In light of FIFA’s attacks on small firms it seems interesting that a World Cup search on Youtube lists on top many non-sponsors like ESPN and Pepsi’s Oh Africa ad. Nike’s WRITE THE FUTURE commercial features world wide soccer pros playing their hearts out and striving to be the best in their sport and fans celebrating their skills and success. There are no direct mentions of the World Cup. However, soccer players striving to ‘Write their future’ would seem to imply making it to the World Cup.

Nike faced off with FIFA (Federation Internationale de Football Association) in 2003 before the Women’s World Cup, disputing the use of “USA 2003” which was the FIFA slogan and Nike’s ‘Swoosh’ + “USA 03” logo used for clothing and media. Nike won that suit because FIFA’s repeated use of the country name plus the year of the event is not distinctive enough to establish a secondary meaning and thus a trademark to be infringed upon. This argument did not take any precedence in the South African court case FIFA v. Metcash (most likely due to the different jurisdictions of the courts).

Nike’s WRITE THE FUTURE campaign has swept the world on Youtube, receiving more than 17 million views, while competitor and FIFA sponsor Adidas does not even show up on the first page of videos. When found (and you have to literally search “Adidas world cup commercial”), the Adidas ad features the cantina scene from Star Wars with David Beckham and Snoop Dogg, and has only been viewed by fewer than 4 million people. Both companies sponsor multiple teams in the tournament and hope to have their team win it all, but marketing between these rivals has been rather one sided.

Nike has also kicked it up a notch by constructing a huge statue in the Carlton Center shopping mall in Johannesburg, SA. Nike’s Ballman was constructed of 3000 yellow soccer balls suspended from the ceiling of the atrium inside the mall. Nike is throwing their influence in the face of FIFA who had bought up all the advertising rights inside the stadiums as well as along high traffic streets throughout Johannesburg. There are no reports of a lawsuit against Nike this year.

Courtesy of weheart.co.uk

Social media is the big frontier for marketing, PR, advertising, and just about every other department. But there is a big pink elephant in the room waiting to be addressed, “Should we use our employees in social media and how do we do so?”

Yes, some employees should be active in social media; using real people as channels in social media will personalize brands by enabling consumers to associate with a tangible person rather than a disembodied entity.

The humanization of media also allows for interactive communication between the brand and the consumer, which enables consumers to give instant feedback, and allows for higher opportunities for loyal and repeat business.

Employees should be allowed to be creative and innovative with their ideas while being genuine in their efforts.  It’s obvious to social media users when insincere marketing attempts to target them, rather than coming from real brands with real people who strive for direct interaction; therefore, it’s essential to allow employees to exhibit their individuality, even when representing the company.  However, most companies do have guidelines on social media or social networking to manage and sensor the process.  Companies must ensure these guidelines are up-to-date, explain the guidelines, and allow for open communication so employees may completely understand the rules.

Not every employee will be suited for such a position, and not every company should market their employees.  If social media is not a logical part of a company’s strategic marketing, then it should not forge ahead into this channel. By jumping on the bandwagon, a Facebook page will not benefit a company’s marketing efforts, only exhaust them.  Do not join a particular network just because every other company is doing it, but join because that is where you can reach your target audience.  Remember every employee is a source for social media and networking, and utilizing them properly will increase an organization’s “human element.”

Pepsi’s Yo Sumo (Spanish for “I Add”) is one of many campaigns reaching out to the Hispanic Market. Although the campaign is a great idea, the name may not properly convey the intended message, due to a poor translation. If Pepsi wants to encourage Hispanics to participate in the census and be counted, a better choice would be Pepsi Yo Cuento, Spanish for “I Count.”

On an unassuming, cold January morning in 2007, a man began playing a violin at the Washington DC Metro Station. He was a young, white man dressed modestly in jeans, white long-sleeved t-shirt and baseball cap. It was rush hour, and most of the 1000+ people who would pass by in the 43 minutes he played would hardly notice him or the music he played. Most were on their way to work and accustomed to seeing an occasional street performer in this urban area dominated by government workers. A few would slow down or stop for a few seconds and then rush away to keep their schedules.

Four minutes into his performance, he received his first dollar from a woman who threw the money in his case as she walked by. 10 minutes in – a small boy stopped, but was hurriedly pulled away by his mother. He could only turn his head to catch a few more notes as his mom dragged him along. This played out several more times with other children and their parents.

The man played for roughly 45 minutes. His audience comprised of 7 people who stopped long enough to enjoy part of his performance and 27 people who donated money. His total – $32.

By now, I’m sure you’re wondering how this story could possibly apply to Branding. Here is the segue.  Of the 1000+ people that passed, only one recognized that the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the best musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, with an 18th-century violin that once belonged to the great Austrian-born virtuoso and composer Fritz Kreisler worth $3.5 million dollars. Two days before, Joshua Bell had played at Boston’s Symphony Hall where average seats were $100.

True story. This social experiment about perception, taste and people’s priorities has many lessons. However, for the basis of this piece, the question raised is, “In a common place environment, do we perceive value? Do we stop long enough to appreciate it? Do we recognize value in an unexpected context?”

Here’s another example of how important Branding is in our times. I recently attended a breakfast event where Pattye Moore, former Sonic Corporation President, spoke. As a member of the Board of Directors for a particular company, she was trying to convince the Board that they needed to move forward with a Branding Proposal that they had received. To a fault, most Board members felt that spending money on branding was a waste of money. She struggled to find an example to illustrate the importance of branding. As with most great ideas, her revelation came most unexpectedly. As she was rushing to her child’s 3rd grade party, she picked up some Oreo cookies as her contribution to the party. Upon arriving to the party, she placed the Oreos next to the only other cookies – a generic brand. As the children began eating she noticed that all of the Oreos were gone before the other generic brand cookie was even opened. This was the spark. She offered to host the next Board meeting. She bought a mix of name brand drinks and snacks (Coke, Pepsi, Nature Valley, etc.) along with an equal number of generic brands (Sam’s Choice, Great Value, Always Save, etc.). As the Board meeting began it didn’t take long to notice that her Board members were acting just like the third graders. All of the name brand drinks and snacks were eaten first before they tried the off-brand items. When she let the Board in on her little experiment, they quickly realized the point they had been missing.

The lesson is simple: Whether it’s a conscientious decision or not, consumers choose items based on the perceived quality of a Brand and are “manipulated” by Brand presentation whether it occurs on television, on the Internet, in print advertising, or by the packaging. As well, the context in which you present your Brand is equally important (i.e. The DC Metro station is not the best venue for a world-renowned musician, nor the right target audience for the Joshua Bell Brand).

Your company’s Brand is important. The way you present your Brand, whether it’s a service or product, will determine the perception of your current and potential customers. Having the best product or service in the world is not enough. Companies have to show that they know their target audience, understand their brand and value it enough to present it in a positive light.

The bottom line is clear: If you don’t invest in your Brand, consumers won’t either.

Footnote:
The story of Joshua Bell came from an excerpt of a 2007 Washington Post article. The article described the details of what amounted to a stunt which shed a lot of light on human perception. The stunt was the brainchild of Washington Post writer Gene Weingarten. You can read Mr. Weingarten’s original article, “Pearls Before Breakfast” to see how it all transpired from the original idea. It’s a great story.