From a marketing and business perspective, a shift in focus has begun. Perhaps a product of necessity, evolution, or even both, brands are moving from building communities toward identifying users who are relevant to their brand.

Amazon: Intelligent Data Analysis

To understand relevance, it’s first important to understand the value and importance of data.

In 2006, Amazon reported that 35 percent of product sales resulted from recommendations on their site, putting it second only to search in regards to revenue generated. While the end result was showing relevant items to consumers, the process of knowing exactly what to show a user started from the first time a user arrived on the site. Recording everything from what a consumer purchased to what items were viewed, Amazon’s recommendation engine analyzes massive amounts of data to intelligently suggest items to consumers. As a result of these targeted actions, Amazon is able to direct users to items with a high conversion opportunity, leading to higher net revenue.

From a marketing standpoint, brands should consider approaching social networks and the digital space in the same manner that Amazon approaches consumers who visit their site. Rather than viewing a Facebook fan or Twitter follower as just a faceless number (1 out of 1MM fans), brands should consider each individual as an opportunity to learn and cultivate an understanding of the user. By constantly learning and gathering more data about a consumer/fan, brands can learn to become smarter in the way that they market and approach them. From what type of content a user is engaging with to the frequency in which they engage with the brand, data such as these can be used to build stronger ties with users long-term.

While not every brand may operate like a retailer like Amazon, the basic principles of serving relevant content to lead users to a conversion point spans across most if not all industries. How efficient and adept a brand is in applying this principle will correlate to how they not only collect data, but how they analyze it.

Relevance and ROI

Findings from a study conducted in January and February of this year by the Columbia Business School Center on Global Leadership and the New York American Marketing Association found the following:

A survey of 243 CMOs and other marketing executives found that 57% don’t establish their budgets according to ROI measures. 68% of respondents said they base their budget decisions on historical spending levels, while 28% said they go with gut instinct. And 7% said most of or all their spending decisions aren’t based on any metrics at all.

In what could be described as a sort of laissez-faire environment, marketing teams have become overly comfortable to the model of measuring the success of their campaigns through ‘brand awareness’ and public sentiment. While important, they have no standard measurement by which to compare against nor is standardized across industries. Until we get to that point, marketers and brands need to consider what they can measure and how they can use that in their favor.

By understanding what categories ($ spent in 12 month period, visits per month, etc.) by which individuals should be segmented, brands can shift through and find those that help move the needle forward. Additionally, by establishing benchmarks for metrics and milestones, brands will be accurately appropriate resources and budgets toward attaining them.

The Many Degrees of Relevancy

Once an individual has been identified as being relevant to ones brand, the next step will be to answer the question of to what degree. The varying degrees of relevancy is what helps marketers determine who to give the most attention to.

In relation to degree of relevancy, a word that we hear most often in the business industry is brand evangelist or influencer. As the name suggests, these individuals are those that promote and stay ‘loyal’ to the brand. These are the individuals who will buy a product or watch a movie just because it is associated with your brand. While these individuals may account for a small percentage of ones target market, they are ones that help a brand succeed and grow. Because of this, brand should consider these individuals on the high-end of the value chart when it comes to relevant users. O

–

Just how you wouldn’t play a carnival game without knowing the rules or how to win, nor should you pour resources into a community you know little about. Through data collection and analysis, as well as strategic planning, brands can shift from a mass communication approach to intelligent, micro-level marketing.

Some may answer that the advertisement doesn’t favor one side more than the other, but athletes for the most part have been the centerpiece of sports marketing campaigns and continue to be the centerpiece for global sports brands.

Nike Versus Everyone Else

When you think of athletic shoes, one of the first brands that’s always thought of is Nike. Although Nike makes great shoes, there are plenty of shoes out there that are just as good, if not better. So what is it about Nike that makes us jump when we think of athletic shoes? Branding. Simply put, Nike knew that not matter how great of a shoe they could make, it wouldn’t matter unless they could get people to believe in the Nike brand and the culture it represented. If you ask the average person about what brands like Reebok, New Balance, Adidas, or Puma represent, you’d probably get many different answers. Ask someone about Nike though and they’d probably have a good understanding of what the Nike brand represents.

