Archive for the ‘Chrissie Douglas’ Category
Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010
Much has been written on the subject of brands – not least by B2B International! As we know, a brand is made up of many things – name, logo and values to name but a few. But can there be any doubt about the importance of a brand name? In a Thursday Night Insight article last year, Chrissie Douglas gave us some hints on selecting a brand name:
- Brand names should be simple so that they are easy to understand, pronounce and spell. Two words in the name should be considered the maximum.
- Brand names should be vivid in imagery so that the mnemonics present strong memory cues.
- Brand names should be familiar sounding so that much of the information to which the name relates is already stored in the mind.
- Brand names should be distinctive so that the word attracts attention and does not become confused with other brands.
So, what happens if you get it wrong?
According to research by YouGov/G2, Cillit Bang has been voted the UK’s most disliked brand name. Of the 2,000 British consumers surveyed, a quarter of women, a fifth of men and 27% of over-55s did not like the brand name. Yet, the cleaning brand, which was launched in 2005 by Reckitt Benckiser, is actually considered by its owner to be a “power brand” and its sales show it to be an extremely successful product. So, clearly, brand name is not everything.
Yet, of the top 10 most disliked brand names (shown below), four are new names for previously known brands, including 3 in the top 5:
- Cillit Bang
- Cif
- Starbucks
- Pasta Hut
- Snickers
- Veet
- Accenture
- Aldi
- Plenty
- Mates
Cif used to be known in the UK as Jif, Snickers was for many years called Marathon, and Veet previously went by the name Immac. This perhaps underlines the importance of getting the brand name right in the first place. Once people have started to associate certain values and attributes with a brand, any changes can lead to confusion or mistrust. Unless you recognise the importance of brands and adopt a well thought-out marketing and communications rebranding strategy, you could find yourself with a lot of brand rebuilding work to be done.
To find out more about branding, please refer to several of our white papers, including:
Posted in
Articles, Branding, Chrissie Douglas, Consumer Research, Corporate Identity, Customer Insight, Re-branding |
Comments:
None Yet »
Friday, May 1st, 2009
In her latest Thursday Night Insight, Chrissie Douglas highlights the sheer pace and scale of economic change in the UK (the so called credit crunch), how this has completely changed our perceptions of things that we have always taken for granted (i.e. that our money is safe in the bank!), and the fact that market research is now perhaps more important than ever to keep in touch with what exactly is going on out there.
Let me start by telling you about my banking experience in the last six months. After ten years of riding the property boom we sold our house and put the proceeds in the safe hands of our family bank – Royal Bank of Scotland, whilst waiting for our next dream move. The months passed and as the property market began to decline we felt great in the knowledge that our secure pot would actually buy more as time went on. We thought we were playing it by the book. We’d made some money and we’d put the proceeds away safely in the bank with no risk – just as we’d always been told to do (“after all, your money is always safe in the bank”).
This all changed in October last year with news reports that British banking giant Royal Bank of Scotland was about to collapse. The share price had fallen from over £2.50 to 40p (a fall of 84%!) in a matter of days and was on the verge of going under. We had to move quickly. A review of the alternatives revealed that the only 100% safe option for savings was now the Post Office (owned by the Bank of Ireland), following the Irish government’s pledge to guarantee 100% of all savings in Irish Institutions. So the money was safe again, or so we thought. Just after Christmas, amidst continuous press reports of financial doom and gloom, we noticed that the Irish economy was worst hit and on the verge of bankruptcy. The promise of their 100% safety on savings was not worth the paper it was written on (they would not have the funds to back up this guarantee if bankruptcy occurred). With the hysteria surrounding the bankruptcy of the Iceland economy and the loss of savers’ deposits in Icesave still fresh in our minds, we moved the money back to RBS where incidentally it would have been safe all along (in the meantime RBS had become 75% owned by the British government).
The point of telling this story is to highlight the rapid scale and pace of change, and that things that you had always taken for granted are not necessarily so in the current climate. The term ‘credit crunch’ has become part of our everyday vocabulary but, until it hits you on a personal level, I don’t think you appreciate the nature of the current financial situation in the UK. Things are changing very quickly and it is difficult to keep up.
A quick review of recent headlines highlights this point. For example:
- The 2009 Sunday Times Rich List suffered its biggest annual fall since it was first compiled 21 years ago.
- Unemployment is forecast to reach 3.3 million next year (possibly 5 million in the next few years!) – the highest since the early 1980s and at any time since comparable records began in the early 1970s.
- The UK has just announced its biggest budget deficit in peacetime history and the steepest downturn in the economy since the Second World War.
