Prof Offers 20 Tips to Land Internships Reprinted from www.culprit.com
February 22nd, 2011 · 1 Comment
Clarke Caywood
As a teacher I have spent 20 years helping hundreds of graduate students secure over $3 million in tuition and fees from companies, agencies and NGOs. Through this experience of matching students with organizations, I have learned a few lessons that might help students and teachers work as teams for securing residencies as we call them.
1. Contact the human resources department or internship program directors, but personal contacts with professionals in the field are critical.
2. Use Linked-In, professional association memberships, class speakers and other contacts.
3. Write finely honed resumes, Linked-In and Facebook listings of client-based projects from courses, summer internships and previous work experience.
4. Give the company a choice of candidates (but not too many) since using resumes will make the process manageable for them and the internship team (professor and student).
5. Rely on experienced staff with relevant contacts at the university who can manage the critical details that professors seem to lose track about.
6. Build a website about the program and maybe an old fashioned brochure to allow the agency, company or NGO to show the quality of the school program to others.
7. Produce a strong video interview on YouTube, Yahoo video or Flickr as a link.
8. Use interview skill training for internship candidates.
9. Academic credit can be helpful if the professor is involved for a syllabus of expected work to evaluate the internship and intern.
10. In school-managed programs students should agree to go to the first company choosing them to avoid traditional market job competition.
11. Students should only apply and be matched to organizations that they are willing to work for.
12. For 10 weeks students should expect to work like any other employee without special requests for summer time off, weddings, etc. Work early and work late to show your willingness and passion to solve the organization’s problems.
13. Having a job description prepared by the faculty and team in advance will allow the student to get to work more quickly.
14. Treat all staff including administrative assistants with great respect–they can facilitate your productive time.
15. Seek out mentoring and learn about the organization over cups of coffee on a break or modest lunches.
16. Be prepared to do more than the assigned work when they find out you are not the typical intern even if you think you might not want to work there.
17. Plan the end of the internship carefully so that you don’t leave any work undone.
18. After you return to school send your contacts an occasional article or reading from your courses that might interest them and keep them aware of your pending graduation date,
19. Write a paper on your experience and use of course knowledge for internship credit or for publication in a trade journal.
20. When you have established your career reciprocate with internships for the next generation! Finally, I don’t believe in in “free” internships. Any company or agency can afford to pay some amount to at least cover your expenses. School programs should include securing payment for at least the course tuition. Good luck!
Clarke Caywood is Director of the Graduate Program in Public Relations in the Medill Graduate School at Northwestern University where he teaches crisis management, communications management, marketing and public relations.
* Share/Bookmark
Tags: Advice from a Pro · Guest Post · Job Search
1 response so far ↓
*
1 Jesse Davis // Feb 22, 2011 at 11:08 am
To start this is some great information. However, I am a college senior majoring in public relations and I am currently looking for an internship. I have been rather successful in finding the right person to talk to or take out to coffee, but I don’t know how to begin a conversation with them without looking like all I want is a job. Do you have any advice to begin to ask people if they are willing to take time out of their day to have a conversation about their job?
Another question I have is that I really like the idea of a YouTube interview video to separate myself from the rest of the applicants, but how creative or casual should you get with the video to show personality while maintaining a professional image?
Thanks for posting this blog!
*
2 Clarke Caywood, Ph.D. // Feb 22, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Jesse thanks for being alert to this important blog site. Watch my Twitter site for more clues about PR at IMCPROF. People in our field seem naturally inclined to help mentor the next generation. As long as you are respectful in your request, ask interesting questions (based on your classes and readings) most PR pros will try to be helpful. The creator of this blog, Ron Culp, taught me that meeting young professionals pays off in the long run as you may have an opening for them at some point in the future. They know you want a job or internship. You know they know so just be transparent. “Do you have an opening or can you help advise and direct me toward a career in PR?" is a fair question. On Flickr or YouTube (other sites as well) I would use a digital image, on a tripod (to avoid Blair Witch Project look) with a friend (swap out). Casual but not sloppy is fine, look into the camera and say something interesting about yourself and something interesting about the field from your studies. You might mention your findings on a class project for a client. 3 minutes is enough. You might rotate the video or have two titled for a choice. See IMC residencies on YouTube though they are bit dated. Good luck!
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Happy Birthday Abe Lincoln.
"If I were to try to read, much less answer, all the attacks made on me, this shop might as well be closed for any other business. I do the very best I know how – the very best I can; and I mean to keep doing so until the end. If the end brings me out all right, what is said against me won’t amount to anything. If the end brings me out wrong, ten angels swearing I was right would make no difference.” by Abraham Lincoln (February 12, 1809 – April 15, 1865)
Also quoted by my first boss - Wisconsin Governor Warren P. Knowles (1969) and his Executive Assistant Paul Hassett in a printed card used in the office durng tough times with the legislature, press and other stakeholders. I still have the card that was printed by the office to remind the small staff that we had to persevere when we knew we were right. The quote still gives me courage to "to do the very best I know how" regarding matters of academic and personal freedom, the celebration of democracy for our nation, the sanctity of the university and education, the intellectual growth of my students, the protection of my faculty colleagues from injustice and the health and welfare of my family. Thanks, Abe!
Also quoted by my first boss - Wisconsin Governor Warren P. Knowles (1969) and his Executive Assistant Paul Hassett in a printed card used in the office durng tough times with the legislature, press and other stakeholders. I still have the card that was printed by the office to remind the small staff that we had to persevere when we knew we were right. The quote still gives me courage to "to do the very best I know how" regarding matters of academic and personal freedom, the celebration of democracy for our nation, the sanctity of the university and education, the intellectual growth of my students, the protection of my faculty colleagues from injustice and the health and welfare of my family. Thanks, Abe!
Monday, November 22, 2010
Someone asked where do IMC students go after graduation?
IMC (Advertising Department) used to send almost 100% of the graduates in the late 1980s and early 1990s to marcom agencies advertising, PR and direct marketing. When these firms were merged under holding companies they still hired out students in IMC but also hired MBAs for the corporate offices.
After teaching MBAs for over a decade I found that they would and could work in any industry doing almost anything. Look around your office or room and ask if you are willing to sell anything you see and work for a firm that sells it. The inclination may define an some of the 265,000 MBAs who graduate each year. There are two attactions to hiring IMC students: 1. they use communications as a primary and unique strategic advantage to conduct business. 2. they like to work in the communications industry (agencies, media, publishing).
The 15 month degree is also a bit cheaper than some private school MBAs. All individuals considering graduate should seriously consider "running the numbers" or calculating the return on investment of the degree. You will need to search this blog site for help but also ask the schools 1. all direct costs (tuition, books, travel for classes) 2. housing costs in area as more or less costly than your current costs, 3. estimate loss of income from leaving work to return to school, not working while in school and how long it takes to find a job after graduation (a serious issue in this economy since it can be 6 months or more). What is the cost of borrowing and finally what will be the estimated increase in your salary based on earning a new degree (demand details here). Naturally you can add less economic factors like the value of pride of a graduate degree, meeting your life partner in school, taking time off from work, etc. But, please run the numbers to show that you are a business person with your own decisions.
However, at NU IMC students are educated and trained to be able to apply their in-depth knowledge of communications which is not taught in MBA prograsms to any type of company in B2B and B2C and NGOs and even government. They work in "marketing services", public relations, employee relations, branding (with some distinctions), investor relations, issues management and strategic planning and more.
While many MBAs are hired to work in brand management in consumer goods companies; IMC students are better suited to work on communications (rather than pricing, logistics and product issuues) of branding. There is some confusion in this hiring arena by HR professionals since MBAs may have taken only one or even no course on advertising and promotion, no courses on PR, media analysis and none on database customer analysis. Still, MBAs dominate the brand management hiring.
Of course, IMC students are just as entrepreneurial as as MBAs. They are able and willing to form their own companies (usually with a communications advantage). Search for IMC at Northwestern for a more comprehensive insight to the degree.http://www.medill.northwestern.edu/imc/default.aspx. If you want more information on the salaries, employers, careers of IMC students contact the school for details.
After teaching MBAs for over a decade I found that they would and could work in any industry doing almost anything. Look around your office or room and ask if you are willing to sell anything you see and work for a firm that sells it. The inclination may define an some of the 265,000 MBAs who graduate each year. There are two attactions to hiring IMC students: 1. they use communications as a primary and unique strategic advantage to conduct business. 2. they like to work in the communications industry (agencies, media, publishing).
The 15 month degree is also a bit cheaper than some private school MBAs. All individuals considering graduate should seriously consider "running the numbers" or calculating the return on investment of the degree. You will need to search this blog site for help but also ask the schools 1. all direct costs (tuition, books, travel for classes) 2. housing costs in area as more or less costly than your current costs, 3. estimate loss of income from leaving work to return to school, not working while in school and how long it takes to find a job after graduation (a serious issue in this economy since it can be 6 months or more). What is the cost of borrowing and finally what will be the estimated increase in your salary based on earning a new degree (demand details here). Naturally you can add less economic factors like the value of pride of a graduate degree, meeting your life partner in school, taking time off from work, etc. But, please run the numbers to show that you are a business person with your own decisions.