When Nike first signed Romanian tennis player, Ilie Năstase and distance runner, Steve Prefontaine in the early 70′s, Nike set the precedent of using athletes as evangelists for their brand. Although many brands today have an athlete as their brands focal point, Nike transcends those brands in that they don’t focus on just one individual, but have built a family of athletes that embody the Nike brand. From Kobe Bryant to Derek Jeter, Nike has profited off a network of athletes that as a group make up the Nike brand.

The Image

Although we may not realize it, we don’t choose brands just because we like the quality of their products, but rather because we like what they represent. For example, when someone puts on a pair of Jordan’s, not only are they buying a pair of basketball shoes, but they are buying the experience that comes with it. A majority of us may never hit the game winning shot in a basketball game, but owning a pair of Jordan’s allows ‘fans’ to be part of the moments that defined Michael Jordan. Similarly, the same can be applied to when someone buys a pair of Kobe Bryant shoes or a Lance Armstrong “Live Strong” shirt. We like our products, but we love our athletes. No one knows that better than sports brands.

The Marketing Value of an Athlete

While it may be bold to say that an athlete can transcend a brand entirely, with each new ‘investment’ by brands into an athlete, the notion that athletes are replaceable is slowly fading. Brands like Adidas, Nike and Reebok for example have been in a frenzy trying to lure NBA stars to sign contracts, much of which resembles a bidding war. Back in 2009, Dwayne Wade announced that he would be leaving the Converse brand to join Nike’s Jordan brand. In a conversation with the AP, Wade made it clear why he was leaving them:

“I didn’t want to be in the Converse brand anymore because it seemed like they didn’t know what to do with me. I want to go global. It’s something I feel like I have to do. I want to continue to build my brand.”

Although Converse had plans to make Dwayne Wade the focal point of their athletic shoe line, they were unable to fully utilize his marketing potential. Wade realized this and jumped ship. An important point to understand about the relationship between the athlete and the brand is that an athlete can only take you so far before they need help, which in most cases means the ability to expand their reach globally through strategy and brand influence. Converse gave Wade a shoe and hoped that it would catch on domestically. The problem here is that Dwayne Wade is one of the most recognizable basketball players in the world. While other NBA players are being marketed both domestically and internationally, Wade’s reach had a ceiling. Although the dollars and cents matter when it comes to an athlete representing a brand, a brands ability to propel an athlete and increase their relevance and influence plays a big part in the decision as well.

Earlier this year, McDonald’s came to a multiyear agreement with NBA star LeBron James and also renewed a multiyear contract with Dwight Howard. Investing millions of dollars, brands and organizations like McDonald’s understand the impact value that athletes can have. Before the Tiger Woods debacle, Tiger was one of the top earning athletes when it came to endorsement deals. In fact, Forbes announced that in 2009, Tiger had become the first athlete ever to earn over 1 billion dollars over his career before taxes, with a large percentage coming from endorsement deals. Regardless of what has transpired over the last 6 months with Tiger Woods, the fact remains that athletes are one of the highest paid marketing ‘tools’ for brands because of their ability to compel ‘fans’ to become part of what they are representing.

While at first glance Sesame Street may seem like an obvious children’s favorite, the reality of the situation was that Sesame Street was the counter to the ‘norm.’ Part genius and part luck, Sesame Street’s ‘success story’ serves as an excellent examples to marketers on how to make anything from an idea to a campaign succeed.

The Big Bird That Almost Never Happened

Believe it or not, but when Sesame Street was first conceptualized and created, Big Bird wasn’t part of it. Not just Big Bird, but other lovable Muppets, like Oscar the Grouch, were never even supposed to be part of the original sketches. What caused Cooney and Morrisett to write in the characters of Big Bird and other Muppets was the realization that Sesame Street didn’t ‘stick.’

