The reverse Groupon strategy

I have never seen a Groupon offer from Target. I suspect the closest I'll ever see is being able to buy a Groupon gift card at Target. 

Groupon seeks to attract mostly new customers for a business through deeply discounted offers. This fledgling and often fleeting relationship is brokered by and benefits the third party, Groupon.  

Target neither wants nor needs help from Groupon to gain new customers. They have their own methods for shepherding existing customers.

Retention is the new acquision, declared "Flip the Funnel" author Jospeh Jaffe. And few businesses are as good as Target at enticing exisiting customers to stay, return and buy more.

(download)

A recent article in the New York Times shed some light on Target's somewhat controversial tactics to gather information on customers to keep them coming back, especially for new parents. In many cases they know what the customer wants before the customer knows. 

One key step in this process is to transition a customer from buying a few staples from Target to buying more and more of their houshold goods, from diapers to clothes to orange juice. Retention becomes expansion. 

Reading this article was like unearthing the archeology of my own evolution as a Target shopper and father of an almost 2-year-old. It was startlingly accurate. It also explains why Target doesn't need to be at the mercy of Groupon to get them new customers.  

To dig a little deeper into Target's methodology -- and because I could use more paper towels -- I downloaded their app. I created my account and handed over my location, email, phone number, "home store," and other personal info. 

Even before I could get my first text message offer, I checked out their daily deals. The app featured heavily discounted four or five items with a count-down when the deal ended. Sound familiar? 

The daily deals worked very similar to Groupon's daily offers, except Target didn't have to pay a sizable cut to a third party. 

The other difference is Target seemed to know exactly what I wanted, maybe based on my previous purchasing history, location or some combination of information. The top daily deal item was exactly what my wife and I are in the market for -- a 5/5-star rated children's toy organizer for 33% off. 

It's as if Target saw me picking up my daughter's toys all night and putting them in haphazard, poorly organized and overflowing containers with no real home. Maybe they were. 

The other deals were spot on, too. This was in contrast to the general restaurant and massage offers from Groupon that litter my inbox, and have become boring and undifferentiated. 

So what are these methods of customer retention worth to Target? I'm going to guess about $23 billion dollars - give or take a billion - which is how much their revenues have increased since they started using the tactics outlined in the article on existing customers.   

This time, I managed to avoid Target's siren song and didn't buy the toy organizer. But just knowing they had great deals on items that are exactly what I want will keep me coming back.

Well played, Target. Well played.

Filed under  //   Groupon   target  

How to bottle lightning

I recently wrote about the case studies of Jockey and Hanson Dodge Creative "bottling lightning" when the opportunity struck. An excerpt: 

One key takeaway from all three speakers is that "hard work goes hand-in-hand with opportunity." You have to put in the hours and move quickly when an unexpected or high-caliber chance arises to move the needle. You don't know when something similar will come along again. 

Read the whole post on the PRSA Southeastern Wisconsin blog.

Social media and crisis communication

No organization strives to become a case study in social media crisis communication. It rarely ends well. 

The Susan G. Komen Foundation recently found itself on the receiving end of one of these scenarios, and it became one of most vehement backlashes in the short history of social media. It didn't end well. 

The blizzard of opposition came as a result of their decision to stop funding for Planned Parenthood. Advocates for Planned Parenthood took to every medium to voice their outage -- even Google reviews

After a barrage of social media protest, the organization posted a YouTube video -- with comments closed -- of their leadership defending the company's decision as not politically motivated and not solely targeting Planned Parenthood.

But the damage had already been done. In short order Komen reversed their decision and was left with a damaged reputation and uncertain future. What happened?

I have been inside crisis communcation situations, and I know once it is triggered it can escalate so quickly it takes your breath away. Combatting its negative effects requires extensive pro-active planning and a swift and comprehensive response, and even that never guarantees positive results.  

Nevertheless, these are steps I would have recommended to Komen and any company that finds itself in a similar situation.

Realize that perception is reality 

With a complex decision, it's often difficult or impossible to communicate your story if another version has taken root in the public cosciouness. This is why it's particularly important to get out ahead of the message. 

Recognize controversial decisions

Involve your public relations and social media communcation as soon as possible before communicating decisions that may be controversial. Decide how to proactively communicate your side of the story instead of reacting to a story that's already out there.   

Provide context 

As stated before, there's almost always more to the story than the public realizes. Even if you can't share all the details, offer an explanation to clarify what caused certain actions. In the case of Komen, their CEO explained that the decision was a result of allocating funds for the best use of resources. A list of all programs that were funded or cut may have made this issue less of a focused, polarizing debate around Planned Parenthood.  

Make leaders visible

Press releases won't do on their own. Video is a powerful medium to communicate important messages. If the message is important enough, get it on video right away - don't wait until your back is against the wall. 

Apologize 

If your company was out of line, don't wait to apologize. Acknowledge the error immediately, own up to it and explain what you will do to rectify the situation. Don't equivaquate or use wishy-washy non-apologies like "mistakes were made." 

I'm in no way defending Komen's decisions and actions, but the crisis they found themselves in is familiar to any business that makes unpopular decisions, falls victim to misinformation, can't keep up with the spread of messages in social media and/or just screws up. While nothing can provide complete damage control, early planning and a quick and coordinated response can help mitigate the aftermath.  

