Heritage brands storytelling by viral marketing in social media Part 2

December 29, 2014

Written by Onsurang Siripiyavatana

Case and discussion

To illustrate how heritage brands develop viral storytelling in the era of social media where the power of sharing and the perception of brand value are in the hands of consumers. The examples of Thai Life Insurance and Volkswagen will be analyzed from heritage perspective as well as consumer orientation.

Branding in social media era is not only about creativity but also facilitating conversations around the brand. From the heritage perspective, roots down to brand promise and brand essence, heritage brands have track records and many stories to introduce to the audience. Heritage brands have demonstrated successful relation to consumers in the past through its core values and heritage essence hence, it should be able to modify and re-tell the story given the current marketing landscape and the way to stand out in the crowd is to make the brand’s story go viral. In order to go viral, a brand must choose the right story to tell and craft around it, brands must know their targeted audience, learn what the consumers are care about most and do more of that. The new version of the heritage stories provide relevant factor that is consistent to the brand’s core and hence consistent heritage brand image that yield trust, caring and authentic impression to the targeted audience. Thai Life Insurance (TLI) is a heritage brand that is still much relevant today, the key behind this is to take simple product and to promote it by relating the most relevant human emotion to the product. TLI exploited sensitive human emotions and develop extremely effective marketing tool, namely advertisement campaign. The emotional ads have made the brand memorable and placed securely on top of the mind of the consumers.  Take the “Silence of Love” advertisement campaign for example, without directly mentioning about the insurance product, the story of the commercial states: the kids are sometimes ashamed of their parents, but it is their parents who care for them no matter what. The overall tone of the ad is sad and touching which provoke all the positive emotions full of caring, love, family bonding and honesty are then translated into more down-to-earth message: if you care about them, insure them. The “Silence of Love” ad is not the first in the series of TLI emotional advertisement campaign, but it definitely creates a consistent message, and adds to consistent brand story and relevant brand image through the co-creation with the consumers who were impressed by the message delivered. The company made the ads public by broadcasting it through Thai television channels as well as in YouTube. The first channel of distribution is costly but it opens to wider audience and definitely worth it, amongst the crowd of television ads “Silence of Love” gains much attention from audience and creates a viral offline word of mouth impact. In parallel, the company makes the ads available in YouTube to create online viral with a potential to reach endless consumers since they are much more likely to view an advertisement if it is communicated to them from someone they know and not a company.

The language spoken in the ads was Thai, the company later provide English subtitle to enhance the understanding and hence emotional engagement of international audience.

<img src=”Siripiyavatana_image1.jpg” alt=”Silence of Love Thai Life Insurance Advertisement”>

Figure 1) Silence of Love-Thai life insurance commercial (Thailifechannel, 2011)

As a result “Silence of Love” becomes viral because TLI does it right by understanding the culture and know what the consumers want and how to approach it for example Thai audience have the characteristics of sympathetic, sensitive, like to chit chat, social media addict and easy going. The brand works hard to give people something they are willing to talk about, something they can relate to. The series of emotional ads is a catalyst and the tool that the brand use to consciously and continually bake word of mouth into its product. The company gives consumers a reason to talk about its product part of its culture, not just marketing.

Heritage brands on the other side of the world also work hard to understand consumer and find the relevant in brand storytelling. Rules, regulations and restrictions of international marketplace are different, let alone the consumer diversity. A successful marketing story of the brand from one country may not even gain recognition in another country for example Dove’s real beauty campaign was a viral success in the US but the same campaign fails to market in China (Chiu, C., Ip, C. and Silverman, A. 2012). That’s why social media marketers have to be creative and specific, matter to one person first, speak to that person. Volkswagen’s The Fun Theory is a good story of viral success in social media. Volkswagen launches a campaign through The Fun Theory website with the slogan “Be it for yourself, for the environment, or for something entirely different, the only thing that matters is that it’s change for the better”. The brand invited creative people to come up with their ways of making everyday activity more fun.  The Fun Theory campaign is brand’s storytelling tactic that relates to consumers in a given current marketplace and brand’s core messages of being innovative, offering enduring value and responsible (Volkswagen, 2012). One of The Fun Theory award is “The speed camera lottery” the idea behind this is to get more people to obey the speed limit by making it fun to do, this idea was made a reality in Stockholm, Sweden. The Speed Camera Lottery device would photograph all drivers passing beneath it. A portion of the subsequent fines levied against speeders would be pooled in a lottery, with a random winner periodically drawn from the group of speed-limit adherents. The result of this campaign is impressive, according to Volkswagen, average speed before the installation of the Speed Camera Lottery sign on a multilane street was 32 kilometers per hour. That figure dropped to 25 kilometers per hour during a three-day test, despite the device’s inability to issue financial penalties.  The short films documenting the projects went viral and it invokes positive brand association in relation to the audience. By making boring thing such as obeying the traffic rules fun and instead of getting punishment for disobeying the rule, people get rewards by obeying the rules. The idea not only reflects upon brand heritage and story but also score high in the relevant scale of contemporary marketplace. The consumers are engaged in the campaign from sending their ideas in for the competition and the trials is seen as a little excitement added to consumers’ everyday lives without provoking frustration to the pedestrian. The brand uses an excuse of promoting safety for positive brand associations and gain awareness. The Fun Theory is a storytelling strategy that embraces the heritage and stays relevant in the consumers’ minds in the current era of social media. The continual success of the campaign endures the heritage for tomorrow.

