Random Photos: 2009-2010

     Most of the students in these photos would graduate in 2010, and most of them were students of mine.  The students above are, from left to right, Jasmine Chen, Michelle Chen, and Cristina (now Katrina) Liao.  The first six photos on this page were sent to me by students.

      At left above, Teresa (now Momo) Chen shares a laugh with Ruby and others while proving her case before a class.  Jane waves at right. 

      At left, Julia and me.  Ruby, at right, is unsure of herself as she states a belief and  attempts to prove it to the class.  Take a look at the whiteboard behind Julia and me.  I held all the students to the same high standards of evidence and critical thinking skills.

      Very few of my students had a prettier smile than Wendy.

 *          *          * 

 *          *           * 


*           *           *

*          *           *

11. Cause/Brand Alliance

     A cause/brand alliance is the result of a marketing strategy based on the image of public service. The strategy itself is called cause branding.

     First, there’s the cause. It may be flood relief in Taiwan, the search for a cure for AIDS, or something more humble such as supporting a local Little League Baseball team.

     The brand—that is, the company that markets the brand—does something to benefit the cause. The cause benefits because the company provides donations or other support. The brand benefits from the alliance because people associate the name of the brand to a popular cause.

Which benefits more, the cause or the brand?

     Studies have shown that both the cause and the brand benefit. Which benefits more depends largely on which starts out better known and is more popular.

     It’s like taking two different objects and rubbing them together—two different rocks, for example. Some of each rock will rub off on the other. In the case of the cause and the brand, the more popularity one has, the more it will rub off on the other.

     You’ve also seen something like that in college social life. Suppose “John Smith” starts dating “Jane Doe,” and let’s suppose that Jane Doe is the most popular female student in the school. Other students may not see what Jane sees in him, but they will have more respect for John because he’s dating so popular a woman as Jane. If they’re both popular, both gain something from the relationship.

     There is a hypothetical condition attached to this fact: “All other things being equal, that’s the way it works.” Of course, in the real world, all things are not equal.

What conditions may influence how well cause branding works?

     First of all, people supporting the cause must believe that the company involved in this cause/brand alliance is sincere. Foremost in almost everyone’s mind will be the question, “Does that company really believe in the cause, or is this just a cheap public relations gimmick?”

     Potential customers will look at the company’s reputation. They will be influenced by signs of goodwill, especially with regard to issues related to the cause.

     Suppose the company in question were a clothing manufacturer, and suppose that company had donated uniforms to a local Little League baseball team. That sounds like a good fit (there’s that word again). But what if that company were marketing tee shirts and other clothing items related to the cause/brand alliance? Then the company’s support of the team would look like a loss leader in a cynical advertising ploy.

     It would be a better fit if the CEO of the company were known to be a community leader and a baseball fan.

Let’s take a couple of hypothetical examples of an appropriate fit between a brand and a cause. (Mind you, these examples are only hypothetical.)

     Let’s suppose that Alpo, a popular brand of dog food, wanted to form an alliance with a popular cause in the United States. Two suggestions are made. During the advertising campaign, Alpo could donate 5% of their earnings to:

1. Animal spay/neuter clinics associated with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA.)

2. The Wild Horses Preservation Society (WHPS.)

Question: Which of these would make a more appropriate cause/brand alliance fit?  Why?

Answer: A cause/brand alliance with the ASPCA would make a better fit.

Question: What about a cause/brand fit involving the McDonald’s fast food franchise? Here are two suggestions:

1. Free medical treatment for the children whose families are too poor to afford medical treatment.

2. Free treatment for young people suffering from anorexia nervosa.

Now it’s your turn!

How would you and your team build a cause/brand alliance involving your product?

How would you convince the cause to ally with your brand? Remember, both the cause and the brand must respect each other's reputation enough to see any benefit to the alliance.

10. Reputation as an Intangible Asset

     By now, you see that you’re not marketing just a product—you’re marketing an image. You need to build an image to market your product, but you also need to protect the image of both your product and your company.

In a large part, this involves two important concepts:

1. Stakeholder relations management (SRM)

2. Corporate social responsibility (CSR)

     (If your business is not a corporation, the lesser-used term business social responsibility would apply. We still use the abbreviation CSR.)

     Let’s start off with some simple exercises in reputation management. You already know that your business should have a reputation for a reliable product and dependable service after the sale.

     What about threats that your company’s reputation may face? How do you manage your business so that the threats are less likely to arise?

