Before, in the good ol’ days (about 6-7 years ago), SEO was purely a digital strategy. It was all about link-backs, key words, mark up, snippets, etc. The holy grail was to get onto, and stay, on the first page of search engines such as Google and Yahoo. Lately, I have seen SEO companies start to change their tune. Many of them now see SEO, not as an online strategy only, but as part of an integrated marketing approach. They now include such things as branding, design, PR and traditional advertising. SEO companies are starting to redefine themselves and retool in order to stay relevant in search. They are trying to acquire the skill sets of these “traditional” marketing tactics. Why is that? Here is a link that was provided to me by a colleague who is very knowledgable and works in the SEO world: Why we can’t just be SEOs anymore

The overview:

• SEO is bigger than SEO – True SEO is bigger than what many normally think of when they talk about SEO. Now search engines are looking for “brand signals”, social graph signals, user/usage data and even offline data potential.

• SEO is about “all things marketing” – Integrated marketing is what gives brands the edge in SEO. Now SEO must address defining the brand, culture, mission, community, email, social, product, etc.

• SEO  must be redefined – It used to be considered spam, manipulation, unethical and rule breaking. There are companies who are dropping the SEO in their names to become a more holistic marketing company who happens to have expertise in the digital arena.

• True SEO touches all marketing activities – SEO must be baked into design, advertising, branding, PR, email, development/engineering, social.

As I have always believed, integrated marketing is more effective, in the long run, than any single tactic used independently. Many of these “former” SEO companies are now calling themselves In Bound Marketing or Digital Marketing firms. Great branding is about everything you do from the warehouse employee to the CEO and from every piece of communication from the newsletter to major advertising campaigns to your online social graph.

So, if you are branding, advertising, emailing, building your social graph and have a robust PR program, along with your “traditional SEO”, you are now a digital marketer. If not, then you’re just a plain old SEO guy or gal, stuck in the “old ways.”

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226

Over the last 3-5 years, many marketers, large and small, have focused their advertising and brand in communicating more of a higher purpose than just selling stuff. Messaging has become more messianic. On the surface, this makes sense, especially with the millennials. Many do care that a company is giving back, taking care of the planet and just trying to be good corporate citizens.

The real question, is it paying off on the balance sheet? Though it’s too early to tell, initial indicators is a “qualifying” no. I’ll get to why I say, “qualifying” shortly. P&G helped lead the charge several years with Bob McDonald’s (P&G CEO) public mantra of “Marketing is serving.” Burger King embraced, “empowering consumers to achieve social connectivity.” And Pepsi’s strategy to divert marketing resources to award grants for all kinds of worthwhile purposes.

Results thus far:

P&G – They have lost market share in core businesses that account for more than 50% of their revenue. Bob McDonald is on the hot seat with investors calling for his firing. In response, Mr. McDonald has gone back to focus more on marketing products, though he says the higher purpose is still important.

Burger King – Still floundered and gained no focus until it was sold, brought more under discipline and began to market food at an attractive price point.

Pepsi – They saw their flagship brand drop to #3 behind Coke and Diet Coke. This sent an alarm throughout Pepsi Co. Now they are focusing their marketing might to push their brands.

Purpose-driven marketing does have an effect, but THE key element must be alignment. The purpose must be in harmony with the brand. The most successful companies do this. People know when a brand is “faking” it. A purpose must be a natural association to your brand.

A myth of purpose-driven marketing is it separates you from your competitors. If everyone starts adopting this idea, and it already is reaching a mass adoption point, then there will be “Nobility Parity”. Consumers will be left confused deciding which purpose is more noble than the other, so they will go back to the basics on judging products and services by benefits and costs. This ends up leading back to where we were before. Purpose-driven marketing is a powerful tool for brands, but it must be relevant to the brand and it’s mission, not just tacked on because it’s the thing to do or it sounds good.

As Alfredo Gangotena, the chief marketing officer of MasterCard World Wide has said, “You see many brands doing good with cause-related marketing, but honestly, if the cause they are involved in is not fundamental to their brand, what good does it do? Brands are like humans. You can see quickly if they’re faking it.”

