Mistrustcasting: A Tale of Two Brands

One day recently, a high school math class decided to conduct an experiment to ascertain whether Oreo’s Double Stuf cookies actually contain twice the “stuf” – crème filling – as implied by the treat’s name.

The class’s work yielded the faintly damning discovery that the Double Stuf contain only 1.86 more filling than the original incarnation – a shortage of 7 percent. Hardly headline-making news, right? After all, most folks would agree that it’s close enough and simply applaud the teacher’s creative, hand-on approach to this classroom exercise.

And that’s where Oreo should have left it, but they chose not to. Instead, when contacted about the matter by Business Insider, the company issued a formal statement claiming the math class had reached an inaccurate total and that their Double Stuf recipe does indeed include fully twice the amount of filling. So Business Insider put together its own experiment, which came down in favor of the math class.

Oreo’s response made this story bigger than it needed to be, and as a result, the brand’s overall reputation took a hit. After all, if they felt the need to lie about 7 percent of their filling, what else might they be hiding? The cookie controversy served up good fodder for a few days of news bites and morning drive-time humor, but given the public’s lasting love for Oreo, the Double Stuf kerfuffle blew over in short order.

More than filler

The Double Stuf debacle is an entertaining – if relatively innocuous – example of just how easily the integrity of even the most well-known brands can be called into question. That’s why the task of building and maintaining trust in your brand is such serious business. For more evidence, let’s take a closer look at BP and SC Johnson, two huge corporations with very different approaches to brand integrity – and very different reputations.

Both companies deal in products under close scrutiny in today’s increasingly green-minded business and marketing environments. BP is the world’s sixth largest petroleum fuel interest, and SC Johnson is one of the world’s largest producers of household cleaners.

If you look at their advertising and PR, both companies use strikingly similar language, which is logical, given that each company has a vested interest in portraying itself as environmentally responsible and forward-thinking.

But the court of public opinion tells a very different story, making it clear that their efforts to define themselves are yielding drastically different results.

BP’s big problem

More than three years after the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, BP is still dealing with the aftermath on many fronts. In addition to the illegal practices which led to the spill, the company has been found guilty of felony for lying in its response to the disaster and has paid out more than $42 billion in clean-up costs, settlements and fines.

BP was found to have engaged in multiple deceptions before, during and after the spill. The company repeatedly refused to disclose accurate or timely information for months after the disaster, which resulted in a far greater impact on the environment than would have happened if the company would have been immediately forthcoming.

A visit to BP’s website shows that the spill still dominates much of the company’s PR efforts. That’s as it should be.

But even as BP touts its gulf clean-up efforts in carefully crafted feature articles, it releases defensive statements whenever its efforts and motives are called into question. For example, in a statement dated August 28, BP responds to recent allegations by the state of Louisiana claiming that BP has not adequately addressed the clean up. Here’s the money quote that leads the statement: "Any suggestion that BP has failed to address the clean up of the Louisiana coastline is both false and irresponsible.”

No acknowledgement of BP’s responsibility, no conciliatory tone indicating that BP is committed to repairing the damage it caused, no apology for all of the suffering. Just a hardline defense, with copy that reads like it was drafted by a stereotypical Hollywood lawyer. This antagonistic tone is at odds with the shiny, happy stories that appear throughout the special section of its site dedicated to the Gulf of Mexico restoration.

This stark discrepancy between rosy PR fluff pieces and sharp legal statements defines the very heart of BP’s brand integrity issue. This is a company whose practices are squarely at odds with the public image it attempts to project.

Start with the logo

Petroleum is hardly a “clean” business; the best any oil company can offer is diligent safety practices and commitment to mitigating its environmental impact.

When BP debuted its green sun logo in 2001, the flowery “helios” mark, it was a clear effort to position the brand as somehow “cleaner” and more environmentally conscious than its competitors. The green sun implies a very different focus than, say, an oil derrick looming over a seascape. Yet in the decade plus since its logo shift, BP has actually decreased its efforts in the arena of solar power, finally announcing plans to shutter them altogether in 2011.