However, at NU IMC students are educated and trained to be able to apply their in-depth knowledge of communications which is not taught in MBA prograsms to any type of company in B2B and B2C and NGOs and even government. They work in "marketing services", public relations, employee relations, branding (with some distinctions), investor relations, issues management and strategic planning and more.
While many MBAs are hired to work in brand management in consumer goods companies; IMC students are better suited to work on communications (rather than pricing, logistics and product issuues) of branding. There is some confusion in this hiring arena by HR professionals since MBAs may have taken only one or even no course on advertising and promotion, no courses on PR, media analysis and none on database customer analysis. Still, MBAs dominate the brand management hiring.
Of course, IMC students are just as entrepreneurial as as MBAs. They are able and willing to form their own companies (usually with a communications advantage). Search for IMC at Northwestern for a more comprehensive insight to the degree.http://www.medill.northwestern.edu/imc/default.aspx. If you want more information on the salaries, employers, careers of IMC students contact the school for details.
What should you ask before returning or entering graduate school?
Questions to ask (some are very sensitive but ask them anyway)
1. placement record and time to secure a job after graduation
2. scholarships or loans (not available for international students)- this will become a serious issue
3. percent of international and U.S. students (too many too few to learn from and what countries).
4. quality of placement (some call it the euphemistic "career planning") to get you a job with the companies and organizations supporting the school.
5. names of contacts of former graduates to hear the good and bad (not a short list of admission department names)
6. what has happened to the international students? Are they working in the U.S., is it even possible, does the school know where they are if they returned to their country.
7. is the program in professional education dominated by recent graduates with little or no work experience. Does this matter to you?
8. is the program a balance of men and women? Does it matter to you?
9. are they too many part-time faculty teaching in the evening (not available for meetings). Should classes be co-taught to get a mix of new research and thinking from doctoral faculty and new experience and contacts from industry faculty?
10. Is a part-time degree the best choice financially and personally to keep your hand in business? Is the return on investment (ROI) stronger?
1. placement record and time to secure a job after graduation
2. scholarships or loans (not available for international students)- this will become a serious issue
3. percent of international and U.S. students (too many too few to learn from and what countries).
4. quality of placement (some call it the euphemistic "career planning") to get you a job with the companies and organizations supporting the school.
5. names of contacts of former graduates to hear the good and bad (not a short list of admission department names)
6. what has happened to the international students? Are they working in the U.S., is it even possible, does the school know where they are if they returned to their country.
7. is the program in professional education dominated by recent graduates with little or no work experience. Does this matter to you?
8. is the program a balance of men and women? Does it matter to you?
9. are they too many part-time faculty teaching in the evening (not available for meetings). Should classes be co-taught to get a mix of new research and thinking from doctoral faculty and new experience and contacts from industry faculty?
10. Is a part-time degree the best choice financially and personally to keep your hand in business? Is the return on investment (ROI) stronger?
Saturday, October 16, 2010
IMC Retail Plan: Research, Plan, Implement and Evalulate
Sample Retail Level Audit of the Brand Image and Performance
Prepared by Clarke L. Caywood, Ph.D. 2010
This task and audit memorandum is designed to apply the experience and thinking of the Department of Integrated Marketing Communications and Clarke L. Caywood, Ph.D. to retail, single site business. Many of the ideas most often applied to larger consumer goods and business to business level companies have been adapted to a retail firm located in a single site. However, the importance of the application of modern marketing practices to strengthen the store and store owner brand is just as important and may be more important since the stakes are relatively higher for the personal success of the business owner. As with any application of strategic thought and tactics; the memo is really a list of hopefully powerful suggestions that may stimulate the owner to devise his own version of his branding strategy.
First, the memo identifies a number of questions that should be answered in the eyes of the business consumer, in this case member or student. The research steps first ask the brander to understand the consumer, the employee, the co-branding partners, the lending institution, the media, community, business organizations and other stakeholders or publics at the retail level. The retail level IMC communication strategy includes these four steps: Research, plan, implementation, evaluation. See attachment for questions asked at each step for high level professional performance. Each step constantly reminds the branding manager to consider the information gathered primarily in step one (research).
Research
Research is important to gather facts, insights, understanding of the consumer, prospective member, and other critical stakeholders who may heavily influence the consumer’s perspective of the quality and importance of the store and owner brand.
1. Run the “Brand contact audit” and take notes. Ask a current, friendly member to walk through with you recording all his/her comments on their impressions starting in the parking lot.
2. Discuss the brand contact ideas from the impressionable consultant:
1. Where do I park, can I park on the side or is that for the restaurant?
2. Where is the gym? I see the sign but I don’t see the windows. Is that the door?
3. Is it safe to enter? I am in 15 feet and I still don’t know if it is really open?
4. “Wow! Look at all those people in the class; it looks great".
5. Is it the right place?
6. Will someone welcome me? Why don’t they notice me?
7. Was there bell that sounded when I entered?
8. Should I leave now?
9. Where do I wait? Where do I sit? Is my car safe?
10. What is going on here? Do they have my centers of interest?
11. Where are the showers, lockers and toilets?
12. Is that coffee or water for me?
13. Do I like the music?
14. Why is the lighting so harsh?
15. Why are the walls so beat-up?
16. I like the wooden and rubber floors.
17. Do they have shower stalls?
18. Should they have more mirrors? I don’t really like mirrors.
19. Will the class welcome me?
20. Where do I put my purse, bag, and coat?
21. Do they have “cubbies?”?
22. How much is it (wall chart)
23. Do they have personal training? Are these the people? Do they have a female trainer?
24. Where are their pictures and credentials?
25. Is it really, really, really clean.
26. Is the science part real? Can I have an article to take home? Do you have a website link on science?
27. More.
3. Audit of all your communications.
1. All printed materials, contracts, brochures, ads, letters, emails, website, billing notices, exercise sheets, directions to the gym, story of the owner, page of valuable links to website to learn, brochure on science testing device and article confirming its validity.
2. Call your store and gather an impression of how this communications works for brand building. Leave a message and check if it arrives in a timely way. Leave a message for specific trainers.
3. Leave a message on your website.
4. List of all “competitors” that you would like to compare yourself to. Other gyms big and little. Churches, schools, other non-gym gyms. Spas. Home exercise equipment stores?
5. List all formal and informal co-branding agreement and actions taken and date of next action.
a. All stores in the shopping mall and across the street, on each corner.
b. Other business partners including hospitals, doctors, dentists, schools, coaches and gym teachers, university Greek and independent houses, bike shops, sporting goods,
Etc. to place your materials and ask for rewarded referrals.
4. Focus groups and other face to face human research – each idea is an option.
1. Run 5 Post class 30 minute discussion with rewards (drawing for a prize)
2. Offer surveys for all visiting with reward (drawing for a prize)
3. Offer a survey on website
4. Email to members a free survey on “survey monkey”
5. Conduct exit interviews of members who have not renewed, have announced they are leaving because of dissatisfaction with service, price or moving from the area.
6. Interviews with customers you know have left due to service complaints in the past 6 months
7. Find and review of stories and any research on gym management and marketing
8. Locate research materials from suppliers (equipment) of their exercise related research.
9. Conduct general government and social research on exercise
10. Review and locate current scientific and supplier data on your scientific testing systems
5. Gather feedback from conferences, events, meetings
1. Data from show sponsors (pre and post surveys, trends, speakers)
2. Data from specific industry booths
3. Collect data on the floor and events of specific interest to your goals and ideas
4. Arrange to run a focus group at event for a free lunch for about 9 people.
5. Interview people watching people running at half marathons, marathons, 5Ks. What would they like to accomplish in the next 6 months to a year? Would they like to participate in the event
6. See questions on the score sheet attached.
7. more
Planning
1. Prepare new product plans that include new audiences identified above and from your own experience and study of competitors
a. Elderly and deals with senior centers
b. People planning to get in shape for an event (party, season, run, family, doctor, trip, etc.)
c. All motivations need to be examined.
d. New equipment ordered or needed to compete (crazy exercise equipment in bike shop)
e. Recent birth mothers with babies in tow
f. Father’s preparing to give away the bride
g. Unemployed professionals who want to look fit, energized and great (team with spa)
2. From the audit above plan to improve the brand contact points
a. Plan specific decorating, remodeling, reorganization and new machines.
b. Use a form to list contact points:
i. List contact point, e.g. front door, front hallway entrance,
ii. List positive or negative impression,
iii. List how important it seems to be to the consumer,
iv. Quote the consumer on if the contact is positive, negative or neutral to them
v. Note improvement s needed on the brand contact point.