To an extent, before Big Bird and the Muppets Sesame Street was like every other show. It targeted the 3 to 5 year old demographic and implemented and executed ‘best practices’ for children’s shows during that time. Still, what Cooney and Morrisett determined through group testing of shows is that their initial plans of separating all fantasy elements of the show from real elements (street scenes with live actors), which was believed to have been a standard practice due to a child’s inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality, actually had a detrimental effect on the attentiveness and interest of the demo group. Here, Cooney and Morrisett faced a hard decision: go with the ‘norm’ or go with the unknown and take a leap of faith.

Fast-forward 40 plus years and we see that Cooney and Morrisett made the right decision. While most marketing specialists aren’t in the situation of having to decide between Big Bird or no Big Bird, everyone in some form or another has their own Sesame Street situation. As story tellers, our goal is to make sure that the story and messages we weave not only resonates with an audience, but that it has the legs to run and continue to be relevant. We can only make assumptions as to how Sesame Street would have done had the changes not been made, but it wouldn’t be far fetched to think that after a few episodes, Sesame Street would have drifted into obscurity and have become just like any other children’s television show. Learning from Cooney and Morrisett, the key to a great idea sticking and growing into something bigger is knowing how to adapt and develop ideas that challenge the current status quo as well as finding new ways to optimize and improve existing best practices.

The Details of Success

An interview question that I like to ask prospective candidates is how they would take a simple product, such as a DVD, and sell it at a university. While the obvious reason for asking the question is to see how creative the individual is when given a relatively simple task, the deeper meaning of the question is to determine how detailed the individual is when approaching and formulating a plan or idea. The real challenge for the individual isn’t to come up with a creative idea, but rather when they have their plan examined and scrutinized for holes and gaps.

In almost systematic fashion, the team of Cooney and Morrisett took every possible measure to produce the highest quality product in Sesame Street. From developing multiple variations of scripts for segments to measuring demo group attentiveness down to the seconds, if Sesame Street was going to fail, it wasn’t going to be because of their lack of detail. As marketers we can both appreciate and learn from Cooney and Morrisett. In the business world, we are able to influence many things, but control very few. Among the things we are able to control are the details and the lengths at which we go into planning and developing our ideas. For example, if you are telling a stranger how to get from point A to point B, the amount of detail that you provide them with will have a direct affect on whether or not they actually reach the location. Similarly, marketing efforts that provide detailed steps from start to finish leaves little room for error or failure on the part of the brand. Today especially, in an environment where user sentiment and impulses can be impacted within a matter of seconds, developing an idea that has been scrutinized and broken down until it’s perfect can be the difference between success and failure.

—

While Sesame Street has changed since its inception, the fundamentals of its success are still present. Big Bird is still big and Kermit is still green. We may all be a little older and wiser, but we can all look back on Sesame Street to inspire our creativity to push boundaries and develop innovative ideas.

With an ever growing demand by consumers for engagement and relevancy, the sports industry has responded by taking marketing and creativity to new levels. As a result, the sports industry has opened up new partnership opportunities and ways to connect with fans.

Reactive and Proactive

In 2010, the top 50 advertisers in sports spent a combined $6.6 billion on sports advertising, up 27 percent over what the top 50 companies spent in 2009 and 22 percent more than 2008 (SportsBusinessJournal.) So what changed? While we may not go so far as to say everything, a clear change was the way that the sports industry approached fan engagement and the creative process.

Although social networks Twitter and Facebook started in 2004, the sports industry only began catching up with it around 2008. Although ‘late to the party,’ sports teams quickly began to turn their attention toward the digital space and social networks because of the intriguing opportunity that they offered. Prior to the ‘new digital age,’ sports advertising and marketing online revolved around advertising opportunities where success had a clear definition. From traditional advertising campaigns that focused on the PPC/CPI/CPM model and standard sponsorship titlement of web assets, sports teams played it safe when it came to online marketing and advertising, with creativity often found only in offline opportunities.

