliver this clarity.

But being clear is not easy. It requires discipline, hard work and, in case we forget, a proposition that really motivates your audience.

We will be working for many utilities, financial service providers, telecoms and public sector clients this year. Our primary task will be to make their statements, websites, bills, and other information-rich interfaces more effective.

But actually, we’ll be giving them the ultimate proof point that they mean it when they say to their customers they are going to be more open. That they’re as good as their word.

Add Comment.

Permalink

Dec 28th, 2009 by Irene Etzkorn

Plain talk replaces police lingo

I cheered when I read that police departments around the nation are rapidly dropping their “10 code” lingo in favor of Plain Talk radio transmissions. The events of September 11 precipitated the changeover when dozens of emergency responders couldn’t communicate because each had their own set of coded messages.

It is a classic example of how “insider jargon” can be both glamorous and dangerous at the same time. I admit I loved Adam-12 and other television shows and movies that glamorized police jargon—after all responding to a 10-22 sounds a bit more intriguing than chasing a burglar. Speaking in code is fun when it makes you feel part of a club. But, it can be dangerous when it becomes exclusionary in a moment of crisis.

I’m hopeful that the medical profession will jump on this bandwagon. It’s disconcerting when doctors and nurses ask, “How are you doing since the cabbage?” when you have just had major surgery and haven’t eaten in days. Most open heart surgery patients don’t know that a Coronary Bypass is called a cabbage by doctors and nurses (some shortening of Coronary Arterial Bypass and Graft).

So, over and out for now.

Add Comment.

Permalink

Dec 23rd, 2009 by Howard Belk

A Saab Story

Originally presented on Portfolio.com
Howard Belk, a marketing executive and Saab aficionado, laments the passing of the quirky Swedish car brand—or, as he calls it, the first “Smart Car.”

Entrusting the Saab brand to General Motors has been a disaster. Instead of protecting the proprietary features that define Saab, GM has shared brand differentiators with competitive GM brands and even now intends to sell Saab technologies to Beijing Automotive Industry Holdings Co. Ltd.

Not only has GM made no apparent effort to understand the essence of Saab and what revs the Saab buyer, they have also imposed the endless GM design vetting process (a.k.a. an innovation-killing time machine) on Saab’s idiosyncratic aesthetic. The results have been disastrous.

This is especially sad to the small and, yes, quirky segment of drivers who mourn the killing of Saab. These are not the “car guys” who have welcomed the resurrection of the Mustang and Charger. And they’re not the drivers of generic Toyotas and Hondas.

For many years, Saab held the unique position of the quirky car for intelligent drivers (or, better said, the intelligent car for quirky drivers). Like the Karmann Ghia or Citroen, Saab has never yearned to be the status symbol that a BMW or Mercedes is. One of a kind, created by the Swedish air-force design team, it was for owners that were involved with their cars at a level deeper than the mere cosmetic. It conferred a status more cerebral than temporal.

My colleague Ben’s dad was an early serial-Saab aficionado. He bought three in the ’60s alone, each more refined than the last, but all quintessential Saabs. He is one of the stalwarts who, in return for the Saab experience, measured and poured their own mixture of oil and gas into three-cylinder, two-stroke, smoky engines that rumbled like gravel in a metal bucket. He raced his first Saab 93 on the frozen lakes of New Hampshire and profited from its rare front-wheel drivetrain. In later years he graduated to a ‘95 wagon (with a more civil four-stroke engine) and later the Sonnet sports car. As Saab brand values were compromised over the past 15 years, he’s reluctantly abandoned the brand.

Born in Scandinavia, it is no wonder that the further north one ventures, the more Saabs one sees on the road. More than 20 years ago I cruised over countless Vermont back roads in my own first car, a silver-blue 1986 Saab 900 Turbo and felt part of a small community of mountain-loving individualists. The car accelerated deliberately from a standing start, but as it hit third gear the turbo charger engaged, slamming me back in the cockpit. Tight in the steering, it swooped through mountain curves and never faltered in the Vermont snow.

The aviation engineers at Saab had a very different way of thinking about cars. Their early designs were an antidote for the bourgeois design sensibility propagated by the Detroit marketing machine. And the latest concept cars, stalled in Swedish design studios, show a contemporary evolution of that singular aesthetic.

This is totally unscientific, but I think Saab was the brand of choice for more designers, writers, artists, and nonconformists than any other automobile. It seems every architect I know had a Saab at some time or other. On the road we were members of a cult and flashed our highs and winked as we purred by each other. Designers everywhere will surely lament the demise of this iconic creation.

