In class, we’ve talked about brand positioning and product differentiation as strategies behind successful marketing. What we haven’t explored yet that blogger Danny Brown writes about, is the effectiveness of brand storytelling.

Brand storytelling is about “making the business human through stories.” I think it’s a subtle form of advertising, and that’s what makes it brilliant. It incorporates aspects of brand positioning and product differentiation without explicitly making the viewer aware of it.

Brown reviews Duracell Canada’s “Moments of Warmth” commercial, in which they build a bus shelter with heaters powered through a human connection.

What I noticed:
The overarching theme isn’t even about Duracell. It’s about the power of the human connection, and how Duracell is – on the sidelines – supporting this relationship. Duracell doesn’t once “brag” about its features like portability or long-lasting battery life. However, Duracell is able to differentiate itself in my mind because it has successfully humanized itself. Its slogan, “Trusted Everywhere”, is never mentioned, but I’m already thinking about it since the commercial shows strangers relying on each other and Duracell to stay warm.

I believe because we’re humans, we appreciate the materialistic items we’ve attached a sentimental feeling to most. Brands who utilize brand storytelling understand this. Their advertisements are one step ahead; instead of waiting for consumers to purchase their products and grow attached, they form the connection before the product has even been bought.

Storytelling transforms marketing into something real. And that makes it really powerful.

---

References:

Danny Brown’s External Blog Post: http://dannybrown.me/2014/03/27/this-is-how-you-do-brand-storytelling/

Duracell Canada’s “Moments of Warmth” commercial:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mQZqKLiMIg

Image Source: http://cdn.creativeguerrillamarketing.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Duracell-Bus-Shelter-Warmer-1-640×340.png

Sally Osberg of the Skoll Foundation said, “Social entrepreneurs … see opportunities where other people see hopeless failures.” I think she’s absolutely right. This viewpoint differentiates social entrepreneurs and organizations like the ARC Initiative from ordinary relief workers.

Social entrepreneurs see social problems as an outlet for change. I’d argue though, successful social entrepreneurs are not necessarily the ones changing the landscape. Instead, they’re providing the locals with the skills to invoke or sustain change how they want it. The ARC Initiative demonstrates this by training local business owners in poorer nations. They’re essentially saying, “Here’s a toolkit. Use this and build your business and community how you want it to be built.”

I’m not undermining the United Nations however. They have great incentives in place like the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which is striving for sustainable change. What the United Nations lack, however, is innovation. It doesn’t matter if the United Nations is fully funded. The organization is too structured, change is too slow, and decisions are too dependent on the wealthier countries. Individuals aren’t given enough power to enact unconventional change, which is what social entrepreneurs do. Unusual but strategic ideas are what it’s going to take to break cycles and solve societal issues.

In my opinion, the UNDP has immense potential IF it partners with social entrepreneurs. These ambitious, results-driven individuals are the ones who will create and follow-through with original solutions that can be sustained in the long run by those directly affected.

---

References:

Sources/Text Hyperlinks: http://skollworldforum.org/about/what-is-social-entrepreneurship/

http://www.sauder.ubc.ca/Global_Reach/ARC_Initiative

http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home.html

Further reading (about social enterprises): Grameeen Bank, Sarvajal

Image Sources: http://imaginationforpeople.org/en/project/sarvajal/

http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/ourwork/
povertyreduction/overview.html

My classmate, Philip Monagan, wrote a blog post about how Bain Capital has invested in and acquired 50% of Toms Shoes. Philip explores how this move can be viewed in two ways: Bain Capital is either trying to become more socially responsible, or it’s using Toms Shoes to give it the appearance of being socially responsible.

In my opinion, it doesn’t have to be either-or. Toms Shoes’ one-for-one value proposition is an example of shared value. Through giving shoes to impoverished children, Toms Shoes is helping society battle poverty. Meanwhile, their proposition also allows them to charge a premium price which maximizes profits.

I believe companies that are creating shared value are the future of business. Giving back should not be a side project any longer, but an integral part of the business model. Bain Capital is driving this notion forward through its decision to aid Toms Shoes in global expansion. So, while Bain Capital’s image may be boosted by this partnership, I think the main point to focus on is that Bain Capital has demonstrated how investment firms can play a role in the creation of shared value.