The sudden change toward fan engagement and the need for creativity didn’t happen because the sports industry suddenly discovered Facebook and Twitter. Rather, it was the realization that without creativity and innovation, you would slowly begin to lose touch with your fan base. New social networks and a change in the digital environment wasn’t the solution, but rather a catalyst for the sports industry and its fans.

The Sports Marketing Renaissance

In what could be called a sort of sports marketing renaissance, sports teams have begun developing strategies that are both reactive and proactive.

By reactive, we refer to the monitoring of the engagement between the brand and the fan. From putting out fires when negative comments are shared, to lead generation, reactive marketing and advertising in the digital space is playing a bigger role in the curating of a sports teams brand. In addition, teams are seeing results financially as was the case with the New Jersey Devils and Mission Control. Acting as a social media central hub for monitoring all things related to the New Jersey Devils, the Devils were able to not only able to part of the conversation, but they were also able to drive significant results including $17,776 dollars in direct ticket sales due to online promotions through their Facebook and Twitter accounts. (cite: National Sports Forum)

On the other side of the spectrum, proactive refers to developing content that will drive conversation. Rather than wait for the conversation to take place as is the case with reactive strategies, proactive actively pursues and develops content that will get people interested and “create a buzz.” Content development with a proactive approach has become especially popular with sports teams because of the unique “assets” that they have at their disposal. By this, we refer to the sports athletes themselves. Like Hollywood celebrities, sports personalities have become a valuable asset to sports teams as they become marketable assets beyond just a simple advertisement on a billboard or ticket. From an advertising and marketing standpoint, athletes now become the centerpieces for which campaigns can be built around. Athlete involvement no longer stops at taking photos at media day and signing balls. Instead, athletes have become actors (see Steve Nash, Toyota Prius Canada), bloggers and in some cases, even ticket salesman (see Dirk Nowitzki Selling Tickets.)

David Ogilvy, also known as the “The Father of Advertising,” once said: “If it doesn’t sell, it isn’t creative.” In the case of the sports industry, this was exactly where advertising and marketing was headed. When it came to advertising and marketing, sports teams were selling fans the same old story: ‘Here are some pretty pictures with a sponsor logo. Please click on it.’ The creativity and engagement that fans desired coupled with the growing impact of the digital space made it the perfect time for sports teams to move toward a innovative marketing and advertising. While it’s too early to tell how these new strategies will play out long-term, early signs show that fan engagement leads to positive results both from a branding standpoint and a business one which we can only hope will continue to be the trend.

So what is the cause? What is causing brands like Disney and Harley Davidson (Former agency: Carmichael Lynch) to reconsider the future of their advertising, marketing, and entire branding? The answer is specialization.

Specialization

Specialization is defined as “the act of making something suitable for a special purpose.” In the case of the “do it all” agencies, specialization is a word that can be hard to come by. Because of the growth and speed of information and content in the digital space, there is an accelerated market adoption rate when it comes to new products, messages and brands. This has led to the the need for agencies with quick turnaround times without the sacrifice of quality.

From Facebook campaigns that need specific applications built for Fan Pages, to social monitoring tools that help a brand listen in on the conversation, finding a one stop destination that is able to do ‘everything,’ is becoming more and more difficult. Due to the rapidly growing number of opportunities that the digital space presents and the lack of specialized individuals, the need for agencies to recruit individuals with an expertise and background in the digital space is at its’ highest.

It what can be best described as a supply and demand problem, ‘do it all’ agencies need to begin addressing their needs for specialists in different areas of the digital space before it’s too late.