Saab was the first “Smart Car.” For many years Saabs were marketed as “The Most Intelligent Car Ever Built.” And the aircraft designers did think different. Beginning with their mental model of drivers as pilots, they dubbed Saab interiors as cockpits. They incorporated dramatic aerodynamic principles into form factors. Considering Swedish environmental conditions, they engineered the first mass-produced, front-wheel drive. Lovers of g-force, they introduced the first mass-produced turbo-charged engine. Wary of crashes, they were a passenger-safety leader. And accustomed to very little in the way of constraints on turns, dives, and rolls, they focused more on handling than acceleration.

But typical of engineers, Saab never exhibited a genius for telling their own story—or even recognizing the plot. Saab historically eschewed crass commercialism and never claimed to be a badge brand. But they haven’t done the “indie thing” as well as Subaru. They seemed to draft in the safety promise of Volvo but never claimed it for themselves. They couldn’t connect the dots between the jet-engine expertise and a superior passenger-car experience. They missed the boat on leveraging their one-of-a-kind styling, their Swedish provenance, their odd name (that conjures tears now more than ever) and all the other singular parts of the brand and experience.

Legend has it that more than 50 percent of prospective buyers who test-drove a Saab bought one. But today they can’t win over a critical mass of buyers. According to published results, only 371 Saabs were sold in the United States in November. Compare that with 18,500 Lexus vehicles sold in the same month and the severities of the consumer disconnect comes into sharp relief. Obviously, Saab no longer attracts buyers to the showroom. It appears the Volkswagen Beetle, the Smart Car, or the Cooper Mini fills the market for a low-volume, quirky brand.

As I type, the Swedish government is scrambling squadrons of financial engineers to rescue this brand. To be successful, the new owners of Saab must answer mission-critical questions. “What exactly would the world lose if Saab goes away tomorrow? We know what Saab does, but why does it do it?”

If the rebirth of the MG, Mini, and Lotus demonstrate anything, it’s that this brand can reemerge as relevant and credible with the right brand strategy. But if it is ever to rise above today’s wreckage, it must define a brand purpose. This brand needs to reconnect with its Swedish heritage. It must stand for intelligent design. It must embrace environmental values, use recyclable materials, introduce hybrid models, and adopt sustainable practices. Become a green Saab. Get smart again.

Add Comment.

Permalink

Dec 22nd, 2009 by Gail Nelson

Qtel and Siegel+Gale: ‘Fueling The Senses’ of Qatari Consumers

Dubai - United Arab Emirates (21 December, 2009): Siegel+Gale, the global strategic branding consultancy (Omnicom Group) has been working closely over the past several months with Qtel Qatar on developing the company’s new brand promise and refreshed look and feel that was revealed on December 6th.

The “Fuel Your Senses” brand theme was launched across the country after an intensive unbranded “teaser” phase over the recent Eid holiday that captured people’s imaginations and sense of curiosity.

Speaking for Siegel+Gale Middle East, Managing Director Tarek Sultani commented: “As one of the region’s leading companies, Qtel realizes the critical role that brand plays in engaging customer’s hearts and minds and building loyalty, especially in the service sector. Our goal was to reenergize the Qtel brand while maintaining a link to Qtel’s heritage, its pivotal role in the development of Qatar and its unmatched understanding of the Qatari market and consumers.”

“In the Middle East, there is a misconception that “branding” is about simply changing the logo. The way Siegel+Gale and Qtel have approached this brand development program is an excellent example of how an organization can use the brand to engage internal staff, create consistency in external communication, and reshape customer’s perceptions of the organization – all without having to change their logo. “

“Ultimately, it is about defining a promise and aligning all of the organization’s functions and resources to deliver on that promise.” Sultani concluded.

During the teaser phase, consumers across Qatar were engaged by the campaign in unbranded form along with a mystery website at www.fuelyoursenses.qa. Many of the activities connected to the launch have been designed to stimulate different senses, whether through massage chairs placed across Qatar (“a sense of peace”) or through the wide range of water-based activities at beaches and along the Corniche (“a sense of adventure”).

Dr. Nasser Marafih, Chief Executive Officer, Qtel, said: “Every act of communication offers a new sensation for people – excitement, satisfaction, surprise or peace of mind – and we really wanted a brand campaign that embodied that. All of our services help to engage people’s senses and emotions, and ‘Fuel Your Senses’ really captures that.”

Qtel revealed itself as the company behind the activities on December 6th when the “Fuel Your Senses” TV commercials developed by Adabisc were aired.

About Siegel+Gale

Siegel+Gale is one of the world’s premier strategic branding companies. Since Alan Siegel founded it in 1969, the firm has applied the art and science of simplicity to create branding programs that have helped many of the world’s best known organizations excel. Driven by its philosophy of Simple is Smart, Siegel+Gale has led the way in bringing innovation to the corporate branding field, including transforming complex, incomprehensible customer communications into clear language; helping clients create distinctive brand voices across all their communications; transporting brands onto the Internet; and aligning the brand experience for customers with the brand promise.

