Posts Tagged ‘retail marketing’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Mobile Apps: “We Don’t Need No Stinking Badges”

Wednesday, October 6th, 2010

By Doug Stephens

If marketing research has taught us anything at all, it’s that consumers despise being manipulated – at least knowingly manipulated.  As humans we prefer not to be cajoled into working for unclear results or rewards.  So, why then have so many retailers defaulted to employing mobile applications that essentially treat consumers like fun loving Golden Retrievers?

Mobile app Shopkick for example, puts consumers on virtual steeple chase through the store, completing various tasks in order to earn “kick-bucks”, points redeemable for discounts and merchandise.  Tasks may include scanning products, visiting the fitting room or looking at a particular in-store sign.

Geo-social pioneer, Foursquare, which started more as a social game than a shopping app, has been massaged by several retailers into a pseudo rewards program, offering special discounts for location-based “check-ins”.   The GAP, for example, recently offered Foursquare users 25% off, just for checking in to their local GAP store.

Similarly, new entrant SCVNGR prompts users to go places and complete location-specific challenges and in turn earn rewards.

The Games People Play

So why has gaming become the entry point for so many of these shopping apps?

For one thing, games are easy to build.  Establishing a do this get that convention is pretty simple from a programming standpoint.  At least it’s a lot simpler than developing loads of content.

Secondly, games are a fairly non-threatening means of inducing people to trial something.  If it’s just a game, who gets hurt right?  And given that the eventual market value for mobile applications depends largely on their number of regular users, the path of least resistance is the best path to follow.  And that path is often gaming.

But with the rush to gaming conventions, one has to wonder how long it will be before consumers begin to experience game-fatigue.  How many goose chases can we go on before the charm wears off?  How many places can we become the Mayor of before we get bored?

Tell me something I don’t know

What we’ve known for a long time is that what consumers really crave is control over the shopping experience and with it, the information required to make informed and satisfying buying decisions.

So, rather than badges, bucks or mayoral office, the real value of mobile proximity marketing would seem to lie in delivering relevant, timely and contextual information.   The kind of information that can snap us out of the catatonic state a wall of indiscernible product can induce.  The kind of information that can rocket us toward an informed buying decision.

Given the digital nature of just about everything, it would seem simple enough to deliver worthwhile information to shoppers where they need it most –the store floor-  but retail has been surprisingly slow in catching up to the shopper.

Some mobile apps have done a good job of trying to add value for consumers.  ShopSavvy for example, offers the ability to scan products and quickly pull down information and pricing on identical products within the user’s proximity.  Best Buy has been pretty boldly experimenting with QR codes – rich 2D codes that when scanned, link the user to relevant information and media. Point Inside has focused on mapping retail environments making simple things like finding the cereal aisle a lot less time consuming.

Friends with Benefits

We also know from research that people trust their friends and even strangers more than companies. In fact, According to a recent Nielsen study, 90% of Consumers trust friend reviews compared to only 24% that trust text ads delivered to their mobile phone.

The End Game

In the short term, games will continue to serve as a catalyst for consumer interest in mobile shopping apps.  The long term key however, lies in delivering relevant, timely and contextual product and service information with a tie to the user’s social network for opinions and advice.  If done properly, retailers should be creating mobile applications that become indispensible shopping assistants that their customers can’t imagine being without…apps that hold real value.

Ultimately a remarkable shopping experience shouldn’t be something consumers have to play for but rather something they’d be willing to pay for.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Marketing, Mobile Marketing, Store Experience, Technology, Trends

Speaking of the Future…

Thursday, September 30th, 2010

By Doug Stephens

I had the pleasure  of being a guest on the Competitive Futures podcast series.  Competitive Futures, based in St. Louis was founded by Eric Garland, author of the book Future Inc. and highly respected authority on intelligence and futures analysis. Eric and I spent the better part of an hour talking about some of the big stuff that will be changing the shape of retailing in the future.

Our chat is broken out below into 4 parts.  Enjoy!

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Marketing, Podcasts, The Future, Trends

Who Needs Retail Anyway?

