Last week I tried this trick that I read about on various marketing blogs and asked my little brother (a football fanatic), “Who were the main sponsors of the Football World Cup 2010?”. And to my surprise, he spitted out brands like Pepsi and Nike. If you readers too, agree with this answer, then I’m afraid all of you (and my littler brother) are under the spell of what’s called “ambush marketing”.

Pepsi and Nike are not the official sponsors of the Football World Cup 2010, i.e., they did not pay huge sums of money (like Adidas and Coca Cola) on buying these so called “exclusive rights” but yet was able to make itself look like was an “active participant” during the event.

In a more formalized sense, ambush marketing is an approach that companies use to carry out similar-themed campaigns in the time frame of a particular event without mentioning the event itself. The bold highlight is important because that is exactly what fuels the significance of the word, “ambush”. So, the similar theme for Pepsi and Nike’s case would be the World Cup (without specifically mentioning the word, ‘World Cup’) and they had their own respective campaigns (for Nike it was ‘Write the Future’ and as for Pepsi, it was body paint Football Stars)

The reason as to why I’m talking about this is that this fits well with what we’ve been discussing in class regarding “Marketing Ethics”. Did Pepsi and Nike do the “right thing” by achieving success through ambush marketing? Is it unfair from Adidas’ or Coca Cola’s perspective that they had to pay tons of money to be center stage of such a big event but yet Pepsi and Nike were able to get as much success without having to pay so much?

The issue of ethics doesn’t just lie under ambush marketing but is applicable everywhere. The issue of ethics can also be seen in my fellow classmate, Catherine Guan’s (https://blogs.ubc.ca/catherineguan) recent blog post where she talked about Benetton’s recent ad depicting famous world figures locking lips to apparently spread a message of “unity and tranquility”. Benetton is a company known for its “shock value” marketing to promote their line of clothing. The company definitely was able to garner attention its way with the release of these photos. In fact even I didn’t know about this company until the news of such ads flooded the media stream (so, it clearly worked Benetton’s way).

So, is it unfair from Adidas’ or Coca Cola’s perspective that they had to pay tons of money to be center stage of such a big event but yet Pepsi and Nike were able to get as much success without having to pay so much? How ethical was it for Benetton to post such an ad? It’s a tricky question to answer but I personally believe that such a question warrants a complicated reply since the situation and the context within which it lies, is in its own nature, quite complicated.

As learnt in our marketing classes, the brand is more than just your logo, advertising, and miscellaneous marketing campaigns. What is important to keep in mind is that the gist of a company’s brand comes from its ability to execute its promises and meet the needs/wants of the customer. To take a step further, the company’s brand can also be seen as a type of criteria. Based on this criteria, customers judge and reflect on the company overall because it’s all about whether the customers’ needs/wants are met. So, a company’s brand is (to an extent) a reflection its reputation in the market, not just its physical logo, advertising approaches etc. Coca Cola is an excellent example of this. Coca Cola aims to provide beverages to potential consumers and delivering the promises of Coca Cola being part of family-oriented drink and painted as a beverage that inspires optimism, happiness and affection. That is exactly what consumers who use Coca Cola perceive the drink as (looking at the brand as a criteria in terms of meeting needs/wants).

In contrast, let’s take a look at Enron. Enron (before the scandal) was seen as a company every other company learnt from in terms of the success the company had presented in the market. At that time the Enron brand had a very strong reputation as it was at the time (in the eyes of consumers) a brand that had kept its promise of meeting the needs/wants of consumers and keeping them satisfied. However after the scandal, everything quickly changed, the company’s rep also did a complete 180 on its head. As a result the Enron brand is synonymous and to some extent, interchangeable with concepts like fraud, cheat and never focusing on the needs/wants of the customers.