Siegel+Gale has full-service offices in New York, Los Angeles, London, and Dubai and strategic partnerships around the world. It is part of the Omnicom Group Inc., (NYSE-OMC) (www.omnicomgroup.com), a leading global marketing and corporate communications company.

For further media information from S+G Middle East, please contact:
Natalia Rawlinson
Siegel+Gale Middle East
Dubai Media City
Tel: +971 4 425 8600
Mobile: +971 50 457 8912
E-mail: nrawlinson@siegelgale.com

About Qtel

Qatar Telecom (Qtel) is the telecommunications service provider licensed by the Supreme Council of Information and Communication Technology (ictQATAR) to provide both fixed and mobile telecommunications services in the state of Qatar. Qtel has a presence in 17 countries and is committed to expansion both in the MENA region and South East Asia. The company’s vision is to be among the top 20 telecommunications companies in the world by 2020.

Contact Details:
Mohammed Mamdouh
Consultant, Wallis Marketing Consultant
T +974 3175617

Comments (2)

Permalink

Dec 16th, 2009 by Rachel Colley

Innovation: the next big thing?

Right now it’s hard to avoid the call for innovation, innovation, innovation.

Across the world business gurus and creative firms are extolling innovation as the answer to a CEO’s prayers for growth during hard times. Type innovation + recession into Google, and you’ll be rewarded with thousands of articles, blogs and tweets encouraging leaders to pile investment into new products, services or business models. The general opinion is that those who invest in innovation will be best primed to succeed as the good times come again. Couple this assumption with the ever growing noise around co-creation and open innovation briefs, and you’d be forgiven for thinking that innovation is the next big thing.

But it’s not really, is it? Companies have always done new things, and they always will. Isn’t innovation in danger of being hyped as the magic pill to justify spend on external advisors in a period of cost-cutting?

We may read a lot about how vital innovation is, but at times the process appears deliberately shrouded in mystique. The debate is not whether innovation is a good strategy, but, instead, how it can be leveraged to offer the best chance of success.

What are the risks as well as the rewards? For every example cited of groundbreaking success there are hundreds of examples of expensive failures: For every Disney during the Great Depression there’s a Go.com (Disney’s failed search portal in case you missed it), for every iPod during the dot-com burst there’s a PalmPilot, for every Ryanair there’s a Silverjet.

I don’t cite these examples to prove that innovation is the wrong path to take, but to emphasise how vital it is for businesses to concentrate on a few simple and impactful ideas which will bring real business impact.

The key to rewarding innovation is not generating hundreds of ideas (actually that’s relatively easy); it’s understanding which ideas will have the greatest impact on your business and be the most worthy of investment. To evaluate the impact of your ideas we suggest assessing their impact against the following five parameters:

1. Brand-building impact: which ideas best fit with your brand positioning? Which ideas build your brand as well as leverage it?

2. Market impact: Which ideas have the greatest competitive stand-out? Which ideas have the most sustainable competitive advantage?

3. Financial impact: Which ideas have the best cost return balance? Which ideas have the greatest market size?

4. Strategic impact: Which ideas best fit your overall strategy? Which ideas best fit our organisational capabilities?

5. Customer impact: Which ideas meet our customers’ needs? Which ideas will have a positive impact at our most critical touch points?

Of course not every idea will excel in all these areas. The point is to get the right balance of impact within your innovation portfolio over time. The purpose of these evaluation areas is not to constrict you when coming up with dazzling ideas, but to give you a solid framework to decide which of your ideas brings your business the most reward and will still be dazzling when faced with the hard commercial reality of the marketplace.

Add Comment.

Permalink

Dec 15th, 2009 by Dona Wong

“Great presentation. You are a rock star!”

That’s what you want to hear after you step down from the podium.

Getting to that point can be painful for many professionals though. Most people create presentations by trial and error, often co-mingling clear and concise copy with complex graphics that yield no benefit to the audience. As in creating any communications piece, attention to clear mechanics, simple style and artistry is key to designing good information graphics. Yet 99 percent of presenters make charts and graphics on the fly, right before show time.

As a result, many presenters lose their audiences in slide after slide of complex charts and graphs that muddy the message they’re trying to deliver.

Working at Siegel+Gale, a brand consultancy and pioneer in simplified communications, I’ve combined my training in information design with simplified communications techniques to help an array of audiences communicate their messages clearly. Whether it’s reporting financial information, creating a client presentation, interactive communication, or customer document, understanding how to design information graphics that complement the message is key to business success.

In my new book, The Wall Street Journal Guide to Information Graphics, I begin with the basics – the data content – that drives all graphics. You will learn to make the right choices about filtering and displaying your data. For example, plotting a stock index in actual values versus plotting the percentage change will yield two different pictures. By charting the same data in a different framework, you provide a new reference point for your audience. When you supply the reference point, you control the message.