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226

Recently, LiveStrong has announced a legal change of name and logo. It is now LiveStrong Foundation (see graphic). Executive VP, Andy Miller, noted in a speech, “The change is subtle but it is substantive. The positioning of the bars suggests forward and dynamic movement.”

This is a great case that demonstrates the benefits and risks of having your brand so closely tied to a celebrity or founder.

Benefits –
• You do get immediate credibility and that generates quick support and cash flow
• You do get quick brand recognition without having to build one
• You get inexpensive advertising and PR

Risks –
• You fail to create a strong brand that goes beyond the celebrity or founder. As a result, the brand is limited in it’s potential. When they fall or disappear, so does the brand.
• There will be a high probability any brand achievements will be overshadowed by the celebrity
• The advertising and PR asset will backfire and burn your brand to the ground

LiveStrong is not the only brand that has run the risk of being too closely tied to an individual. For example, Apple is facing a critical period since the passing of Steve Jobs. Steve was credited for being THE source for any creativity and innovation at Apple. If this perception lingers, Apple stock will eventually take a beating.

If brands want to thrive long into the future, they must keep the individual brand of the celebrity/founder to a minimum. Individuals who understand this created brands that meant something far beyond themselves or any other individual. Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard understood this from their garage beginnings. They set out to create brand HP, not brand Bill or brand Dave.

Brands also must resist the temptation to build a brand around the “celebrity of the moment” too. People are not perfect and it’s crazy to think that they will do nothing wrong (Tiger Woods, anyone?) To use a celebrity properly, brands must be very clear that they are leveraging specific qualities of the individual that matches up with the qualities of the brand. The person should not over take and become the default personification of the brand.

It doesn’t matter if it’s a not-for-profit organization or a for-profit enterprise, a brand must be built around a core purpose and set of ideals that is separate from the founder. Customers must fall in love with the brand, not the individual. And most importantly, the brand must exist for a purpose much higher than just the individual founder or celebrity.

As for the LiveStrong Foundation, one graphic change I would make is to reduce the emphasis on Strong and focus it on Live. It’s about living, not Lance. The foundation must make a focused effort to demonstrate what they stand for and their values and prove to the world the LiveStrong Foundation is a brand, not an individual.

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226

Most smart marketers realize that women make (or influence) 80% of all purchase decisions across a wide range of categories from sophisticated financial products to electronics to cars. Unfortunately, most brands are still stuck in the past. It’s not they ignore women. In fact, many are pouring millions of dollars into marketing and advertising to reach women. What is wrong is they are still stereotyping women in their creative approach. The same goes for men. Many brands are still portraying the “boomer” male as clueless and incompetent. Conversely, millennial males are more like their women counter parts.

Women’s societal roles are more diverse than ever before. They are now almost 50% of the American work force. Their median age of first marriages has steadily risen. They take on more of an authority role, not just a “product user”. Women are no longer the stereotype of a dependent, stay-at-home subordinate housewife. They are in the office, on the plant floor and owning businesses. Yes, they still do dominate decision-making and wield substantial influence on purchases, but not from the home. Brands that still portray women as they “used to be” in their marketing are still missing the point. Dozens of studies have searched for a “rethink” by brands on women.

Results are not that promising:

• Three times more likely than men to be depicted as a product user as opposed to an authority figure

• Four times more likely to be shown in a dependent role

• 3.5 times more likely to be in a domestic environment rather than a work environment

 Millennial men have also changed the stereotype from their Boomer counterparts.

• Younger men increasingly shape their identity through shopping

• Brands that capture their perception of cool, what’s important and what their lives really look like, capture their loyalty and dollars

• Number of men that self-identify as fashionable and trendy: Millennials – 38%; Boomers – 16%

• Willing to pay more for brands that reflect their personal style: Millennials – 26%; Boomers – 13%

The lesson here is brands must reflect what is happening in the real world and not just go by outdated stereotypes or depend on “that’s what always worked before”. Today’s society is much more fluid and defined roles are becoming less commonplace.

