B2B Branding Research

So, we just finished the Branding and Research project that I've mentioned before on BigWordzProject (here and here).

All in all it involved: 6 weeks, 61 in-depth-interviews, 2 continents, 6 cities, 9 flights, 67 taxi rides, 2 cases of amoebic dysentery (not me, thankfully), 147 Starbucks visits (there's two on each corner in London, so you never have to cross the street to get your (well, my) venti coffee frappucino lite with an extra espresso shot), 62 restaurants, 1 eleven PM frantic search for a hotel in NYC as the DoubleTree all of a sudden had neither my reservation nor a room, 1 lost iPod and set of Bose Headphones, 1 really bad meat stromboli (told you to just get a slice), and 1 really good meal in Chinatown in London after the restaurant already closed at 11 PM, and the best $1 hamburger I've ever had.

Well, some of these numbers are a little exaggerated, but we really did the 61 in-depth-interviews (with clients, non-clients, internal stakeholders, industry analysts, partners).

While I can't go into specific details about some of the results (competitive advantage and all of that), one of our key findings is just how important Brand is in the B2B / Services marketplace.

This actually came as a surprise to some of the project team members, and while I hate to say it, "I told you so."

(Actually, I very much enjoyed saying that).

No company has every bought anything from any company. What does happen is this: A person in one company buys something from another company. And for some reason, people assume that when that person walks into work, he (or she, of course) suddenly puts on this 'Business Consumer' hat, and is not influenced by the same type of emotional triggers that they are affected by before or after work or on the weekends when they are wearing their plain old 'Consumer' hat. Still the same person, still the same emotions, still the same desires to be made better/taller/faster/bigger/thinner/more successful. And they are looking for a product or service that they can trust, that will help them achieve those goals with as little (perceived) effort but as much (perceived) value as possible. And unless they've already been working with someone, the only thing they have to go on is the brand of the company they are considering.

Every single touchpoint is important. Press relations, analyst relations, articles/trade press, white papers, events/trade shows, web site (and as an aside, the Web actually plays a very specific, yet surprising role in all of this, at least in the two main industries - technology and marketing - we serve at Sapient - this was one of those 'Wow' moments during the research), call centers, service/client facing personnel, all need to be living, constant, consistent, embodiments of the brand. Of course, you need to understand what your brand is, what it represents to clients/prospects (your market), and more importantly what it can represent to them. And then spend time, effort, and $$$ building it. It's simple.

Why this is surprising to people, though, is beyond me. But now, we have the research to show this, and some people are listening. Which was the whole point of me pushing for and then doing this research - we now know, in fairly certain terms, the importance of Brand in B2B. And what we need to do to leverage, extend, and grow our brand in our key markets.

The research specifically showed the importance and direct relation of Brand to inclusion in initial consideration set, inclusion in final consideration set, pricing, perceived value, client satisfaction, etc., etc., etc. The list goes on and on. And now that we know this, we are going to be focusing our efforts on the specific areas where we have, shall we say, opportunities for improvement.

Like I used to tell clients when I used to be client facing, it's really amazing what you can learn when you talk to your customers.

When was the last time you asked your customers what they thought?

Engagement and the Galaxies

I came across Galaxy Zoo earlier today. Basically, the site uses volunteers to catalog different types of galaxies that can be found outside of our own. In their own words, Galaxy Zoo is "the project which harnesses the power of the internet - and your brain - to classify a million galaxies." It launched in July, 2007, and so far has well over 100,000 active volunteers (one estimate I saw in doing a little research put the number at over 150,000). Their user Forum on the Web site, has only 8,000 registered and active users. So far the volunteers have cataloged, well, let's just say more galaxies than the founders could ever have hoped for. Speaking of the founders, a number of peer reviewed papers have been published based on the results.

And they have done this without any advertising, having basically built a brand by simply engaging a community (that they weren't even sure existed when they launched?) in something meaningful and useful.

Earlier today, I was reading an article by Bob Greenberg, chairman of R/GA in Contagious Magazine (an incredible publication I'm planning to post about in the near future). Basically he put forth in the article that "consumers have demonstrated time and again that they will quickly adopt whatever they find useful and meaningful in their lives - with or without advertising to prompt them." In the article, he was mainly talking about consumer technology products and how the really meaningful (and successful) technology product campaigns are focused on the utility and use of the product (Apple's iPhone) , and have moved away from (less successful) emotional and metaphorical themes (Motorola's Razr). Other examples would be Google, which has become the #1 brand in the world with absolutely no consumer advertising, or Facebook, which has 100 million users, and I don't think even has an ad agency.

Not that I want to disagree with Mr. Greenberg, but in my mind, what these products (the successful ones at least) all have in common is engagement, which is at a much deeper level than the 'utility' of the campaigns mentioned in the article. Everyone that I know who has gotten an iPhone (and I think I'm the last person I know who doesn't have one) is so 'involved' with it. It's not just a phone to them - they feel and have stated out loud that it has changed their lives. Likewise with Facebook. How many times a day do those of us who have accounts check them, and update the status, or upload photos? The people who use it are so involved with it, constantly searching for and finding more and more 'friends.' I know that both my wife (the divine Miss J) and I sit and watch TV, she with her laptop, me with mine, and are both on Facebook, sometimes even having FB IM conversations with each other (yes, I know, no comments, please).