The book goes on to cover how to use colors to your advantage, how to manage costs and resources through the use of graphics, and many other practical applications through numerous dos and don’ts.

The great feedback that I’ve gotten from reviewers shows that graphics sensibility is an essential ingredient of effective business communications today. After reading the examples from the book, you will never look at any communications piece the same way.

Add Comment.

Permalink

Dec 14th, 2009 by Larry Vincent

Wireless disconnect

AT&T wants you to use less wireless data.

Last week The New York Times reported AT&T is considering communications programs that encourage you to do so. The initiative is intended to reduce the burden on AT&T’s network, due to the explosive popularity of Apple’s iPhone. Before changing consumer rate plans based on actual data usage, AT&T would inform consumers on how their data consumption affects performance of the entire network.

This plan creates a brand gap.

AT&T and Apple have spent two years promoting the iPhone’s value, and its Applications or “Apps.” In fact, “Apps” are one of the biggest drivers of the iPhone’s popularity—so much that new competitive offerings (i.e., Blackberry Bold, MyTouch 3G, Droid, etc.) include similar “apps” platforms. BUT, promoting “apps” AND launching campaigns to curb data usage will send a conflicting brand message to AT&T’s current and potential customers. It’s akin to tobacco companies advising you not to smoke while depicting smokers in glamorous, energetic lifestyle scenarios.

The truth: Apple and AT&T created a remarkable brand platform with the iPhone. Twice as many people choose AT&T for their smart phones over other competitors. “Apps” are an essential touch point for the brand. Though AT&T may prefer encouraging users to consume less data instead of changing pricing strategies, the program will likely fail, create a brand alignment challenge—or both.

Add Comment.

Permalink

Dec 3rd, 2009 by Jeff Lapatine

The Siegel+Gale Moniker Monitor: Smartphones


There are many factors that affect how consumers make decisions about product brands. As practitioners in the brand strategy and naming field for over 40 years, we understand the nuances of what drives brand choice. One thing that’s highly important is the right product name .

We thought it would be an interesting exercise to, from time to time, visit the marketplace and ask consumers directly what they like or don’t like about certain product names.

Introducing the Siegel+Gale Moniker Monitor™.

Each month or so, we’ll select a different product category, do some market research (online survey with about 400 statistically significant potential purchasers), and find out what people think about the names of some newly launched products. This month, we’ve picked cell phone/smart phone names.


What do people think about today’s cell/smart phone names?

These days, so many models are being introduced that it’s hard to keep them all straight. We wanted to know to what degree their names have an impact on what phones consumers buy.

We picked seven cell phone/smart phone names to test (without mentioning the manufacturers):

Comeback
Glance
LX-290
Ozone
Smooth
Surge
Tritan


We asked the following five questions:

Is it a good name for a cell phone/smart phone?
Does it sound cool?
Is it intriguing and does it make you want to find out more?
Does it suggest an innovative product?
Is it a unique name?

And here’s what we found out:

1. The more powerful sounding names scored best. Tritan and Surge consistently did better in response to all of the questions. That is, these names were the most appropriate, cool, intriguing, innovative, and unique. They’re also the names that people said they most preferred.

Why did they do so well? These names not only sound strong, but they capture the promise of power, speed, reach and connectivity—qualities essential to wireless service.

Most Preferred Names

2. Comeback performed by far the weakest against the questions. It’s also the name people least preferred.

Why would Comeback do so poorly? In naming, you need to be careful about unintended negative connotations. People might associate the name with previous performance problems or the fear that they may have to return the phone for repairs.

3. Interestingly, the alphanumeric entry LX-290 did OK. While people didn’t think it was a unique name, it did just about as well as Glance, Ozone, and Smooth on appropriateness and innovation. The letters LX, borrowed from car model naming, implies superior quality and luxury. We’ve seen this well-established naming convention do very well for computers and sporting equipment as well. It would make sense that it would resonate with phone buyers.

4. How important is the company name in driving the purchase decision? Apparently, very. Only 17% of the subjects found the model name more important, while 49% found the company name to be more important. In fact, 19% of those didn’t know the model name of the phone they currently had.

5. At the end of the survey, we asked the subjects to tell us which of the names they remembered. Here the results were a little different. Tritan and Smooth were the most memorable. Least memorable were Surge and Glance. So while Surge was a preferred name, it was hard to remember. Go figure.

So, what can we take from this study? It seems that power and innovation prevail as key attributes. And alphanumeric models, though not exciting, do better than names with vague or confusing brand benefits.

In the end, Tritan seems to be the kind of moniker that’s a good fit and one that consumers remember.

What do you think? Leave a comment or email me (jlapatine@siegelgale.com) with your thoughts.

Comments (1)

Permalink