Recent Updates RSS Hide threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Intelligent design for B2B brands

    Kimon 4:39 pm on April 24, 2010 | 1 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ,

    I’m a really lucky guy. My wife you see has terrific taste, perhaps not with whom he chose to mate with, but when it comes to fashion, interior design and other girly stuff, she’s brilliant. My good fortune is not having to think about where things go, or what to buy, or even how to dress myself. Subsequently, our home earns praise (was once even featured in Country Collections), and my surroundings are in a word – cosy. And I didn’t have to spend a nano-second of fretting about things. Oh, and she’s “Swedish.” Ha!

    Left to my own devices, the garden would look like a cross between the Sahara and a Shetland pony bordello. I would leave the house clothed in nothing more than a tastefully placed banana peel, if there were not laws against such things. I enthusiastically admit I don’t have much in the way of “taste” (except in who I chose to mate with!), so I thank my lucky stars that I have someone around who knows all that “taste” stuff, and I get the benefits.

    But I can recognise good taste, I can spot good or bad design from a mile away. And in the world of B2B branding, more often than not, you see examples of third world style, trying to sell new world technology. The real issue is, those who live with poor corporate design can’t recognise the disaster they preside over, and don’t know how to fix it or even if they should.

    To hang things onto “taste” is a risky business, because you avoid the real issues that good design must address with B2B branding. Branding should never be a matter of taste; it has to be a matter of function. Before a truckload of designers out there prepare to Photoshop my image with a dwarf and a cheese platter for global publication – let me explain.

    If you begin B2B design for an industrial brand or what is better known as a corporate profile, with the position of what “I like” or “he likes” you open a Pandora box of nonsense. Personal taste is completely irrelevant, and creating design assets for a technology or innovation based company with preferred styles, means you are off course before you have taken a step.

    You know you have reached this point when you start-up “fashion shows” to decide what look and feel you want. When your decision-making about design is based upon gaining a lolly shop of choices, to pick and choose as you would a shirt, based upon personal taste, you have crossed the bridge of silliness and heading the town of “baseless ideas.” You’re asking for big trouble when you get a committee together, to dissect, poke holes in and garnish opinion in the hope of gaining “buy-in”, when what you really opening up is an expensive and time consuming exercise in raising more doubt than making a decision to benefit the business. As far as decision making goes, you need a benevolent dictator, who can take accountability for the brand.

    There are a number of crucial questions you have to raise. Perhaps most important is, “sod my own preferences, what does the customer want?” And when looking for the answer, throw into the mix these questions, “how does this compare to the competition? Do we have a brand strategy to follow? How can we increase the perceived value of the brand? And lastly, “Are we determined to stick with our decision for design, the look and feel of the company to become a true corporate profile?”

    You also have to give thought to the value of great design. B2B brands create no value when the look and feel of the company is not nurtured. The business case for caring about your corporate profile is that you’ll attract the right type of customer, employee, investor, channel partner and generate the right type of perception for the business. The value of this varies greatly between companies and industries. But even if you can’t see the immediate value, don’t you want to cover all your bases and do all things well?

    When you establish a corporate profile it must be strong enough to maintain the core value of the brand, but flexible enough for ideas to flourish. So therefore you can conceptualize centrally and implement locally through your normal sales channels.

    There are a few milestones that I strongly recommend are followed, in order to make the process as easy and pain free as possible. You’ll need to have people with skills and understanding of B2B branding strategy, design and creative ideas. So therefore briefing is vital – better the brief, less the pain if those you have to help are competent.

    For the sake of the exercise I’ll assume that you have a brand strategy, and are ready to put some skin onto a sound structure. What follows are the typical steps to take, so that you gain a quality result, without wanting to blow your brains or anyone else’s brains out.

    Step 1 – Mood Board
    A mood board is a first interpretation of the brand and brief, using colours, visual and text. It’s an exercise that establishes that everyone is on the same page.

    Typically a mood board is just one A3 page, presenting the key assets required for building a corporate profile. This allows everyone to agree to a “mood” or a taste of what is to come. For example, you would have an image, and ask the question, “Does this style of image suit the brand?” If so, then when it comes to actually sourcing images, this will be the benchmark.

    You would have a pallet of colours, and again, are these the right combination of colours? Same with fonts and so forth. Once established and agreed to, then you want to see how to use these assets.

    Step 2 – Style guide
    A.K.A – Corporate visual identity, program, brand manual etc. Whatever the tag – the result is the same, to establish rules for branding and examples of real-life, so that everyone knows the rules, how to use and benefit by them.

    There are priorities that need to be addressed, because you must be draconian in some areas and loose as a goose in others. The point is to make sure that brand core values are implemented, but that there is freedom to enjoy strong creativity, that matches the needs for the brand. So the components of a style guide are:
    Logo: Its dimensions, colours, use and variations (if any). This is then set in stone. No messing about!