The fact remains that BP is first and foremost an oil concern, with all the environmental risks that such companies encounter. Until BP’s research spending on alternative fuels exceeds the 50 percent mark, that logo is a blatant lie.

Follow the money

Many brands seeking to build trust with the public establish charitable foundations or make contributions to causes. With its image in desperate need of a reboot, BP has made significant donations to gulf cleanup efforts and regional charities that focus on hunger and housing. These are all high-profile, press-release-ready efforts.

It’s certainly better than nothing, and BP does seem to grasp the idea that it needs to spend big to show its concern.

But you won’t find much in the way of marine environmental research on BP’s books or any slowdown whatsoever in the company’s high-risk deepwater drilling projects. No, right along with its more environmentally friendly efforts like wind and biofuels, BP is still using the lion’s share of its research dollars to pursue the same kind of risky drilling that damaged the Gulf of Mexico so dramatically.

As John Bell writes in Forbes Magazine, “BP’s talk about caring for the environment was for naught, as its actions failed to match its message.” Small wonder that a site like boycottbp.com is still growing strong. Or that the brand ranked at number seven in MarketWatch’s 2013 poll of companies with the worst reputations.

SC Johnson’s evolving transparency

While SC Johnson certainly faces environmental concerns, it does have an inherent advantage over a company like BP. After all, a Gulf-scale tragedy is highly unlikely in the arena of household cleaners.

But this field carries its own set of risks. Many of SC Johnson’s products – insect repellents, cleaners and baby shampoo, to name a few – are used by families on a daily basis. And in the last decade, concerns have increased about how these types of products impact not only the health of customers but the greater environment as a whole.

In large part, SC Johnson has responded to such concerns with a careful trust-building approach that includes admission of mistakes and a proactive willingness to change corporate policy and behavior. While there have been a few bumps in the road, even their response to setbacks has been characterized by a tone that emphasizes responsibility over defensiveness.

Open policies

One major area of concern with consumers about household products is the ingredients. Many cleaners and air fresheners tout a natural, organic identity while their labels contain a long list of unpronounceable components unfamiliar to anyone lacking a degree in chemical engineering. In an effort to counteract this, SC Johnson launched its "What’s Inside SC Johnson" website in early 2009, where it has published complete ingredients lists for almost all of its products.

However, the company’s track record is not perfect. Its “Greenlist” label, featured on Windex and other products SC Johnson claimed passed its highest environmental standards, was the subject of several consumer-advocate lawsuits. Because the label closely resembled other third-party designations for independently vetted products, the suits rightly called into question the legitimacy of SC Johnson practice of promoting its own – potentially misleading – self-proclaimed green standard.

Response to criticism

One of the ways in which SC Johnson has been most successful in upholding the integrity of its brand is in its response to controversy. The company trades heavily on its identity as a family-owned business, something that can be difficult to buy given its global scope and multi-billion-dollar annual sales numbers. But when issues arise, it is not a corporate lawyer that does the talking for SC Johnson; it’s Fisk Johnson, CEO and true blood family representative.

In the case of the Greenlist issue, Johnson reiterated the company’s commitment to the environment, but admitted its misstep. “When you're out in front of an issue like this, it means that you're not always going to get it completely right, as was the case with this particular issue," he said.

SC Johnson has also demonstrated a willingness to change its formulas and policies ahead of any legal mandate – and also ahead of many competitors. The company has reduced its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 42 percent since 2000, and it has installed two wind turbines at its largest global manufacturing facility, enabling that facility to produce most of its electrical energy onsite.

Integrity gets results

All of this earnest effort is certainly paying off for SC Johnson. In 2012, the United Nations Foundation for Social Change honored the company as a global Leader of Change, and in 2013, the company received an EPA Climate Leadership Award for Aggressive Goal Setting.