3. Use MBO (management by objectives) to plan your statements of success.
a. Mission is your broadest statement of what words represent your reason for being in business and serving others
b. Goals are general statement of what new and continuing actions you wish to do to improve your branding offering. Help recent birth mothers to XXX
c. Objectives are very specific intentions of the plan. By X date, Y person will increase memberships by Z% with a renewal rate of A. The cost of each new member will not exceed $B. Or, By X date, Y person will create a consumer contact database for a cost not exceeding $Z. The database will be used to contact A consumers by B date with offer C. etc.
4. Plan for the personal branding goals of Tony, but plan to improve the store contact points and brand before launching a personal brand to the media or other stakeholders.
a. Conduct a personal brand audit of Tony
b. Develop goals, objectives
c. Devise a list of communication actions that are more personality driven
5. See the questions on the score sheet.
Implementation
1. Develop an 24 month schedule of action (over two budget periods and two seasons)
2. Test and do your marketing product and communication ideas.
3. Be opportunistic but follow the plan.
4. Measure everything
5. Have fun doing it
6. See question on the score sheet
Evaluation
1. Measure everything
2. Take before and after pictures of the store, the owner and the customers.
3. Re-interview members, consumers
4. Redo the brand contact audit
5. Measure and report on all consumer data, finances profits, costs, per customer acquisition costs, lifetime value of the consumer/member, value of leads from co-branders, etc.
6. See the questions on the score sheet
7. More
Rewrite you corporate statements, if needed. Start over.
Clarke Caywood, Ph.D. ccaywood@gmail.com 847 2420901.
Prepared by Clarke L. Caywood, Ph.D. 2010
This task and audit memorandum is designed to apply the experience and thinking of the Department of Integrated Marketing Communications and Clarke L. Caywood, Ph.D. to retail, single site business. Many of the ideas most often applied to larger consumer goods and business to business level companies have been adapted to a retail firm located in a single site. However, the importance of the application of modern marketing practices to strengthen the store and store owner brand is just as important and may be more important since the stakes are relatively higher for the personal success of the business owner. As with any application of strategic thought and tactics; the memo is really a list of hopefully powerful suggestions that may stimulate the owner to devise his own version of his branding strategy.
First, the memo identifies a number of questions that should be answered in the eyes of the business consumer, in this case member or student. The research steps first ask the brander to understand the consumer, the employee, the co-branding partners, the lending institution, the media, community, business organizations and other stakeholders or publics at the retail level. The retail level IMC communication strategy includes these four steps: Research, plan, implementation, evaluation. See attachment for questions asked at each step for high level professional performance. Each step constantly reminds the branding manager to consider the information gathered primarily in step one (research).
Research
Research is important to gather facts, insights, understanding of the consumer, prospective member, and other critical stakeholders who may heavily influence the consumer’s perspective of the quality and importance of the store and owner brand.
1. Run the “Brand contact audit” and take notes. Ask a current, friendly member to walk through with you recording all his/her comments on their impressions starting in the parking lot.
2. Discuss the brand contact ideas from the impressionable consultant:
1. Where do I park, can I park on the side or is that for the restaurant?
2. Where is the gym? I see the sign but I don’t see the windows. Is that the door?
3. Is it safe to enter? I am in 15 feet and I still don’t know if it is really open?
4. “Wow! Look at all those people in the class; it looks great".
5. Is it the right place?
6. Will someone welcome me? Why don’t they notice me?
7. Was there bell that sounded when I entered?
8. Should I leave now?
9. Where do I wait? Where do I sit? Is my car safe?
10. What is going on here? Do they have my centers of interest?
11. Where are the showers, lockers and toilets?
12. Is that coffee or water for me?
13. Do I like the music?
14. Why is the lighting so harsh?
15. Why are the walls so beat-up?
16. I like the wooden and rubber floors.
17. Do they have shower stalls?
18. Should they have more mirrors? I don’t really like mirrors.
19. Will the class welcome me?
20. Where do I put my purse, bag, and coat?
21. Do they have “cubbies?”?
22. How much is it (wall chart)
23. Do they have personal training? Are these the people? Do they have a female trainer?
24. Where are their pictures and credentials?
25. Is it really, really, really clean.
26. Is the science part real? Can I have an article to take home? Do you have a website link on science?
27. More.
3. Audit of all your communications.
1. All printed materials, contracts, brochures, ads, letters, emails, website, billing notices, exercise sheets, directions to the gym, story of the owner, page of valuable links to website to learn, brochure on science testing device and article confirming its validity.
2. Call your store and gather an impression of how this communications works for brand building. Leave a message and check if it arrives in a timely way. Leave a message for specific trainers.
3. Leave a message on your website.
4. List of all “competitors” that you would like to compare yourself to. Other gyms big and little. Churches, schools, other non-gym gyms. Spas. Home exercise equipment stores?
5. List all formal and informal co-branding agreement and actions taken and date of next action.
a. All stores in the shopping mall and across the street, on each corner.
b. Other business partners including hospitals, doctors, dentists, schools, coaches and gym teachers, university Greek and independent houses, bike shops, sporting goods,
Etc. to place your materials and ask for rewarded referrals.
4. Focus groups and other face to face human research – each idea is an option.
1. Run 5 Post class 30 minute discussion with rewards (drawing for a prize)
2. Offer surveys for all visiting with reward (drawing for a prize)
3. Offer a survey on website
4. Email to members a free survey on “survey monkey”
5. Conduct exit interviews of members who have not renewed, have announced they are leaving because of dissatisfaction with service, price or moving from the area.
6. Interviews with customers you know have left due to service complaints in the past 6 months
7. Find and review of stories and any research on gym management and marketing
8. Locate research materials from suppliers (equipment) of their exercise related research.
9. Conduct general government and social research on exercise
10. Review and locate current scientific and supplier data on your scientific testing systems
5. Gather feedback from conferences, events, meetings
1. Data from show sponsors (pre and post surveys, trends, speakers)
2. Data from specific industry booths
3. Collect data on the floor and events of specific interest to your goals and ideas
4. Arrange to run a focus group at event for a free lunch for about 9 people.
5. Interview people watching people running at half marathons, marathons, 5Ks. What would they like to accomplish in the next 6 months to a year? Would they like to participate in the event
6. See questions on the score sheet attached.
7. more
Planning
1. Prepare new product plans that include new audiences identified above and from your own experience and study of competitors
a. Elderly and deals with senior centers
b. People planning to get in shape for an event (party, season, run, family, doctor, trip, etc.)
c. All motivations need to be examined.
d. New equipment ordered or needed to compete (crazy exercise equipment in bike shop)
e. Recent birth mothers with babies in tow
f. Father’s preparing to give away the bride
g. Unemployed professionals who want to look fit, energized and great (team with spa)
2. From the audit above plan to improve the brand contact points
a. Plan specific decorating, remodeling, reorganization and new machines.
b. Use a form to list contact points:
i. List contact point, e.g. front door, front hallway entrance,
ii. List positive or negative impression,
iii. List how important it seems to be to the consumer,
iv. Quote the consumer on if the contact is positive, negative or neutral to them
v. Note improvement s needed on the brand contact point.
3. Use MBO (management by objectives) to plan your statements of success.
a. Mission is your broadest statement of what words represent your reason for being in business and serving others
b. Goals are general statement of what new and continuing actions you wish to do to improve your branding offering. Help recent birth mothers to XXX
c. Objectives are very specific intentions of the plan. By X date, Y person will increase memberships by Z% with a renewal rate of A. The cost of each new member will not exceed $B. Or, By X date, Y person will create a consumer contact database for a cost not exceeding $Z. The database will be used to contact A consumers by B date with offer C. etc.
4. Plan for the personal branding goals of Tony, but plan to improve the store contact points and brand before launching a personal brand to the media or other stakeholders.
a. Conduct a personal brand audit of Tony
b. Develop goals, objectives
c. Devise a list of communication actions that are more personality driven
5. See the questions on the score sheet.
Implementation
1. Develop an 24 month schedule of action (over two budget periods and two seasons)
2. Test and do your marketing product and communication ideas.
3. Be opportunistic but follow the plan.
4. Measure everything
5. Have fun doing it
6. See question on the score sheet
Evaluation
1. Measure everything
2. Take before and after pictures of the store, the owner and the customers.
3. Re-interview members, consumers
4. Redo the brand contact audit
5. Measure and report on all consumer data, finances profits, costs, per customer acquisition costs, lifetime value of the consumer/member, value of leads from co-branders, etc.
6. See the questions on the score sheet
7. More
Rewrite you corporate statements, if needed. Start over.
Clarke Caywood, Ph.D. ccaywood@gmail.com 847 2420901.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Comment on this draft of a paper for a conference
When Mere “Selling Word” Strategies Jeopardize Your Brand: “The Other White Meat” as “The Other Brand Strategy”.