    Fonts: These are very important. Strong brands can be recognised just by a font. And different fonts have very different personalities, such as,

    GNM Engineering – brilliant ideas (Verdana)
    GNM Engineering – brilliant ideas (Palatino)
    GNM Engineering – brilliant ideas (Baskerville)
    GNM Engineering – brilliant ideas (Bank Gothic)

    Colours: Select a range of colours and again, stick with them. It might be one or it might be 5. But it is vital to stay with a primary colour/s and if desired some supporting colours. You need to be aware of how these colours translate with PMS, RGB, Web and other production methods such as signage. It can be difficult to get exact matches for different production methods.
    Images: An image library is a worthwhile pursuit, to generate around 50 or so images that can then be used for internal and external communications. However, here you can be a bit lax, because you would not want to prevent a great idea going ahead, just because you need to use an image sourced elsewhere. Also the way you present diagrams, graphs and other illustrations should follow a set format.
    Creative concept: Great brands often have a great idea pushing them along. Creative concepts can change and evolve over time, but each one must be working to the brand strategy. Within your style guide, present what your creative concept is and the assets that go with it.
    Copy style: When you articulate the company and write about the company, what sort of copy style is to be used? I like to see style guides authored in the way that will reflect the real world use of language.
    Application to corporate communications: Present the templates for business cards, letterheads, signage, email signatures and so forth.
    Application to marketing communication campaigns: What will an advert look like, or an exhibition, website, Direct mail and so forth. This is not to say that all advertising forever and a day, must look like this – but take this moment to present some inspiration!

    Once you have established a corporate profile, you must make it someone’s responsibility to police it, and be the authority on what is and isn’t allowed. This person must have accountability and authority to make sure that the brand is built, and built well.

    And leaves personal taste out of it.

    Cheers,

    Kimon

     

  • Hey buddy, how much for the brand?

    Kimon 9:59 am on April 4, 2010 | 2 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , ,

    Damn good question! Exactly how much can you sell a brand that represents technology, innovation or engineering for? In the world of B2B, there are untold riches within a small accounting term called “Goodwill.”

    Goodwill is something that kicks into gear when a company is sold, and shareholders want money not just for assets and profit performance but also anything intangible (all the stuff not nailed down). This is the very nature of goodwill and normally is applied to the perceived loyalty of a company’s customers. It is with this loyalty, that the link and case can be made for selling the brand as you would with any other asset.

    A B2B brand is built using a variety of different methods, media, creative ideas and customer experiences. Each of these things on their own carries different values and contributes in different ways. When used together and orchestrated, you can generate significant value in monetary terms for the brand to be valued as an asset.

    Companies, products or services that are enhanced beyond functional purposes, with a brand built and managed correctly will generate an experience and add a layer of desire. It is this layer of desire that is the reason why customers are prepared to pay a premium for one industrial brand over another.

    For those creating, managing and living with B2B brands, the key question is, “if the business was placed on the open market, how much would someone pay for the logo, the name, the trademarks and everything else you have used to build the brand?”

    Managing directors tend to go a bit green when they think of this because it hits them that during years of existence they have placed little emphasis on the branding. Rather they have been serving a market, and not building anything extra into the customer relationship, that can eventually be a valuable asset and sold.

    All that time and opportunity has been squandered, because the business could be swallowed up, and no-one would care. Certainly the buyer won’t pay for something that has no market value. It is indeed a sobering thought.

    Look at it from a buyer’s perspective

    Imagine you are the head of a Venture Capital firm and decide that you want to buy IBM, GE, Siemens or CISCO. Having done all the due diligence would you just walk away from the brand? Hardly! You’d dramatically devalue the purchase, and future viability of the company to generate a handsome return, if you didn’t have the right to use the brand.

    Now think about your company, and give serious consideration to how desperate would a buyer be to use your brand, and therefore multiply the EBIT evaluation, to secure the rights to the brand.

    Goodwill extends beyond loyalty to include other intangibles, which enable a company to earn super profits, you know – the fun type allowing earnings over and above what could be expected from tangible assets.

    By accepting the concept of goodwill as an asset is to confirm that here is something an organisation controls to provide future benefits.  And if goodwill can be sold with the company, then as an asset, goodwill can be assessed at any time.

    Typical intangible assets can include people (key staff), special company procedures (ISO 9000 or other quality systems), distribution agreements (which keep the product in and the competition out) and patents (which give a product protection over a finite number of years).

    All these intangible assets have a value. Sadly, what is often missing is the brand because little is understood about the subject in engineering, science, technology and innovation companies – it is not core business.  As you are about to discover, a lot of money has been missed out on by B2B organsations.