Filed under  //   Komen   crisis communication  

Super Bowl advertising and social media

Analyzing one ad

Last year, Volkswagen's Darth Vader ad was the biggest hit of the Super Bowl commercials. But game day viewing was just one segment of the video's marketing. Today the video has more than 50 million views on YouTube on top of the 111-million record audience that watched Super Bowl 2011.

This year's sequel was again larger than the game itself. To kick off the campaign, Volkswagon released a link to an extended version of the new ad and embedded it in the previous year's YouTube video before Super Bowl Sunday. 

Social Buzz Before Game

This year's ad wasn't just launched before the Super Bowl. It started with a teaser YouTube video posted on January 18th called "The Bark Side" with dogs barking Darth Vader's theme. "Watch our game day ad," the copy below the video explained. "It will all make sense." 

Then came  "The Dog Strikes Back," which sticks with the cute and clever themes with an overweight dog that gets in shape to chase after a Volkswagen. It already had more than 3 million views on YouTube the day before this year's Super Bowl, and pundits discussed its tactics and evaluated its effectiveness before it even hit television. But not counting "The Bark Side," this year's Volkswagen Super Bowl ad fell short of less than a quarter of pre-game views of its 2011 predecessor, whose recrod was eclipsed by Acura this year for most views before the game.  

In the Chicago Tribune, Steve Johnson inteviewed experts that said most advertisers are trading the element of surprise during the Super Bowl to get the most bang for their buck out of blockbuster ads that are expensive to produce and air. The general manager of brand marketing at Volkswagen of America had this to say: 

For a marketer, "the Super Bowl is really not a game on a Sunday anymore. The Super Bowl is almost a three-week PR and social media campaign, and you have to think of it that way."

It's hard to pull off a sequel to any popular original, but prior to the game the buzz is favorable toward Volkswagen. The new view has more than 14,000 likes to "only" a few hundred dislikes on YouTube. Anticipating the debate about which year's ad was better in living rooms, bars and across social media, the advertisement goes meta at the end and features a Star Wars parody of this discussion.  

Social buzz during and after Super Bowl

As shown in the meta sequence of the ad, people immediately sounded off in social media about which year's ad was better and if the Star Wars sequence improved or made the advertisement worse.

On Twitter, Volkswagen featured a custom brand landing page (reported costing $25,000) to post a stillshot of its video and to show the hashtag #DogStrikesBack. The Twitter account posted the video (with more than 40) retweets and retweeted comments favorable about the ad. 

Interestingly, if you Googled "volkswagen ad" after the Super Bowl, you also saw paid advertisements for Chevy and Mazda, which must have also bid on (and drove up the price of) the paid search key words. 

On YouTube the video jumped a million views from the previous day to more than 4 million with a 97% favorable rating. If you went to Volkswagen's Facebook page, a custom landing tab greeted the visitor with embedded videos from last year's ad, "The Bark Side," this year's Super Bowl ad and even a 6 1/2-minute making-of video complete with director's commentary ("the dog is a metaphor.."), "interviews" with the animal talent, demonstration of the fat suit worn by the dog and more. 

According to Facebook, more than 21,000 people were talking about the brand after the Super Bowl, including more than 2,000 likes and 300 shares of their wall post with the ad. Volkswagen's page also actively posted on other page's wall. In the Facebook/ USA Today Super Bowl ad meter - where the public and view and rate all the commercials - the Volkawagen ad ranked 6th after the game in a close contest with an average of 4.21 out of 5 stars. 

(download)

As for the newest social media player, Google Plus seemed to be an afterthought, even though viewers gave their videos received thousands of +1s. But on Google Plus itself Volkswagen posted some previews leading up to the Super Bowl placement, but never linked to the actual video like they did on Facebook and Twitter. That's another telling signs that most brands haven't bought into Google Plus even for high-profile campaigns that saturate social media. 

What did they get right and what would you have done different?

In retrospect, releasing the advertisement ahead of time seems like a savvy move. Looking at comments on Facebook, it appears that people who previously saw the ads were excited to actually see it on the big stage. (Though many were confused why they didn't see "The Bark Side" during the game.) It also crates a possible effect of those who saw it ahead of time alerting friends and family to watch it when it came on during the game, so it stands out for a wider audience rather than getting lost in the deluge of game, ads and halftime show. 

From a public sentiment aspect, it appears to be a success. What is less clear is the ROI of this effort. Volkswagen spent millions and millions of dollars on this ad, since NBC was charging $3.5 million per 30 second spot alone, to say nothing of the cost of production, marketing and PR dollars added to the campaign. Will the huge Super Bowl audience plus the echo effect from the blanket social media coverage help justify the spending? 

The director of this year's ad believes that the commercial symbolizes Volkswagen being back and better than ever. The company's bottom line will tell if a Super Bowl ad helped prove this to be true, or if the public just likes to be entertained by cute and cuddly dogs while watching football. 

About

Tim Cigelske is a Senior Communication Specialist at Marquette University, founder of Teecycle.org and blogger for DRAFT Magazine. His full profile can be found at http://about.me/teecycletim