     Here you’ll learn that SRM and CSR are often inseparable. You’ll learn to use both SRM and CSR as a team to build your company’s reputation.
Let’s take some case studies.

Starbucks and reputation management

1. Starbucks coffee beans are grown in third-world countries.

2. Political instability is often found in third-world countries.

3. Poverty and worker abuse is often found in third-world countries.

4. Jungle areas often have to be cleared for growing coffee plants.

5. Coffee plants are grown along mountainsides.

Question: What events may threaten Starbucks’s reputation? How should they keep these events from taking place?

1. Since Starbucks is the world’s best-known marketer of coffee, they’re an inviting target for any labor activist group or environmental group with a gripe against them.

2. Most coffee consumers know that coffee bean growing and harvesting is a highly labor intensive business. Laborer’s are usually poor, overworked, and are housed under substandard conditions. It wouldn’t be much trouble to link Starbucks to labor abuse.

3. Coffee growing is often associated with rainforest destruction and soil erosion. It wouldn’t be much trouble to link Starbucks to rainforest depletion, soil erosion and global warming.

Question: If you were the CEO of Starbucks, what would you do to keep labor activists and environmental activists from questioning your reputation?

Here’s what Starbucks does:

1. Starbucks is a generous contributor to several activist groups.

2. They regularly meet with leaders of these groups to discuss problems that directly or indirectly touch upon Starbucks’ operations in those areas.

3. They initiated and maintain programs of education, poverty relief, and environmental protection in the countries where Starbucks operates.

4. Starbucks publishes an annual CSR report on Starbuck’s activities. Their CSR report is published on recycled paper but is also available on the (paperless) Internet.

     As far as we have been able to determine, Starbucks has never been accused of labor or environmental abuse. Other coffee marketers have been accused of both.

     As it pertains to this lesson, we’ve already discussed SRM and CSR in Lesson 1 (Fit). We’ll further discuss them in other lessons (Supply Chain Management) and (Managing Outside Pressure).

     In this part of the lesson, we’ll go over a couple of case studies in crisis management. Put on your thinking caps. You’ll be expected to make suggestions as to how a business can manage its reputation when things go wrong.

How do you handle negative publicity? Here are two case studies:

Case Study #1: The Johnson & Johnson case

     Johnson & Johnson is a maker of household medicines, baby care products such as baby powder, and other care products. Their best-known product is Tylenol, a headache reliever.

In the Chicago area in September 1984, six people died after taking Tylenol tablets.

Investigators quickly determined how the poisonings had occurred. It had been done at a store in the Chicago area—nowhere else. Of course, it had been done after it had left the Johnson & Johnson factory. Quite clearly, Johnson & Johnson was not at fault.

     Over the next few weeks, sales of Tylenol dropped by more than half and were continuing to decline. If something wasn’t done soon, Tylenol would become so unpopular that no one would buy it. Johnson & Johnson’s most successful product would have to be dropped from their inventory.

     Question: If you were Johnson & Johnson, what would YOU do?

Here’s what Johnson & Johnson did:

     The chief executive officer (CEO) of Johnson & Johnson appeared in a series of high-profile public service announcements. He apologized but then explained how it all had happened. Without sounding like an excuse maker, he made it clear that Tylenol was safe.

Not leaving it at that, he said that...

1. Johnson & Johnson would recall and destroy all containers of Tylenol,

2. People who had already bought Tylenol could take it to the store for a full refund, and

3. Johnson & Johnson had designed a tamper-proof bottle. From then on, all Johnson & Johnson medicines would be marketed in tamper-proof bottles.

Case Study #2: Levi Strauss and child labor in Bangladesh

     During the early 1990’s, Levi Strauss formulated a code of conduct for its source suppliers. One of the provisions of the code was that school-age children would not be hired in source factories.

     Less than a year after the code was made public, labor activists revealed that a Levi Strauss source factory in Bangladesh was using children as factory workers.

     Levi Strauss faced a dilemma. The children should be in school, but they were important sources of income for poor families. If they didn’t go to school, the cycle of poverty would never be broken. On the other hand, if Levi Strauss had the children fired, they still wouldn’t go to school. They would go into such dangerous occupations as rag picking and child prostitution. If they didn’t have the children fired, the Levi Strauss’s reputation and business would be harmed.

Question: What should Levi Strauss have done?