    Capitalising brands – lessons learned

    Those smarty-pants in the B2C world caught on how to generate significant wealth for companies by capitalising their brands. Essentially this means that they had separate valuations made for their brands. This enabled these brands to be taken out of goodwill and labeled as an identifiable asset on the balance sheet. The key to this was demonstrating on the balance sheet the performance of brands, in terms of sales, market penetration, and ability to command a higher price than competitors.

    This approach made it easy to identify performing brands, and then treat them as something that could be removed from the company and sold separately to a new owner, who in turn would have a core component for a profitable business.

    Grand Metropolitan was one of the first companies to recognize this potential in 1988. They arrived at an assessment totaling an eye popping £565 million for their brands, such as Smirnoff Vodka, which it had acquired.

    Then in November of that same year Rank Hovis McDougall capitalised its internally created brands, Bisto, Hovis and Mr Kipling, placing a value on them of £678 million.  Here is the fun part. The company’s net assets at the time were valued at only £300 million.

    Now out of the world of breakfast cereals and shampoo, what about B2B? It really is not difficult to understand that if you spend the resources to create ownership of a perception, which directly leads to strengthening the business performance of the company, that perception (brand!) is worth something.

    Conversely, not investing will mean you gain nothing.

     

    • Anton Baron 10:05 am on April 4, 2010 Permalink

      Very well written. With permission I want to use this in my local market (France). The bean counters and marketers alike overlook the value of a brand. Which is odd really when there is abundant evidence from many other B2B brands, which do demonstrate value by helping to make sales easier. Have not come across an article like this before where it is all neatly summed up. Great!

  • Who has the keys to the B2B marketing green machine?

    Kimon 2:54 pm on March 28, 2010 | 1 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , ,

    Currently debate rages about carbon tax, carbon emission schemes, capture and storage and what it all means to Australia. Ignorant old farts like Wilson Tuckey (who won’t be around in 20 years) find it easy to score cheap points on a completely redundant level, by arguing about issues that are not issues at all.

    In December we had COP 15 – the climate change showdown for global leaders in Copenhagen. Mixing in with ladies who smoke cheap cigars in cafes, the world will attempt to draw a line in the sand about the cost of carbon, and where it will apply. If you are worried that you are more confused about carbon emissions than a hormone imbalanced teen, then don’t be. Fact is corporate Australia has really yet to get a grasp on the issues, evidenced by how many lack governance at a board level on the issues. Trust me, this will rapidly gain massive importance.

    From the outset, I want to declare I am apolitical, so the above shot at Wilson Tuckey has nothing to do with being in a different political camp. You have to take it in the true context, people like him are ignorant old farts, and it serves them a good purpose. Ask Wilson; he’s been a star at this for over 40 years. The fact is I have zero political alliance. I cheer for the guy who will give me the most and not destroy too many things in the process.

    Being apolitical, means you suffer double the frustration in situations such as climate change. At least if you had an alliance, you don’t tend to see all the dumb things that your team does. We who drink apathy like fine wine have an average life expectancy of 5, due to hardened arteries, blood pressure and continually getting bowled over by stupidity, which can graze the knees and cause infections.

    Most frustrating of all is the off topic strategy with politicians raising the spectre of job loses, and economic hardship, and that now is not the time to make economic changes to account for carbon. It’s off topic, because it simply does not need to be discussed. The facts are in – we the world are moving to a carbon economy. Australia – are you ready or not?

    For anyone who has been to central Queensland, you’ll see that the coal industry has really cashed in. The infrastructure is incredible; money is not an object for these guys with export value topping $25 billion, that’s 30% of our trade. As business owners, they have to determine how their business will move ahead, based upon the prevailing conditions, just like the rest of us.

    The current public debate is focused on how to protect this big daddy from carbon pricing. Forgetting that it actually has nothing to do with us the producer, it’s our customers who will determine the future for coal exports. Japan has announced that they will reduce greenhouse emissions by at least 50% by 2050. That’s important to know, because Japan buys nearly 50% of our coal. Moving ahead, the carbon price for coal in Australia can be anything, because for Japan, our coal will be more than worthless, it will be jolly expensive for them. The same goes for the EU, who wants even tougher cuts, between 60 to 80% by 2050. They buy $3 billion worth of exports, but that will decrease rapidly as they (and Japan) go nuke, gas, renewable. I don’t know why everyone is worried about China, they account for just 2% of our coal exports.

    In short, by way of illustration, our customers have discovered that drinking beer makes them fat, and are switching to bottled water. Meanwhile we bicker about how to protect beer, and not think about how to make the best-bottled water possible.

    What does this have to do with B2B marketing? Well the most alarming aspect is wasting time about discussing the coal industry, and not putting into place the needed things to supercharge our economy with the green machine as the world makes carbon “da bomb.” I’m talking about things such as realistic pricing for carbon, water and recycling, to generate commercial grounds for home-grown technology and innovation to flourish.