Abstract: Marketing communications becomes more than a mere consumer strategy for high risk industries, products and services. The National Pork Board’s Highly Successful Message “Pork, the Other White Meat” faced serious challenges by competitors. A 2010 Trademark Trial and Appeal Board found that earlier “impact” research at Northwestern University and the broader integrated stakeholder strategy of the pork industry and other commodity associations protected the rights of speech and the industry brand.
Following a landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Appeal Board that confirmed the constitutionality of commodity checkoff programs as “government speech,” the U.S. Appeal Board of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit in Philadelphia affirms the constitutionality of the dairy producer-funded checkoff program, reversing an earlier decision. http://www.dairycheckoff.com/DairyCheckoff/AboutUs/WhatIsDairyManagementInc/What-Is-Dairy-Management
We find especially compelling the
evidence from the Northwestern Study of 2000 showing that
only four other consumer messages in the United States had a
greater degree of recognition than THE OTHER WHITE MEAT.
[Ex. 338] This finding supports a conclusion that
Opposer (Pork)s’ mark is extremely well recognized by a broad
spectrum of consumers, and that this degree of recognition
among the general consuming public of this famous mark also
supports the conclusion that dilution by blurring is likely
upon the introduction of applicant (lobster)’s message into the
marketplace. The case is a mark infringement case
Hearing: Mailed: December 16, 2009 June 11, 2010
Bucher UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board National Pork Board and National Pork Producers Council
v. Supreme Lobster and Seafood Company, p. 59
So much of marketing communications can seem trivial. Mere selling words and phrases seem so disconnected from the total brand objectives of a company to exist with permission of society to provide products, services, employment, investment and a clean environment.. (www.awpagesociety.com). As a society we should expect so much more than merely a “new, proven, free, dependable, convenient and advanced product X.” See list of common selling words below from: http://www.writingthoughts.com/?p=256feed. New, Proven, Improved, Guaranteed, Free, Tested, Pure, Best, Fresh, Sure, Healthy, Natural, Refreshing, Energizing, Safe, Quality, Dependable, Secure, Advanced, Easy, Convenient, Quick, Instant, Save, Personal.
When the Supreme Court (Dairy) or the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (Pork) rules on a challenge to whether you should be able to promote or market your product as a matter of Constitutional and Trademark law, it seems logical that the marketing goals and practices of that industry probably have more to say than “buy me”. This is the story of how “Pork the Other White Meat”, and other commodity product messages have gained marketing notoriety and success. It is also a story of integrated marketing communications managers building a total branding effort that goes well beyond mere selling language. As addressed in the cases cited above for commodity marketing associations, some marketers must define their “risk industry” products as requiring integrated marketing messaging to stakeholders and customers beyond mere selling messages.
Two works of marketing and law are examined here. In the first case, a seemingly out-of-date piece of research by the authors (1990) (Gronstedt, Caywood, and X ) gained new life as an important piece of evidence for a new case of law (2010) when one of the authors (Gronstedt) testified in the case about the research. In the second case, the authors’ research (and other research) were used extensively by a Trial judge in the U.S. Trademark Office to determine the outcome of an appeal to prevent a corporation from using the brand messaging of the pork industry to market lobster.
Repeating that sometimes marketing seem trivial, we acknowledge that the brief description of the case and research generates more looks of bemusement from our friends and students than attention to social and legal issues.. It does not appear, on its face, to be the story we believe should be told about how commodities and other risk products are more dangerous to consumers and stakeholders unless their messaging is clear and transparent and recognizable.
Research: Case 1
A decade ago the authors were asked by the Tom Hayden, LLD , then President of Bozell Advertising in Chicago IL (now faculty member in the Northwestern University Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) Department) to help conduct a study for their client the Pork industry (National Pork Board). It was not a simple brand study. The owners of the brand were thousands of pork producers (farmers) who contributed a portion of their hard earned income to a “check-off” program to market their commodities in the U.S. and world markets. The experience of one of the authors (Caywood) with other industry associations in the U.S. (beef, dairy) had demonstrated the more complex policy politics of shared governance where thousands of members who paid the fees demanded proof of success and a strong governance role. These organizations also provided extraordinary research and education to society on risk issue regarding their product from “mad cow” disease, to nutrition and food preparation safety. The original research and this summary are a casebook example of what universities with research based professional schools call “research with impact”.
The concept of the “check-off” not usually taught in business schools or IMC programs has given commodity industries like dairy, pork, beef, avocados and other agricultural products in highly fragmented industries a way for producers to cooperate to promote their products where the market buys. The Cattlemen's Beef Board and National Cattlemen's Beef Association’s experience with “Beef, it’s what’s for dinner” was not always positive with one spokesperson found to be a vegetarian and one suffering cardiac arrest. Still, as the research reported here notes, the message has been a strong one for the industry. The dairy industry’s experience with their selling message “Got Milk” won a lot of advertising awards, but industry research in the1990’s by the Leo Burnett agency showed that it did not sell as much milk as the producers wished. With the cooperation of one of the author’s stakeholder integrated model, the industry association representing the dairy farmers (producers) moved away from the message to successfully sell more milk enriched cheese, and cheese infused pizza for younger consumers. In the 1990s the industry also began to use a much wider range of communications channels others than traditional mass national TV and magazine ads.
Research
The key work of research used in a trademark case decided in May of 2010 was conducted for the National Pork Board in 1990 by the authors. The national survey concluded that “The Other White Meat” was the fifth most recognized message in the United States the year 2000. As many as 69% of the adult population responded that they recognized the message and could correctly identify it with pork.
Table 1-1 below shows the top 25 messages identified in phase one of the research study in rank order along with the percentages of people that could correctly identify the brand, company or product associated with each message, i.e. said “Yes” on the question if they had heard or seen the message, and also correctly identified the product, brand or company. It ranked higher than such household messages as Nike’s “Just do it” and State Farm’s “Like a Good neighbor.” In fact, it was among the top-ten most recognized messages among all demographic sub-segments analyzed. Moreover, it had one of the strongest associations with the correct brand or product groups of all messages; as many as 88% of respondents who recognized the message would also associate it with pork. This power of the message suggests that the language was far more effective than a mere selling message.
TABLE 1: PERCENTAGE OF CORRECT SLOGAN RECOGNITION AMONG TOTAL SAMPLE
Ranking Slogan Percent
1 You're in Good Hands (Allstate) 81.7%
2 Please Don't Squeeze the ____ (Charmin) 80.4%
3 Snap, Crackle, Pop (Rice Krispies) 80.2%
4 The Breakfast of Champions (Wheaties) 72.5%
5 The Other White Meat (Pork) 69.0%
6 No More Tears (Johnson's Baby Shampoo) 67.5%
7 Double Your Pleasure, Double Your Fun (Doublemint) 65.6%
8 The King of Beers (Budweiser) 62.8%
9 The Un-Cola (7-Up) 59.2%
10 Like a Good Neighbor (Statefarm) 57.2%
11 Be All That You Can Be (Army) 57.0%
12 Just Do It (Nike) 54.2%
13 Got _____ ? (Milk) 50.6%
14 The Place with the Helpful Hardware Folks (Ace) 48.8%
15 When you Care Enough to Send the Very Best (Hallmark) 48.1%
16 They're Great (Frosted Flakes) 42.5%
17 Don't Leave Home Without It (American Express) 41.4%
18 The Coppertop (Duracell) 41.4%
19 Built_______Tough (Ford) 41.2%
20 The Fabric of Our Lives (Cotton) 37.4%
21 How America Spells Cheese (Kraft) 35.0%
22 Did Somebody Say______? (McDonalds) 33.0%
23 Drivers Wanted (Volkswagen) 30.6%
24 We Bring Good Things to Life (GE) 30.3%
25 The Soup that Eats Like a Meal (Chunky) 29.0%
Sample size: 1,003
Methodology
The first phase of the study consisted of 126 personal interviews, testing the recognition of a list of 114 messages. The list was generated through research of secondary sources and input from a panel of advertising professional from Bozell Advertising. The personal interviews were used to narrow down the list to 25 messages. It was a combination of 50 mall intercept interviews in Boulder, CO and 76 classroom surveys at Northwestern University. To qualify for participation, respondents had to be over 18 years of age and have command of the English language. The respondents were read the list of 114 messages and were asked to identify the product, brand or company behind the message.