Here’s what Levi Strauss did:

1. They instructed their source suppliers to stop using child labor,

2. They instructed their source suppliers to keep the present child laborers on the payroll even though the children were no longer working,

3. Levi Strauss would continue to pay the children at the same rate they had been paid previously, and

4. Levi Strauss built and provisioned a school for the children who had been working at the source suppliers’ factories.

     Here are the results of Levi Strauss’s response:

1. When other foreign-owned companies in Bangladesh learned of Levi Strauss’s actions, they took the same steps Levi Strauss had taken.

2. When the Bangladesh government learned of what Levi Strauss and other foreign-owned companies were doing, they started their own program to get children out of the factories and into the schools.

3. The end is not yet in sight, but Bangladesh is making progress. They’re taking steps to end the exploitation of children, improve educational opportunities, and break the cycle of poverty.

Now it’s your turn.

     You and your team must design a reputation management strategy for your business.

9. Brand Personality and Packaging

Personality: the complex of characteristics that distinguishes an individual or a nation or a group, etc…. (Merriam Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, Ninth Edition)

     Strictly speaking, the word personality applies only to persons or groups of persons. When we speak of brand personality, however, we refer to “a complex of characteristics that distinguishes” your brand from other brands. Brand personality speaks of brands in the same way that personality speaks of persons.

     When you create a brand personality, what you’re really doing is trying to cause your target consumers to think that your brand closely fits his or her personality. By identifying your brand with the way your target consumer sees himself, he is supposed to have a more favorable attitude toward your product.

     In a way, your target consumer says of your product, “It fits who I am!”

How do you create brand personality?

     Note the boldfaced word fit on this page. You’ll often see that word in this course. From product creation to marketing and advertising, everything you do has to neatly fit together.

     So, how do you create brand personality? You do it by a process called transference. First, you identify how your target consumer feels about something or someone. Then you transfer that feeling to your product; that is, cause him to have the same feeling about your product.

     For example, Nike focuses on people’s admiration of certain sports heroes. Their advertising then creates an emotional link between the sports heroes and the Nike products.
How do the marketers do this?

     They do it by using the most basic technique of advertising: They encourage target consumers to feel—not to think.

     If they were to think, would they really be thinking, “Oh, that Tiger Woods is really cool.” If I wear a Nike hat, I’d be cool, too.” No, of course not.

     If they were to think, would they really be thinking, “Oh, that Tiger Woods is really cool, and I’m worthless. I need to wear a hat like his so that I can have feelings of self worth."?  Again, no. The illogic of it would be obvious.

     Those thoughts not what any reasonable person would think, but advertising encourages people to feel that way.

The dark side of advertising:

     Probably the most cynical area of advertising and marketing is the promotion of status products. In this area, advertisers try to make the target consumer feel unworthy. Their “remedy” for feelings of unworthiness is to buy their product. As such, they “create a bogus disease and a bogus cure in the same laboratory.”

     If they didn’t engage in this practice, people would realize, to give a few examples, that Nike shoes are just shoes; Prell shampoo is just shampoo; and a Gucci handbag is just a handbag. None of these products will make you a more worthy person.

     If you’re marketing a product designed to fit a human need, however, you have a simpler job of it. If you need it, all you have to do is tell the target consumer about it. Then the product will sell itself.

The downside of status marketing

     There are higher profits in marketing status items, but the market for status items is more volatile (unstable) than the market for necessary items. You should consider that when you market your product.

Let’s separate products and services into four types:

     1. Necessary items that are privately consumed

     2. Necessary items that are publicly consumed

     3. Luxury (status) items that are publicly consumed

     4. Luxury (status) items that are privately consumed.

Let’s look at some examples of each.

1. Necessary items that are privately consumed. (Food, drinks such as milk, dish-washing liquid, bath towels, household furniture, etc.)

2. Necessary items that are publicly consumed. (Practical clothing, transportation,

3. Luxury (status) items that are publicly consumed. (Status brand clothing, Starbucks coffee, etc.)

4. Luxury items that are privately consumed. (Bath oil, brand name pajamas, home decorations, etc.)

     During economic downturns, luxury (status) items suffer the fastest decreases in earnings. This is especially true of luxury items that are privately consumed.

     When scandals attached themselves to companies, luxury items that are publicly consumed suffer the fastest decreases in earnings.

