Branding gaps and 6 ways to bridge them

Tweet

Branding gaps are the most likely source of declining enrolment in an independent school. But where do you find them and what do you do about them?

First, some ground rules. For the purpose of this discussion I am using Seth Godin’s definition of a brand: “A brand is the set of expectations, memories, stories and relationships that, taken together, account for a consumer’s decision to choose one product or service over another.” So, you can see that a brand is infinitely more than logo, tagline and ad copy.

Now, to define branding gaps we need to accept that organizations effectively have two brands. One is the promised brand – the one that marketing, communication, mission and other efforts have been designed to convey. The other is the delivered brand. This is the one you find out about when you survey stakeholders and ask them to characterize their experience with and perceptions of your school. In organizations that really have their branding act together (think Apple, Whole Foods), the two are aligned. In most organizations, there are going to be differences between the promised brand and the delivered brand and those differences are the branding gaps.

There are many sources of branding gaps. Most of them can and should be considered proactively. Here are some ideas for where those gaps maybe lurking in your school and what to do about them.

Teachers – There is no one more important to delivering your school’s brand than teachers. For most families, they are the most common point of communication. It’s critical that teachers know and understand the school’s brand. Clearly it should be reflected in all their communication with students and parents and that includes classroom websites and email blasts. I would contend that the brand should also be evident in the classroom. I know a Head of School that challenges teachers to consider the changes they would make to classroom content if the mission of the school changed. If mission and curriculum are married, then brand must also be part of the educational product.

Everyday Communication – Parents are recipients of what sometimes seems like an endless stream of communication from the school. While this often deals with day-to-day issues like early closings, lunch programs and upcoming events, there’s no reason that it shouldn’t reflect the school’s brand. The danger is that much of this type of communication is often written hastily by people other than marketing and communications staff. There are a number of solutions. Many of these communications can be anticipated and templates can be prepared in advance. Everyone in the organization should be brand-trained and understand how that affects even the most mundane messaging. Finally, a review system that gives the communications staff the final say could help maintain the brand.

Office staff – We all know the adage about having one chance to make a first impression and office staff are the front line of most interaction with stakeholders – whether in person, by phone or by email. Like everyone else, they need to understand the school’s brand promise but more importantly they need to know how to incorporate that into daily activity. Front-line staff in a school that emphasizes inclusivity and diversity should communicate differently than those in an elite IB school.

Board members – Lay people are often represent the greatest brand challenge. Their implicit contract with the school is not employment based and requires more refined management measures. Yet they wield tremendous influence –within the school community and the community at large. Brand training for board members is essential. What’s more is that lay people are often not aware of the ways in which they subtly make brand impressions in their everyday conversation.

Mission/Marketing Misalignment – Finally, it’s possible that everyone in the organization is delivering the brand experience dictated by its mission or even brand strategy and the real problem is that marketing efforts have missed the mark. What’s being promised isn’t what’s being delivered. Assuming that most people are satisfied with their interaction with the organization, the fix is to re-tool the marketing effort.

The real solution is the 3 M’s - You can only fix branding gaps that you are aware of. The key to brand management is to measure, monitor and modify. You have to survey stakeholders on a regular basis to determine if you are delivering your intended brand. Likewise, it’s critical to be monitoring social media including the parking lot that, in a school, is often the most potent social media channel. Final, you have to be prepared to act based on what you discover.

Branding gaps can undo the most masterful marketing efforts and create enrolment crises. Knowing how to find them – and bridge them – will undoubtedly improve results.

What do you think? What branding gaps have you uncovered in your organization and what are you doing about them?

Branding to the converted

Tweet

Preaching to the converted is usually taken as a waste of time. The same could be said of branding. Why bother branding to those that have already bought?

But I had an experience last month that ought to send a shiver down the spine of any independent school advancement professional – or for the keeper of the brand in any organization.

I was speaking with a woman whose oldest child is a grade one student at an independent school to which I consult on marketing and admissions issues. She told me that as a parent she didn’t really know how to articulate what distinguishes this school from others. And in a moment of panic, I thought, “Houston, we have a problem.”

You see, this is a school that mounts aggressive recruitment campaigns with very healthy budgets. And the marketing is effective. It generates hundreds of inquiries and provides a school of over 1500 students with enough new students to offset attrition and maintain stable enrolment.

The problem seems to be that four years after they signed on, parents clearly can’t remember why they chose the school and what makes it different. The reality is that current parents don’t see all the fancy advertising. The expensive viewbook they were once given is gathering dust somewhere – assuming it was spared from the recycling bin. They don’t look at the admissions section of the website.