The Orange Versus Fruit Problem

One reason why smaller, ‘one-stop shop’ agencies succeed is because they are able to focus on one specific area which makes finding talent easier. In comparison with larger, multifaceted agencies, these ‘one-stop’ agencies don’t need to go out and recruit talent in multiple areas. Just how it’s easier to go to the market and pick out 15 oranges rather than 1 of each fruit, this is the same reality that agencies will go through.

So how can multifaceted agencies compete? In the end it will come down to the overall commitment and recruitment strategy of these agencies. In order to compete with specialized agencies, ‘one-size-fits-all’ agencies need to have a holistic approach to the digital space that encompasses all areas of the digital space. A common mistake that some may make is to hire a Digital Manager to handle all of their clients digital work. While this is a good start, it shouldn’t stop there. Rather, every area of the digital space needs to have some responsibility. By clearly outlining all the possible areas that the brands they represent may need, the agency can then hire groups of specialists to help address them. From individuals who specialize in digital promotions and sponsorships to those who have a background in digital copywriting, by building a team that can manage high-quality campaigns and strategies from start to finish, client retention rate will increase as well as lead to new ones.

The Digital Space Moves Faster

Former First Lady of Argentina, Eva Perón, once said that “time is my greatest enemy.” Along the same lines, time is an enemy for ‘do-it all’ agencies. While common sense says that given enough time, you can do anything, the problem is that the digital space may be the exception to that rule. With every new day, a new area of the digital space finds itself in demand. Coupled by the advent of new technology and the fast paced nature of the digital space, agencies that are trying to play catch-up can be at a disadvantage.

Ultimately, brands that decide to move towards smaller, specialized agencies will do so because of cost and quality. Although it may be difficult for larger, do-it all agencies to compete with these specialized agencies, in the long-run they may be able to win if they are able to make changes now before it’s too late.

Ideas are much the same. Everyone can have think up an idea, but executing it and producing positive results is difficult. There plenty of books out there that talk about ideas, but just how there are many recipes on how to make the ‘perfect’ egg, its less about the steps and more on the detail of the execution.

Paying Attention To Detail

English mathematician and philosopher, Alfred North Whitehead once said that “we think in generalities, but we live in detail.” His words not only resonate in our daily lives, but they also paint a clear picture of how ideas are formed and evolve. Too often do we assume that having the ‘right idea’ is all it takes that we forget that it’s the details that make an idea relevant and impactful. To fully understand this, we re-visit the egg comparison.

As mentioned, eggs are one of the first things that someone whose just starting out will learn how to cook because of they are quick and simple. If you were to tell someone how to make a fried egg for example, you would tell them to heat a frying pan, add oil, crack an egg and add it to the frying pan. From a purely basic process outline, those steps are correct. While correct, what’s missing is the details on how to make it ‘perfect.’ Depending on the degree of detail that is put into the instructions, as well as execution, the outcome will be directly related to it. More details will produce better results while less will yield poor ones.

The Facebook Comparison

With Facebook investors looking for an exit and expected to IPO sometime next year, everyone is looking to be the next Facebook. Trying to be the next ‘lighting in a bottle,’ those looking to replicate and surpass Facebook must not only understand their current state, but also how they got there in the first place.

Although there are many reasons for their success, Facebook succeeded in part because of their close attention to detail which thus improved the quality of their product. Where social networks like Friendster and MySpace failed, Facebook’s diligence toward detail ensured that the same mistakes wouldn’t be made. In perspective, anyone can create a social network, but not everyone can make the ‘perfect’ one.

Facebook’s business has been well documented leaving little unknown, yet their have been hundreds of attempts at creating the next social network with little success.

Facebook reaffirms the notion that it’s less about the steps and more on the detail of the execution.

—

Thomas Edison said it best when he stated that “the value of an idea lies in the using of it.” We all have ideas, but the quality of it and the impact that it will have ultimately lies in the execution and details.

Remember, everyone can prepare an egg. They are simple and easy.

Few can prepare the ‘perfect egg.’