SC Johnson’s mix of staying true to its family roots, increasing transparency with customers and demonstrating a willingness to change combines to reinforce its reputation as a brand that operates with integrity. While the company isn’t perfect, its actions maintain consistency with its image. By any measure of consumer confidence, that’s a powerful – and to borrow from BP’s ill-used lexicon – sustainable strategy.

---

Five Tips to Fuel Your Next Launch From the Coolest Cooler's Record-Shattering Kickstarter Campaign

62,64 backers. $13,285,226 dollars. 26,570% of the fundraising goal met. By any count, these are staggering figures – even more so when you discover that they all pertain to a cooler. Specifically, we’re talking about inventor Ryan Grepper’s Coolest Cooler, a high-tech party-on-wheels that boasts fun-inducing features such as a built-in blender, speakers, USB charger and much more. It has also surpassed other headline-grabbing Kickstarter campaigns, including the Pebble smartwatch and the Veronica Mars Movie Project, to become the site’s most funded campaign ever. Perhaps the most surprising fact about this record-smashing campaign, however, is that Grepper’s first attempt at funding the Coolest Cooler through Kickstarter failed less than 12 months ago. So what were the sparks that set the second campaign ablaze? And how can you apply these lessons to ignite your next marketing campaign or product launch? Let’s take a look:

What was different this time around?

Before we look at the exact lessons that this campaign can teach us, it is helpful to consider what was done differently on this second, wildly successful campaign versus the first one which did not meet its funding goal.

• The campaign was launched during the summer months, rather than the winter.
• The design of the Coolest was revamped and updated.
• The funding goal was lowered.

In addition to these changes, the second campaign also benefited from supporters who backed the idea the first time around. That first campaign fell short of its goal of $125,000, but it did generate $102,188 in pledges from 279 supporters – and those supporters were first in line when the second campaign launched. So what lessons do these changes, and the success resulting from those changes, teach us?

1. Timing is key.

The first time this campaign was run, it was in December. This time, it was done in the summer, when trips to the beach and having an amazing cooler are much more in people’s minds. As the Coolest’s inventor told Geekwire in a recent interview, “launching a product when backers are most likely to be receptive makes a difference.” This same principal holds true for any marketing campaign. You need to launch your campaign when the time is right. For instance, take the week of Thanksgiving. The company that I work for does no marketing pushes during that week. This is because we are a B2B company, and the customers we work with are either off during the week of the Thanksgiving holiday or, if they are in the office, their mind is certainly not on making new business technology decisions or purchases. For a B2B company, this holiday week is not good timing for a campaign. If, however, you are a B2C business, this week is golden! The day after Thanksgiving, commonly known as Black Friday, is one of the biggest shopping days of the year, followed a few days later by the similarly popular Cyber Monday. This entire holiday weekend is filled with ads and promotions for B2C companies, because their customers are in the mindset to buy during that time. Timing is important, and the exact timing that will work for you may be different than what will work for other companies. You need to think about your audience and what their mindset is and you need to consider your product and whether or not there is a specific time when it will most resonate with potential buyers. You likely even have some offerings that make sense at certain parts of the year and others that are most suited to different time periods. Kicking off a campaign at the right time can be the different between success and failure, as shown in the two different campaigns for the Coolest Cooler.

2. Design matters.

Another change that was made to the Coolest for this second campaign was the product’s design. The new design is much more vibrant and exciting than the first. With sleeker lines and a bold, orange color that really stands out, as well as better integration of the component parts, the improvements to the design of this product played an important role in the amazing success that it has seen on this second go around. Design is important; yet it is often one of the first things to be compromised on when budgets are being reviewed. Using pre-built templates as opposed to hiring a design professional to craft a look and feel unique to your needs and ideas is an option that too many companies bypass in order to save some money, but as we have seen with the Coolest, design absolutely matters. Skimping on design is the same as skimping on success. If you are going to launch a campaign, do it right and give it the best chance to succeed by investing in design.