Monday, September 13th, 2010

By Doug Stephens

If we’ve learned anything from the advent of online social networks, it’s that ordinary people can be quickly organized around a common idea, cause or event more effectively than ever before.  Whether it’s to monitor urban polling stations during elections, aid earthquake victims or simply flash-mob on a city street corner, our ability to rally people, for any purpose, is unprecedented, which raises an ominous question for retail.

If it’s that simple to coordinate attention, interest and effort, how difficult could it be to harness consumer buying power?

It’s also become abundantly clear is that our need for middle-men is quickly diminishing.  Disintermediation is occurring all around us – in music, publishing and even advertising – so why not retail?

The Groupon Incident

August 19th, 2010 may go down in retail history as the day the game changed.  It was on this otherwise uneventful day, that an estimated half-million people jumped on an unexpected GAP promotion offered through online deal-maker Groupon, crashing Groupon’s server in the process and shocking the retail world.  And while the lead story understandably touted this as a win for the retailer, the real wake-up call had more to do with the power of the consumer and the ease with which so many of them could have their collective buying power amassed so quickly.

Beyond Coupons

The idea of consumers coming together to combine their purchasing power is not new.  As early as 2006 we heard reports out of China of hoards of consumers coordinating online and descending  on retailers at a specific time to essentially extort discounts from them.  But as social networks become increasingly ubiquitous and sophisticated, the ability for consumers to coordinate their respective needs and organize in an effective way is clearly a reality, especially on major purchases such as appliances, electronics or automobiles, where the savings can be significant. And to be clear, I am not referring to the kind of direct-buying clubs often seen on television which are really only a slightly different layer of retail distribution.  Rather I’m talking about one hundred percent, consumer generated buying groups – by the people for the people so to speak.

For example, suppose 500,000 consumers wishing to buy appliances come together within a social buying network.  And of those, the 200,000 wanting refrigerators form a sub-group. And within the sub-group, the 10,000 consumers wanting a Sub-Zero model 123 form a buying group and make a direct offer to the manufacturer for all 10,000 units.  What manufacturer could simply walk away from an offer like that, especially when there’s 100 percent retail markup in their pocket to play with?

What’s particularly worrisome for retailers is that this social buying group could have more collective purchasing clout than they do!

Why Retail in the First Place?

A Retailer’s value used to be in their ability to amass selected assortments of goods that consumers would otherwise have little or no access to.  Secondly, they displayed the products in a way that made selection less time consuming. Lastly, they supported the assortment with valuable product knowledge – knowledge that was unavailable to consumers.   In other words, the Retailer added real, tangible value to the product in the process of selling it to the consumer.  They earned their cut.

However, given the access to information that today’s Consumer has, this value is increasingly being diminished.  To an ever -growing extent, the consumer doesn’t need the retailer.   After all, how do you adequately serve a consumer who knows more about your products than you do?  From the Consumer’s point of view many stores have become little more than expensive ship-to points.

The Key to Survival

Retailers that do manage to survive the inevitability of consumer-direct buying will be those who firmly re-establish their added value.  Beyond product, price or promotion, they will deliver something unique, difficult to replicate and above all, something of real worth to the consumer.  They’ll deliver an experience.  An experience that’s well worth the mark-up.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Behavioral Marketing, Marketing, social media, The Future, Trends

YOU ARE HERE…Whether You Like It Or Not

Wednesday, August 25th, 2010

By Doug Stephens

A recent study by Forrester Research concluded that while location-based services (LBS) such as Foursquare, Gowalla and Loopt are intriguing, they are still too small for major marketers to spend much time on.  Location-based services allow users to not only share their physical location with others but also to gather and receive information relative to their location such as reviews, recommendations, other nearby venues and friends that may be in proximity.  Forester added that while current users of location-based services are very likely to be influencers within their social circles, they are also largely male and therefore better suited to marketers targeting men.  Their overall advice to marketers was a resounding “wait-and-see” on location-based services.

Then Why So Much Location-Based Marketing?