<img src=”Siripiyavatana_image2.jpg” alt=”The Speed Camera Lottery The Fun Theory by Volkswagen”>

Figure 2) The Speed Camera Lottery- The Fun Theory by Volkswagen (Rolighetsteorin, 2010)

Conclusion

Heritage brands have developed the brand story over a period of time, the time required for the consumers to absorb and digest the story. However in an ever changing marketing landscape of social media era, the ability to adapt and fit in poses a challenge on heritage brands to stay relevant in consumers’ minds. They key to relate to consumers while maintaining brand’s heritage is to understand consumers and focusing effort to change how people feel before trying to change what they do. As illustrated by Thai life insurance case, telling simple emotional stories work well in relating the brand’s heritage to consumers. The brands deal with customer-centric orientation in an emergence of social media and act as facilitators. Storytelling facilitates conversation amongst customer community and it is brand’s job to give people a story that they are willing to talk about. By this method, consumers become co-creators of the brands as they influence the transmission of messages by getting involved in the viewing, commenting and sharing through social media or even directly helping to create a story, as illustrated by Volkswagen’s The Fun Theory where consumers get involved in the process from the beginning to submit their ideas, take part in trials and sharing the story.

More specifically, while keeping to the heritage, brands have to invite consumers into the branding process in order to stay relevant and this can be achieved by telling a consistent series of compelling story, stories that keep going viral. The businesses that succeed outrageously are not just founded on ideas that are shared in a split second; they are grounded in what matters to their customers throughout the long heritage. The track record and relationship between a brand and its consumers are parts of the heritage that they co-created and stay relevant until now. The key for an enduring heritage is to make giving people a reason to talk about your products and services part of brand’s culture, not just marketing.

References

Aaker, D. A. (1996). Building Strong Brands. New York NY: The Free Press.

Aaker, D. A. (2004). Leveraging the corporate brand. California Management Review, 46(3), 6–18.

Barwise, P. & Meehan, S. (2010) The One Thing You Must Get Right When Building a Brand, Harvard Business Review, December 2010

Cambridge University Press (2011). Cambridge Business English Dictionary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chiu, C., Ip, C and Silverman, A. (2012), “Understanding social media in China”, McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 78-81.

Fournier, S. & Avery, J. (2011) The uninvited brand, Business Horizons (2011) 54, 193—207

Hamm, J. (2013). Why Agencies and Brands Need to Embrace True Storytelling Branded content is not the same thing. Adweek Magazine, [online] Available at: < http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/why-agencies-and-brands-need-embrace-true-storytelling-152534> [Accessed 10 February 2014]

Jiwa, B. (2013). Fortune cookie principle. Perth: The Story of Telling Press

Liebrenz-Himes, M., Shamma, H., & Dyer R.F. (2007). Heritage Brands- Treasured Inheritance Or ‘Over the Hill’. Charm, 2007.

Merchant, A., Rose G.M. (2013). Effects of advertising-evoked vicarious nostalgia on brand heritage, Journal of Business Research, 66 (12), p.2619-2625

Moser, M. (2003). United We Brand. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Rolighetsteorin, (2010). The Speed Camera Lottery, The Fun Theory. [video online] Available at: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iynzHWwJXaA#t=106> [Accessed 13 February 2014]

Seybold, P. B. (2001). The Customer Revolution. New York, NY: Crown Publishing Group.