3. Set a realistic bar for success.

Whenever you initiate any kind of marketing or sales campaign, you will have a goal that you are trying to achieve. If you are promoting an event, you will have a certain number of attendees you hope to attract. If you are selling a product, you will have a set number of units you may seek to move. In the case of Kickstarter, there is a “funding goal” that is trying to be reached. While the Coolest’s first campaign came close to that funding goal, the organizers of this campaign decided to drastically lower their goal on the second go-around, from $125,000 to $50,000. For crowdfunded campaigns, there is wisdom in having a lower threshold for success. Backers are often more likely to contribute to a project if it is close to meeting its goal or if it has already met that goal, which guarantees that the project will move forward. The backers who pledge to a project that does not meet its goal are not charged their pledge amount, so it is not like they are out any money if a campaign fails, but people who back a crowd funded campaign are likely to be excited about that campaign and the “rewards” that their pledge will bring them. If they know that the success of a campaign is all but guaranteed, they are apt to jump in and join the fun instead of waiting by to see what happens. By lowering your threshold for success, you actually encourage people to contribute earlier in the campaign! In business, having a realistic measurement for success means that a campaign can be seen as positive – and if a campaign yields positive results, it is more likely that you will be able to do other campaigns in the future! On the flip side, if you are unrealistic in your goals for what a campaign will produce, you will be disappointed when the results fall shy of what you were aiming for, even if the numbers you end up with are totally respectable. Set a realistic bar for success and give yourself the momentum to kick off future campaigns that can build on that success!

4. Passionate customers are like gold.

When the second campaign for the Coolest was kicked off, it already had a few hundred passionate supporters – those who had supported the first campaign. These backers helped spread the word on the Coolest, and coupled with the lower funding goal, positive results were seen very quickly (the funding goal was reached in less than 36 hours)! The passion of those initial backers was contagious, and once the campaign started rolling, the success was amazing, and it all started with help from some passionate and vocal supporters. Having customers who are passionate about your company is one of the best ways to help spread the word on what you have to offer. You can promote your offerings on social media as much as you want, but it often just comes across as a company pitching their products. When a person who is not connected to your company does this, it is received very differently. Customers who love your company and evangelize to others in their social circles hold weight with their connections that you do not possess. If a company says that they have “the best prime rib in the state”, that is seen as marketing copy, but if a friend of yours updates from a restaurant that they “just has the best steak I’ve ever had!”, you view that message much differently. It is not seen as marketing, it is seen as a recommendation from a trusted source, a friend whose opinion you may value. While the marketing speak may not get you to try that restaurant, your friend’s recommendation likely will. This is why passionate customers are like gold. They will help spread the word on your business to people who trust them. In turn, you then have the chance to “wow” new customers and create new referral sources that can result in amazing business success, just like what we see with the Coolest campaign.

5. Ask for help.

The final item we will point out actually happens at the end of the video introducing the Coolest. Not content to hope that people will share the information on the campaign with other in their social circle, the video ends will an actual request for those share. Arrows point to the social sharing button on the page, directly underneath the video, prompting viewers to click a link and share that video. Over 350,000 share of that video have been done on Facebook alone (compared to a little over 700 on the first video/campaign). Yes, part of this success in social sharing comes from the overall success of the campaign itself, but you cannot discount the power of asking people for help! Making social sharing buttons available is step 1, but if you want people to use them, ask them to do so! Sometime, making a simple request is the difference between a person clicking that link, and sharing your content, and bypassing that option altogether.

In summary

The campaign for the Coolest is obviously not typical. You should expect to achieve the same, incredible level of success (remember, set those realistic expectations!), but by following some of the principals that we see at play in this products second campaign versus its first one, we can absolutely find more success in our own campaigns and online initiatives.

---