And yet current parents are any school’s greatest salespeople. If they can’t articulate the brand, the return on marketing investment isn’t going to be very exciting. So, what to do?
Here are some suggestions for what is not an uncommon challenge.

1. Live the brand. A brand is way more than a logo and a tagline. If the brand is that which truly distinguishes a school, then it is defined by the sum of all experience with the school. Every interaction has an impact on that brand. Based on that, the goal is to have everything that happens at the school – educationally, programmatically, even administratively, reflect the brand. It’s possible that although the parent in my story felt that she couldn’t distinguish what was different about the school, her description of her family’s experience at the school may in fact reveal unique qualities. If she’s living the brand, she becomes an effective ambassador.

2. Communicate the brand. Current parents should be just as much a target of communication efforts as are prospective parents. Knowing what’s going on in their kid’s grade one class isn’t enough. They have to know about the notable events and successes throughout the school. More importantly that communication should also reflect the brand. Whether you’re using e-newsletters, social media, websites or old-fashioned print, what you say and how you say it has to convey the values, priorities and essential characteristics of the school.

3. Measure the brand. Let’s start this one with the basics. You absolutely need to be surveying your parents regularly. Are they satisfied? What areas need improvement? How do they assess the quality of core curriculum components and key aspects of student life? Assuming that those elements are reflective of the brand, those questions are already measuring your success at conveying the intended brand. You can go further. Ask parents about the extent to which they identify with the principles that are at the core of your brand.

An interesting question then arises. What happens if parents don’t identify with those principles? Well, you have two choices. One is to redouble your efforts to live and communicate the brand. The second choice is more intriguing. Even though the brand being articulated by your parents is different than what you intended, it’s possible that brand is more authentic and equally attractive. Maybe you need to rethink the brand.

Any way you slice it, branding and marketing efforts must be inbound as much as they are outbound. That way, current parents become powerful brand advocates for their school – and you reserve your spine chilling moments for horror movies.

What brand is your thank you?

Tweet

In a fit of fundraising heresy I posted this question on Linked In last week:

Does saying thank you really make a difference? Do you know of a research study that proves that thanking donors will lead to further or increased donations?

There was some method to my madness. I had just read the findings of a study conducted for AFP Canada by Ipsos Reid, entitled, “What Canadian Donors Want.” One of the conclusions reported was:

"Less than half agreed with the statement that not receiving a thank-­you message would decrease their likelihood of giving in the future (14% strongly agree, 31% somewhat). Fifty-­two percent disagreed with the statement (30% somewhat disagree, 22% strongly disagree)."

Stripping away the confusing double negatives, it tells us that 52% said that not receiving a thank you would not decrease the likelihood of giving in the future.  That seemed to fly in the face of fundraising fundamentals.

Being a proponent of data based decision-making, I decided to see if in fact there was research that could confirm the efficacy of thanking donors.

So, I contacted some industry experts and I posted my question. I received a number of interesting responses although none of them could point to studies that directly confirm that thanking donors will lead to improved results.

I was directed to research conducted by Penelope Burk that indicates donors say they will give again if they receive:

1. prompt, meaningful acknowledgment of their gifts
2. reassurance that their gifts will be directed as donors intend
3. meaningful results on their gifts at work, before they are asked for another contribution

But that speaks to intent and not actual results and in addition, the "prompt, meaningful response" was only one of three requirements.

There is interesting research at Donor Voice that shows that a significant number of donors feel that a gift should be acknowledged within two weeks. But that speaks to timeliness. Interestingly, 54% of donors said it didn’t matter how long a charity should take to say thank you. It occurs to me that’s pretty close to saying it doesn’t matter whether they say thank you at all.

Some seemed to feel that the answer to my question was immaterial. For example:

"Why would it matter? You are going to thank them because it's the right thing to do, anyway, so what difference does it make?"

Others responded more rhetorically and one of those responses unwittingly addressed what I believe is the core of the issue. Here’s what he said:

"Is there really a reason to consider not thanking a donor? If we found out it doesn't make a difference, how do we change our behavior?"

Well, maybe the AFP study has told us that it isn’t making a difference and that yes, we need to change our behaviour. I believe the research may indicate that donors have become cynical about “canned” thank you letters and emails. Perhaps they are saying that no thank you is better than a clearly automated thank you.