But it’s hard to reconcile the Forester report with a lot of what’s happening in the marketplace.  Large players like Starbucks have been experimenting with services like Foursquare since early 2010, giving in-store discounts and rewards to users for checking in to their stores.  The GAP recently launched a one-day 25% off promotion to Foursquare users checking-in at GAP locations.  Add to the list the Wynn Las Vegas Hotel, the City of Chicago and Tasti D-Lite and it would appear that location-based marketing is being taken very seriously by major marketers across categories.  And it all seams completely understandable.  After all, isn’t the goal of marketing to be timely and relevant?  It would seem that LBS is an ideal means of achieving both.

Recently released LB applications such as the Shopkick are making news by taking shopper rewards to entirely new and location-specific levels, literally allowing shoppers to earn rewards simply for moving through various areas of a participating store.  And with retail giants such as  Macy’s, Best Buy, Sports Authority and American Eagle Outfitters and Simon Property Group testing it, Shopkick is getting some serious attention.

And in what is perhaps the ultimate sign that LBS has arrived, Facebook recently launched its own home-grown location service, Facebook Places, allowing users to share not only what they’re doing but also where they’re doing it.

All this activity and interest around LBS begs the question, if in fact marketers follow Forester’s advice and wait on the sidelines, do they run the risk of missing the “LB boat” entirely?

Making Location Make Sense

What most agree on is that location-based marketing services are still relatively new to the mainstream and largely misunderstood by the public and marketers alike.  To that end, organizations are forming to foster discussion, education and understanding about LBS.  One such organization, the Location-Based Marketing Association of Canada hopes to not only better define LBS but also share with marketers the unique opportunities the technology represents.

In response to the Forester study, Association Founder and President Asif Khan said “What they failed to highlight was the explosive recent growth of such services. Foursquare alone has over 2.5 million users and has experienced 28% growth in just the last month, according to RJ Metrics. More and more people are beginning to utilize location-based services and as Smartphone adoption increases globally, the numbers will only continue to increase.”  Khan also points to the introduction of Facebook Places as having the potential to immediately introduce upwards of 500 million users to the concept of location based services.

As for marketers considering location-based marketing, Khan believes that those who “move to embrace LBS early-on will reap enormous rewards from proximity marketing, including attracting more first-time customers, encouraging more repeat business and increasing sales.  I also see huge opportunities for cross-brand promotion for companies that have multiple brands like Gap and Old Navy.”

Forget technology. It’s about “return on relationships”

Techno-Anthropologist Clay Shirky is quoted as saying that “Communications tools don’t get socially interesting until they get technologically boring.”   To that end, Khan sees the use of LB reaching critical mass in 18-24 months.  “I think Clay is right” said Khan. “I don’t think it’s about technology at all.  At least, I don’t think people care about which app they use.  They only care about the size and relevance of the deal.   For brands and retailers engaging with these tools, the real measurement of success will not only be ROI, but Return on Relationship (ROR).

As for the future and the continued evolution of location-based technologies, Khan suggests that the very context in which we consider the term location will also evolve.  “Today, we think of location as only the physical space.  But I see a time where we will be in virtual spaces and augmented reality where brands and content will live as well.”

Full disclosure:  Retail Prophet Consulting sits as a current member of the advisory board for the Location-Based Marketing Association of Canada.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Marketing, social media, Technology, The Future, Trends

The Problem With What You Do Best

Monday, August 2nd, 2010

By Doug Stephens

One of the first lessons I was taught in marketing was that when times were tough and sales were hard to come by, smart companies focussed on their core business.  They didn’t chase unproven concepts and ideas or explore unfamiliar ground.  Rather, they drilled even further into their primary occupation.  They “stuck to what they did best”.

I know now that nothing could be more untrue and that this pseudo-strategy has probably killed more companies than it’s salvaged.  And yet, we regularly hear CEO’s declare that they’re re-trenching around their core business in an effort to succeed.

When your core business IS the problem

The problem with simply focusing on your core product in tough times is that your core product might actually be what is making times tough in the first place. Focusing more intently on it  may only speed your demise!  Any creative or innovative thinking that could actually save the company is often stifled once the stick to what you do best mentality becomes pervasive.  Revolutionary ideas rarely see the light of day.