In phase two, the top 25 messages were tested in over 1,000 phone interviews. The interviewer asked the respondents if they had heard or seen the message and the respondents who answered yes were asked to identify the brand, product or company behind the message. A national sample was used and the qualifier was that the respondents were over 18 years of age and did not work in the field of marketing or advertising. The margin of error for the study is +/- 3 percent for the total sample and +/- 5 percent for the subgroups (at a 95% confidence level). It is interesting to note that none of the top ranking messages use what are overtly called selling words or phrases, but they have nevertheless penetrated the memory of the audience,
Case 2: The Legal Case: Pork and Lobster
In this review of national trademark law case we point out that marketing has far more serious integrated messaging to conduct that can be understood by a host of stakeholders including Supreme Court, Federal Court and Trademark Appeal Board judges. A lack of integration means that the creative message may be an isolated and independent group of words that are not linked to key stakeholders including employees, media, shareholders, government, community supplier and more. The public as represented by the press if you look at any recent Wall Street Journal are not interested in selling words; they are reading about takeovers, reduction of workforce, CEO salaries, corruption, the EURO, China business, trade, and other substantive issues (September 29, 2010). The challenge in marketing communications is to make the selling messages relevant, important, and signifying of a wider range of reasons to put a buyer’s confidence in a product or service. Some companies as revealed by research understand this better than most by supporting their brand message as a product message and a corporate/organizational reputational message or integrated communications (Caywood, ed. The Handbook of Strategic Public Relations and Integrated Communications, 1997 revision 2011.
These industries are always under some attack which is why research, public relations and issues management play a key role in their success. The authors’ have called certain organizations “risk industries”. Risk industries are those who market products that are taken internally (drugs, food, beverages) or applied to the skin (cosmetics, hair care, drugs) or used for transportation (autos, motorcycles, airplanes, boats, etc.). They can also be products sold to children, the elderly, poor or other protected social groups. The risk category normally contains food products due to ingestion, safety issues, commodity status and chemical content or use. How many brand marketers and agency leaders have the ability to respond to such attacks by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) as “Got Pus” instead of “Got Milk”? www.latimes.com/2007/dec/13/business/fi- The commodities beef industry was also under attack by NGOs and individuals with harsh counter messages such as “Heart attack on a bun” featuring a billboard picture of a hamburger. Commodity foods demand more serious marketing thought and planning beyond mere selling language. In these cases the messages much appeal to higher courts – figuratively and literally.
More than ever, research is needed to protect the trademark but also the reputation of the fragmented, risk commodity industries. The story of how the National Pork Board protected its message “Pork the other white meat” as a leading brand message reveals the value of such messages, the importance of their being more than “selling words”. This case is about a message becoming a “larger brand message supported by the public and protected by the law.
How the Federal Trademark Appeal Board Used the Research
With the breadth of such commodity promotional
messages in the marketplace, there can be no
question that consumers recognize these
messages for what they are, marks designating
the promotion of an industry group as a
whole. As such, these messages function
quintessentially as trademarks.”
Clearly, the Appeal Board judge was impressed with the original Northwestern study, but this discussion is more about how the ruling illustrates the value of a fully integrated marketing program that even those trained in the law understand and appreciate as evidence of impact. The “Opposers’ in this case were the National Pork Board with the National Pork Producers’ Council and the “Applicant” was the Supreme Lobster and Seafood Company. The seafood company had tried to use the well-known brand developed by the pork industry and Bozell Advertising as the “The Other Red Meat” with other variations of use to possibly mimic the “The Other…”. As the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) recounts, the Pork Board had taken their message to a very high and broad level of use to ensure that the highly recognized message was also linked to many marketing channels, customer experiences and frame of mind when thinking about food, family, romance and more.
This rich and integrated use of the creative message was first articulated by Professor Stanley Tannenbaum, one of the four faculty team founders of integrated marketing communications at Northwestern University (Tannenbaum, Schultz, Caywood and Scissors). Ref. Caywood and Ewing). Professor Tannenbaum in 1992, with great verbal and gestured drama, would often note that the integrated message should be “one voice, one look, one feel” across all channels of communications.
To emphasize the IMC linkage, the Trademark Trial Appeal Board documents an A-Z list of marketing communications tactics (Cite: Harris and Whalen, A Marketer’s Guide to Public Relations). They list “shirts, jackets…recipe books, cooking utensils…etc. bearing the mark THE OTHER WHITE MEAT…” The Court was also impressed with the early website (July 2007) www.theotherwhitemeat.com which “received almost a hundred thousand daily, unique visitors, with a total of almost six hundred thousand page views”. In some astonishment the Court writes:
The highest volume traffic goes to Opposers' (Pork) web pages having recipes – an
informational service that has proven to be most popular. Perhaps logical to modern marketers and IMC practitioner the Court must seemed amazed at the breadth and depth of ways that a message can be employed when they went on to list other creative uses of the slogan:
Opposers (Pork) have run local and national advertising playing off the mark with tag-lines that read
“The Other Backyard Barbecue,” “The Other Stir-Fry,” “The
Other Romantic Dinner,” “The Other Sunday Brunch,” “The
Other TV Dinner,” “The Other Way to Spice Up Your Love
Life,” “The Other Steak Dinner,” “The Other Prime Rib,” and
“The Other White Protein”
The Appeal Board clearly recognizes the concept that we noted in the introduction to this paper. The complexity of the marketing challenges facing the commodities industries in a high risk agriculture field does not escape the Appeal Board. They see that marketing in the world of “check-off” under government rule, with a fragmented industry of independent business leaders (farmers) of high visibility and high risk consumables is not child’s play for mere selling terms. The Appeal Board clearly recognizes that the industry and their marcom consultants have devoted themselves to establishing the power of the brand with enormous effort, investment, dedication and creativity.
Opposers (Pork) argue that these marks and other like them:
“… function in precisely the same way as
NPB’s mark, as a message to promote the
interests of an entire industry through
marketing aimed at promoting the consumption
of that industry’s principal product,
whether it be fresh beef, cotton fabric, or
whole eggs. These messages pervade the
marketplace. The marks are instantly
recognizable, and their iconic impact aims
to promote not a particular brand of goods,
but rather a service to that commodity
industry as a whole, promoting consumption
of that industry’s principal product.
Here, in black and white, is where we separate the wheat from the chaff of marketing and messaging. The challenge was to show that the applicant (lobster) did not fully understand the nature of stakeholder marketing by associations such as the National Pork Board, Dairy Management or the National Cattlemen’s Association or dozens of other commodity marketing organizations. The Court gives credit to commodity marketing organizations for promoting the commodity but not acting as a government agency to guarantee the product.
However, applicant (lobster) argues that consumers will be
misled and deceived by commodity promotion messages, and
that all such agencies should be scrutinized because of
their inability to control the quality standards of the
commodity being sold.
In an age of increasing food safety issues (cite) it may be that the associations should be more diligent in showing how they do work closely with government agencies and other stakeholders to protect the quality of their member’s product with program like ”Pork Quality Assurance Plus” program and the work of Dairy Management with programs of food safety research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
The National Pork Board has adopted a resolution urging all U.S. pork producers to become certified in the Pork Quality Assurance Plus® program by June 30, 2010, and to achieve PQA Plus® site status by Dec. 31, 2010. Additionally, the board is recommending that producers embrace the ethical principles the industry adopted in 2008. http://www.innovatewithdairy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/WisconsinCenterforDairyResearch.pdf#page=3http://www.pork.org/News/313/NewsRelease673.aspx
In this important case, the Appeal Board sees the challenge as larger than a simple single brand. The Appeal Board clearly understands the larger stakeholder issues facing the pork industry.
Additionally, this is not a product mark for identifying a
brand of pork. Clearly, the owner of a product mark for
fresh pork who does not control the quality of a
licensee’s products risks a finding that its trademark has
been abandoned. By contrast, the owner of a commodity promotion message
is concerned with the marketing effectiveness of all the
producers, suppliers and vendors within its industry sector
as a whole, whatever the principal product may be.
Opposer (Pork) herein maintains a precise message and focus by
controlling the ways in which their message/mark is used on
the promotion and packaging of pork and pork products. The
ultimate measure of this effort is the level of pork
consumption in the United States as a share of all meat
products, ultimately translating into economic benefit for
all pork producers
The Appeal Board cites as an important reference to valued communications about an industry and its producers to the consumers, the media, government the notion that the Pork Industry (and many other groups) only allow their message to be used in cases of high standards. The message is a validation of the reputation and Total Brand of the industry:
(Contra Midwest Plastic Fabricators Inc. v. Underwriters
Laboratories Inc., 906 F.2d 1568, 15 USPQ2d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
[Underwriters Laboratories certifies with its well known
symbol that electrical equipment meets safety standards];
In re Celanese Corp. of America, 136 USPQ 86 (TTAB 1962)
[CELANESE certifies plastic toys meeting certifier’s safety
standards])
Conclusion
There are many more questions to be addressed. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board document cited throughout contains many more pages of deliberation and debate over the value of this form of branding which should find their way into academic and trade articles testing other concepts of marketing, public relations and business. The authors’ expect to address some of the questions posed by the Appeal Board (not simply because the Appeal Board praised our research). We are embarked on a replication of the original research to retest some of the findings and more developed concepts of a more complex, stakeholder rich, and integrated world of marketing communications.