So, the question is, what is your organization doing to to engage with your customers? Are you just selling a product or service, or are you providing something deeper and more meaningful to the community that is out there? As a marketer, what is it that you are doing to not only try and find, but to then engage this community, just as GalaxyZoo did (and did it so successfully that they didn't even need to advertise)? It's not an easy thing to do, I know. It's something I think about every day, about how do we (at Sapient, my employer) fully engage not only our disparate client communities, over and above the actual services we are contracted to provide, but also non-clients. Over the next few months, we are going to be trying a few things, so I'll let you know how they work out.

But if you have some ideas, 'friend' me on Facebook, and then send me a message from your iPhone.

Wordle.net

I came across this web site, called Wordle.net (http://wordle.net/). It's a pretty amazing little site, that allows you to create tag clouds (or 'word clouds' as the site calls them) on the fly. Just enter a bunch of words into the site, or give it a URL, and it will give you back a fully formatted cloud that you can then use as you see fit - on your site for instance. The other really cool thing about it is that once you've created your cloud, you can then reformat it as many times as you want; everything from fonts to color schemes can be modified.

So I took all of the posts (so far, not including this one, of course) and created a tag cloud. I then 'randomized' the design a couple of times, and came up with the following clouds (all images courtesy of http://wordle.net/):











One of the things that I noticed when I looked at the clouds that were created, is that I really, really, really use the word 'really' way too much (and I have to admit, that it was so apparent that my 10 year-old daughter noticed it too when I explained to her what a tag cloud was). It actually looks like I use it more than any other word. My freshman English professor must be getting a severe case of heartburn, as she never let us repeat a word in any essay we did for her (wish I could remember her name, as she was the one who actually taught me how to write well - at least I think I write well). [Note: I had to go back and edit that last sentence, and take the word 'really' out. Twice.]

But the truly best part of the story is the story of how this site was created. You see, its creator, Jonathan Feinberg, works for IBM. And he created the main algorithms that the site uses on IBM's time. And, it seems that that's ok with IBM. I mean he talks about it right on the site. True, he does work for IBM Research. But still. If IBM is allowing their employees to do non-IBM work and create something based on it that is outside of the scope of their day jobs (a somewhat Google thing to do, imho), maybe there is hope that corporate America is moving in the right direction in keeping competitive.

Then again, it might be just a really cool little site. Really cool. Really.

Clients, Non-Clients, and Stakeholders, Oh MY!!

So, I'm here in London with the research team, interviewing clients, and non-clients, and stakeholders for the positioning research project for Sapient (my employer). (See previous post here).

We've already spent some time interviewing a large number of our internal stakeholders (in the US), and we found some interesting results just based on that. One of the results is that we seem to be very aligned internally to our message, and our go-to-market positioning. Which was interesting, simply because in previous conversations around the office, no-one seemed to think that we had a consistent message. So this is good.

It will be interesting, though, to see if the messaging that we are using will resonate with clients, and especially with non-clients. So far, we've had 1 client interview, and in one specific area there was a clear difference between what our internal stakeholders viewed as important, and what this specific client thought was important. But that was just one client. We will see what happens as we speak with non-clients (which we are doing in London this week and part of next, and Chicago and New York week after next), and more clients throughout. I'm not going to give away the specific nature of this difference, at least not yet. But it is dramatic.

Which is, I guess, the point of doing customer research - to unearth the differences (and similarities) between what we think is important, and what client know is important. It's so easy for every company or organization to take a look at itself, and say, 'This is who we are and what we stand for. And this is what our clients feel is important about that.' But until you actually go speak with customers, and prospects, and verify these thoughts and messages, all you have done is build a Monument to Yourself. You have taken your organization (it's structure, culture, and history) and presented those as the reasons customers, new and old, should do business with you.

And rarely, imho, do customers and prospects really care about these things. Not one customer wakes up in the morning and says "I need to find a new partner, one who has an organizational structure along geographic lines (or functional lines, or based on the size of their clients - all examples that I know everyone has seen). Likewise, if you were to go back to your customers and ask them why they chose to do business with you, I would bet that it had nothing to do with your org chart, or how many people you have in your firm, or who your partners are. Maybe (and I really mean maybe) it is what these things represent to a client that's important. Yet how many web sites and marketing materials discuss how the organization is structured or these other things, specifically in the B2B industries? Virtually no B2B marketing materials are told from the POV of the client (see previous post here).

What clients care about are the things that are important to them - the things that they view as helping them be successful. And until you go and ask them what those things are, you just keep adding on to your monument

And you keep on adding to it, until it becomes so big, that it is almost impossible to find your way out of it. You start believing that your monument is unique, and that no other monument maker can do what you do, in the way that you do it. Tell you what, go do a competitive assessment. Take a look at your competitors' web sites and marketing materials. Take their logos off and put yours in those spots. Does it work with your logo on it? Is it the same words and phrases (and maybe even imagery) you use? Recognize your monument? Bet you, you do.