- Last September the Dow Jones recorded the biggest single-day point loss ever.
There are many more examples but the common theme is that economic decline seems to be on a bigger scale and is changing faster than ever before. Nobody knows what is going on. Nobody knows what will happen next. All we do know is that we have to carry on and plan for the future as we have always done.
This brings me back to the topic of market research. In this current environment it would be understandable to remove market research from your list of top priorities. It may be hard to justify expenditure on something that may be out of date soon after completion (given the pace and scale of change, last year’s market research may already be out of date). However, companies still need to make informed decisions on future direction. I would argue that market research is actually now more important than ever. What we really need is continuous customer monitoring that is cheaper and has a quick turnaround. Luckily with the aid of new technology, market research techniques have come on leaps and bounds and now enable us to keep our nose to the ground. For example, e-surveys, online focus groups, internet panels and bulletin boards are all providing us with the ability to keep up and keep in touch.
For more information on how B2B International can help you stay in touch, please call one of the B2B teams on +44 (0)161 440 6000 or +1 914 761 1909.
Posted in
Banking, Chrissie Douglas, Economic Crisis, Online Focus Groups, Online Research, Online Surveys, Thursday Night Insight |
Comments:
None Yet »
Friday, January 30th, 2009
In this week’s Thursday Night Insight, Chrissie Douglas reflects on a recent branding decision that has hit the national press and discusses the importance of good branding.
Whilst flicking through the Sunday papers dominated by doom, gloom and impending recession, a light-hearted article on a recent re-branding decision focused my attention.
The article in question described how Watercliffe Meadow primary school in Sheffield dropped the word ‘school’ in favour of a ‘place of learning’. The head teacher believed that the word ‘school’ has ‘negative connotations’ and that the traditional description sounded too ‘institutional’. At the same time, the local authority renamed many of the traditional school support services. For example, lollipop ladies became “school crossing patrol officers”, teachers are now known as “knowledge navigators”, libraries as “ideas stores” and dinner ladies as “education centre nourishment production assistants”!
On the one hand, the content of this article is light-hearted and funny but on the other hand, changing established names that have become almost institutionalised over hundreds of years borders on ridiculous. This focused my attention on the seriousness of the re-branding decision.
So what’s in a name? A brand name is the label by which people recognise something and when they think of that name some image or values are conjured up which are special and unique. These are often built up over many years as the name becomes a familiar front end to the values and perceptions associated with a particular company. The name becomes a reflection of what the company stands for.
Let’s consider a few examples. In March 2001, Royal Mail – the UK national postal service – changed its name to Consignia at a cost of £500,000. The brand lasted little over a year before public outcry forced the group’s return to its original Royal Mail signature at a further cost of £1 million.
What the Royal Mail failed to do was transfer the awareness and perceptions of the brand which had been built up over 400 years to the new name. That is, they failed to recognise that Brits are a proud, culturally-heritaged bunch and that centuries-old traditions and values were encapsulated in the name. Consignia had no association or meaning to the population, sounding more like an Italian airline or, ironically, an American branding consultancy. Not the sort of organisation the Queen would trust her correspondence with. However, if Royal Mail had been called Consignia when it was first created, would the company and its businesses be smaller or larger, or otherwise significantly different? The answer is probably not.
Other not so well known examples include the re-branding of Backrub to Google, and Marafuka to Nintendo. What makes these two examples different is that the brand names were changed prior to any large-scale commercial success or before the world established any values or associations with those terms. A reversion back to their original form is now near impossible as they are a fundamental part of our global vocabulary.
So the key message is that naming is not something to be taken lightly. In an ideal world the trick is to get it right first time. If you don’t get it right first time, it’s a lot more difficult to change once the name becomes established and the values, perceptions and identity of the company become entrenched and almost inseparable from the name.
That’s not to say that the successful re-naming of an established brand is impossible (there are a number of success stories – for example the creation of Aviva from the 200-year old Norwich Union and CGU insurance brands) though it is important to question whether it is really necessary (is it really necessary to replace the term ‘school’?). If it is, the trick is to transfer the good from the old brand to the new.
So how do you go about re-branding? Good branding is not about original thinking. It’s about focus, consistency and doing the right thing. Although there are no hard and fast rules, some criteria suggested by researchers as factors which affect the recall and recognition of names are as follows:
• Brand names should be simple so that they are easy to understand, pronounce and spell. Two words in the name should be considered the maximum.
• Brand names should be vivid in imagery so that the mnemonics present strong memory cues.
• Brand names should be familiar sounding so that much of the information to which the name relates is already stored in the mind.
• Brand names should be distinctive so that the word attracts attention and does not become confused with other brands.