-30-
Abstract: Marketing communications becomes more than a mere consumer strategy for high risk industries, products and services. The National Pork Board’s Highly Successful Message “Pork, the Other White Meat” faced serious challenges by competitors. A 2010 Trademark Trial and Appeal Board found that earlier “impact” research at Northwestern University and the broader integrated stakeholder strategy of the pork industry and other commodity associations protected the rights of speech and the industry brand.
Following a landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Appeal Board that confirmed the constitutionality of commodity checkoff programs as “government speech,” the U.S. Appeal Board of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit in Philadelphia affirms the constitutionality of the dairy producer-funded checkoff program, reversing an earlier decision. http://www.dairycheckoff.com/DairyCheckoff/AboutUs/WhatIsDairyManagementInc/What-Is-Dairy-Management
We find especially compelling the
evidence from the Northwestern Study of 2000 showing that
only four other consumer messages in the United States had a
greater degree of recognition than THE OTHER WHITE MEAT.
[Ex. 338] This finding supports a conclusion that
Opposer (Pork)s’ mark is extremely well recognized by a broad
spectrum of consumers, and that this degree of recognition
among the general consuming public of this famous mark also
supports the conclusion that dilution by blurring is likely
upon the introduction of applicant (lobster)’s message into the
marketplace. The case is a mark infringement case
Hearing: Mailed: December 16, 2009 June 11, 2010
Bucher UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board National Pork Board and National Pork Producers Council
v. Supreme Lobster and Seafood Company, p. 59
So much of marketing communications can seem trivial. Mere selling words and phrases seem so disconnected from the total brand objectives of a company to exist with permission of society to provide products, services, employment, investment and a clean environment.. (www.awpagesociety.com). As a society we should expect so much more than merely a “new, proven, free, dependable, convenient and advanced product X.” See list of common selling words below from: http://www.writingthoughts.com/?p=256feed. New, Proven, Improved, Guaranteed, Free, Tested, Pure, Best, Fresh, Sure, Healthy, Natural, Refreshing, Energizing, Safe, Quality, Dependable, Secure, Advanced, Easy, Convenient, Quick, Instant, Save, Personal.
When the Supreme Court (Dairy) or the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (Pork) rules on a challenge to whether you should be able to promote or market your product as a matter of Constitutional and Trademark law, it seems logical that the marketing goals and practices of that industry probably have more to say than “buy me”. This is the story of how “Pork the Other White Meat”, and other commodity product messages have gained marketing notoriety and success. It is also a story of integrated marketing communications managers building a total branding effort that goes well beyond mere selling language. As addressed in the cases cited above for commodity marketing associations, some marketers must define their “risk industry” products as requiring integrated marketing messaging to stakeholders and customers beyond mere selling messages.
Two works of marketing and law are examined here. In the first case, a seemingly out-of-date piece of research by the authors (1990) (Gronstedt, Caywood, and X ) gained new life as an important piece of evidence for a new case of law (2010) when one of the authors (Gronstedt) testified in the case about the research. In the second case, the authors’ research (and other research) were used extensively by a Trial judge in the U.S. Trademark Office to determine the outcome of an appeal to prevent a corporation from using the brand messaging of the pork industry to market lobster.
Repeating that sometimes marketing seem trivial, we acknowledge that the brief description of the case and research generates more looks of bemusement from our friends and students than attention to social and legal issues.. It does not appear, on its face, to be the story we believe should be told about how commodities and other risk products are more dangerous to consumers and stakeholders unless their messaging is clear and transparent and recognizable.
Research: Case 1
A decade ago the authors were asked by the Tom Hayden, LLD , then President of Bozell Advertising in Chicago IL (now faculty member in the Northwestern University Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) Department) to help conduct a study for their client the Pork industry (National Pork Board). It was not a simple brand study. The owners of the brand were thousands of pork producers (farmers) who contributed a portion of their hard earned income to a “check-off” program to market their commodities in the U.S. and world markets. The experience of one of the authors (Caywood) with other industry associations in the U.S. (beef, dairy) had demonstrated the more complex policy politics of shared governance where thousands of members who paid the fees demanded proof of success and a strong governance role. These organizations also provided extraordinary research and education to society on risk issue regarding their product from “mad cow” disease, to nutrition and food preparation safety. The original research and this summary are a casebook example of what universities with research based professional schools call “research with impact”.
The concept of the “check-off” not usually taught in business schools or IMC programs has given commodity industries like dairy, pork, beef, avocados and other agricultural products in highly fragmented industries a way for producers to cooperate to promote their products where the market buys. The Cattlemen's Beef Board and National Cattlemen's Beef Association’s experience with “Beef, it’s what’s for dinner” was not always positive with one spokesperson found to be a vegetarian and one suffering cardiac arrest. Still, as the research reported here notes, the message has been a strong one for the industry. The dairy industry’s experience with their selling message “Got Milk” won a lot of advertising awards, but industry research in the1990’s by the Leo Burnett agency showed that it did not sell as much milk as the producers wished. With the cooperation of one of the author’s stakeholder integrated model, the industry association representing the dairy farmers (producers) moved away from the message to successfully sell more milk enriched cheese, and cheese infused pizza for younger consumers. In the 1990s the industry also began to use a much wider range of communications channels others than traditional mass national TV and magazine ads.
Research
The key work of research used in a trademark case decided in May of 2010 was conducted for the National Pork Board in 1990 by the authors. The national survey concluded that “The Other White Meat” was the fifth most recognized message in the United States the year 2000. As many as 69% of the adult population responded that they recognized the message and could correctly identify it with pork.
Table 1-1 below shows the top 25 messages identified in phase one of the research study in rank order along with the percentages of people that could correctly identify the brand, company or product associated with each message, i.e. said “Yes” on the question if they had heard or seen the message, and also correctly identified the product, brand or company. It ranked higher than such household messages as Nike’s “Just do it” and State Farm’s “Like a Good neighbor.” In fact, it was among the top-ten most recognized messages among all demographic sub-segments analyzed. Moreover, it had one of the strongest associations with the correct brand or product groups of all messages; as many as 88% of respondents who recognized the message would also associate it with pork. This power of the message suggests that the language was far more effective than a mere selling message.
TABLE 1: PERCENTAGE OF CORRECT SLOGAN RECOGNITION AMONG TOTAL SAMPLE
Ranking Slogan Percent
1 You're in Good Hands (Allstate) 81.7%
2 Please Don't Squeeze the ____ (Charmin) 80.4%
3 Snap, Crackle, Pop (Rice Krispies) 80.2%
4 The Breakfast of Champions (Wheaties) 72.5%
5 The Other White Meat (Pork) 69.0%
6 No More Tears (Johnson's Baby Shampoo) 67.5%
7 Double Your Pleasure, Double Your Fun (Doublemint) 65.6%
8 The King of Beers (Budweiser) 62.8%
9 The Un-Cola (7-Up) 59.2%
10 Like a Good Neighbor (Statefarm) 57.2%
11 Be All That You Can Be (Army) 57.0%
12 Just Do It (Nike) 54.2%
13 Got _____ ? (Milk) 50.6%
14 The Place with the Helpful Hardware Folks (Ace) 48.8%
15 When you Care Enough to Send the Very Best (Hallmark) 48.1%
16 They're Great (Frosted Flakes) 42.5%
17 Don't Leave Home Without It (American Express) 41.4%
18 The Coppertop (Duracell) 41.4%
19 Built_______Tough (Ford) 41.2%
20 The Fabric of Our Lives (Cotton) 37.4%
21 How America Spells Cheese (Kraft) 35.0%
22 Did Somebody Say______? (McDonalds) 33.0%
23 Drivers Wanted (Volkswagen) 30.6%
24 We Bring Good Things to Life (GE) 30.3%
25 The Soup that Eats Like a Meal (Chunky) 29.0%
Sample size: 1,003
Methodology
The first phase of the study consisted of 126 personal interviews, testing the recognition of a list of 114 messages. The list was generated through research of secondary sources and input from a panel of advertising professional from Bozell Advertising. The personal interviews were used to narrow down the list to 25 messages. It was a combination of 50 mall intercept interviews in Boulder, CO and 76 classroom surveys at Northwestern University. To qualify for participation, respondents had to be over 18 years of age and have command of the English language. The respondents were read the list of 114 messages and were asked to identify the product, brand or company behind the message.