Singh, S., & Sonnenburg, S. (2012) Brand Performances in Social Media, Journal of Interactive Marketing 26 (2012) 189–197

Thailifechannel, (2011). Silence of Love (Official English Subtitle), TVC Thai Life Insurance. [video online] Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZMX6H6YY1M> [Accessed 13 February 2014]

Trusov, M., Bucklin, R.E., & Pauwels, K. (2009). Effects of Word-of-Mouth Versus Traditional Marketing: Findings from an Internet Social Networking Site. Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 90-102.

Urde, M., Balmer, J., & Greyser, S. (2007) Corporate brands with a heritage, Brand Management, Vol. 15, No. 1, 4–19 September 2007

Vargo, Stephen L. and Lusch, Robert F. (2004) Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing, Journal of Marketing 68(1), p. 1–17

Volkswagen, (2010). The Fun Theory. [online] Available at: < http://www.thefuntheory.com/> [Accessed 12 February 2014]

Volkswagen, (2012). Annual report 2012. [online] Available at: < http://annualreport2012.volkswagenag.com/managementreport/value-enhancingfactors/salesandmarketing.html> [Accessed 12 February 2014]

Winer, R. (2009) New Communications Approaches in Marketing: Issues and Research Directions, Journal of Interactive Marketing 23 (2009), p. 108–117

Woerndl, M., Papagiannidis, S., Bourlakis, M., & Li, F. (2008). Internet-induced marketing techniques: Critical factors in viral marketing campaigns. Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, 3 (2), 34-45.

What motivates consumer participation in social networks and how can brands benefit from it?

September 18, 2014

Written by Corinna Jürgens 

With the rise of the internet and accompanied by the formation of social networks such as Facebook or Twitter, consumer participation has become more proactive.  Consumers have now the opportunity of sharing their lives and experiences with friends and family and even strangers online through social networks (Kosonen and Ellonen, 2012).

Many companies try to become part of this interaction by being active in social networks in order to create and foster a social network around their brands (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010). Consumer participation in virtual worlds offers the opportunity for companies to promote their brands and increase purchases, provide information, and conduct market research (Eisenbeiss et al., 2012; Hutter et al., 2013). But what drives consumer participation? Why do they share their opinions and experiences in social networks? Consumers do not get any privileges for sharing their thoughts and promoting brands or companies. So what is it that motivates consumer participation in communities in general and in a brand community in specific?

Consumer participation in social networks

The important aspect for consumer participation in social networks is the need for social interaction with like-minded people as it gives them a feeling of belonging (Eisenbeiss et al., 2012; Guosong, 2009; McKenna and Bargh, 1999; Porter et al., 2011). The internet offers consumers the opportunity of finding those like-minded people more easily and allows them to share their interest and identity (Dholakia et al., 2004; McKenna and Bargh, 1999). Consumers use social networks to talk to people, interact with strangers, and even make new friends (Eisenbeiss et al., 2012). This makes clear why online communities have such high levels of consumer participation.

First of all, we need to understand what a (brand) community is and how it is built. What makes it so special? A community is based on social relationships and forms around a shared admiration for a matter of mutual interest. In the case of a brand community the brand itself represents its centre. Members of such social networks develop a shared consciousness of kind, rituals and traditions, and a sense of moral responsibility for each other and the brand (Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001).

The motorcycle brand Harley-Davidson is a illustrative example for a strong brand community. It provides different communication platforms for Harley-Davidson customers and admirers such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube and a website-based brand community (see image 1 and 2) (Harley Davidson, 2014). Over time, a whole subculture developed that influences the daily lives of Harley Davidson motorcycle owners (Schouten and McAlexander, 1995).

Harley Davidson brand community

Image 1: Focus on sharing the spirit and being part of the brand community

 (Harley Davidson, 2014)

Harley Davidson Social Media

Image 2: Social networks for brand admirers

(Harley Davidson, 2014)

The difficult path to brand-related consumer participation

That sounds all very well, but is difficult to achieve. In order to take advantage of consumers’ behaviour in social networks and to foster their brands some steps need to be taken. As a first step the company has to analyse what consumers’ needs and wants are and what motivates them. As stated before, individuals who are part of a brand community share a consciousness of kind. This means that they have a shared identity with other members of the brand community and can therefore truly understand each other (Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001; Porter et al., 2011). As a consequence, they develop a feeling of belonging to that brand community and to one another (Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001; Porter et al., 2011).