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226

According to some reports, even at the latest CES (Consumer Electronic Show), many tech companies still cater to men and boys with their spec sheets and “booth babes”. That will end up costing many of these companies a ton in the long run. According to Angela Steele, CEO of mobile agency Ansible Mobile, women are quicker to adapt newer technologies, especially if it helps her get things done. For example, women use QR codes much more than men. Here are a few other points on why tech needs to change their stereotypes of women and technology:

• Keep the focus on the benefits. Women are very rational when it comes to making decisions, especially for their families.

• Things don’t need to be “girly” to be accessible. Look at Apple, they haven’t made one pink phone, but focus on the life benefits their technology provides. This is one reason why a vast majority of women love iPhones.

• Don’t overwhelm women. They are already multitasking. Your benefits should help them gain control of their busy lives. If you make tools to help them manage life’s situations, they will reward you with their loyalty.

• Women will be at the forefront of the retail revolution, driven by convenience enabled by mobile devices. This dramatically changes the way women shop.

• A powerful motivator is to show, and prove, how your technology will benefit their children. For example, if you show that this iPad app will help your child cognitively or in their coordination, it will resonate for them.

It is no secret, women are the CFO of most American families and control how the household dollars are spent. When developing your technology strategies, don’t focus on the Y chromosome. That’s the niche. The winning play is to understand and accommodate women by communicating clearly the benefits that help her manage her daily life, keep control and provides value their family, especially, their children.

And don’t make it pink.

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226

There is much talk these days about the battle between Apple and Samsung in the high-end smart phone market. Court battles as well as marketplace battles rage on. What used to be unthinkable about 3 or 4 years ago is now being discussed openly in the business and investment circles: Has Apple lost it’s “Cool” position to Samsung?

There are a few indicators supporting this thought. Apple’s stock is getting hammered as of this writing (down by almost 35% from their high of late 2012).  Samsung has sold more smart phones in 2012 than Apple. Just in the 4th quarter of 2012 alone, Samsung had sold 64 million while Apple had sold 48 million. Finally, there is more buzz and chatter with the Galaxy S series among consumers than for the iPhone 5. It used to be people only talked about was iPhone, nothing else.

What has contributed to this extra “coolness” to Samsung? There are three factors (according to Wall Street Journal), engineering prowess, manufacturing power and deep commitment to marketing. I’ll focus on the marketing portion since that is my area of expertise. As you see, all components of a company must be in alignment to deliver a consistent brand experience and brand message.

Samsung poured over $200 million in the U.S. alone in marketing muscle to promote their Galaxy S line. So much for being the best kept secrete. They didn’t just depend on word of mouth or hope it catches on in the social media world so they could save a few dollars. Samsung believed in their product offering and aggressively told their story. Of course, social media was part of their mix, but that wasn’t the focus of the campaign. Most smart marketers know that in order to win the battle for consumers emotion and mind, they must invest in telling their own story and not just depend on others (social media) to do it for them.

Another point is you know when a company really likes their product. They tend to do less competition bashing and more excitement building for their own stuff. This is what Samsung has done with the launch of the Galaxy S III. In fact, they even took a page out of the Apple play book by centering their advertising around the idea of “What If” with the same confident, reassuring tone of Apple advertising. (It goes to show, everyone steals, the difference is the best knows what to steal.) They also successfully painted the iPhone as passé which takes away from it’s coolness. Their success was achieved through a significant commitment to marketing and integration of their media (traditional, social, online, transit, outdoor). As Tom Peters (business management guru) says, “How can you expect splashy results when you only dip your toe in the water?

Here are some reactions that any marketer would love to have to show the effectiveness of the brand push thus far:

Dora Daniels, 26, of Oakland, Calif., said she learned about Samsung’s latest Galaxy S III because of giant ads plastered around a downtown San Francisco transit station. ”It’s silly because I don’t want to be a slave to marketing but it really got into my head,” said Ms. Daniels, who recently switched to the Samsung phone from an older iPhone.

“If you see this stuff on TV enough, it gets you thinking,” said Mr. Hernandez, a 34-year-old resident of Somerville, Mass.

The battle royal is on.