In phase two, the top 25 messages were tested in over 1,000 phone interviews. The interviewer asked the respondents if they had heard or seen the message and the respondents who answered yes were asked to identify the brand, product or company behind the message. A national sample was used and the qualifier was that the respondents were over 18 years of age and did not work in the field of marketing or advertising. The margin of error for the study is +/- 3 percent for the total sample and +/- 5 percent for the subgroups (at a 95% confidence level). It is interesting to note that none of the top ranking messages use what are overtly called selling words or phrases, but they have nevertheless penetrated the memory of the audience,
Case 2: The Legal Case: Pork and Lobster
In this review of national trademark law case we point out that marketing has far more serious integrated messaging to conduct that can be understood by a host of stakeholders including Supreme Court, Federal Court and Trademark Appeal Board judges. A lack of integration means that the creative message may be an isolated and independent group of words that are not linked to key stakeholders including employees, media, shareholders, government, community supplier and more. The public as represented by the press if you look at any recent Wall Street Journal are not interested in selling words; they are reading about takeovers, reduction of workforce, CEO salaries, corruption, the EURO, China business, trade, and other substantive issues (September 29, 2010). The challenge in marketing communications is to make the selling messages relevant, important, and signifying of a wider range of reasons to put a buyer’s confidence in a product or service. Some companies as revealed by research understand this better than most by supporting their brand message as a product message and a corporate/organizational reputational message or integrated communications (Caywood, ed. The Handbook of Strategic Public Relations and Integrated Communications, 1997 revision 2011.
These industries are always under some attack which is why research, public relations and issues management play a key role in their success. The authors’ have called certain organizations “risk industries”. Risk industries are those who market products that are taken internally (drugs, food, beverages) or applied to the skin (cosmetics, hair care, drugs) or used for transportation (autos, motorcycles, airplanes, boats, etc.). They can also be products sold to children, the elderly, poor or other protected social groups. The risk category normally contains food products due to ingestion, safety issues, commodity status and chemical content or use. How many brand marketers and agency leaders have the ability to respond to such attacks by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) as “Got Pus” instead of “Got Milk”? www.latimes.com/2007/dec/13/business/fi- The commodities beef industry was also under attack by NGOs and individuals with harsh counter messages such as “Heart attack on a bun” featuring a billboard picture of a hamburger. Commodity foods demand more serious marketing thought and planning beyond mere selling language. In these cases the messages much appeal to higher courts – figuratively and literally.
More than ever, research is needed to protect the trademark but also the reputation of the fragmented, risk commodity industries. The story of how the National Pork Board protected its message “Pork the other white meat” as a leading brand message reveals the value of such messages, the importance of their being more than “selling words”. This case is about a message becoming a “larger brand message supported by the public and protected by the law.
How the Federal Trademark Appeal Board Used the Research
With the breadth of such commodity promotional
messages in the marketplace, there can be no
question that consumers recognize these
messages for what they are, marks designating
the promotion of an industry group as a
whole. As such, these messages function
quintessentially as trademarks.”
Clearly, the Appeal Board judge was impressed with the original Northwestern study, but this discussion is more about how the ruling illustrates the value of a fully integrated marketing program that even those trained in the law understand and appreciate as evidence of impact. The “Opposers’ in this case were the National Pork Board with the National Pork Producers’ Council and the “Applicant” was the Supreme Lobster and Seafood Company. The seafood company had tried to use the well-known brand developed by the pork industry and Bozell Advertising as the “The Other Red Meat” with other variations of use to possibly mimic the “The Other…”. As the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) recounts, the Pork Board had taken their message to a very high and broad level of use to ensure that the highly recognized message was also linked to many marketing channels, customer experiences and frame of mind when thinking about food, family, romance and more.
This rich and integrated use of the creative message was first articulated by Professor Stanley Tannenbaum, one of the four faculty team founders of integrated marketing communications at Northwestern University (Tannenbaum, Schultz, Caywood and Scissors). Ref. Caywood and Ewing). Professor Tannenbaum in 1992, with great verbal and gestured drama, would often note that the integrated message should be “one voice, one look, one feel” across all channels of communications.
To emphasize the IMC linkage, the Trademark Trial Appeal Board documents an A-Z list of marketing communications tactics (Cite: Harris and Whalen, A Marketer’s Guide to Public Relations). They list “shirts, jackets…recipe books, cooking utensils…etc. bearing the mark THE OTHER WHITE MEAT…” The Court was also impressed with the early website (July 2007) www.theotherwhitemeat.com which “received almost a hundred thousand daily, unique visitors, with a total of almost six hundred thousand page views”. In some astonishment the Court writes:
The highest volume traffic goes to Opposers' (Pork) web pages having recipes – an
informational service that has proven to be most popular. Perhaps logical to modern marketers and IMC practitioner the Court must seemed amazed at the breadth and depth of ways that a message can be employed when they went on to list other creative uses of the slogan:
Opposers (Pork) have run local and national advertising playing off the mark with tag-lines that read
“The Other Backyard Barbecue,” “The Other Stir-Fry,” “The
Other Romantic Dinner,” “The Other Sunday Brunch,” “The
Other TV Dinner,” “The Other Way to Spice Up Your Love
Life,” “The Other Steak Dinner,” “The Other Prime Rib,” and
“The Other White Protein”
The Appeal Board clearly recognizes the concept that we noted in the introduction to this paper. The complexity of the marketing challenges facing the commodities industries in a high risk agriculture field does not escape the Appeal Board. They see that marketing in the world of “check-off” under government rule, with a fragmented industry of independent business leaders (farmers) of high visibility and high risk consumables is not child’s play for mere selling terms. The Appeal Board clearly recognizes that the industry and their marcom consultants have devoted themselves to establishing the power of the brand with enormous effort, investment, dedication and creativity.
Opposers (Pork) argue that these marks and other like them:
“… function in precisely the same way as
NPB’s mark, as a message to promote the
interests of an entire industry through
marketing aimed at promoting the consumption
of that industry’s principal product,
whether it be fresh beef, cotton fabric, or
whole eggs. These messages pervade the
marketplace. The marks are instantly
recognizable, and their iconic impact aims
to promote not a particular brand of goods,
but rather a service to that commodity
industry as a whole, promoting consumption
of that industry’s principal product.
Here, in black and white, is where we separate the wheat from the chaff of marketing and messaging. The challenge was to show that the applicant (lobster) did not fully understand the nature of stakeholder marketing by associations such as the National Pork Board, Dairy Management or the National Cattlemen’s Association or dozens of other commodity marketing organizations. The Court gives credit to commodity marketing organizations for promoting the commodity but not acting as a government agency to guarantee the product.
However, applicant (lobster) argues that consumers will be
misled and deceived by commodity promotion messages, and
that all such agencies should be scrutinized because of
their inability to control the quality standards of the
commodity being sold.
In an age of increasing food safety issues (cite) it may be that the associations should be more diligent in showing how they do work closely with government agencies and other stakeholders to protect the quality of their member’s product with program like ”Pork Quality Assurance Plus” program and the work of Dairy Management with programs of food safety research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
The National Pork Board has adopted a resolution urging all U.S. pork producers to become certified in the Pork Quality Assurance Plus® program by June 30, 2010, and to achieve PQA Plus® site status by Dec. 31, 2010. Additionally, the board is recommending that producers embrace the ethical principles the industry adopted in 2008. http://www.innovatewithdairy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/WisconsinCenterforDairyResearch.pdf#page=3http://www.pork.org/News/313/NewsRelease673.aspx
In this important case, the Appeal Board sees the challenge as larger than a simple single brand. The Appeal Board clearly understands the larger stakeholder issues facing the pork industry.
Additionally, this is not a product mark for identifying a
brand of pork. Clearly, the owner of a product mark for
fresh pork who does not control the quality of a
licensee’s products risks a finding that its trademark has
been abandoned. By contrast, the owner of a commodity promotion message
is concerned with the marketing effectiveness of all the
producers, suppliers and vendors within its industry sector
as a whole, whatever the principal product may be.
Opposer (Pork) herein maintains a precise message and focus by
controlling the ways in which their message/mark is used on
the promotion and packaging of pork and pork products. The
ultimate measure of this effort is the level of pork
consumption in the United States as a share of all meat
products, ultimately translating into economic benefit for
all pork producers
The Appeal Board cites as an important reference to valued communications about an industry and its producers to the consumers, the media, government the notion that the Pork Industry (and many other groups) only allow their message to be used in cases of high standards. The message is a validation of the reputation and Total Brand of the industry:
(Contra Midwest Plastic Fabricators Inc. v. Underwriters
Laboratories Inc., 906 F.2d 1568, 15 USPQ2d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
[Underwriters Laboratories certifies with its well known
symbol that electrical equipment meets safety standards];
In re Celanese Corp. of America, 136 USPQ 86 (TTAB 1962)
[CELANESE certifies plastic toys meeting certifier’s safety
standards])
Conclusion
There are many more questions to be addressed. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board document cited throughout contains many more pages of deliberation and debate over the value of this form of branding which should find their way into academic and trade articles testing other concepts of marketing, public relations and business. The authors’ expect to address some of the questions posed by the Appeal Board (not simply because the Appeal Board praised our research). We are embarked on a replication of the original research to retest some of the findings and more developed concepts of a more complex, stakeholder rich, and integrated world of marketing communications.