    For anyone who has to market cleantech or water solutions, it is an uphill battle due to the fact that in Australia we are:

    1. Very stupid
    2. See point 1

    Compare our attitudes, forward thinking, policymaking and enlightenment, to other parts of the world, we look like the drunken Uncle at a wedding who staggers into the party at inappropriate times. The debate about coal illustrates this in all its horrific detail.

    Take for instance water. What would a smart country do, if they continually suffered from drought, had encouraged water crazy industries like dairy and had no clue about the predictability of weather? Would they price water so low that the need to change rampant and wasteful consumption had no commercial grounds?

    There exists right here, so many innovative means to conserve, save, use, store, create and recycle water, you would literally drown. But locally these technologies don’t get a shake, because the commercial grounds don’t exist. Why spend $20,000 to save $2,000 worth of water? It’s only the truly innovative customers who want to do the right thing, which takes this type of offer up, because it’s not the cost, it’s the volume of water they care about. Unfortunately there are not many of these customers about. If the price of water was raised to realistic levels, a lot of innovation would be unleashed.

    We also have the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) which allows just about anything to be thrown down the drain, save plutonium tainted soap. Again if we have tougher regulations, then recycling innovation would be unleashed.

    So the discussion about carbon must focus upon how to embrace this new economy, this new technology revolution. Jobs will get created in new and more advanced sectors then digging great big holes. We need to establish a carbon framework now and begin to live with it, in order to meet the immense global demand for cleantech.

    It’s a tactic that Google has employed, recognising that they are currently exposed to carbon pricing due to their energy hungry data centres. While they and no-one else knows exactly what the cost will be, one of the world’s most innovative companies has taken upon itself to begin living with carbon taxes.

    The opportunity is for countries that have reliable, renewable and low carbon emission means of generating energy to court the big boys such as Google to set-up shop. Anyone who is still tied to coal and other hydrocarbons will wind-up like the guy who’s pants are too short, socks too white and has a stain mark near the crotch. No one will want to be their friend.

    Australia does have a healthy beginning for home-grown cleantech and water solutions. We need to have more than just a grant program. We need to have the environment in which they can market – by leading the way with carbon emissions trading and tax, raise the price of water and have a tougher EPA.

    The green machine exists. It is ready to play a role in a new global boom. Has anyone seen the keys?

     

  • Australian B2B marketing potential, is harder to pick than a broken nose

    Kimon 11:20 pm on March 16, 2010 | 2 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ,

    You might not know it, but there is a small group of marketers out there who are neglected, abused, misunderstood and ignored. A group who are rarely seen, and hardly ever get any recognition for what can be a tough gig. They are, B2B Marketers, the ones who help sell technology and innovation to other companies.

    These are people who typically work with companies that don’t like marketers all that much, in fact companies that can be outright hostile to the very idea of marketing. The core business is typically all about the product, rather than in the consumer world, where the brand takes precedence over product (often, marketing the marketing – it’s a lifestyle baby, yeah!).

    While adverts that go “pop” and jingles abound for new shampoo formulas, making their creators famous, there are other marketers doing their best to convince senior managers, engineers and other party animals, why they should invest in new technology or ways to improve manufacturing.

    In Australia, B2B marketing and advertising is given scant notice and is often confused with Direct Mail, telemarketing or cold call sales. The very term, “B2B” is not known, and hardly discussed by marketing institutions, associations, Universities, or even by those who practice the discipline.

    To place this into context; I lived in Sweden for about 10 years, where B2B is widely known, understood and is a highly recognized part of the local advertising scene. You either work with B2C (i.e. dog food, beer or shampoo) or B2B (i.e. engineering, science or manufacturing). Amazingly enough, B2B had it’s own awards (100 watt), own media publications and education. If you look around in the US, Germany, Holland, France and the UK, you’ll find similar maturity and recognition, but not here in Australia.

    Why?

    I think it has a lot to do with the media commission business model that “traditional” advertising agencies have enjoyed. If a client spends $20 million on TVC’s and you get 17.5% of that for thinking of ideas involving puppets being dragged behind cars, why would you look at the B2B market?

    Typically media spend is very small, you have to actually understand how the product is made, why it was made and work hard to deliver creative messages that talk to a range of decision makers, and deliver a media plan that reaches multiple levels. Add to this, many B2B companies which are technology driven consider marketing to be drivel, and you got too much of what sounds like hard work for little return.

    Currently, the top 20 B2C advertisers spend more on marketing communications than the entire B2B market, which is valued at $2 Billion p.a. It comes as no surprise that everyone with a creative/marketing bent has been chasing after the TVC media commissions like weasels hunting a panicked sausage.