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226

The common accepted mantra of the social media and digital platforms is “open”. Your ecosystem should be open and free to all. This is an effective strategy when your goal is to get mass numbers of users. It’s not a great way to drive real revenue. More and more of these social media platforms are now becoming a “closed” environment (is Steve Jobs right in believing that it takes a closed environment to offer the best customer experience?).

For example, Facebook has become increasingly more controlling of it’s environment. Their rules change almost weekly and they are constantly floating balloons to see what can they get away with in reducing or restricting user rights and options and getting more “liberal” with how they view your content as theirs. Many other social media sites are evolving to become closed environments. Twitter is the most recent to turn close their ecosystem. In late 2012, PeopleBrowser sued Twitter and won an initial judgement in court. Twitter had marketed their platform to third party developers as a “social utility”, opened up their ecosystem and granted access of their database of tweets to all, for a fee. PeopleBrowser spent millions of dollars and man hours in development based on the promise from Twitter of openness. The reason why Twitter would make this as part of their brand promise is to help ensure their survival by having as many third party developers to contribute and enlarge their ecosystem.

Here are two points I would like to make concerning the evolution of social media going closed:

1. Brands must spread out their bets – This is common sense, but too often, many get caught up in the flavor-of-the-month and dump most, or all, of their marketing budget into one or two channels. This is especially tempting since you only pay relatively a small amount to gain access to their data about users. Once that ecosystem is closed off, you’ve invested time and money into a marketing program that is now rendered useless. Use all of the channels that make sense and are available to you. No need to make an all or nothing bet just because it’s the newest thing to do.

2. Don’t build your business around a single ecosystem – If you create your brand or product based on a single platform, you’re asking to be put out of business. Zynga is a prime example. They built their empire solely on Facebook. Now, they are losing users and money and are scrambling to diversify onto other platforms and become more independent. It won’t be easy and it may be too late. You endanger your brand because you don’t own the platform and are dependent that they follow through on their promise to stay open and keep the data flowing. As in life, things change over time. It’s inevitable.

These lessons applies to all ecosystems, Twitter, Pintrest, Amazon, Ford, Starbucks. At any time, the platform owner can close the system and leave your business shut out in the cold. Avoid this by not putting all you bets onto a single system, but integrate your marketing approach and be constantly adapting and changing.

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226

PSY is a phenom. His song Gangnam Style is one example of the power social media has in promoting a brand and driving revenue. To many, the mass popularity of the song is contributed to a lucky break or some other one-off reasoning. Many also see him as a one-hit wonder. PSY could most likely be a one-hit wonder, but his global popularity is not a lucky break of an individual.

PSY is a part of a strategic global branding effort by South Korea. They are trying to make their own space and brand since they are caught in the squeeze between China and Japan. Through years of planning and execution, South Korea is emerging as a cultural and economic powerhouse in their own right. They blend pop-culture such as K-pop’s (Korean pop music, a term that is gaining global status) Wonder Girls and Girls Generation (they have gained global appeal over the last few years) with business powerhouses with the likes of LG, Kia, Korean Airlines and Samsung. PSY is just another installment of this global strategy to build and enhance South Korea’s global brand influence.

Their mission is to “export” their ideas and brands to the world since their own country is a relatively small market. Most countries spend millions and billions of dollars promoting cultural brands within their own country (Buy American), The Korean Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism spends $3.5 billion in promoting “Brand Korea” to the world. As a comparison, the U.S. spent $146 million in 2012. There’s little wonder why the emergence of South Korean entertainment and business have dominated Asia and, now, the global scene.

Their investment in branding deserves a closer look. Here are the key elements they employed on their road to success:

• Investment – They put their money where their goals are. Too often in this tech world, many companies are under the false notion that you can market and dominate for almost nothing. Social media is “free”. Crowdsourcing is “free”. All of the digital metrics allow us to see the effectiveness of each tactic leading to the believe in a “silver bullet”. If all of this “free” stuff and singular tactic approach really worked by itself, shouldn’t we have a lot more mega brands? It still takes good, old fashioned capital investment to make any marketing and brand strategy work effectively.