For the past few weeks, I have been going through many external marketing blogs. A much followed blog called Jim’s Marketing Blog, caught my attention in many news archives. One of the posts talked about the importance of being crystal clear about your end game when targeting a market and how it goes hand-in-hand with one’s overall strategy in business (Connolly). In other words, if you don’t have a solid idea as to what your function, position, and target is as a business, you have no strategy and will be somewhat depending on luck for success (which, as mentioned in the blog is not an effective strategy). And as learnt in our marketing classes, strategy is the overall direction a business aims to take in the long run, the adjustments it makes to unforeseen external factors that may prove to be a hindrance to that vision, and taking opportunities it takes that the market offers.

A clear sense of direction definitely goes a long way in contributing to basic marketing needs such as target markets, understanding and narrowing down on value proposition, and most importantly speculating the company’s image in the future. An excellent example of this is Steve Jobs (co-founder of Apple), who had a clear idea concerning the direction of his company, Apple. In fact he redefined Apple’s strategic approach from being a computers company to being a successful and innovative consumer electronics company. Apple touched on its targets, its newly defined value proposition (relative to its competitors), had the company make adjustments to unforeseen external factors that may prove to be a hindrance to that vision, and took a lot of opportunities the market had to offer (telecommunications and more recently meeting consumer needs with the iPad).

Connolly, Jim. “Strategy is Key which is Direction.” (2011): n. page. Web. 2 Nov. 2011. <>

My recent encounter with the function of the basic marketing model has suddenly rewired my eyes into looking at products in a new way. I recently came across a special segment on television, called “The Most Embarrassing Gadgets of the 21st Century”. While watching the show, I suddenly started to think about the basic marketing model, and tried to see which parts of the model these “gadgets” failed to adhere to.

One gadget that caught my eye in that segment was the Segway. An upright, two-wheeled, personal transportation device designed by Segway Inc. in the mindset of gifting the world with the “future’s bicycle”. However, this product is now known for its overhyped expectations that deflated as soon as the company’s dream was teared by reality. In my opinion, the reason as to why Segway failed in its expectations was because it did not meet the first step of the model (Understanding the Market & Customer Needs). Instead, it looked at current means of transport such as buses, cars, vans etc and thought that the Segway would put them in a unique position in the industry. However, this is what is known as “Marketing Myopia”. Segway Inc. focused too much on the products and services that existed (buses, cars, subways etc) instead of focusing on customers’ needs. Many consumers have complained that the Segway was too heavy, costly and made them looked embarrassing in front of most folks who do not own a Segway. Segway clearly failed to understand customer needs, in this case the customer’s need for social belonging and companionship. So, if Segway fails in this area, it becomes quite difficult to bounce back after that because the rest of the marketing model is built on the first step. The next step of the model is to design a customer-driven strategy for a product. Segway possibly can’t address this as it wasn’t customer-oriented in its thinking to begin with. And let’s just forget about any possibility of creating customer delight and capturing value because due to the nature of such hurdles.

Sometimes I wonder, if Segway stuck to the basic marketing model and fixed its mistakes (cheap enough to be called a ‘household’ object, light in weight, incorporated as a social trend for all etc), it could’ve been a hit!

Hello everyone! My name is Abhinav Sharma. I’m a Year 2 student here at Sauder pursuing a Bcomm Degree. I’m really interested in the field of business, its applications, concepts, and basically just all the works. And it is this interest that has lead me to now studying the exciting field of business that is, ‘Marketing’. Some of my hobbies include travelling, social networking etc and hopefully my experience in Sauder will help to propel my in that direction.

My experience with marketing, through the entirety of my life has been as a consumer, experiencing the seemingly mundane process of watching ads between my favourite shows, online, on billboards, newspapers, magazines along with declining scores of offers made by sales persons in malls and even at my doorstep. However, in the midst of these vast amounts of ‘junk ads’ (as i call them) there are a handful that once in a while catch my eye. It is a result of this, that I have made many emotional connection to tons of brands with some of them including Apple, Google, Sony, Adidas etc. So, it is because of the handful of eye-pleasing ads that have caught my eye, that I create connection with them in some way. A recent Superbowl ad, in fact of has done the same thing which also lead me to having a deep connection with this brand.