    So what sort of dimwit would choose a life of B2B? Well me for one… And why is quite simple, it is very rewarding and challenging. While you never see your work on TV, or played on radio, you get insights into amazing technology, meet incredibly brave and brilliant inventors and the dental plan ain’t half bad.

    But slowly the tide is changing. Universities are picking up the need to provide more in the way of B2B education to students. The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology has two experienced B2B marketers on staff, and is investing in B2B resources such as b2bmarketer.com

    Professor Michael Beverland has spent many years furthering the interests of B2B marketing, having established and developed programs at Monash, Melbourne University and now RMIT. In many ways the reasons why B2B marketing is not offered in many Universities are the same reasons that apply to the local advertising industry.

    “The biggest challenges when I’ve established B2B as an elective, has been to find people to run it. Every single time B2B has been raised as a deliverable, the University jumps on the idea and can see the value. But to have qualified and experienced B2B marketers available to deliver is a problem,” says Michael.

    “The really encouraging thing about B2B marketing is the uptake once something is offered. Demand has always been explosive once the programs have been established, especially with Postgraduate students, who work with B2B and yearn for B2B examples, cases and theory. From a resource point-of-view, these are the students most under serviced.”

    It is estimated that 80% of Universities in Australia lag behind offering B2B as an elective. Aside from the resource issue, there can be an image issue as well.

    “I would love to see B2B offered more often, but I think that Universities look at B2C as being a bit sexier. Students want to think of TV, copywriting, glamour, and awards. So it is not much of a stretch to think that Universities feel that B2C is the main subject to bring in the numbers. But I’ve found that B2B when offered freshens up the whole offering. Students have enjoyed the change for the sake of change,” says Michael.

    Just how significant is B2B? Well a quick look at the scope of B2B can have you thinking of all of the suppliers for office equipment, machines, tools, paints, chemicals, professional services, IT, telecom, infrastructure & capital works, construction, medical, engineering, bioscience, primary industries, aerospace, mining and defense. The list is considerably more, but I think you get the picture!

    Something as fundamental as mechanical engineering, can be broken down into a range of sub sectors, such as: industrial plant and steelwork, tools, engines, compressors, heating and ventilating, pumps and valves.

    Within each of these industries are a host of specialized manufacturers, dealers, agents and service providers. All of them are in one way or another generating revenue by selling to other companies.

    In Australia, I see the market opportunities to be vast for any large traditional player who turns an eye to B2B. Media commissions from what I understand are either out or well on the way to a deathbed. Add to this traditional media, such as TV, Radio and Print is under siege from digital, means that getting paid on the basis for large market reach is rapidly not becoming an option.

    B2B conversely is a market that does require strategic thinking and creative execution, two key talents that abound in the B2C realm. Sure the hours are a bit longer, and the pay packet is not as juicy, but there is reliability within the market. B2B embraces many different areas and segments, so while one might suffer, another is booming. My limited understanding of B2C is that when consumer confidence goes down, everything pretty much goes down.

    Another bright light for B2B is that service fragmentation is nowhere near as rampant as it is with B2C. For example, take a client who sells shampoo, you have a dozen or so service providers chasing the same pool of cash. Everyone from the traditional advertising agency, to digital media, design studios, event marketing, packaging, trend consultants and guerilla marketers. Depending upon the mood and the moment, any one of these can grab a greater share.

    B2B on the other hand, is still very much “agency” centric, meaning that one service provider retains accountability for different media channels and activities. The ability to help evolve a client, as they gain more confidence from results, means that scalability for the account becomes possible, rather than needing to invest into a whole range of different areas, which could just be only a marketing trend.

    B2B marketers themselves also need to really lift their sights, and become far savvier as is the case overseas. A key issue is that many work within environments that are hostile to marketing. You will literally hear senior engineers grumble about resources going to marketing that could be used for R&D. This situation is not helped with poor leadership from marketers not demonstrating how to make a buck from that crazy thing called “marketing communications.”

    All too often you find B2B “marketers” spending their time worrying about shades of blue for brochures, or putting on yet another customer event, without seriously thinking about how to add more value to an orgainsation, by outwitting the competition in the marketing arena.

    Companies themselves hire marketing graduates who lack the fundamental understanding of B2B, having been subjected to case studies about cornflakes in Universities, as noted earlier. Are then expected to “do-marketing” which often involves knocking up a newsletter, brochure and patching up a website.

    The future for B2B marketing in Australia is bright, if growth opportunities are taken by agencies, Universities and B2B marketers themselves, to the point where B2B is a well defined and understood discipline.

    Otherwise, the industry will continue to exist as it currently does, and forever be a pool of promise, never quite swam in as much as it should have.