In commenting on the research that he presents at Donor Voice, Kevin Schulman says, “there are in fact a lot of donors who don’t care about the acknowledgment." He also speculates that there may be a segment of donors who are “annoyed by the constant stream of thank you’s” And then he addresses what I believe is the crux of the issue. He says, “… I’d further guess this is about … the way the acknowledgement is done.”

In the same way that organizations have to break away from the clutter to compete for donated dollars, they have to make sure that their acknowledgments also stand out. Thanking a donor just because it’s the right thing to do may be a wasted opportunity. If branding helps get the gift in the first place than the thank you ought to reflect that branding. The thank you is part of the brand experience and organizations should give a lot of thought to expressing gratitude in a way that is brand-consistent. This may include considerations like:

• the voice in which the thank you is written
• the design of the thank you
• content that accompanies the thank you
• the medium that is used for thank you
• who says thank you

I’d bet that organizations that give serious thought to the experience of being thanked see a great lift in gift frequency and amounts.

The last thing that organizations want is donors who say "no thanks" to being thanked.

I’d love to hear what others have to say on this and in particular would like to see some great examples of well branded thank you’s.

 

Both gift and sale are four letter words

Tweet

If organizations treated a gift more like a sale, they’d find out the two words have more in common than four letters.

There was a great post from The Agitator last week discussing the fact that fundraising organizations often concentrate on donor acquisition to the exclusion of donor retention. This, despite the fact that data clearly demonstrates that it is more likely to get an additional donation from a first time donor than a new donation from someone who has never given.

It made me think about how this issue is dealt with in the for-profit world.  In business terms, a donation is essentially a sale. And for enlightened companies the sale is the beginning of a process, not the end of one.

There’s an old sales adage that goes something like, “Sometimes the scariest thing that can happen is making the sale.” It may sound counter-intuitive but the point is that sometimes making the sale is easier than delivering the product. The principle is easy to understand in service industries or in cases where something is being custom made. But I would argue that’s its potentially true when any sale  – or donation – is made.

That’s because there’s an implied contract in every sale. Even when a finished product is at the centre of the exchange, there is an experience to be delivered. It could be the taste, the feel, the time saved, the utility gained or even the jealousy of others. Successful businesses worry about whether that experience is delivered. They understand that their brand is at the core of that contract. They know that the possibilities for future sales lie in meeting the expectations of current customers.

What’s the implied contract in a charitable gift? Answering that question will allow organizations to see the ways that they can increase donations from current donors and in fact attract new ones. The more practical question is what’s the potential donor experience that can emanate from making a gift and what can organizations do to make sure it is delivered? Here are some thoughts (potential experience in italics and action items below):

A personal sense of satisfaction.
Thank you notes, calls, videos that reinforce that feeling. Congratulate your donors for what they have done.

The ability to tell others about what I’ve done.
Recognize donors publicly. Use social media or other means to make it easy for donors to share what they have done.

The knowledge that I am helping people, supporting a cause or making a difference.
Regular communication that informs donors about the difference their gifts – in specific or in general – are making. Personal communication with a donor. Testimonials from those who have been helped.

The opportunity to find out more about an organization or a cause.
Develop a relationship. Inform donors about opportunities for further involvement – those of time and money.

The opportunity to do it all again.
If it was a rewarding experience the first time, odds are a donor will do it again. Don’t be afraid to ask. Often.

There are lots of other (and probably better) ways of defining the donor experience and figuring out how to deliver it. But recognizing that the donation – just like the sale – is just the beginning of the relationship is the key to growing your donor base and the quantum of giving to your organization.

So, what do you think? Is a donation really a sale in disguise? What does your organization do deliver on the contract that is made when someone makes a gift?

“Wow” is not the “how” of brand building

Tweet

Last week I read a post on the HBR blog that described two “wow” customer experiences. They really were amazing. One involved a tech company customer service rep who was on a very long troubleshooting call and upon hearing the client say that he was hungry, had a pizza delivered to the client’s office. The other involved an employee at a restaurant chain who delighted a three year old with a “ride” on his mop.

So your first instinct might be to think about all the ways you can create those kind of “wow’” experiences for your customers (or donors or parents). But here’s the thing. If you’re relying on those kind of out of the ordinary experiences to distinguish your brand, you’re making a big mistake.

The reality is that you can have an amazingly successful organization without ever having created one of “those” moments. Let me illustrate by looking at things in reverse. Let’s say you have a company that delivers a sub-standard product with salespeople who are generally less than attentive and one day one of your reps does something truly heroic. Guess what? You’re still going to have a lackluster brand that doesn’t get much attention.