For the Apple’s and Google’s of the world, radical innovation is a daily breakfast item but the companies I truly admire are the ones for whom innovation is a painful leap of faith.  One can’t help but respect companies who have the courage to look outside their comfort zone for answers to seemingly insurmountable problems.

Below are what I consider to be three great examples of companies that chose NOT to stick to what they already know when times got tough but instead stretched to find new points of connection with their customers and in doing so, charted new territory for their brands.

Core Business WAS: Manufacturing a brand of automobile with little relevance, equity or appeal with young consumers.

What they DID: Instead of focussing on the automobile itself, Ford invested in Sync, a Microsoft designed system that seamlessly integrates phone, text messaging, web browsing and music through the car’s voice activated communication system.  Since its introduction in 2007, Ford has sold more than 2 million Sync enabled vehicles and claims that Sync-enabled models outsell non-Synch models twofold.

But the point here is really less about the technology and more about the message that Ford was sending to younger consumers.  In this decisive departure from its core product, Ford clearly told younger consumers that it “got them”.  The brand understood their need to integrate their personal technology into their driving experience and built a system that allowed them to do just that.

Core Business WAS: Manufacturing a low tech, old-fashioned toy in a market being increasingly dominated by video games.

What they DID:  Rather than waste effort trying to convince kids that plastic building blocks were cooler than video games, Lego reached beyond the safety of its core product, embracing the very technology that threatened its existence and making it part of the Lego experience.

The website offers video and online games, allowing kids to discover various Lego product sets in a fun and interactive way.Themed Lego kits correspond to popular movies, bridging the gap between passive entertainment and creative play.  They’ve also done a brilliant job of incorporating in-store technologies such as augmented reality to make the Lego buying experience truly exciting.

Core Business WAS: Making a brand of clothing that was being commoditized in the market and increasingly overlooked by younger consumers in favor of more fashion oriented, up-market brands.

What they DID:  Instead of focussing consumers on stitch-counts and pant styles,

Levis turned their attention to something well outside their core strength… music.  In 2010 they launched the Levis Pioneer recording sessions, a collection of 12 recordings by contemporary artists re-working classic songs that they’ve been inspired by.  The tracks and subsequent videos served as an allegorical bridge between the old and the new, a marrying of the classic and the contemporary.

Furthermore, it broke through the din of unremarkable messaging in the apparel market, sending a clear message to younger audiences that classic can indeed be cool.

Sticking to what you do best isn’t a strategy

These are only a few examples of brands that’ve had the courage to explore beyond their core.  There are others.  And in fairness, there are also a few notable examples of companies who did intensify their focus on their core offering to better serve their consumers – Starbucks being one of them.

But don’t let anyone convince you that simply sticking to what you do best constitutes a long-term strategy.  It’s more often the battle-plan of frightened business leaders who’ve simply run out of ideas.  They fail to realize that the core business of all great brands – regardless of what they sell – is innovation.

Innovation is what great businesses do best.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Marketing, Technology

Generosity

Tuesday, July 13th, 2010

By Doug Stephens

Generosity: noun~ Willingness to give or share; unselfishness

All successful relationships are underpinned by generosity.

The willingness to give or share without expectation of repayment is central to healthy, human interaction.  It doesn’t matter what you give.  It can be your time, your praise or simply your attention but without generosity, relationships tend to vanish in a cloud of selfishness and resentment.

This is equally, if not more true with business relationships.  Long-term success in retail comes down to fundamental beliefs with respect to the whole concept of generosity.  Specifically, you either believe that generosity is almost always rewarded or almost always abused.

You can easily spot businesses that believe the latter.  They’re the ones that have you deposit a quarter to use their shopping cart.  The ones that refuse refunds without a receipt. Those who link any charity work they do to a sales goal or promotion.  They cut the holiday employee turkey to save a few dollars. And you probably can’t use their restrooms either.  All because their belief system suggests that generosity is something that is abused and taken advantage of.  As the English poet Alexander Pope wrote “…all looks yellow to the jaundiced eye.”