-30-
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Actions will speak louder than words August 2, 2010
Speech and Discussion August 2, 2010
As the Economy Recovers, Actions Will Speak Louder Words
More than two years since the start of the worldwide economic crisis, we still are struggling with some of the new language of the downturn. For instance, universities continue to increase tuition well beyond the inflation rate while providing “negative and zero salary increases.” Service providers are “decreasing the increasing rate” of fees. And the press seems to easily accept politically conjured framing words, like “public investments,” as a substitute for taxes.
These are examples of how some institutional leaders sought to mollify us with words during a time that created real pain for real people. Yet, in my mind, such language misses the real point of wordsmithing which is more like blacksmithing – based on action– and it illustrates why public relations will be essential as we enter the economic recovery.
PR professionals and experienced leaders know communications is not simply persuasive words or selling language, as so many traditional marketers believe. Rather, communications is how humans build relationships; learn to trust one another; study new ideas; and more fully understand the actions of economic, political, religious, educational and other institutions. All of these will be essential both in adjusting to a positive economic shift and in helping make it happen.
How can the PR pro help marketing and management?
As a management profession, PR can help organizations understand that communications is just part of the message. The words we use to talk about an improvement in the economy or in a company’s bottom line must be tied to actions and must speak clearly about those actions.
Did you ever try to drive a car or a single engine plane by only looking at the dashboard or instruments. It doesn’t work.
We must look not just to the financial dashboard but outside the dashboard for windshield management.
To do this most effectively, today’s PR practitioners have a four-part communications model at their disposal – one that includes stakeholders, technology, metrics, and numerator and denominator management.
Stakeholders.
Recently a senior Chicago-area executive, confronted by stakeholders who have challenged every aspect of his normally well-run business, summed up his need for help with this gut-felt statement: “I need someone to tell me how to deal with all these groups out there.” We call them stakeholders.
For more than 25 years, I have tried to teach my colleagues in schools of business and in schools of journalism where advertising and PR are taught that we need to consider more than customers for building relationships. In a very rough metric, Google counts the two words “stakeholder” and “Obama” together with more than a million hits.
It is the era of the stakeholder, and someone has to manage the relationships with dozens of organizations that directly affect a business or organization’s survival. More than any other marketing discipline, PR is uniquely positioned to do this.
Technology.
Technology has given PR and its stakeholders a gift that keeps on giving new strategies and new tools. No other organizational field has been so richly endowed over the past decade. PR has the tools to build relationships and continues to lead in their application of nearly every new communications format.
Social media may not be the right term for management or business but, as soft as it is, it is the right term for building relationships with stakeholders. PR always has found a way to fully use the inventions of Web 1.0 and 2.0. We will be there for 3.0.
If you think you might need a fan page on Facebook, a blog, a Twitter site, even a more interactive website, the usually younger professional can not only tell you why you should use the tool but how to use it effectively.
Metrics.
Basic research at universities (Wisconsin-Madison and Northwestern) and think tanks like SRI International created the theory and early models. Factiva, Lexis-Nexis and Google assembled the words. Companies (Biz360, VMSInfo, Radian6, and Growth Concepts) now offer relatively sophisticated programs.
They track what reporters, experts, columnists, bloggers, competitors, customers, elected officials, tweeters, Secondlife participants and others are saying about a corporation or other organizations.
The charts, graphs and nearly real-time tracking of broadcast, print and digital media sites can give communicators early and frequent access to boardrooms and a heads-up on potential crises.
Numerator and Denominator Management.
My academic friends might be thrilled by this notation: (∂/∂t) (ν/δ). It represents the simple idea that both the short-term and long-term value of an organization increase as the increased numerator value is divided by a reducing denominator value. To capitalize on this in a way that goes beyond academics, PR professionals can use communications to identify and eliminate denominators, i.e., actions that
(1) undermine trust in a brand,
(2) increase recalls due to failed quality systems,
(3) create employee turnover and loss of intelligence, and
(4) ignore prevention of costly crises.
Just as important, communications can help identify and build up numerators that will drive revenue growth – such as brand assets, trust, new competitive alliances, new solutions and a highly motivated workforce.
http://examples.idashboards.com/idashboards/?guestuser=wpins2
Numerator and denominator strategies are more than words, and managing them effectively will lead to stakeholders and media that view communications as a trusted precursor to actions.
Like the economic downturn, the recovery undoubtedly will introduce language of its own. As we all begin to look for words that work to talk about the economy, our companies and our brands, remember this: Actions speak louder than words.
As the Economy Recovers, Actions Will Speak Louder Words
More than two years since the start of the worldwide economic crisis, we still are struggling with some of the new language of the downturn. For instance, universities continue to increase tuition well beyond the inflation rate while providing “negative and zero salary increases.” Service providers are “decreasing the increasing rate” of fees. And the press seems to easily accept politically conjured framing words, like “public investments,” as a substitute for taxes.
These are examples of how some institutional leaders sought to mollify us with words during a time that created real pain for real people. Yet, in my mind, such language misses the real point of wordsmithing which is more like blacksmithing – based on action– and it illustrates why public relations will be essential as we enter the economic recovery.
PR professionals and experienced leaders know communications is not simply persuasive words or selling language, as so many traditional marketers believe. Rather, communications is how humans build relationships; learn to trust one another; study new ideas; and more fully understand the actions of economic, political, religious, educational and other institutions. All of these will be essential both in adjusting to a positive economic shift and in helping make it happen.
How can the PR pro help marketing and management?
As a management profession, PR can help organizations understand that communications is just part of the message. The words we use to talk about an improvement in the economy or in a company’s bottom line must be tied to actions and must speak clearly about those actions.
Did you ever try to drive a car or a single engine plane by only looking at the dashboard or instruments. It doesn’t work.
We must look not just to the financial dashboard but outside the dashboard for windshield management.
To do this most effectively, today’s PR practitioners have a four-part communications model at their disposal – one that includes stakeholders, technology, metrics, and numerator and denominator management.
Stakeholders.
Recently a senior Chicago-area executive, confronted by stakeholders who have challenged every aspect of his normally well-run business, summed up his need for help with this gut-felt statement: “I need someone to tell me how to deal with all these groups out there.” We call them stakeholders.
For more than 25 years, I have tried to teach my colleagues in schools of business and in schools of journalism where advertising and PR are taught that we need to consider more than customers for building relationships. In a very rough metric, Google counts the two words “stakeholder” and “Obama” together with more than a million hits.
It is the era of the stakeholder, and someone has to manage the relationships with dozens of organizations that directly affect a business or organization’s survival. More than any other marketing discipline, PR is uniquely positioned to do this.
Technology.
Technology has given PR and its stakeholders a gift that keeps on giving new strategies and new tools. No other organizational field has been so richly endowed over the past decade. PR has the tools to build relationships and continues to lead in their application of nearly every new communications format.
Social media may not be the right term for management or business but, as soft as it is, it is the right term for building relationships with stakeholders. PR always has found a way to fully use the inventions of Web 1.0 and 2.0. We will be there for 3.0.
If you think you might need a fan page on Facebook, a blog, a Twitter site, even a more interactive website, the usually younger professional can not only tell you why you should use the tool but how to use it effectively.
Metrics.
Basic research at universities (Wisconsin-Madison and Northwestern) and think tanks like SRI International created the theory and early models. Factiva, Lexis-Nexis and Google assembled the words. Companies (Biz360, VMSInfo, Radian6, and Growth Concepts) now offer relatively sophisticated programs.
They track what reporters, experts, columnists, bloggers, competitors, customers, elected officials, tweeters, Secondlife participants and others are saying about a corporation or other organizations.
The charts, graphs and nearly real-time tracking of broadcast, print and digital media sites can give communicators early and frequent access to boardrooms and a heads-up on potential crises.
Numerator and Denominator Management.
My academic friends might be thrilled by this notation: (∂/∂t) (ν/δ). It represents the simple idea that both the short-term and long-term value of an organization increase as the increased numerator value is divided by a reducing denominator value. To capitalize on this in a way that goes beyond academics, PR professionals can use communications to identify and eliminate denominators, i.e., actions that
(1) undermine trust in a brand,
(2) increase recalls due to failed quality systems,
(3) create employee turnover and loss of intelligence, and
(4) ignore prevention of costly crises.
Just as important, communications can help identify and build up numerators that will drive revenue growth – such as brand assets, trust, new competitive alliances, new solutions and a highly motivated workforce.
http://examples.idashboards.com/idashboards/?guestuser=wpins2
Numerator and denominator strategies are more than words, and managing them effectively will lead to stakeholders and media that view communications as a trusted precursor to actions.
Like the economic downturn, the recovery undoubtedly will introduce language of its own. As we all begin to look for words that work to talk about the economy, our companies and our brands, remember this: Actions speak louder than words.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)