B2B International is an expert in branding and re-branding, and has developed a unique and tested model for analysing and building a strong corporate position that has been endorsed by some of the largest companies in Europe and the US. To learn more about how B2B International can help you, contact our Branding Research Team.
Posted in
Brand Strategy, Branding, Chrissie Douglas, Corporate Identity, Re-branding, Thursday Night Insight |
Comments:
1 Comment »
Friday, August 15th, 2008
A recent house move has given Chrissie Hague, IT Support Manager, the ammunition to put pen to paper to write her first Thursday Night Insight post to highlight the complexity of service provider evaluation and selection.
I moved from the heart of bohemia to the extremes of suburbia. From Didsbury, in inner city Manchester, to Mellor, on the edge of the Peak District.
In Didsbury I had all my shopping needs on my doorstep. 24-hour Tesco, M&S Food and the Co-op, all within strolling distance. Day-to-day needs were satisfied by all and I switched between the three without any thought. Running out of the staples – milk, bread and queen green olives stuffed with guacamole and feta was never a problem.
Then a culture shock – I moved to Mellor. In Mellor, I struggled for the basics. You can’t even get a paper on a Saturday morning, never mind trying to satisfy my olive fetish! The quality of what was on offer fared no better. The only milk I could find was sour. And before unwrapping my 3-year-old’s weekly toy treat, I had to shovel the dust off the wrapper like snow from the car! (The shops here don’t cater for a demographic under 60, never mind 3 year old children!). The weekly shop did not lift the gloom. The only option was the Co-op – teaming with blue rinse, poorly stocked shelves and checkout queues the length of airport security.
It was getting me down to say the least but I adapted. I got a milk man and invested in a bread machine. But there was still no alternative to the dreaded Co-op. If I could just find a replacement for the weekly shop I could enjoy my new idyllic rural life. Then it happened. My daughter Lily shouted “there’s the egg van!” The egg van turned out to be Sainsbury’s internet home delivery service which was soon followed up the lane by Tesco and Ocado equivalents. I (or rather Lily) had discovered online grocery shopping.
Ocado was the first store I signed up to and it was brilliant. The website was fast, responsive and intuitive. There were no annoying pop-up windows, it was well thought out and the navigation clear and uncluttered. There were lots of nice touches, like receiving discounts for delivery by selecting a slot when the van was in the local area. A courtesy call ten minutes before arrival to say they are on their way. Arrival on time – I’m used to waiting all day for a gas man/fridge delivery, etc. that never comes! A helpful, friendly, polite driver who was informed enough to recognise it was my first time (I instantly felt valued). And, to top it all, the goods were sorted into colour-coded bags indicating freezer, fridge or cupboard. This was shopping heaven – I swore undying loyalty to Ocado.
A week passed by and it was time for another order. But to my frustration Ocado didn’t deliver on a Sunday and our fridge was bare. I almost felt a slight twinge of guilt for considering another provider but “needs must” and Ocado didn’t satisfy them. It was time to try another store. First I tried Tesco. Again the interface was fine and I was drawn to the gimmicky ‘quick shop’ feature. Great I thought…Ocado but quicker. I went to crisps first but this generated a huge text list with no images. I scrolled through the pages desperately trying to find Seabrook’s but gave up on page 5 with a headache (I had never realised pictures were so important in shopping)! At this point I gave up and made a conscious decision never to use Tesco online again (now I was getting fussy).
It was time to try another. I signed up to Sainsbury’s. An instant perk was the loyalty scheme (being able to collect loyalty points was a bonus not offered at Ocado). The site followed a similar format to Ocado’s. It was easy to navigate and included bright and enticing images of the products. The product range was excellent (better than Ocado) and even offered fresh bread (not available at Ocado). The delivery arrived on time and it made Lily’s day when she saw the “apple van” on the drive! I was a happy customer.
The moral of this story is that this experience has made me recognise the complexities of the service provider selection process. Even a simple shopping task triggered several evaluation criteria, which on reflection were unique to me (and many of which I was previously unaware of). On the face of it all providers seemed the same, but in reality it was those subtle differences (e.g. delivery days, loyalty points, fresh bread, etc.) that proved decisive.
The difficulty for any business is to recognise and understand these differences, though understand them they must in order to survive. The difficulty for us as a market research company is to provide this understanding to serve our clients. It’s at times like this that I am thankful to be part of the IT team at B2B and not one of the researchers who have to deal with these complexities on a daily basis.
Posted in
Chrissie Douglas, Customer Satisfaction, Market Intelligence, Thursday Night Insight |
Comments:
None Yet »
|