Brand personality made simple

What comes to mind when you hear the following brand names:

 
1. Jansport? Trendy, styles for the great outdoors. Environmentally responsible.
 
2. Nike? Being like your favorite sports heroes.

3. Adidas? Top quality sportswear most preferred by Olympic athletes.

4. Wrangler? Durable and dependable work wear.

5. Levi Strauss? Comfortable fit, practical for all occasions, socially responsible.

Brand personality made to fit consumers

     Look at these same images and you’ll see examples of each brand’s target consumers:

 
1. Jansport: Likes to think of himself as trendy, outdoorsy, and environmentally aware. Probably doesn’t litter.

 
2. Nike: Hopes to gain some of a sports hero’s popularity by wearing clothes associated with him. Probably has a hard time getting a date.

3. Adidas: Likes to think that wearing Adidas clothes will make people think he’s athletic. Interest in sports is probably limited to watching television.
4. Wrangler: Worker who wants his clothes to last. Probably likes country music.
5. Levi Strauss: Practical. Low key. Prefers comfort over phony images. Probably isn't interested in Paris Hilton or Lady Gaga.

     So, you see, brand imaging—the art of creating an image for your brand that will become your brand’s personality—is all about creating an image or personality for your brand that FITS your target consumer’s image of his own personality.

     Now you understand brand personality. What about packaging?

In packaging, just as it is with everything else in marketing, FIT is the key. The way you package your product should closely match (fit) the kind of product you’re packaging, the brand personality of the product, the target consumer, the advertising campaign you’ll be using later, and everything else that touches upon the marketing of your product.

     Suppose your product is a drug for elderly people. Would it make a lot of sense to package it in such a way that people with frail fingers would have trouble getting it out of the package?

     On the other hand, what if your product were a children’s cereal? Wouldn’t it make sense to package it in such a way that small children couldn’t open it while the box is still on a supermarket shelf?

     What about the images on the package? Suppose you were marketing an energy drink. Who is your target consumer, and for what purpose are they drinking it?

     If your target consumer is a young, athletic type, he probably wants to drink it for more energy before or after exercise. If your target customer is a body builder, he has another purpose. A taxi driver or a worker on the graveyard shift at a factory would have yet another purpose for drinking it. An elderly person would have still another purpose.

     Of course, the taste and ingredients in the drink would vary, depending on the purpose your target consumer would have for drinking your energy drink.

     The images and color scheme on the package would also differ. Most taxi drivers would not see the connection between his energy needs and the image of a track star on a can of energy drink.

Now it’s your turn!

What about the product you and your team are marketing?

What brand personality will you give your product? Remember to fit it to your target consumer. How will you give your product that brand personality?

What features (size, shape, design, etc.) will your package have to fit your target consumer and the intended purpose of your product?

What colors will you use to fit your package to your target consumer?

What images will you use to fit your package to your target consumer and the purpose of the product?

What if your marketing strategy determines that your product doesn’t come in a package? How will you display and market it?

Final Exam: Critical Thinking Skills 2009

      When you're giving a lecture to a class, you're supposed to be looking at the students in the class, not a laptop or a Power Point presentation.  It's a conversation class--not a class in reading from a laptop, a Power Point presentation, a teleprompter, or from anything else.  Reading a speech may be fine for Mr. Obama but not for students displaying their conversational skills.

     Two of the students whose photos appear on this page were actually very good about speaking directly to the class.  Unfortunately, there's a fraction of a second between the instant the mind says, "Take the picture," and the finger actually takes the picture.   As a result, most of the photos on this page are examples of what not to do in class.

     Most of the time, she looked at the class, but I had to take several pictures of her before I took one that actually showed her talking to the class.  At left, she's reading from the Power Point presentation on the laptop.  At right, she's reading from the Power Point presentation on the screen.

     I don't offer bonus points for pleasant smiles or rolling eyes, but they do provide a more relaxing teaching and learning environment.

 I don't offer bonus points for cuteness, either. 

     This is more like it.  Ann, at left, has stepped away from her laptop and is seen speaking directly to her classmates.  She's involved and they're involved; and she's gesturing toward the Power Point presentation rather than reading from it.  The student at right is still holding onto her laptop as though it were a security blanket, but she's talking directly to the class and smiling.

      This is definitely a no-no.  She's practically staring a hole into my laptop. 

Don't do this either. 

      No, these students aren't lost or confused.  They're involved in a demonstration that the speaker wants to prove to them.  Participation is part of your grade.  When a student is conducting the class, he's graded partly on how well he can get students participating in the class.