The latest installment in John Moore’s Talkable Brand video series makes the point. The video tells us if you want people to talk about your brand, it has to be loveable.  And what makes a brand loveable? Things like always doing the right thing by customers, consistently delivering more than promised and keeping promises even it means losing money. These are all exercises in consistency. Great brands are defined by what they do every day – not just on a good day.

So what is the “how” of delivering a great brand experience? Whether it's for a business, a nonprofit or an independent school, I believe it revolves around three things:

1. Quality – you have to have the best possible people delivering the best possible product or service. Period. Good marketing can’t compensate for mediocrity.

2. Know your brand and make sure that everyone in the organization does as well. Seth Godin defines a brand as “[a] set of expectations, memories, stories and relationships…” Make sure you know the expectations you’re meeting, the memories you’re creating, the stories you want told and the relationships that you want developed.

3. Be consistent. Develop the systems that make it possible for your organization to distinguish itself in every interaction every day.  This involves things like quality control, research, staff training, professional development and incentive programs.

Counting on exceptional experiences to distinguish you brand is like developing online content designed to go to viral. They’re both not going to happen. Being strategic by knowing your target market and how to meet their needs – every day – is a much better approach.

What do you think? Is it really the “wow” experience that makes a difference? And if not, what are your “hows” of brand-building?

Four essential marketing goals for 2012 – inspired by Cirque du Soleil

Tweet

I saw Quidam, my first-ever Cirque du Soleil production last night (I don’t get out much) and I was mesmerized, thoroughly entertained and very much inspired. It was clearly one of the most creative spectacles I’ve witnessed. Even though being there had nothing to do with business (it was my wife’s birthday present), my mind was flooded with the ways in which Quidam offers advice to all of us involved in marketing. So here’s my Cirque du Soleil prescription for 2012.

Be totally, completely, unquestionably unique
Cirque du Soleil is not only different than any other circus. Its different than any other live entertainment – with its own  character and ambience. And it was memorable. If I heard a snippet of the music or saw the flash of an image from the show, I’d recognize it in a heartbeat.

To survive and thrive, the brands we market, create or develop are going to have to be unique. OK, so you’ve heard that so many times that you’re about to close this tab, but think about it – and be honest. Odds are we’re not really distinguishing ourselves from the competition. We’re just part of the pack taking our fair share. To truly stand out, you’re going to have to dig deep – do some research (customers, supporters, employees, the public), soul searching, innovating and come up with a premise and a persona for your brand that is like no other.

Take chances but be prepared for uncertainty
The clowns in Cirque use people from the audience as an integral part of their performance. It’s an incredible risk. What if the chosen people do something totally unpredictable? It’s clear that the clowns are prepared for just about anything and are skilled at manipulating the “performers” while playing the audience.

In the coming year, charge into uncharted territory. Do something you’ve never done before or better yet, something your competitors have never done before. Create that campaign that will have people saying, “I can’t believe they did that – and I love it.” But, be sure you know the risks involved and have a plan (communications, crisis management, back-up campaign) in place in case it doesn’t work.

Sweat the small stuff – it makes a huge difference
While the acrobats and jugglers in Quidam deliver their performance there are all kinds of other things going on - dancers twirling, men in white spinning. people on stage having conversations. You might think these things would be distracting but they’re not. The balancing acts would be no less breathtaking without them but they are little flourishes that just add to the overall ambience – and make it unique.

It’s the small stuff – the attention to design detail, the unexpected thank you, the token of appreciation, the personalized letter – all the things you didn’t have to do but chose to do  - that will get and keep the attention of your customers and supporters.

Create ooohs and aaahs - don’t settle for second best
The unbelievable skill of Cirque’s performers and the perfection in all aspects of the production were key to the quality of the presentation. And yes, there were lost of oohs, aaahs and wows.

There is no substitute for excellence. We have to set our standards high – higher than they ever have been. The people we are marketing to are increasingly sophisticated and discerning. Whether on a conscious or innate level, audiences know the difference between good enough and outstanding. More importantly, they will demonstrate that knowledge in their purchasing or giving decisions. To achieve results  - which is the goal of all marketing - it’s going to take copy, campaigns, initiatives and tactics that create oohs and aaahs.

That’s my take on Cirque du Soleil and marketing in 2012. What’s yours?