Once this first phase is completed, companies need to find a way to foster consumer participation and to motivate interaction in a virtual brand community. The aim of this step is not to create value for the company, but to fulfil consumers’ needs. There are different ways to achieve this: By encouraging consumers to create their own quality content, by creating a positive attitude towards the brand community, and finally by connecting and encouraging interaction amongst its members (Porter et al., 2011).

Some consumers do not only participate in social networks by commenting or sharing other people’s content, but also by creating their own content. These consumers want to express themselves through their creations. They want to increase their self-activation in order to shape their own identity (Guosong, 2009; Dholakia et al., 2004; McKenna and Bargh, 1999; Eisenbeiss et al., 2012). The role of a company in this case is to support their self-expression. It might lead to less control over brand-related content, but at the same time gives consumers more freedom to express themselves within the brand community (Cova and Pace, 2006).

Companies can make use of this consumer creativity by involving them in their branding and product development process. They can try to give them an incentive to produce brand related content for their own benefits. In the last few years, many companies have tried to increase consumer participation in brand-related social networks by motivating consumer interaction. Procter & Gamble’s razor brand Venus Gillette encouraged consumers to post pictures of bad weather of their home in Sweden via Instagram in exchange for a trip to a sunny destination for the best picture (Think with Google, 2013).

As a final step, consumers need to be motivated to fulfil not only their own needs, but also to add value to the brand (Porter et al., 2011). By providing information that outsiders do not get access to or by providing first-hand information before anyone else, companies put an emphasis on the importance of their brand community. At the same time, they foster the sense of belonging and a feeling of being special in its members (Porter et al., 2011). In addition, companies need to bind their members and encourage participation in value creation. A good example for this value creation is the ‘Got an idea?’ campaign by Starbucks which created the Mystarbucksidea.com brand community (see image 3). The brand community aims at giving consumers a platform for sharing their ideas for the brands future and interacting with Starbucks employees (Porter et al., 2011). In the first year, 70,000 ideas were shared. In the end, 94 of those ideas were put into action and 25 were launched (Porter et al., 2011).

Starbucks consumer participation

 Image 3: Interactive platform to encourage consumer particiation

(MyStarbucksIdea, 2013)

Challenges and opportunities of consumer participation

Consumers are the ideal partner for companies to promote their brand, particularly because those who participate in social networks genuinely belief in brand e.g. Harley-Davidson owners. However, companies need to keep in mind that consumers do not want to interact with the brand in the first place. A study by IBM from 2011 confirms that only 23% use social networks in order to interact with brands, while 70% state that they primarily use it to connect with friends and family (IBM report, 2011). As discussed before, companies therefore have the difficult task of providing a platform for consumer interaction with like-minded people rather than having a commercialised brand community only aiming at propagating the company’s message.

In addition, (electronic) word of mouth represents one of the most effective ways of promoting brands as consumers trust each other more than they trust the brand promise in commercials (Blackshaw and Narazzo, 2006). For companies it is interesting to see that, while searching for information, consumers prefer user-generated media if they can choose between user-generated media and information provided by an organisation (Gousong, 2009; Blackshaw and Narazzo, 2006). According to a study conducted by Nielsen BuzzMetrics user-generated media implies high levels of trust, with 60% of consumers trusting posts made by fellow consumers (Blackshaw and Narazzo, 2006). This confirms the importance of interaction with consumers through social networks and supporting the creation of user-generated brand-related content. Research also showed that consumer participation in social networks can lead to higher purchase intentions and can therefore enhance brand value, if perceived as positive by consumers (Hutter et al., 2013).

Even though consumer participation in social networks and user-generated content provide a great opportunity for brands, companies always have to be prepared for negative statements about their brand. Just like brand communities, anti-brand communities are formed by like-minded people and centred around a common interest, in this case brand aversion (Kucuk, 2008; Krishnamurthy and Kucuk, 2009). The stronger a brand, the more likely are negative comments in social networks and anti-brand communities (Kucuk, 2008; Krishnamurthy and Kucuk, 2009). One illustrative example for this movement is Starbucks with a forum called I hate Starbucks that is based on a consumer initiative (I hate Starbucks, 2014).