Rare businesses, however, take the contrary view.  These businesses believe that the simple act of giving – whether to customers, employees or the communities they operate in is simply the right thing to do –it’s just good karma.  They provide their employees with great places to work, their patrons with great places to shop and their communities with businesses that give back.  They regard customers as people – not mere transactions.  Employees are part of the team – not simply headcount.   They give based on the belief that people are basically good and that their generosity will indeed be repaid – if not today then tomorrow and if not tomorrow then someday.

The unfortunate thing is that generosity is no guarantee of success.  Indeed, some of the most successful businesses in the world are also the greediest.    The consolation, however,  is that only those businesses who give generously will leave a positive impression on the world.  And perhaps that’s the truest definition of success.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Branding, Marketing

Dollars and Sentiments. The Real R.O.I. on Social Marketing

Tuesday, June 8th, 2010

By Doug Stephens

Alice in Wonderland speaking to the Cheshire Cat….

“Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?” “That depends a good deal on where you want to get to” said the Cat. “I don’t much care where—“  said Alice. “Then it doesn’t matter which way you go” said the Cat. “–so long as I get SOMEWHERE,” Alice added as an explanation. “Oh, you’re sure to do that”  said the Cat,  “if you only walk long enough.

***************************************************************************************************************************

Like Alice, marketers often find themselves needing to “get somewhere” but may not be precisely sure where that somewhere is.  This has become particularly true of social marketing efforts.  With the fervor around social media, marketers are feeling pressured to begin incorporating it into their program but aren’t quite sure how.  In some cases they’re not even completely sure why social marketing matters so much – they just feel they ought to be doing it.  So, like Alice, they often set out in a direction, only to find that after considerable time and effort, it got them nowhere.

In talking with marketers I’ve come across three common pitfalls that, from the beginning, can lead them astray.

Pitfall #1: Believing that ALL social marketing means creating social media

While social marketing may involve social media, there’s a fundamental misconception that all social marketing involves the development of content – blogs, videos, Facebook apps etc. This is not always true.  Media or content development is only one aspect of social marketing.  Depending on your company’s objectives, you may never want or need to create your own content.  The key lies in defining what results you want from the program.  What do you want to happen as a result of your social marketing?

I like to think of social marketing as a spectrum of engagement ranging from passive to active.  The objectives you target will directly affect the activities you undertake and your engagement level.

Pitfall #2: Setting Program Objectives That Aren’t Measurable

I was speaking recently with the head of marketing for a major regional shopping centre.  We were talking about her desire to begin to incorporate social marketing into her plans.  When I asked what her objective was, she said “to generate foot traffic for the mall.”  This sounded like a reasonable objective but the problem is that the mall has no empirical means of credibly measuring foot traffic.

The objectives you set should meet three key criteria; they should support the overarching strategy and positioning of your business.  They should be credibly measurable. And lastly, they should be meaningful to the people in your company that control the financial and/or human resources you’ll need to continue or expand your social marketing effort.  After all, there’s no glory in meeting an objective, if it doesn’t at least win you the resources you need to continue your program.

This doesn’t preclude you from establishing any objective you want; it only puts the onus on you to make sure it matters and measure it.

Pitfall #3: Confusing Social Activity with Return on Investment

One of the most uncomfortable points in a marketing meeting is when the CFO turns to the CMO and asks what the R.O.I to date is on the company’s social marketing program.  The only thing less comfortable is when the CMO cites the R.O.I as having gotten their 1000th Facebook fan.  This is usually met by a blank look from the CFO, who is quietly making a mental note not to invest another nickel in the social marketing program.

While it’s true that some enlightened companies have simply come to regard social marketing as a tool that is as essential as their phone system, they are definitely the minority.  The rest of the world works for companies that regard social marketing as the new kid on the block that needs to earn every nickel it consumes.

Part of what gives social marketing a bad rap is that too many marketers simply measure and report the company’s social marketing activity – that is blog posts, YouTube videos, Tweets etc.  They also tend to confuse return on investment with non-financial consumer responses like blog subscriptions, YouTube views, Re-tweets etc.  The result can often be a nebulous set of metrics that neither support nor negate the merits of their program.  What they fail to measure is the amount of sales, profit or cost-savings that the social marketing program is (or isn’t) generating – the real return on investment.