The Emmy-winning ad was about Chrysler 300 revolving around the bleak conditions of a recession-hit Detroit (see link below). There are many reasons why this ad really won me over. One, many of my friends work for Chrysler and were part of this marketing campaign. However, the main reason was that it was a unique position they took and there was no other motor company that used such an emotional appeal to promote their product (since they were all already on the environmental bandwagon promising to build hybrid-like vehicles).
The ad below is just one of the ads that was part of the “Imported from Detroit” campaign.

You have heard the expression “First impressions are lasting ones.” Well, your resume is the first meeting between you and a prospective employer more often now than ever. So, how do you want to be remembered? Wrinkled and unorganized. Neat and structured. Long and boring. Precise and interesting. Companies do not have the time to interview every applicant that is interested in the job. If they did, there would not be a company to work for. Interviews are one of the most important hiring tools available to employers, used extensively to judge how appropriate a prospective candidate to fill a role with an organization. You know you are qualified for the job. There isn’t any reason in the world why you shouldn’t be able to call up the company of your choice, give them your credentials, and go right to work. Unfortunately, it isn’t as easy as all that. You see, when a company has an opening, you are not their only option. The purpose of an interview is two-fold. First, it is important for the company to talk to all of the qualified applicants to figure out which one will actually be the best one for the job, beyond simply being qualified for it. I have learnt these important, fundamental points from Comm 299, and I am glad that I was able to take this course in the first year of my Sauder experience, so that in the coming years, I can apply these fundamentals and hope to succeed when it comes to landing a solid job with a prospective employer.

So, in the end of it all this is what I hope to achieve.

A Fundamental Part of Business

Comm 299 represents a fundamental element of learning business in university in that it involves communicating your achievement and experiences to a potential job employer through writing (Cover Letter, Resume, Notes) and face-to-face interaction (Interview, Networking). Business is all about communication and Comm 299 represents exactly that. The fact that we are diving into this area already in our first year goes to show the importance of learning this concept from the beginning and cementing its points in our minds. To manage yourself effectively (and this isn’t just limited to Commerce) in the world you must communication your thoughts, ideas, plans and objectives clearly to the employees.

As the times go by, organizations will get flatter in structure. Consequently , a more diverse employee base and greater use of teams would call for communication as an essential requirement to organizational success. Flatter organizations mean managers must communicate with many people over whom they may have no formal control. With an increasingly globalized world, where there is continuous integration and exchange of ideas, culture, and tastes it is important to catch up to that pace. The only way to do this is by achieving Comm 299’s course goals; effective communication; displays of professionalism; knowledge. These are all the things I’ve taken away from this class and I believe strongly that it will definitely fuel my ability to catch up to that pace of the world.

In class we talked a lot about, entrepreneurship, from two entrepreneurs as guest speakers. Entrepreneurship always has that positive vibe to it, in that if one is successful in it, it can change their lives forever. It is always associated with the popular “million dollar story” of people who started out as the “average man” went on to achieve great milestones, in the end, reaching a high respectable position in society (e.g. Bill Gates, Richard Branson). However, very few focus on the negative aspects of the business (high risk of failing). In fact 75% or more businesses in Canada employ less than 100 people, so, it’s important to open our mind just a little and think realistically about the potential risk that they may face, and how this could seriously impact economy. Another fact that was mentioned in class by the guest speakers, was that there’s a 50/50 chance of a small business in Canada having a life expectancy of 5+ years. So, this adds even more to the fact that there is an importance attached to the need of focusing on the risk of this field rather than just the success stories.

