Comments (0)

By Mitch Glasser, October 13, 2011 9:04 AM

Here is another example of how the right positioning can make all the difference in the success of a new product.

Back in the mid 80s there were two kinds of desktop printers for PCs: impact printers (sold by any number of companies), and Hewlett Packard’s laser printer.  The former were inexpensive, noisy and produced low quality output…but they did the job.  The laser printer, in contrast, produced high-quality documents, was very quiet, but was quite expensive ($5,000 at the time).  There was nothing in between.

In 1988 HP introduced its first mass-market inkjet printer, as did Canon a year or so later.  Though more expensive than the impact printers of their day, they were significantly less expensive than laser printers.  Each company took a different approach in positioning its product.

Canon’s positioning: A quiet replacement for the impact printer

HP’s positioning: Laser quality without the laser price

Now for sure, office workers were keen to get rid of their distracting impact printers so that ‘quiet’ appeared to be a great position for a new market entrant.   However, the majority of those who relied on impact printers suffered from ‘image quality envy’.  That is, what they REALLY wanted was a printer that produced great looking documents, just like a laser printer, but at a significantly lower cost.

What happened?  HP captured the market.

Why does this story demonstrate the importance of positioning?  Well you see, in essence they were the same product.  They were equally quiet.  And, they produced essentially the same quality output.  Did potential buyers know that from the advertising?  No.  How could they.  They relied on the vendors to tell them what was so great about these new devices.   Canon hit a hot button.  HP, however, hit the hottest button!

And the one who hits the hottest buttons win!

Comments (0)

By Mitch Glasser, February 13, 2011 6:39 PM

“Positioning is not what you do to a product.  It is what you do to the mind of the prospect.  That is, you position the product in the mind of the prospect.”

Positioning: The Battle for your Mind, Al Ries and Jack Trout

Positioning is not solely established by what you say about your product.  It’s not that simple.  It is strongly influenced by how you price, package and offer it to the market.  Positioning comes from what the prospect ‘concludes’ about your product from everything you say and imply about it.

Here is a great example of how positioning can make or break a product’s success.

In the early 70s Volvo introduced the 262C, a much sportier car than their existing boxy (and very safe) sedans, the 242 and 244.  It was described as a new, sportier offering from the company and was priced somewhat above those standard models. The 262C was available in only silver or black to help establish its uniqueness.

It sat like a rock in dealers’ showrooms.

At some point they realized changes were needed.

So what did they do?  First, they decided that if they wanted it to be perceived as a special, very different offering from their other vehicles, they needed to price it accordingly.  So the selling price was dramatically increased.  Next, they strongly promoted the fact that it was designed by a well-known Italian sports car designer, Bertoni.  Finally, rather than saying it’s a Volvo with a sporty flair, it was described as a SPORTS CAR, but designed with Volvo’s legendary emphasis on safety.

The result: they couldn’t make them fast enough to meet demand.

Remember, they didn’t change the product.  It was the same car.  That bears repeating.

It was the SAME car.

Poor positioning can cost you a bundle.  Make sure you know what is most compelling to your prospects and that all aspects of your positioning are pulling in the same direction.

Comments (1)

By Mitch Glasser, August 31, 2010 11:58 AM

Social media offers unprecedented capabilities to communicate and connect with prospects and customers.  However, it will only benefit your company if you first decide where it is your current communications activities need assistance to meet your mar-com goals.

Clearly, this last statement is true for all communications tools: print advertising, direct mail, e-mail newsletters, TV and radio advertising, event sponsorships, trade show attendance, speaking engagements, etc.  What makes answering this question for social media so acute today is the massive hard-sell going on among the ever growing list of social media vendors.

People buy using the same model they have always used.  What was important to buyers 30 or 50 years ago is still important.  What has changed is the variety of information and communication sources that exist and the ease with which they can be accessed.

For my money, social media can make major contributions to answering a number of buyer questions.  Specifically, which vendors:

• Have the offerings and capabilities that meet my specific needs?
• Are credible?
  • Have a track record?
  • Have customers?
  • Are experts about the industry issues and problems they purport to solve?
  • Can be trusted to deliver on their promises and stand behind their products?
  • Have a vision for and commitment to future product improvements?
  • Have customers who are happy to be their customers?

Social media affords you the potential of getting your answers to these questions in front of your prospects.  I say ‘potential’ because what has to be true is that your prospective buyers have to first be engaged in using social media for this to happen.  If you’re talking in places where they’re not listening, you’re wasting your money.