On the flip side of things, sports executives that are involved with the marketing, sales, and organization as whole have a different perspective than that of the fan.  Past all the glitz and glamor, what it all comes down to is that it’s still a business. From the promotions that need to hit its’ numbers to the press release that needs to be done before deadline, the world of a sports executive is full of hurdles, surprises, and twists. Just how Alice entered the rabbit hole toward an unknown adventure, the sports world never ceases to surprise those who enter it.

With that said, we present the question of what a sports executive would ask for if they could have everything go the way they wanted? While everyone wants something different, here 5 ideas on what a sport executives dream might be:

1. Facebook Would Be Easy To Understand

Hate or love it, Facebook isn’t going anywhere. For sports executives, embracing Facebook can be difficult because of the simple fact that Facebook’s Promotional Guidelines cause so much friction because of their lack of clarity when it comes to determining what is and what isn’t a violation. For sports executives and teams, this is especially troublesome as the next level of engagement for teams when it comes to maximizing their digital fan base is through contests and promotions via social platforms like Facebook.

2. League Rules Would Be More Flexible

When it comes to great ideas, there isn’t a lack of them in sports. The problem though that so few of them see the light of day. For sports executives that are looking for ways to maximize their resources and talents, league rules can sometimes create barriers that impede progress. In the ideal world, leagues would work hand in hand with sports executives and teams, giving them more freedom to be creative and leniency to try new strategies.

3. A Mobile Marketing Strategy Would Be Easy

With an expected jump in the number of consumers with smartphones this year, finding a way into the mobile market will become a hot topic for sports teams. While few would make an argument against the viral nature of the  mobile space, what is up for debate is whether it’s worth it financially and also more importantly, if it’s even feasible given both league restrictions as well as the difficulty in creating a single application/mobile strategy that will appease all parts of an organization.

4. What’s A Lockout?

Eliminating the possibility of a lockout is an ideal situation not only for a sports executive, but for fans as well. While potential lockouts irk fans, sports organizations must tread lightly with decisions they make when a lockout is imminent, such as the case with the NBA lockout looming next season. These decisions include a multitude of areas including hiring personnel and budget cuts.

5. Digital Sponsorship Are Easy

One of the biggest question marks going into 2011 is the direction sports teams will take when it comes to digital sponsorships. While sponsorship teams have had mild success when it comes to selling CPM and standard sponsorship space on their team sites, sponsorships teams need to begin focusing their attention on social media assets and distribution as well as developing exclusive digital content that are sponsor eligible. For sports executives, educating and bringing in the right talent that know how to effectively sell digital sponsorship would be the perfect situation.

In the perfect world, the more you have to offer, the more valuable you are. Unfortunately, that is not the case. When a company begins to expand their product line, a business could be endangering their brand identity.

It’s Not For Everyone

Although expanding may seem like the best strategy, the truth is that expanding posses problems from a marketing standpoint if not done correctly.

To understand the possible implications of product line expansion, we will use Company X as an example.

Company X has built a reputation of building great copy machines. They have built a solid foundation in the minds of consumers, but now they have decided to expand to building computers, fax machines, and other electronic accessories. Although they are now able to penetrate existing markets, the big question is whether or not they can dominate it in the same fashion as they did with copy machines. In most cases, the answer is no. By expanding the product line and offerings, Company X has disoriented consumers. They are no longer relevant in the minds of consumers for any specific product or service, but are rather identified as selling a lot of ’stuff.’ Remember, there is never a demand for ’stuff.’

Don’t Sell Stuff, Sell Your Brand

While the obvious counter to Company X is to bring up examples like Target and Walmart, we must remember that they aren’t known for selling ‘stuff.’ They are known for selling many consumer products at a low cost. Similarly Costco sells many different product, but again they aren’t known for selling ‘stuff,’ they are known for selling products in bulk.