Part of the problem is that we’ve been told that financial R.O.I on social marketing can’t be measured – that it needs to be valued against softer metrics – which is simply not true.  I won’t go into detail about it in this post but will instead point you to a great Slideshare presentation here from Olivier Blanchard from Brandworks who shares an excellent methodology on for measuring financial R.O.I on your social marketing spend.

We’re beyond the “shiny tool” phase with social marketing and the onus is back on marketers to show the return on their work in this area.  Like most things, with social marketing you tend to finish how you started.  So, be sure to start with the right objectives, the right means of measurement and a clear path to the (real) R.O.I. your program is delivering.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Marketing, Technology, Trends

The Future Hates Mediocrity

Wednesday, February 17th, 2010

By Doug Stephens

I was reminded recently of a really good book I read several years ago called Going Shopping by Ann Satterthwaite, a city planner from Washington D.C. It’s an historical account of shopping formats through the ages- an archaeological dig, so to speak, into the evolution of retail.  Bored

It’s fascinating to see how various forms of retail moved in and out of consumer preference over the centuries.  What’s really worth noting though, is that every form of retail that has ever existed, continues to exist today, to some degree.

We still have some flea markets and bazaars in the world. The downtown department store, although not without challenges, soldiers on. The suburban mall concept continues today and is morphing into some unique and interesting lifestyle formats. Small, independent shops continue to account for a significant percentage of the total store count and of course e-commerce is thriving. So despite centuries of change and evolution, not a single form of retail trade has become extinct.

What is clear however is that only the strongest have survived and those that have managed to withstand the test of time have had one thing in common – they’ve been remarkable. Not necessarily remarkable at everything but definitely remarkable at something.

For Le Bon Marche in Paris, it may be the sheer beauty of the store design that set them apart. At Ritz-Carlton hotels, legendary service may be the differentiator. For the Grand Bazaar in Istanbul it might be its hyper-experiential environment and for the St. Lawrence market in Toronto, it could be the eclectic mix of people and products. 

Voltaire once said, “The perfect is the enemy of the good” and I’ve known some retail executives that have openly subscribed to this idea. They’ve suggested that in the pursuit of perfection we can impede progress towards an outcome that is sufficiently good. I don’t agree. I would argue that good is in fact, the enemy of survival. What’s notable about good? Good things happen to us every day and the following week we can’t recall one of them. Every day good businesses open and good businesses close. In some cases we don’t even notice that they’re gone. The truth is, good is mediocre and the future hates mediocrity. 

Try this… instead of setting out to be good at a lot of things, put your mind to being remarkable at something. The future likes remarkable.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in The Future, Trends

Never Bring a Knife to a Gunfight

Thursday, January 21st, 2010

It’s been called the first rule of modern warfare – “never bring a knife to a gun fight”.  Although I’m not certain who coined the phrase, I can almost assure you it wasn’t the guy who brought the knife.

And as obvious as this idiom is, every day I see independent retailers walking into fights they can’t win.  It happens every time they focus marketing efforts on business attributes which they can’t possibly dominate in. Shootout

I use the word dominate and not compete because frankly, competing is a nebulous term and doesn’t really carry any assurance of success.  Domination signifies that you maintain an own-able position in the mind of the public, distinct from competitors and truly remarkable.    For example, all professional athletes compete but the ones that really stand out actually dominate in their sports.

That said,  independent retailers sometimes have difficulty identifying how they can dominate in their chosen market.  They struggle with isolating the aspects of their business where they can consistently reign supreme.  As a result, they attempt to be good at everything, which usually renders them exceptional at nothing.  In other words, by trying to be good at everything, they actually weaken their competitive position.

Stop trying to be the good at everything

The 2001 book by Fred Crawford and Ryan Matthews titled The Myth of Excellence, is an account of an extensive study examining the competitive attributes of a wide range of highly successful businesses.  Although almost a decade old now, I think the findings are even more relevant today than they were then.