So the first step in your social media activities is to first uncover if and how your customers are using social media to stay informed about the industry in which you operate and the solutions and capabilities you offer.  How do you do that?  Well, as simple as it sounds, you ask them.  This will provide you with the information you need to direct your social media efforts and bear fruit from your investment of time and money.  Once found, then you need to decide what combination of awareness, credibility, trust, etc. needs form the majority of your social media content.

If collecting information from your customers and prospects about their use of social media is not the first step proposed by a prospective social media supplier, be very suspicious.  And if they don’t ask what communication goals YOU want to accomplish with social media, start looking for a new vendor.

Comments (1)

By Mitch Glasser, August 13, 2010 12:05 PM

In Part I, I put down some ideas about how to tell whether your marketing organization has a real strategy or just a collection of words labeled strategy.

Let’s go another step.  For the sake of argument, we will assume you have an honest to goodness marketing strategy (and it is the correct one for your company—no small assumption). Now here is a test to consider:

If an outside marketing consultant studied your organization, documenting all your plans, tactics and activities, what would he or she conclude is your marketing strategy?  Would it agree with what you’ve stated it to be?

It should, but more than likely it would not. In my experience there is a chronic lack of rigor applying a company’s marketing strategy to its tactical planning.  They are usually done by different groups and are seen as independent functions.  What results from this approach is that the tactical planning winds up creating the strategy, rather than the other way around.

You see, it is the sum of your tactics that defines the strategy under which you actually operate (regardless of what is stated in your PowerPoint slides).  The stated and actual strategies will be one and the same if your tactics were properly developed from your strategy.  If your tactics were developed independently—that is, without deliberate adherence to your stated strategy—they are bound to collectively point to a different strategy than the one intended.

It could be even worse.  If the consultant can’t recognize a consistent purpose and focus running through your plans, for all practical purposes you don’t have a strategy.  That is, you are not focused enough to accomplish anything in particular.

The upshot of either of these scenarios is that you won’t achieve the expected outcome from your marketing activities, and you’ll realize something needs to change.  It is both difficult and time consuming to uncover whether it’s your strategy or tactics leading you astray.

Even in the best if economic times it is no easy task to develop a true, effective marketing strategy.  In today’s environment, getting the strategy and tactics right the first time is imperative to survival and growth because there is little wiggle room for a ‘do-over’.

Think about allowing someone from outside your company to look at your tactical plans and see what they come up with as your ‘implied’ strategy.  Yes, it would be a gutsy thing to do because it might challenge some of your market assumptions.  But if problems do exist, how soon would you like to know about them?  Sooner, when you can actually do something about them, or when the market eventually tells you something is amiss?

Your marketing achievements could rest on your answer.

Comments (3)

By Mitch Glasser, August 9, 2010 7:15 AM

Marketing strategies are like budgets, every marketing group has one.  But is what’s claimed to be the marketing ‘strategy’ really a strategy?

A true marketing strategy describes the intended outcome of a marketing organization’s cumulative activities.  It describes what it’s trying to accomplish given its resources and the state of the market it tries to serve.  The strategy is fed by an understanding of company’s:

• Targeted customers
• Competitors
• Its own strengths, ‘unique-nesses’ and position in the market
• The business and economic environment in which it has to operate

It addresses the firm’s advantage in the market and often the position it is trying to achieve.  Importantly, a real strategy also limits what the company offers.  Does your marketing strategy read like this?

Once created, the most important purpose of a marketing strategy is to serve as a framework for aligning all the planned tactics and activities with the department’s intended accomplishments.

Operationally, the strategy is a key tool for tactical planning in that it is the filter through which all proposed marketing tactics must pass to be approved.  If the tactic supports the strategy, then it can move ahead (albeit possibly dropped for other reasons).  If it addresses customer targets, products, promotions, pricing, distribution, communication, etc. out of line with the strategy’s intent and direction, it is eliminated.  Not using the strategy in this way effectively means you have no strategy.

What does a strategy NOT do?

A strategy does not state or imply what will be done—specific activities, operational plans, etc.  These are all part of tactics, and are determined based upon what is needed to realize the strategy—those activities which will move you from where you are to where the strategy says you desire to be.  They are the execution tools for implementing the strategy, and not part of the strategy itself.

More often than not, what’s purported to be a marketing strategy is merely a set of tactics assembled in strategic-sounding phrases.  The lack of a marketing strategy, a real, well developed (and utilized) marketing strategy underlies much of the ineffectiveness of today’s marketing activities.  Why?  Because without the focus brought by a real strategy, all planning and execution activities will not be pulling in the same direction.  There will be no synergy across tactics that enables them to build on each other.

If your marketing strategy contains the tactical ‘whats’ of your activities and not the higher level market issues mentioned above, you don’t really have a strategy.

You have a problem.