• Integration – South Korea just didn’t rely on social media or TV advertising. They also didn’t just depend on promoting their companies or entertainers. They created an integrated approach to market their total brand. A blend of tourism, entertainment and business combined with a fluid mix of social media, paid media and PR, all contributed to the rise of South Korea as a nation. They understood integrating their assets and marketing is more powerful than just trying to sell each one individually.

• Creating brands we like to belong to – They understood how to brand and position each of their assets in a way that had great appeal and not come off as competing with each country. While buying a car from Shanghai Motor Company would feel like a slap to Uncle Sam, buying a Hyundai feels green and right on. South Korean brands don’t threaten, but are seen as more of a common cause we want to belong to. They are viewed as challenger brands and, for the most part, we all love those.

If you are a small business or are competing against giants in your industry, use South Korea as your example to follow. They are punching way above their weight. Who knows, Gangnam Style should be your rally cry.

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226

Since many marketers use or associate with Facebook, I thought providing a brief summary of Facebook policies for brands would be useful. This comes courtesy of Winston & Strawn, LLP, a law firm in Chicago. A partner of the firm, Brian Heidelberger, took the time to read the full terms and policies and provided an overview summary that is concise and helpful.

Terms governing your brand page – 
• Brands may:
– Post or link to a poliy about what content it will remove
– What user actions may cause Brand to band the user
• Brands may NOT:
– threaten legal action
– Claim rights to user content posted on their page

Cover photo on your brand page – 
• Brands can NOT include:
– Price or purchase information
– Contact information
– References to Facebook features or actions
– Call to action

Conducting Promotions (contests, sweepstakes) – 
• Must be “administered” in a Facebook platform application (collecting enries, conducting drawings, judging, notifying winners)
• App can not include features found on the main page, such as a “Like” button
• Game rules must include:
– A release of Facebook
– Disclaimer of affiliation
– Notice that entrant is providing personal information to the Brand and not to Facebook
• Must notify winners via their email
• Must  have your own private policy

Do’s and Don’ts of conducting promotions – 
• Brand may NOT use any native Facebook functionality as a method of entry:
– Prohibited: “Like our page to enter”
– Allowed: “Like our page and then enter”
– Prohibited: “Post a photo on our page to enter”
– Allowed: “Post a photo on our app to enter”
–Prohibited: “We’ll randomly select a Facebook fan of the day to win a prize.”
– Allowed: “We’ll randomly select a Facebook fan of the day (no prize)”

Collecting personal information (PI) – 
• Brands must
– Give notice that entrant is providing PI to the Brand and NOT to Facebook
– Have their own privacy policy with URL on its canvas or web site in the Developer App privacy field
• Must gain consent of user before collecting
• Must only collect PI on app, not on their Facebook main page
• Brand may NOT:
– Use concepts that undermine Facebook (encouraging users to remove friends, take over profiles, tag anything other than real people)
– Automatically post user PI upon submission. Brands must obtain consent using check box explaining content will be shared

Making offers
• Brands MUST:
– Comply with laws and disclose restrictions
– Communicate with any participating merchant over offer made by the Brand relating to such merchant
– Not use Facebook’s offer creator to offer the equivalent of a gift card, gift certificate or stored value card

Referral based rewards
• Brands may NOT:
– Directly tie incentives to the use of its social channels (rewarding for posting a stream story or sending a request)
• Brands MAY indirectly tie to the potential in-app reward

Permitted indirect tie incentive
• Incentive based on the number of friends that accept invite
– No rewards for sending, only potential to earn rewards if the user has friends who accept the invite

Place and “Like” incentives
• Places – Check in
– Brands MAY incentivize users to check-in places
– Brands may NOT use check-in to register users for a promotion
• Like button – Rewarding fans
– Brands MAY give incentives for “liking” provided the incentive is open to all new and existing users who Like your page
• Permitted incentives
– Coupons/rebates, exclusive content, eligibility to enter a promotion, donating to a charity based on number of page likes

Sponsored stories
• User “likes” a company, checks-in at one of its stores or performs certain other actions member’s picture/name appears as ad
• Facebook allows minors to opt out completely

