Fact-Based Branding in the Real World
-
Upload
siegelgale -
Category
Business
-
view
1.135 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Fact-Based Branding in the Real World
February 6, 2013
Rolf M. Wulfsberg, PhD
2
+ 43 years as a survey researcher and executive
+ Prior to joining S+G, worked at Enterprise IG, several leading survey research firms and the US Government
+ An author and frequent speaker at professional conferences
+ An expert witness before the U.S. House of Representatives and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court
+ Holds a PhD and an MA in statistics from American University, and a BA (summa cum laude) in mathematics and economics from Luther College
+ A former Rhodes candidate, Woodrow Wilson Fellow and NCAA Postgraduate Fellow
Rolf M. Wulfsberg, Ph.D. Global Director Quantitative ResearchSiegel+Gale
Agenda
+ What is fact-based branding?
+ What is the compelling truth of your brand(s)?
+ Predicting ROBI in advance of implementation
+ Warning signs of potentially “bad” research
3
What is fact-based branding?
5
What is “fact-based branding”?
+ “The use of rigorous quantitative measurement and forecasting techniques to make better branding decisions.”
+ Fact-based branding covers the entire customer life cycle—from the acquisition of new customers to the retention and expansion of existing customer relationships.
6
1. It builds consensus within your organization.
Five reasons to embrace fact-based branding
7
2. It could add years, if not decades, to your tenure as CMO.
Five reasons to embrace fact-based branding
8
3. It provides concrete metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of brand-building initiatives.
Five reasons to embrace fact-based branding
9
4. It elevates brand and communications to a vital role within the organization.
Five reasons to embrace fact-based branding
10
5. It’s really fun!
Five reasons to embrace fact-based branding
What is the compelling truthof your brand(s)?
12
The role of brand in the acquisition process
“Have I heard of your brand?”
“Do I know what category your brand is in?”
“Does your brand meet my needs?”
“Does it meet my needs better than others?”
“Did you deliver your promises?”
13
Potential “centers of gravity” for the compelling truth of a brand
1. Infrastructure
2. Products/Services
3. Process/Approach
4. People/Skills
5. Mission/Purpose
6. Emotional connection
7. Emotional projection
8. Personality
There are several methods researchers use to determine the importance of brand attributes
1. Ask decision makers how they make choices
2. Derive importance through simple statistical tools such as correlation and regression
3. Use more complex trade-off techniques such as conjoint analysis or discrete choice modeling
4. Construct a “micro-model” built on decision makers’ brand perceptions
14
A chip allocation exercise that compares brands head-to-head establishes both preference and strength of preference
“Suppose you had 11 points to allocate between Exxon and BP to indicate how much you prefer one brand of gasoline over the other.
How many of these 11 points would you give to Exxon, and how many would you give to BP?”
15
16
Chip allocation results can be very informative
17
Unlike conjoint or discrete choice analysis (shown below), this model bases preference on brand perceptions rather than forced disclosure
Perceptual maps demonstrate how various brands perform on key preference drivers
Noncompetitive StrengthsDrivers you are perceived to deliver well, but not as well as another brand(s)
Potential EquitiesDrivers that you don’t “own” but you can talk about credibly
Core EquitiesDrivers that you “own” and are perceived to deliver well
WeaknessesDrivers on which you are perceived as weak
Unmet NeedsDrivers on which you lead, but no brand is perceived to deliver well
PERFORMANCE RELATIVE TO BEST IN CLASS
AB
SO
LU
TE
PE
RF
OR
MA
NC
E
HIG
H P
ER
FO
RM
ING
B
RA
ND
LOW
PE
RF
OR
MIN
G
BR
AN
D
NOT COMPETITIVE WITHIN REACH BEST IN CLASS0–0.3
6
0
18
The brand maps reveal how the brands are positioned in decision makers’ minds
19
AC
TU
AL
PE
RF
OR
MA
NC
E
PERFORMANCE RELATIVE TO BEST IN CLASS
Brand A (Americas)
7
0
~~
ProfessionalC
8
NOT COMPETITIVE WITHIN REACH
Long heritageL
Leader in low voltageL
Leader in UL assembliesL
Leader in UL componentsL
C Dependable and reliable
Meet/exceed standardsP
L Leadership
C
A
S
P
V
Character
Added Value
Service/Support
Products
Value for Price
Value for priceV
Responsive serviceS
Local mfg.S
Full supportS StraightforwardC
KnowledgeableC
EthicalC
Knowledgeable employeesC
Easy cataloguesS
Effective, prompt responseS
Delivers when neededSLeader in medium voltageL
Global leaderL
High quality productsP
BEST IN CLASS
Note: Only Key and Secondary Drivers are shown
Predicting return on brand investment (ROBI) in advance of implementation
A simplistic model for measuring ROBI
21
22
There are other factors that affect the business condition
23
An improved model for predicting ROBI
Warning signs of potentially “bad”research
25
1. Inappropriate respondents
2. Inappropriate level of detail
3. Compound attributes
4. Failure to recognize different use of scales by some cultures
5. Inappropriate combining of scores or ratings
6. Inadequate analysis
Warning signs of potentially “bad” research
262626
2626 26262626