If you look at some of the leading companies that offer a wide range of products to consumers, what you will find is that none of them are known for selling ‘stuff.’ Rather, they are known for selling a particular type. Just how Costco is known for selling goods in bulk and Target at affordable prices, businesses that consider expanding their product offering need to determine what their message will be to consumers.

3 Questions To Ask Before Expanding

1. How much market share do you currently have with your current product offering/service line?

2. Do you have the resources to compete in other product/service market?

3. How will you change your marketing/branding efforts to support your new product lines?

Why It’s Hard To Reinvent Your Brand

When it comes to reinventing your brand, the hard part isn’t coming up with what your brand will represent. Rather, it is getting consumers to ‘believe it.’ It’s easy to say that you are the best in something, but unless your consumers believe it, it means nothing. Because of this reason, brands jump from idea to idea, trying to figure out what will get consumers to ‘trust’ them.

Before we go any further though, it is important that we touch on the idea of ‘trust.’ From the car you buy to the brand of milk you get at the market, we base our buying decisions based on several criteria, one of which is ‘trust.’ While there are exceptions to this statement, like when buying a new type of gum because we are curious about it, trust plays a big factor when it comes to how successful a brand is. Going back to Pepsi Cola and Coca-Cola, Pepsi’s branding campaign was difficult because the market was engulfed in the idea of Coca-Cola being number one when it came to soft drinks. Regardless of how great Pepsi tasted, it meant nothing if they weren’t able to get consumers to even try it.

How Pepsi Reinvented Their Brand & Market

Early on, when Pepsi first took on the market leader, Coca-Cola, their first approach was to highlight the statistical advantages that Pepsi offered. By using jingles and advertisements that focused on how you get more from a Pepsi at the same price of a Coke, Pepsi was able to increase their market value. What is important to note though is that Pepsi was only able to take advantage of this because of a struggling economy and that it was more of a short-term branding strategy rather than long-term branding.

Between 1950 and 1960, Pepsi struggled to solidify their brand in the mind of consumers. While Pepsi tried various marketing campaigns, Coca-Cola remained steady when it came to market share. Although Pepsi’s marketing efforts continued to come up short, 1963 was the year that it all changed and would also become the groundwork for Pepsi’s marketing strategy during the “cola wars” 20 years later. Prior to 1963, Pepsi’s branding campaign resembled that of hundreds and thousands of brands today. Like many marketing/branding campaigns, markets are dominated by a single brand, with the ‘leftovers’ being fought over by the ‘rest.’ While fighting over the 40% of the market not taken by the market leader may seem logical, when you realize that there are 10 companies fighting for it, it makes less sense. Pepsi realized this and took their branding/marketing campaign a different direction.

Realizing that challenging Coca-Cola head-on for market shares when it came to soft drinks made little sense, Pepsi decided to create a create a new market for their products. Instead of targeting consumers looking to buy a soft drink, they focused on the ‘young’ generation. Rather than marketing toward individuals who grew up knowing only the Coca-Cola brand, they focused on marketing toward teens and young adults. While Coca-Cola was busy rolling out marketing campaigns built around Santa Claus and other ‘classic’ Coca-Cola themes, Pepsi was busy focusing on the ‘new generation’ of consumers. While Coca-Cola shouldn’t be considered a loser by any means, Pepsi’s brand positioning in the early 1960′s helped them become the recognizable red, white, and blue logo we know today. Since 1960, Pepsi has built strategic partnerships with some of the biggest cultural icons including Michael Jackson, Britney Spears, and Tina Turner. Through these partnerships, Pepsi developed and nurtured a marketing of those that ‘think young.’ Although Coca-Cola still is a market leader when it comes to soft drinks, Pepsi can say with confidence that consumers know their brand.

3 Takeaways For Reinventing Your Brand

For any business looking to reinvent their brand, here are 3 takeaways that should be consider and made note of:

1. If you’re not first, you’re last. Although the saying is quite cliche, it holds some truth when it comes to the business world. If you look at some the biggest brands we know today (ie: Coca-Cola, Kraft, Johnson & Johnson), one of the reasons they are in the position they are in today is because they were the first ones there. They didn’t have to fight for market position, they defined it.

