Getting It Right: How Do You Know?
Posted on 10. Feb, 2010 by The Relationship Era in Blog, Brand Stories, Principles & Ideas
We’ve been thinking about some different approaches to objectively identify brands that are embracing Relationship Era marketing. If you’re familiar with our position on the future of marketing, you probably know that we can’t make the determination of who’s doing it right solely at the campaign- or tactics-level (see Ian Wolfman’s post Rise of the Always-On Marketing Ecosystem), though we can certainly evaluate these types of activities within the larger context of a brand’s approach and relationships.
Any suggestions as to how you would identify brands getting it right in the Relationship Era? Also, feel free to call out any brands that you believe are doing it well.
2 Responses to “Getting It Right: How Do You Know?”
Leave a Reply
- Facebook Cites imc² Client, P&G, in IPO Filing
- Brady Walcott, imc² health & wellness VP Featured on Pixels & Pills
- Lawnmowers and The Relationship Era
- Come Find Us!
- Six Things Marketers Should Pay Attention to in 2012
- Pro Bono: The Vanguard Idea for 2012?
- Two Inspiring Visionaries from TEDMED 2011
- Plan Today for Post-Holiday Success
- Kevin Jonas Sr. Talks with imc2 About Social Media
- 2011 CEO Summit: Maximizing Stakeholder Value
Manuel H.
10. Feb, 2010
Consumers place companies on their own Brand Sustainability Maps, whether they consciously think they’re doing so or not. It’s interesting how much that plays a role in the decisions companies make. Specifically, decisions that impact their placements/movement on these Brand Sustainability Maps.
For instance:
IKEA charging $.05/bag to use plastic bags vs. T-Mobile Charging $1.50/month for Paper Bills
Reading both companies press releases they clearly had the same goal in mind: to move their companies Up and to the Right on a Brand Sustainability Map. They both let their customers know they were serious about going green; so much so that they wanted to push their values on their consumers as well.
T-Mobile wanted to “reduce the environmental impact associated with paper bills” while IKEA wanted to “encourage reusable bags to cut down on plastic bag waste.”
Oddly enough the results were completely different. The IKEAans loved the concept, while T-Mobilers screamed and complained. Eventually T-Mobile customers found loopholes to jump ship without exit charges and forced T-Mobile to abandon their going paperless idea.
The moral of the story: Decisions that impact your placement on a Brand Sustainability Map should be within a certain range from where you’re placed at the time.
T-Mobile, a Reluctant Relationship, does not have the liberties that an IKEA, a Sustainable Relationship, has. In this case, they both aimed for the same goal, but the relationships the customers of these companies have with each of them are completely different, therefore having completely different outcomes.
Greg Flory
12. Feb, 2010
Great points, Manuel. It certainly makes sense that perception of intent – even when fully disclosed up front as something generally worthwhile – is subject to consumer skepticism and outright revolt among brands that have low trust. I have always viewed the “paper or plastic” question from typical grocery stores a little less generously than I do when I’m at Whole Foods. It also makes intuitive sense that brands with high trust get a lot of leash from stakeholders which allows them to try things that might generate huge competitive leaps or progress toward other goals and objectives.