The main problems leading to failure is starting business for the wrong reasons

– Profit is not the passion/driving force
– don’t want to be bossed around
– want free time vs. stamina to stick with it (free time not an option because you got to be on 24/7)
– poor management
– not enough capital
– location
– lack of planning (planning is obviously essential, when undergoing such a venture, especially with the risk attached, so a calculated method is necessary in order to minimize the risk as much as possible)

So, in the case of many entrepreneurial business, it is the issue of finding a unique value proposition. This is usually done by finding a problem first, but not just any problem, but a significant problem, to which the solution can attract a lot attention, demand, and hopefully in the long-run, profit and sustainability of the business.

So, what other entrepreneurial business can do to avoid the risk, or at least minimize it is to:

Find the problem
– do this first before finding the solution
– help to keep things moving forward
– looking at solutions from a problem based proposition

Entrepreneurship is an extremely flexible, ambiguous, and demanding, which is why such businesses probably fail, since they may not know the scope in which this particular field works.

Image

“Sign.” My Confined Space. Web. 23 Nov 2010

In class we had also been talking not just about entrepreneurs, but also a lot about social entrepreneurship. Many are still coming to terms as to what social entrepreneurship is. It has actually existed for a long time, even though people may not call it entrepreneurship (e.g. woman’s movement, civil rights movement etc). A Social Entrepreneur always has a social mission (to be motivated by something, to fix something that is not being met by other forces in the market, whether it be the private sector, the government etc). For a social entrepreneur there exists, constantly, a sense of social purpose. The function itself is an interesting space. The function tries to address the social issue by using market forces but they have their own middle space, so they have a little difficulty in running their businesses. However, there are certain difficulties associated with this.

These difficulties are:

– struggle with the financial side
– difficult to measure the value yielded/impact through social entrepreneurship, others can measure it by looking at profit but social entrepreneurs do not look at profit
– this is because it doesn’t happen now, or next year, it’s a long-term solution

Along with these difficulties, social entrepreneurs such as Mack McCarter (a social entrepreneur who is the founder of Community Renewal International, or CRI, which focuses on connecting ‘at-risk’ communities to resources, health care, and education) are some who definitely face these risks as funding is a big issue and profit (money coming in) is not the most prioritized need.

Along with such difficulties, social entrepreneurs such as Mack McCarter also have certain necessities to operate under this system of “looking for profit”.
Key Needs:

– More volunteers and staff
– New financial services
– More government involvement
– Better business skills

However, given the will and having a high need to make change in society, I believe this should be enough for people like McCarter to overcome these difficulties (by raising voice and hopefully attracting volunteers, some investors, and other necessary support). This is probably the reason why social entrepreneurship isn’t extinct, and is expanding amongst individuals more than ever before, because of the better platform these days, on which people can raise voice and execute effective change in reality.

Image

“Mack McCarter – The guy with the change.” CRI. Web. 25 Nov 2010.

In class, we talked about how good/accurate/effective market research, along with consumer behaviour are of great significance to companies. In the case of The Nielsen Company, a highly reputed market researching firm, it shows the degree to which various companies sizing from Coca-Cola to a small business reach and look into such firms and market research to better calculate the way in which their respective operations should take place.

Usefulness of market research to a company is determined by:

– the degree to which it reduces risk
– cost
– accuracy
– finally, the willingness to work/act on the data provided

The high, reputable position of The Nielsen Company, is judged so positively because it conducts and highlights the above points strongly when it performs research. In the case of consumer behaviour, there are 3 factors that need to be taken into account. They are cultural, social, and personal factors.

However, it is important to always keep in mind (this was particularly stressed upon in class) that while big/small companies like Coca-Cola and Yelp may find it useful to feed of the data that The Nielsen Company provides, it important to only look at it as an aid and as a guide, NOT as the decision itself. In other words, market research helps and guides with the decision making but does not replace it. So, market researching companies like The Nielsen Company, should only be looked at, from this perspective.

Images

“The Nielsen Company Logo.” The Social Media MGR. Web. 30 Nov 2010.

“Coca-Cola Logo.” 4-H Legacy. Web. 30 Nov 2010.

“Yelp Logo.” The Wall Street Journal. Web. 30 Nov 2010.