2. Create a market Following off #1, consider if the market you are in is overloaded already. Pepsi realized that fighting for market shares wasn’t the optimal way to go about business, so they re-targeted their market and in doing so reinvented their brand.

3. Change isn’t a bad thing Winston Churchill once said that “there is nothing wrong with change, if it is in the right direction.” Along these same lines, a business must understand that changing one’s brand identity isn’t always bad. A company that fails to recognize when their brand doesn’t connect with consumers is a company that is setting themselves up for failure.

In a recent article entitled, “China, India Offer Marketers Opportunities for Scalable Ideas,” AdAge touched upon the scalability of ideas and how in certain situations, ideas that scale should come first, followed by creativity. Using China and India as examples of areas where scalability are keys to a successful marketing strategy, the article points out that in markets like Western Europe and North America, “digital technology is often ahead of other regions, and the consumer engages with the online medium at a deeper level.” Further, the article goes on to say that “ideas that ‘wow’ you and break through the clutter in a big way are more successful” in those regions. Conversely, AdAge notes that marketing campaigns focused in areas like China and India need to be focused more on the scalability side and not necessarily on the creativity.  While the ‘wow’ factor is great to have, in regions where population growth continues to climb, being able to develop ideas and strategies that scale means that you have the potential to reach every single person, which in these regions means millions of people.

You Aren’t Sacrificing Creativity

When you tell a marketer that they need to create an idea that is scalable, one of the mistakes that some will make is to assume that they have to sacrifice creativity in exchange for scalability. While there are obvious arguments that will lend themselves to agree that creativity is being sacrificed, we can take this in another direction and say that creativity is in fact essential in making an idea scalable.

For example, Michelangelo’s The Last Judgment in the Sistine Chapel is a widely considered to be a testament to his creativity. Along the same lines, Henry Ford is considered to have been creative because of how he changed the way that cars were produced. While the two focused on completely different things, Michelangelo creating masterpieces and Ford on making things more efficient, creativity was an essential part to their success.

How To Create Scalable Ideas

1. Understand your target market

One of the most fundamental rules in any project is to understand the target market. Creating a product or providing a service to a market that doesn’t want or need it is a waste of time. Taking the time to understand everything about your target market will and should dictate how you develop ideas and strategies. For example, AdAge mentions how the New Zealand Tourism group was successful with marketing in China because they understood that a majority of their target market used media platforms and video sharing sites thus leading them to develop a short video campaign.

2. Distribution strategy

When we refer to ideas being scalable, we refer to the ability of an idea to be shared and spread. It’s important that when developing an idea whose sole purpose is to spread, as was the case with the New Zealand Tourism group, that you analyze the current distribution strategies for your target market. For example, if your goal is to reach 18-24 year old college students, developing an idea that focuses on brick and mortar promotions is likely to yield poor results as compared to a campaign that has been developed around the Facebook platform as its main distribution network.

3. Want vs. Need

If you look at the way that a consumer makes a decision, one of the biggest factors that determine whether or not they will buy something is if they need it versus if they want it. For example: you need food and you want a new shirt. Of the two, you are more likely to buy food before you buy a new shirt. With that in mind, when it comes an idea, focusing on why someone needs it or needs to believe the message rather than why they should want it increases the likelihood that they will connect with it.

—

Ultimately, the success of an idea involves the right amount creativity along with the ability to scale and connect with its target. Just how certain ideas were able to spread in areas like China and India because they were creative enough to interest the population, yet easy enough to spread, ideas that work in one part of the world, may not necessarily work in another.

Mary Kay Cosmetics founder, Mary Kay said it best when she said:

A mediocre idea that generates enthusiasm will go further than a great idea that inspires no one