     

    • Torsten Herrmann 3:15 am on March 17, 2010 Permalink

      Wasn’t much different in Germany either a few years ago. I guess that (without a few minor exceptions) B2B marketing didn’t exist at our universities until maybe a good 10 years ago. Today, the situation is much better. If anybody cares you find a list of B2B marketing and sales professors in German speaking countries on my website (downloads). But somehow B2C will remain sexier for a lot of students for the next years to come as they are just not confronted with tech ads and trade press. I always prefered the B2B side as it is much more clear to the point, less emotions, advantages and honesty (well, mostly).

  • Why is the AMI, MIA for B2B?

    Kimon 8:46 am on March 13, 2010 | 3 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , ,

    My time in Sweden gave me a lot. I gained a family; a taste for stylish furniture and some great sayings such as, “the cobblers’ children have no shoes.” Ergo – plumbers have lousy plumbing, electricians have death traps at home and I’ve seen “things” in the kitty litter box produced by Hamish, our slightly gay cat, which has more marketing-smarts than the AMI.

    I don’t blame the AMI per se, they are doomed to fail at marketing by virtue of the fact that they represent the peak body for marketing. I’m sure the CPA guys’ books smell like a baked dinner, and whoever represents builders reside in a burnt-out car under a bridge. It is in my nature, that when I experience something of mind-blowing stupidity, I instantly look for an excuse, a reason, just a shred of logic, because I can’t bear to live in a world where stupidity exists as a free range agent.

    What I have experienced from the AMI in terms of understanding its market and how to market to its market has been indeed stupid, but as I pointed out, it is not their fault. Life is full of deliciously ironic examples, and thankfully so. Examples such as these allow people to say witty things like, “Did you hear about the marketing association that didn’t know about marketing? Talk about ironic eh!”

    Let me explain. Imagine you run the AMI, and you take the guise of representing marketers. This would require you to have a solid grasp of your potential market, especially if you are a membership organization. So what would you do if someone pointed out that you are missing out on a segment of your total market that could boost growth by 20%? No finger pointing, just a nice conversation on the phone, followed by an email detailing what the segment is, why it could be 20% growth and even some ideas about how to make it happen.

    That’s a snapshot of what I did for the AMI in regards to the B2B segment of marketing. This is not a B2C vs. B2B thing. I understand and accept that B2C will deservedly dominate the marketing landscape. However, I would respectfully suggest that in total, the balance of 80% prejudice to B2C with 20% for B2B makes sense. Currently with the AMI it is 100% B2C and sod all for us who sell technology and innovation to other companies.

    If I were a member of the AMI, I would have serious concerns about the lack of understanding my representative body had for marketing, B2C or B2B. It’s not all that hard to understand that within marketing there are a range of segments, each fighting tooth and nail to gain a place in the sun. The two major categories that fall under marketing are B2C and B2B. However explaining this to the AMI feels like discussing the origins of string theory to someone who still produces energy by banging rocks together.

    Logically therefore, if they struggle to comprehend their own marketing requirements and potential, it’s terrifying to think that they are trying to contribute to others, and represent we, the true marketers. No wonder the perception of marketing in either field is often sniffed at. Our great hope for perception shifting lies with a chimp that hasn’t worked out where the nice or nasty places are to insert fingers.

    Picking up on the logic of the cobblers children have no shoes, perhaps we should look at the CPA. As much as it hurts to be outwitted at marketing by accountants, we can sooth the hurts by stealing their ideas and strategy with vigor; plagiarism is a marketer’s best friend after all.

    On the B2B front, there was a glimmer of hope at seeing a new category last year for the AMI awards, B2B marketing communications. I gracefully ignored the fact that no one contacted me from the AMI and said thanks for the tip, and when I looked at the criteria, I was overjoyed with not being connected to it. Again, more rock banging, just a slightly different tune.

    There was no substance, no meat, nothing at all to suggest that whoever cooked up the category understood B2B, and therefore those who were to judge had little in the way of correctly assessing if entrants did indeed deserve recognition. To plaster a generic label of “B2B marketing communications” for an entire segment of marketing was confirmation of my worst fear – the AMI, even with a complete blue print, still couldn’t connect the dots.

    Did you see the winner? A home loan wholesale product which is sold to mortgage brokers, the type of product that is at the eye of the GFC storm, with low doc requirements and painful increases of interest rates for people who really should not be getting a loan in the first place. I laughed so hard my liver is now best friend with my spleen.

    For those of you not involved in B2B or have little understanding of B2B, here is what you missed out on because the AMI got it soooo wrong. You missed out discovering some brilliant companies in Australia who develop state-of-the-art technology and innovation, stuff that often takes up to 15 years just to commercialize. These same companies then tear themselves into pieces to market globally into industries with fierce competition, long sales processes and millions of dollars on the line with every deal.