If investment firms support businesses that create economic value through implementing social values, everyone will benefit. Those businesses will grow quicker, investment firms will profit, and society will reap the benefits of a business world that doesn’t operate at the community’s expense.

The takeaway: By investing in Toms Shoes, Bain Capital is investing in the creation of shared value.

---

References:

Philip’s Original Blog Post: https://blogs.ubc.ca/philipmonagan/2014/09/09/blog1/

Source: http://www.waterhealth.com/sites/default/files/
Harvard_Buiness_Review_Shared_Value.pdf

Image Source: http://www.eco-bravo.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/toms-shoes-600-1.jpg

Kimberly Lin recently wrote a blog post about Red Bull and how it is being sued for its misleading but catchy slogan, “Red Bull Gives You Wings”. Everyone knows Red Bull can’t literally give you wings, but even so, the implication of the statement was enough for  Red Bull to settle the lawsuit out of court for $13 million, $6.5 million of which will be refunded to consumers. Kim talks about how foolish Red Bull was for using a deceptive slogan, but I disagree:

Through this slogan, Red Bull has been able to position itself as the leading energy drink. “Red Bull Gives You Wings” has differentiated the brand from other energy drinks like Monster (Unleash the Beast) and Rockstar (Party Like A Rockstar). The latter two taglines aren’t unique to the brands – they’re clichés and old song titles – while Red Bull’s slogan is exclusive and memorable.

In my opinion, the lawsuit isn’t particularly defamatory. Consumers will still buy Red Bull because they knew from the beginning that they wouldn’t have grown wings anyway. Nothing has changed in the ingredients either, which is a more immediate concern. I think consumers will take this lawsuit as a comedic “scandal”, and use those few extra refunded dollars to buy another can of Red Bull.

As for Red Bull’s losses, $13 million is only 0.17% of Red Bull’s net worth ($7.5 billion). That’s a small price to pay for successful brand positioning that has seated them at the #1 spot.

---

References:

Kim’s Original Blog Post: https://blogs.ubc.ca/kimlin/2014/11/08/if-you-dont-have-wings-red-bull-owes-you-10/

Sources/Text Hyperlinks: http://www.forbes.com/companies/red-bull/

https://plus.google.com/+MonsterEnergy/about

http://www.bevnet.com/reviews/rockstar

http://www.statista.com/statistics/304949/global-leading-energy-brands-based-on-sales/

Image Sources: http://www.kiss925.com/files/red-bull-gives-you-wings2.jpg

http://www.cubiclane.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/EffectsofEnergyDrinks.jpg

COO Gretchen Selfridge is Chipotle’s top female executive, but she wasn’t poached from another fast-food chain. Lidia Castillo, a Chipotle restaurateur making $99,000/year, wasn’t recruited from outside either. In fact, Selfridge started as a manager, while Castillo began in an entry-level position.

Chipotle’s restaurateur program emphasizes internal promotion. Other companies base promotions/raises on sales, but Chipotle measures how effective one is at mentoring colleagues.

I think this is a prime example of a productive incentive. Employees help grow corporate culture because they’re rewarded for it. Promotion makes them feel valued, and their new position gives them the incentive and  influence they need to continue mentoring others.

In my opinion, professionals seeking executive positions at new firms often feel like they’ve already gained everything they could from their past job. They’re choosing to jump ship to help themselves. “Me” matters more than “The Company”.

Maybe it’s a far stretch, but I think Chipotle’s successful promotion system mirrors the military. Generals start out as cadets. These soldiers are promoted based on how well they lead others, not on how many men they kill. And it’s easy to see why generals aren’t recruited from other nations’ armies – there’s no loyalty.

Connecting back to business, I know I’d work harder for a company where there’s room to grow. Raises are a bonus, but the focus would be to help grow the company that helped me grow.

---

References:

Article/Text Hyperlinks: http://www.businessinsider.com/from-chipotle-manager-to-executive-2014-11

http://www.businessinsider.com/chipotle-internal-promotion-program-2014-4

Image Source: http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/545909d4ecad04f6288b4570-480/gretchen-selfridge-chipotle.jpg