     Visitors to my class have included dogs, cats, mice, and a few other small animals.  They help to create a more relaxing learning environment for the students, and it's more relaxing for the teacher as well.  There are limits, though.  If you have a water buffalo, leave it at home.

6. Leadership and Creative Disagreement

Every business executive is a leader, and every leader is expected to be effective; however, there are different types of leadership.

There are also four leadership styles:

     To some extent, business managers must be each of these at some time or other. No one leader is just one style and few leaders use just one approach to leadership.

Brief exercise: Look at the chart below.  Try to match leadership approaches on the left to leadership styles on the right. Be prepared to give reasons for your choices.

What are some advantages and disadvantages to the way you matched styles and approaches?

  

     A transformational leader who consistently favors a managerial style is likely to be too conservative in his approach to effect changes.

     A servant leader who consistently favors a participatory style is may be too easily dissuaded from putting bold ideas into action.

     A charismatic leader who consistently favors an autocratic style is likely to make mistakes that harm the company, because people tend not to question his decisions until after the harm is done.

     A team leader who consistently favors a participatory style may or may not be successful in his approach. It would depend partly on whether participation is democratic, consultative, or by consensus.

     Each leadership style has its advantages and disadvantages. Each style of leader should seek balance.

     Transformational leaders are often visionary but impractical. Their teams may need the assistance of a managerial type to help guide their dreams to reality.

     Even then, the transformational leader will face the challenge of getting others to follow. After all, following a transformational leader always involves change. People who want to change the world still dislike having to change themselves.

Creative Disagreement

     Regardless of what kind of leader you are, or what leadership style you adopt, a little disagreement should be healthy for your business.

     One of the biggest mistakes a leader can make is trying to stop people from disagreeing. If everyone agrees on an idea from the very beginning, it’s a sure sign that no one has carefully examined the idea from every angle.

Example #1:

     Many years ago, government leaders decided that the use of state vehicles (usually cars) had become to costly. They passed a bill requiring government workers to fill out forms before and after each use of a state vehicle. Everyone in the legislature favored the bill, and it quickly passed.

     In less than a year, it became clear that the new way of doing things was costing far more than the old way. The bill had sounded like a great idea, no one had questioned it, everyone voted for it, and everyone was WRONG.

Example #2:

     During the 1970’s the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) passed the U.S. Congress with very little discussion or disagreement and was sent to the states for ratification by two thirds of the states. The intent of the law was to give women the same legal rights as men. Over half the states ratified it in less than a year.

     By that time, people actually had had time to read it and discuss it. People realized that, in many states, laws designed to protect women would become unconstitutional. The ERA would do other things that the framers of the ERA had never intended. Women’s groups and religious groups began to oppose the ERA.

     The ERA, which had been enormously popular at first, became controversial and did not pass.

Examples #3 &  #4:

     Steve Jobs was a charismatic business leader who founded Apple ® Computer and was its CEO for many years.

     Michael Dell was a charismatic leader who founded Dell® Computer and was its CEO for many years.

     The boards of directors of both companies fired them for the same reasons: Because they were charismatic, their boards of directors had tended not to question their judgment. As a result, both of them made serious errors of judgment and were fired.

     Both of them were later called back as CEO’s, but their boards of directors learned the value of creative disagreement. Steve Jobs retired in 2009.

Example #5:

     James Vail, the CEO of the Bell Telephone Company during the 1920’s is considered the most effective business executive of the twentieth century.

     At one meeting, a proposal was brought before the board of directors. Everyone agreed that it was a good idea, and they wanted to vote for it immediately.

     What do you think Vail said?

     He told them to spend some time looking for reasons to disagree with the proposal and then discuss the reasons for their disagreement.

     After following Vail’s instructions, the board of directors made several improvements to the original proposal.

Example #6:

     U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt often used creative disagreement to help him in the decision-making process. He would find two or more officials who disagreed on a policy and invite them to a meeting on the matter.

     He would occasionally ask them questions, but he would offer no opinion on the matter. After the meeting was over, he would consider their positions and privately make a decision.

Now it’s your turn.

     Suppose you were a transformational leader starting a business and were coming up with a marketing plan? What kind of approach should you take?

     Suppose you were a charismatic leader starting a business and were coming up with a marketing plan? What kind of approach should you take?

     Suppose you were a team leader starting a business and were coming up with a marketing plan? What kind of approach should you take?

     Suppose you were a servant leader starting a business and were coming up with a marketing plan? What kind of approach should you take?