The heart of fundraising success

Tweet

Sales is a transfer of emotion. That lesson was drummed into me early in my working life. If you want to make a sale, you’re going to have to make someone feel something and your job is to figure out the right emotion for the right person. It’s taken me a long time to accept the tyranny of that principle. I often want to believe that people buy/give for rational reasons – that they research, comparing objective criteria and make decisions on that basis. But that’s not reality and some recent online material as well as a research project in which I’m involved have made me think about the extent to which the heart rules the head when it comes to giving decisions.

A recent post from my Torontonian colleagues at Nyman Ink explored the concept of Emotional Branding, even citing a Wikipedia entry.

But isn’t all branding emotional? Seth Godin defines a brand as “the set of expectations, memories, stories and relationships that, taken together, account for a consumer’s decision to choose one product or service over another.” – or in fundraising terms to donate to one cause over another. How do you even begin to separate the emotional from the rational in that definition? And why bother?

Katya Andresen focused on analysis vs. emotion in a post earlier this week that presents data/studies that not surprisingly confirm that emotion trumps analysis – as I would say it does every time.

That led me to a really interesting post by consultant Tony Macklin and his “Grand Unified Theory of Donor Desire.” Tony says, "if you want to increase charitable giving, first, listen to a person’s story and hopes. He asserts that perspectives on effective philanthropy will always take a back seat to the “fundamental search for meaning and belonging.”

The last online piece is the Money for Good study recently released by Hope Consulting. Their research consists of over 4,00 interviews with individuals representing household incomes of more than $80K. These are the people that you might think are most rationally discerning about their giving. However, the study concludes, “Few donors do research before they give, and those that do look to the nonprofit itself to provide simple information about efficiency and effectiveness.” Moreover, they found that, ” While donors say they care about nonprofit performance, very few actively donate to the highest performing nonprofits.”

All of this is borne out by research in which I am involved based on interviews with Canada’s top philanthropists. One of the most often cited criteria in major gifts decisions is the passion of the person that is driving the organization or project. Hardly an empirical or rational measure. Even at the major gift level, emotion is the major determinant.

The implication for fundraisers and marketers is clear. If you want someone to give to your cause, you’re going to have to make her feel something – even at the highest levels. And while you can’t ignore the need for clear information and accountability, the more you pitch to the heart, the more successful you will be.

Maybe the Taggies are no Biggy

Tweet

Nancy Schwartz, one of the best known bloggers, speakers and consultants in the not for profit world has just released the results of the 2011 Nonprofit Tagline Awards – or Taggies as she and her marketing material refer to them. This year she’s even created a slick video to announce the winners.

Remarkably, over 1700 organizations submitted a total of 2700 taglines for consideration and over 6000 votes were cast to choose the winners. That’s pretty incredible considering that the prize for winning is nothing more than being recognized.

Nancy deserves a lot of credit for coming up with the idea three years ago and developing it into something that 1700 organizations know about and want to participate in. And, through the contest, Nancy is making nonprofits devote at least some attention to their marketing efforts – which is a very good thing.

I think the contest raises some troubling questions.

The video proclaims the tagline to be a “vital marketing tool” and that a “smart tagline is a powerful tool for connecting with your base.” Not only am I not buying it, I think it sends the wrong message to nonprofits. The vital marketing tool is the strategic plan from which a tagline emanates. A well-crafted and implemented plan with a lousy tagline will have better results than the converse any day. Amongst the tools that a nonprofit can use to connect with its base, a tagline is probably one of the least effective.

The awards are distributed without knowing anything about how well they represent the mission, goals or stakeholders of an organization. The winner in the Fundraising category – Oregon Zoo’s “Bring Back the Roar” is smart but is it anything more than that? How did it fit into a broader plan? How did it relate to the target market? How did it contribute to results? On top of that a visit to the Zoo’s website shows no vestige of the tagline. So, while it may have been an award winner it clearly wasn’t a keeper (no pun intended).

The video also declares that a tagline will allow you to “build your brand in 8 words or less.” Brands are not built on 8 word taglines. They are built on thoughtfully considering and developing the relationship that your stakeholders have with your organization. There are many successful brands that – believe it or not – have no tagline. In the for profit world, companies like Apple and Starbucks come to mind. Here in Toronto, York University has just completed a $200M campaign marking the 50th anniversary of the institution. While the “York to the Power of 50” campaign name (is that a tagline?) is creative, I suspect the campaign would have been equally successful with a different – and less creative – name.

Too many organizations already want to skip the strategic steps that will lead to effective marketing. They just want the good-looking logo, the pithy headline and maybe now the award-winning tagline. Ultimately, I worry that the Taggies celebrate the end while ignoring the means.