The key discovery from the research was that none of the best businesses were the best at everything.  However, all of them clearly dominated in something.  Almost without exception, there was a single competitive attribute on which the best businesses stood head and shoulders above the competition. 

With this information in hand, any business can begin to map out a coherent competitive strategy.

Start with your dominant attribute

There are 5 basic competitive attributes across which a business can compete.  First pick the one that your business can realistically dominate in relative to other players in your market.  And although it might seem obvious, make sure that the dimension you choose is both relevant and tangible to consumers.

To Dominate In You need to be remarkable for things like…
Product 
  • The widest selection
  • In-stock position
  • The highest quality goods
  • The most unique items
  • The most desired brand(s)
  • Most hard-to-find items
  • One of a kind and customized items
Price 
  • The lowest every day price on the most items
Service 
  • The highest level of expertise
  • The best after-sale support
  • The friendliest and most helpful staff
  • The most liberal return/exchange/refund policies
  • The best in-home services
  • Best warranties/guarantees
Convenience 
  • The most stores
  • The best locations
  • Call ahead services
  • The longest store hours
  • The most efficient systems
  • The best delivery program
  • The best online shop
  • The best payment options
Store Experience 
  • The most fun/enjoyable
  • The best learning experience
  • The most interactive
  • The most relaxing
  • The most welcoming environment

Now you need to select another attribute where you can be good, relative to competition.  You don’t have to dominate but you should noticably excel in this attribute.

Lastly, you need to be at least average with respect to the remaining attributes.  Not necessarily excellent but acceptable.

Here are some examples

Starbucks is highly regarded as being dominant in store experience while having a good product.

Dollar General dominates on price and offers good convenience through numerous locations.

Apple dominates on product, while offering a good store experience.

So, it doesn’t matter how you dominate – only that you do.

Now tell them

Once you’ve established your ideal mix of attributes, build all marketing messages around it.    Don’t waste energy talking to customers about what you’re average at.    Focus the message almost exclusively on what you dominate in and why that’s worth caring about.

Using this approach will create clarity on all fronts.  Customers will be clear on why they should shop you.  Staff will be clear on what they should be delivering to customers.  And you, the owner will be clear on what you’re taking into your next gun fight.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

The Road to Remarkble is an interactive workshop aimed at assisting retailers in deveoloping own-able competitive positioning.  If you would like to schedule a session of the Road to Remarkable for your group, contact us.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Branding, Marketing

Luxury Retailers Hit the Panic Button

Friday, December 11th, 2009

By Doug Stephens

As the recession drags on, it’s become clear that few in the retail sector are being spared its wrath. In separate stories this week, New York icon Saks Fifth Avenue and super-luxe retailer Neiman Marcus conceded to just how bad the situation has become. 

With both chains bleeding double-digit sales and profit declines, strategic shifts are taking place that go to the very heart of their respective value propositions. These changes, unless carefully managed, could have lasting negative implications for both brands.

For example, the once venerable Saks is now using gift cards and lower priced merchandise to coax aspirational customers back to their stores. They also reported a 52 percent increase in their use of coupons, a sales tool that until recently was a foreign concept at Saks.

Neiman Marcus has likewise called for fundamental changes to its assortments in order to provide lower priced, entry point products for hesitant shoppers. The chains’ luxury vendors have been tasked with supplying lower cost versions of designer collections. As further incentive to buy, customers are being given extra points on their loyalty cards and gift cards for future purchases. To make matters worse, neither chain sees a quick recovery in sight and are in fact bracing for a long road back to pre-crisis sales levels.

The decision to move down-market will likely come as good news to that percentage of consumers who might not otherwise visit a Saks or Neiman Marcus. What’s less certain is the reaction of core customers – the elite shopper– without which, neither chain could have become what it is today.

While even discount pricing at Neiman Marcus or Saks is still well outside the means of the average American, it can’t help but to impact the air of exclusivity that surrounds their names. And if scarcity and exclusivity do in fact breed luxury, then one has to wonder if these chains are taking a dangerous step toward obscurity. As always, time will tell

Tags: , ,
Posted in Branding, Marketing, Trends

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »