Failing in the "Last Mile"

September 17, 2008 16:21 by mattk
We at Pivot + Levy have been talking a lot about the "Last Mile" lately. This is the final point of contact between thinking about buying and actually purchasing - the consumer facing website and the retailer. If your final customer is excited about a big purchase, but can't explore the product online, or knows more about the product than the salesperson they interact with at the retail level, your brand has failed them.

Recently, I have experienced this. I am in the market for a new pair of glasses, something I haven't purchased since 2003. Because of their great customer service, I headed back to Seattle Eyewear where I shopped before. After trying on what seemed like 100's of frames, I stumbled across a pair of KLIIK frames from Denmark that I really liked. They only had a couple frames in a couple colors that worked for me, but the brand seemed very intriguing.

So I headed to the KLIIK website. At the homepage, you are asked to select between a Flash or HTML site. No matter which one you select, a popup opens, and this now serves as the website. That is, however, until you select the catalog. This selection opens a new window in the original browser. Talk about bad UX.... To top it off, you can only view 4 of the hundreds of frames they offer unless you have a login and password.

I do not understand the thinking behind this. The entire collection does exist on the website, so no added production work is needed to let the customer browse your entire collection. And, this is not the type of purchase normally made online, so sharing this information would not alienate the dealer. Customers will still need to head to a dealer to try the glasses on, have measurements made, and to place the order.

Consider the money KLIIK spent on the Flash intro on their website - the models, the photo shoot, and the music. Why not spend a little more time thinking about the "Last Mile", and how your customers will want to interact with your product? 
Digg It!DZone It!StumbleUponTechnoratiRedditDel.icio.usNewsVineFurlBlinkListLinkedIn

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

The demise of the Jeep brand?

June 4, 2008 16:58 by mattk
"It's a Jeep thing. You wouldn't understand". You have seen it before, most likely on a beat up old Jeep's windshield behind you at a stop sign. Jeep owners, with CJ's and Wranglers in particular, are a family of sorts. They wave or nod to each other in the streets, signaling a mutual sign of appreciation for each other. This extreme brand loyalty is unique to Jeep among modern car manufacturers.

With such a strong brand following, each new Jeep that is introduced to market faces heavy scrutiny by current Jeep owners. Over the years, Jeep owners slowly accepted the steady modernization of their beloved CJ into the YJ and then the TJ Wranglers. New model introductions, like the Grand Cherokee and Commander, were still true to the Jeep brand promise of being "Trail Ready" and accepted into the Jeep family as cousins.

Then came the new Jeep lineup, and the introduction of the first 4-door Wrangler. It is obviously designed to complete against the FJ Cruiser and Hummer's H3, but has Jeep has gone too far? Does this new Jeep stray too far from the Jeep brand with it's 4 doors and power windows? Or will it’s familiar removable top, slatted grill, and true trail readiness be enough to grant it entrance into the Jeep family?

Only time will tell if this new arrival will be brought into the fold, but the real brand killers come in the form of the Jeep Compass and Jeep Patriot. Both are not built to leave the road and this goes against everything the Jeep brand stands for. Although in the short run these two new models may help Jeep sell a few more vehicles, the potential damage to their brand in a crowded space like the auto industry is not a risk that I would take.
Digg It!DZone It!StumbleUponTechnoratiRedditDel.icio.usNewsVineFurlBlinkListLinkedIn

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

"Live" living on borrowed time?

June 4, 2008 13:46 by mattt

Yesterday, Kevin Johnson, president of Microsoft’s platforms and services division announced that the “Live” brand—Microsoft’s flavor of search and online services—could be replaced.  Given the many millions that have been invested by Microsoft, as well as the numerous iterations of “me to” services that have been added to their online offerings over the years, this is a pretty stunning admission. The failure of Live to really catch on and represent a credible threat to Google’s dominance has been cast as a branding problem, but I think there’s a real user experience issue that lives just below the surface. I also believe that without addressing this, any rebranding effort is unlikely to make a real difference.

Consider the development arc of Google as a brand. From the very beginning, that empty field centered on a nearly blank page made it crystal clear what Google was about—search. The fact that Google, as a word, has become synonymous with search in the public’s mind goes to show just how successful they have been. I think that you can attribute quite a lot of the brand’s success to the truly simple and intuitive user experience Google delivers.

Microsoft’s latest gambit to essentially bribe people to use Live search just underscores how much they have to catch up. And I think a part of the problem is the way Microsoft always seems to want more from the user if they want to play with the toys.

Visit windowslive.com, and one thing is clear immediately, you’re going to have to give up a bunch of personal information and allow Microsoft to install a whole bunch of stuff on your computer. Pretty strong contrast with the elegant simplicity and immediate gratification of the Google search field.

I’m confident that Microsoft will develop a successful strategy, which is a good thing. Google needs a credible competitor to keep it sharp, and we all benefit when really smart people compete to come up with innovative new services and products. When they get it right, you’ll know because they won’t have to be paying people to play.

Digg It!DZone It!StumbleUponTechnoratiRedditDel.icio.usNewsVineFurlBlinkListLinkedIn

Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Kerning matters-a brief rant

June 3, 2008 12:03 by mattt
Pity the poor brand manager--they have to keep track of a million tiny details all the time. But there are times when it pays to sweat the small stuff--one of them being when your brand mark is literally carved in stone. Here in Seattle, the Wells Fargo head office is in a nice skyscraper downtown on 3rd Ave. And if you're at street level, and you happen to be just a touch obsessive-compulsive, you'll notice how the Wells Fargo logotype carved into the stone plaza in front of the building has TERRIBLE kerning. Maybe only one person in a thousand notices, but once you do, it starts to annoy, kind of like getting the Macarena stuck in your head. I'm guessing Wells Fargo has a few bucks invested in their corporate image, so it strikes me a bit surprising they'd let this go in such a permanent setting.

Another example--a local cruise company who has a reputation for going the extra mile when it comes to the details has unbelievably bad kerning for some of its ship names. You may ask, "so what?” but when the name is rendered in four foot high letters that you can see from half a mile away, badly executed kerning really shows. Does this impact their business? Probably not. But when you consider that their reputation is based on delivering a luxury experience, the very name of the ship is sending a subtle message that maybe the cruise isn't quite going to be everything that was promised.
Digg It!DZone It!StumbleUponTechnoratiRedditDel.icio.usNewsVineFurlBlinkListLinkedIn

Currently rated 5.0 by 2 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tags:
Categories: Brand Stewardship
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (1) | Comment RSSRSS comment feed

How to create an army of brand loyalists

June 2, 2008 10:57 by mattk


Weber Grills has an army of loyal outdoor chefs that are still cooking on their old charcoal kettles and wouldn't think of buying another brand when it comes time for a new grill. While this may seem like a situation any company would be happy to be in, brands with a diehard user base like Weber are constantly challenged to innovate while not diluting their brand with their existing customer base.

 
To create brand loyalty you must first and foremost build a product that lives up to expectations.

Weber has been building grills from day one that not only cook well, but are designed to last. You won't see too many functioning 10+ year old CharBroil grills out there, but there are plenty of 20+ year old Weber kettle grills with owners proudly grilling away on them. Weber decided to mobilize their user base and take an indirect crack at their competition when they introduced the  Campaign to Promote Grill Decency. As a campaign member, you are delivered informative pamphlets, stickers, and other campaign materials designed to make sure "friends don't let friends buy crappy grills". Members register how many crappy grills they have been able to get converted into Weber’s online, and a worldwide competition is born. Marketing genius!

To sustain brand loyalty you must communicate with your customers and continue to deliver value.

When I registered my three Weber grills with the company I was enrolled as a member of Weber Nation for free. As a member, I am emailed a new recipe each week. The recipes were originally delivered in HTML email format with basic photos. Weber now includes videos of their recipes being prepared by Real Grilling's Jamie Purviance in the emails. A complete, searchable archive of the recipes lives on the Weber Nation website and can be downloaded as podcasts or vodcasts. Now, I am not sure how many pit bosses would be caught getting recipes off an iPod, but that is industry leading innovation! 

Digg It!DZone It!StumbleUponTechnoratiRedditDel.icio.usNewsVineFurlBlinkListLinkedIn

Currently rated 4.7 by 3 people

  • Currently 4.666667/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5