    Companies who are transforming the way health care is delivered, redefining lean manufacturing, performing miracles with water efficiency or providing workable solutions for climate change. B2B marketing embraces these and many others seismically sized significant industries. Stuff that you might never hear about, but they change the way you are treated in hospitals, they make our economy more competitive, and just might help to save the planet.

    What we got for the first award in B2B from the esteemed AMI, was a home loan product, sold by commission only sales people, who in turn used it to contribute to the sub-prime crisis. Oh dear.

    I can see that the AMI has an award for this year using the same old generic category for B2B marketing communications. I would love to see some more effort put into B2B awards for these hard working, highly skilled marketers. Check this out, and AMI – go ahead and use anything you like, you did before, but just don’t cock it up this time.

    My dream award categories – B2B marketing

    -       Best new brand

    -       Best international product launch

    -       Best national product launch

    -       Best brand management

    -       Best integrated sales force campaign

    -       Best integrated marketing communications campaign

    -       Best marketing innovation for improved competitive edge

    -       Most creative advertising or direct mail

    -       Most compelling collateral material

    Personally I would like to have more awards focused on the creative side, simply because those who do manage to produce stunning creativity often do so against significant opposition. Could have an extra category for, “B2B marketer who had the guts, guile and grace to get a brilliant idea past engineers, without it being torn to pieces, like a chocolate coated hamster in a pack of mad hyenas.”

    Wordy I know, but highly accurate reflection for what many face internally when striving for overall marketing and communications excellence.

    I write all this understanding two very key points. 1. As mentioned, the AMI is doomed to mediocrity with marketing, because they represent marketing. 2. It’s easy to stand back, lambaste an organization by flaying them mercilessly in public for any shortcoming.

    Honestly, I don’t know what the exact situation is with the AMI. Perhaps they have an inordinate amount of incredibly difficult work to perform and not even the bastard child of Steven Hawkings and David Ogilvy could cope. Or there is a methane gas leak that’s been undetected for many years underneath them, slowly depleting their brain cells.

    All I do know is, that the peak body of marketing is MIA with B2B, and has done so for many years. I don’t know exactly why, but it’s a shame. For all those B2B marketers who work hard and get results. It’s also a shame for those who need more resources, who want to improve and develop professionally.

     

    • Jack 11:14 pm on March 16, 2010 Permalink

      Brilliant expose! Don’t worry, AMI won’t be touching B2B marketing any time soon. They have not finished with B2C. lol

  • Marketing the Triple Bottom Line

    Kimon 3:07 pm on November 21, 2009 | 2 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , ,

    The criteria B2B buyers use when making purchasing decisions is changing and companies that embrace these changes can add considerably more value to their brands.

    Traditionally, B2B buyers have built business cases around the economic performance of the products and services under consideration. These business cases are usually heavily dependant on financial indicators like return on investment (ROI) and net present value (NPV). Whilst the financials are still critically important, there are now other key considerations B2B buyers are factoring into their decision making processes.

    Expectations on businesses to operate as good corporate citizens are now common place. Stakeholders are demanding organisations make real contributions to economic prosperity, environmental quality and social well-being, now commonly referred to as the Triple Bottom Line, TBL or 3BL.

    So, just how does 3BL change the way B2B buyers look at products and services?

    Before an organisation buys your product or service, they’re now likely to consider the impact it has on society and the environment.

    Social benefits are measured by how an organisation contributes to the community. For example, B2B buyers that choose to purchase Australian made products can claim a social benefit because they’re contributing to local employment. Same goes for organisations that donate to charities, promote work-life balance initiatives and so on.

    The Environmental component of the Triple Bottom Line is measured by the size of the organisation’s footprint and what they’re doing to reduce it. Organisations buying products that harm the environment are likely to be perceived as contributing to the problem, rather than the solution.

    So, when you’re promoting your organisation or the products and services you sell, be sure to highlight the Triple Bottom Line benefits. Whilst you may be selling the best functioning product or service at a reasonable price, tell your target audience what you’re doing to promote social and environmental wellbeing too. You may just increase your brand’s value in the process.

     

  • Beware of the “smartest” guy in the room

    Kimon 7:52 am on September 21, 2009 | 1 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ,

    Everyone loves an expert, I certainly do. When I’m taking my car in for repairs, getting a job done around the house, or using an accountant to do the tax thing every year, I rejoice in the fact that there is someone smarter and better than I am in a special field of knowledge. That leaves me to crack on with the stuff I’m good at. It’s a comfort to know that there are people dedicated single-mindedly to a task, because naturally if you spend all your time in one special area of expertise, you would have to be pretty damn good.

    This is true for all experts, in all fields except for volcanologists. I’m thinking of that earth burp, known as Mount St Helens back in 1980. The experts said not to worry, let’s evacuate people to a distance of 13 kilometres into a “safe” zone. There was just the small issue that the experts’ only knowledge base was Hawaiian volcanoes, which have open craters to erupt in a violently controlled manner.