Referencing Facebook in advertising
• Brands MAY:
– Make truthful references about presence on Facebook
• Say “Like our page” or “Become a fan by clicking Like on our page” (do not use “friend”)
• Brands may NOT:
– Imply endorsement by Facebook
– Link to pages other than the Facebook.com login page or your Brand page
– Do not use Facebook as a verb (Facebooking)

Use of Facebook logos and marks in advertising
• Brands may NOT:
– Use logos in broadcast advertising without permission
– Combine Facebook logos with other IP
– Use the full Facebook logo
– Use the Facebook “Like” button in online advertising
– Modify the “f” in the square logo
• Brands MAY:
– Use the the “Like” button in offline advertising

Use of screenshots in advertising
• Brands may NOT:
• Use screenshots without written permission from Facebook and the user
• Modify screenshots
• Use screenshots of user without consent

That’s about it. I hope you found some useful information you didn’t already know. Remember to “Like” us and win… our appreciation and thanks.

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226

It is predicted online shopping will break the $1billion mark by the end of the year and it looks like it will be growing even more in the near future. There are so many advantages as a consumer; convenience, time saver and instant shopping comparison are just a few of the many benefits. With all of this e-commerce, where does this leave the retailer or business, both big and small?

To many, it reduces them to just a price point with no real distinguishing value. This has caused many brick-n-mortar brands to disappear or become reduced to just a shell of their former glory. With all of this rapid change and price shopping dominance, does this also mean there is no need to create a strong brand? In my opinion, it is the opposite, having a strong brand is more critical now and in the future. Here is why I think this:

• Lack of physical contact means brand recognition has to work harder – Because people are shopping more online, they cannot feel, touch and otherwise, engage physically with your products, so many decisions come down to brand recognition. If they don’t know you, then most likely, you won’t make the first cut. Shopping online is also a function of trust. Customers are making decision on what they currently know about your brand. If they trust it, this reduces the risk factor. Often great products and services are not purchased because the customer thinks, “I’ve never heard of that brand before.”, then gravitate towards the brands they do know something about. This lack of physical connection that a brick-n-mortar store allows forces brand recognition to have to work even harder.

• Avoid the price war trap – Online and comparison shopping has reduced many of our purchase decisions to just a price point, regardless of the intangibles. It’s hard to “feel” or experience the quality just from your computer screen. A lack of a strong brand makes you 1 of 1,000 who offer similar quality, similar price and similar features. Not many companies can win the price war, especially small to medium sized businesses. For example, if the concept of Target was only online, then they wouldn’t stand a chance to Wal-Mart, but many people are willing to pay more for the Target experience than save a few bucks and shop at Wal-Mart. It’s the feel of a Michael Graves gadget or the fit of an Isaac Mizrahi dress. Both of these examples deliver something more than just a price point. They deliver on Target’s unique brand of cool chic at a low price (notice, I didn’t say “lowest” price.) A strong brand helps you break away from the price war game. Apple is the gold standard in proving this concept.

• Reviews are good, only to a point – I know many people believe in customer generated reviews. They take them as gospel and depend on the “wisdom of crowds” theory that many digital companies embrace (Google, Amazon, Yelp). What about plunking down $500 for a flat screen TV brand you’ve never heard of? The reviews are good, the price is great, so why the hesitation? It’s usually because there are TV brands you’ve heard of with similar features and price point that are also being shown in your search list. A vast majority of shoppers will consider the brands they know first before they drop down to the names they don’t know. By then, the no-name brands have already lost the sale.

As the world turns more to online shopping, it creates both crisis and opportunity for all brands. If you have not invested in creating a strong, great brand in your customer’s mind, then it is crisis time for you. Now you are reduced only to a price point and are at risk of not even making the first cut on a customers online list. It’s a great opportunity if you have consistently invested in building a brand that has real intrinsic and emotional value in your customer’s heart as well as their mind. Now, when you show up on a list based on a specific search criteria, more customers will keep you as a choice since many feel they already know you and have an emotional connection to  your brand.

www.bebranded.net
317-797-7226