Starbucks Anti-brand community

 Image 4: Anti-brand forum (I hate Starbucks, 2014)

All in all, the degree of consumer participation depends on the platform that is provided, as consumers want more than just a brand platform that informs about the latest products. First and foremost, they care about their social life and need to interact with others, either directly or through social networks and virtual communities.

By providing a brand community for like-minded people, companies can try to become part of this interaction and consequently reach higher levels of brand awareness and increase purchase intentions. The main question is whether this is achievable for all kinds of brands, regardless of how much consumers are actually interested in them, such as every day products.

REFERENCES:

Blackshaw, P. and Nazzaro, M. (2006). Consumer-generated media 101: world-of-mouth in the age of the web-fortified consumer. Available online: http://goo.gl/xuAL8U [Accessed 10.02.2014]

Cova, B., & Pace, S. (2006). Brand community of convenience products: new forms of customer empowerment–the case “my Nutella The Community”. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40, No.9/10, pp. 1087-1105.

Dholakia, U. M., Bagozzi, R. P., & Pearo, L. K. (2004). A social influence model of consumer participation in network-and small-group-based virtual communities. International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 21, No.3, pp. 241-263.

Eisenbeiss, M., Blechschmidt, B., Backhaus, K., and Freund, P. A. (2012). “The (real) world is not enough:” Motivational drivers and user behavior in virtual worlds. Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 26, No.1, pp. 4-20.

Guosong, S. (2009). Understanding the appeal of user-generated media: a uses and gratification perspective. Internet Research, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 7-25.

Harley Davidson (2014). Homepage of Harley Davidson. Available online:

http://www.harley-davidson.com/en_US/Content/Pages/Community/community.html?locale=en_USandbmLocale=en_US

[Accessed online: 09.02.2014]

Hutter, K., Hautz, J., Dennhardt, S., & Füller, J. (2013). The impact of user interactions in social media on brand awareness and purchase intention: the case of MINI on Facebook. Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 22 No.5/6, pp. 342-351.

IBM Global Business Services Executive Report (2011) From social media to Social CRM - What customers want. Available online:  http://www.google.de/url?sa=tandrct=jandq=andesrc=sandsource=webandcd=2andved=0CC0QFjABandurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpublic.dhe.ibm.com%2Fcommon%2Fssi%2Fecm%2Fen%2Fgbe03391usen%2FGBE03391USEN.PDFandei=vMv7Ut7iCMPEtQb4oIGQBwandusg=AFQjCNEebZFYaFUyi0yaqQ5pxjSJri5SSgandbvm=bv.61190604,d.Yms [Accessed 10.02.2014]

I hate Starbucks (2014). Logo of the blog. Available online: http://www.ihatesbux.com/forum/ [Accessed online: 12.02.2014]

Kaplan, A. M., and Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 59-68.

Kosonen, M., and Ellonen, H. K. (2012). The Business Value of Consumer Participation through Social Media. International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies (IJICST), Vol. 2, No.1, pp. 1-17.

Krishnamurthy, S. S., and Kucuk, S. U. (2009). Anti-branding on the internet. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 62 No.11, p. 1119-1126.

Kucuk, S. (2008). Negative Double Jeopardy: The role of anti-brand sites on the internet. Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 209-222.

Muniz Jr., A. M., and O'Guinn, T. C. (2001). Brand Community. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 412-432.

McKenna, K. Y.A. and J. A. Bargh (1999), Causes and Consequences of Social Interaction on the Internet: A Conceptual Framework, Media Psychology, Vol. 1, No.3, pp. 249 – 69.

MyStarbucksIdea (2013). Facebook ‘Anti Starbucks’ keyword search. Available online: http://www.starbucks.com/coffeehouse/learn-more/my-starbucks-idea 

[Accessed online: 12.02.2014]

Porter, C. E., Donthu, N., MacElroy, W. H., and Wydra, D. (2011). How to foster and sustain engagement in virtual communities. California Management Review, Vol. 53, No.4, pp.80-110.

Schouten, J. W., and McAlexander, J. H. (1995). Subcultures of Consumption: An Ethnography of the New Bikers. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 22, No.1, pp. 43-61.

Think with Google (2013).  Tag the Weather. Available Online: http://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/campaigns/venus-tag-the-weather.html [Accessed online: 14.02.2014]