    Mount St Helens was a completely different kettle-of-fish, no open vent, and even when a massive bulge appeared on the Northern flank, no-one except for a chap called Jack Hyde pointed out how nasty it could be. Jack was not a part of the “expert” panel, so his voice was not heard at the time. What came next was a catastrophic explosion beyond comprehension. The world’s greatest landslide screamed 250 kilometres per hour down the mountain, carrying enough material to bury Manhattan to a depth of 120 metres. Then the main show with an explosion of five hundred atomic bombs, killing people as far away as 30 kilometres, as the blast went out of that bulge, the experts had considered as “insignificant.”

    On second thoughts there are experts in other fields who also get it wrong, such as (pause for effect), digital media people. In fact they are so far off the pace, they don’t even have a proper sounding title, at least volcanologists have that much going for them. On the other hand, when a “digital media person” cocks-up, it’s not quite as cataclysmic on human life, so I guess on that score, it all evens out.

    The real issue is, when an expert digital media person talks about B2B, are they an expert with B2B? They could by all rights be a borderline genius with digital media, but in the world of B2C, creating buzz for cornflakes or launching e-commerce sites, which creates impressive bio-copy, stating how much business their digital media expertise has generated. Problem is, without a deep understanding of B2B, innovation and technology companies are blowing holes into their budgets and credibility following the advice of “experts.”

    The most striking example is in the world of SEO, with many taking the same approach to selling large capex products as you would when flogging collectable Hot Wheels. The most obvious difference is the time to buy. My boy takes about 20 seconds to decide what Hot Wheel he wants, a B2B buyer will take 2 years or more, just on the due diligence. Perhaps the best illustration of the expert gap is with key word strategy.

    B2C searchers often use well-known brand names, such as Hot Wheels, because many already know what they want to buy. The real hunt is for the best source. If a B2C searcher uses a generic term, expect less variance such as “toy car.”

    B2B keyword strategy is more complex, because often there are many ways to skin a cat. Imagine for instance, you sold cat-skinning technology, not a bad thought at all really. In any case, you have a business, which sells technology licensing for a remote controlled plant that skins a thousand fur balls per day, using various ingenious methods.

    To attract licensees/investors/customers, you need your key word strategy to cover not only the bleeding obvious such as your brand and “cat skinning” but also “slaughter systems,” ” slaughter technologies,” “food processing,” “animal management systems,” and dozens of other related and specific search terms.

    You also have to consider the variation of what to call things, because people will use weird combinations of words because of industry-specific lingo or generic terms. Your typical B2B searcher uses words focused on the need or problem, rather than a product or solution. Add multiple searches during the buying cycle and multiple parties influencing the sale, B2B SEO keyword strategy can quickly become more complex than a weasel chasing a snake in your trousers.

     

  • Going for a revolution? Before you storm the gates…

    Kimon 7:19 pm on July 20, 2009 | 0 Permalink | Reply

    The French, they gave us silly accents, glorious vistas and the spirit of revolutions. The way the French cracked on in 1789 taught us that if you’re sick of something and believe you have a better idea, you have to shake things up to dump the status quo. Unfortunately in B2B marketing, you can’t willy-nilly cut the heads off people who block your progress, not matter how much you feel the world would be a better a place. With our current legal system, you have be a bit more strategic to get your revolution going.

    Technology for instance can enable us to hold our own revolutions to change the world and take leaps into new markets begging to be exploited. Sometimes markets are stuck in ways that just don’t work, at times stupidly so. That’s when inventions sprout forth, new technology powers new ways, which requires new thinking and in turn can generate some really exciting changes.

    And then someone has to market it and here the revolution can get shaky, because revolutions in technology and innovation often require a vast change in people’s thinking, conceptualisation and behaviour, along with a dose of bravery for being the first to try something new.

    Imagine if buying behaviour of corporations and Government was applied to that nifty revolution – fire. We would all still be eating raw meat and freezing our bums off. In fact let’s quickly run a ruler over that radical idea of “fire,” a genuine revolution of technology in the light of modern day procurement procedures.

    1.     Risk-management policy, never be first to use – Well that would mean every other cave will be enjoying pork chops, without worrying about getting worms

    2.     Need to get three competing offers, open tender policy – Does that mean you have to go out, teach two others how to make fire, hand over IP and then pray that you don’t get under cut?

    3.     Non-compliant tender – No kidding! It’s non-compliant, because no one has ever done fire before! Perhaps if the underdeveloped sapiens who did tenders, did so with an understanding about what they needed to achieve?

    Any of this sounds familiar? I really do admire the brave and brilliant minds that develop new technology. And what a challenge to market it!

     

c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
esc
cancel