Comments on: Cool Stuff vs Boring Fluff http://www.spokenwhirred.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/ A Spoke Marketing Blog Thu, 22 Jul 2010 18:46:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Brian Schwartz http://www.spokenwhirred.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/comment-page-1/#comment-24 Brian Schwartz Fri, 01 May 2009 18:48:18 +0000 http://sw.spoketest.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/#comment-24 Tanalyn, Good points (and I love your site). This topic is worthy of it's one post about how brands should respond to those touch-points and triggers. It makes me think of something that comes up during branding conversations. Authenticity. If a client, who is a business owner, says they are 'X' and you ask the same question to the junior staff members and they say 'Y', there can be a problem with perception of the brand versus reality. Because the actions of both people define (or in this case, confuse) the brand. Authenticity has to come through. These people have to live the brand, day in and day out. Of course Quizno's (corporate) says that they have great customer service, but if the employee / manager doesn't it, it doesn't matter. Sorry for the slow response and thanks for reading. Cheers, Brian Tanalyn,
Good points (and I love your site). This topic is worthy of it’s one post about how brands should respond to those touch-points and triggers.
It makes me think of something that comes up during branding conversations. Authenticity. If a client, who is a business owner, says they are ‘X’ and you ask the same question to the junior staff members and they say ‘Y’, there can be a problem with perception of the brand versus reality. Because the actions of both people define (or in this case, confuse) the brand. Authenticity has to come through. These people have to live the brand, day in and day out.

Of course Quizno’s (corporate) says that they have great customer service, but if the employee / manager doesn’t it, it doesn’t matter.
Sorry for the slow response and thanks for reading.
Cheers,
Brian

]]> By: Brian Schwartz http://www.spokenwhirred.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/comment-page-1/#comment-25 Brian Schwartz Fri, 01 May 2009 18:36:55 +0000 http://sw.spoketest.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/#comment-25 Agreed Pat. Video can work (especially for remote clients). Finding the right balance between fluffy and not too fluffy is the key. Every clients is different, of course, and finding that balance of creative is key to help keeping them engaged. Certainly need to grab lunch soon. Hope to see you at a happy hour soon as well. Cheers, Brian Agreed Pat. Video can work (especially for remote clients). Finding the right balance between fluffy and not too fluffy is the key.
Every clients is different, of course, and finding that balance of creative is key to help keeping them engaged.
Certainly need to grab lunch soon. Hope to see you at a happy hour soon as well.
Cheers,
Brian

]]> By: Brian Schwartz http://www.spokenwhirred.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/comment-page-1/#comment-26 Brian Schwartz Fri, 01 May 2009 18:30:58 +0000 http://sw.spoketest.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/#comment-26 Kelly, thanks for reading and your response (and being a fellow fact finder). We've found that even the most engaged clients, need to see creative during the delivery of a discovery. It's not the lack of engagement during the process, it's the lack of excitement for the deliverables. In fact the problem I'm trying to articulate is that after all that build up and excitement from the engagement and throughout the discovery meetings, delivering something devoid of creative (like a plain word doc) tends to have a "that's it?" result. Some people like visuals, some are text-readers, most are both. Even little touches during the discovery document, like images from comparable (or aspirational) brands, potential imagery or tag lines, makes a huge step towards maintaining the excitement through this process and towards the next step. I'll tell Dan you said hello. Dan and I have spoke at a few CSPRC events, including the Spectrum conference a few years back. Hope that group is doing well. We're still in touch with Deb and just helped her with a campaign. Cheers, Brian Kelly, thanks for reading and your response (and being a fellow fact finder). We’ve found that even the most engaged clients, need to see creative during the delivery of a discovery. It’s not the lack of engagement during the process, it’s the lack of excitement for the deliverables. In fact the problem I’m trying to articulate is that after all that build up and excitement from the engagement and throughout the discovery meetings, delivering something devoid of creative (like a plain word doc) tends to have a “that’s it?” result.
Some people like visuals, some are text-readers, most are both. Even little touches during the discovery document, like images from comparable (or aspirational) brands, potential imagery or tag lines, makes a huge step towards maintaining the excitement through this process and towards the next step.
I’ll tell Dan you said hello. Dan and I have spoke at a few CSPRC events, including the Spectrum conference a few years back. Hope that group is doing well. We’re still in touch with Deb and just helped her with a campaign.
Cheers,
Brian

]]> By: Kelly Ferrara http://www.spokenwhirred.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/comment-page-1/#comment-27 Kelly Ferrara Fri, 01 May 2009 17:03:07 +0000 http://sw.spoketest.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/#comment-27 Brian, I'm a 7 on Kolbe Fact Finder - my highest ranking. Interesting take on applying this to the brand discovery process. The dilemma to me is to perhaps consider ways to engage the client a bit more in the discovery process with you - so they are part of the team and as excited about this as you all are. And I thought the "dead on, dead on arrival" turn of phrase is simply poetic. Well done! Say Hi to Dan K for me. Met him years ago at CSPRC. Kelly Brian,
I’m a 7 on Kolbe Fact Finder – my highest ranking. Interesting take on applying this to the brand discovery process. The dilemma to me is to perhaps consider ways to engage the client a bit more in the discovery process with you – so they are part of the team and as excited about this as you all are.
And I thought the “dead on, dead on arrival” turn of phrase is simply poetic. Well done! Say Hi to Dan K for me. Met him years ago at CSPRC.
Kelly

]]> By: tanalyn dollar http://www.spokenwhirred.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/comment-page-1/#comment-28 tanalyn dollar Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:19:21 +0000 http://sw.spoketest.com/index.php/2009/02/cool-stuff-vs-boring-fluff/#comment-28 Power brands are defined by their obsession with the minutia. I believe clients need to map out and define their customers and link 'emotion' to EVERY company touchpoint. Special care should be given to the points of failure. Here is my real life example: I found a coarse, black and white hair in my Quizno's Torpendo sandwich. This was from an animal (I know, I have dogs). Along with a nonchalant attitude I was handed a new sandwich and as an after thouht, an 'Oops, we can do better' card. Free sandwich, right? Wrong. Phone number and name of the manager or franchise owner asking me to let them know if I was satisfied with the resolution? No. Incredibly, the card was for 50% off my NEXT sandwich. Right...you screw up, then invite me back to your store to spend more money with you. We all know people talk more about what you did wrong than all the times you operated flawlessly. So what's needed, are different levels of 'Oops cards'. Failing to put cheese on my sandwich doesn't rank with finding a hair. Each customer has an expectation for treatment and for me, I just wanted the franchise owner to know and care about what happened. Maybe brand ID should include the emotional exposure of failure and the operational process (expense) they're willing to undertake to toward customer trust building. Will the words be followed with specific actions? Power brands are defined by their obsession with the minutia. I believe clients need to map out and define their customers and link ‘emotion’ to EVERY company touchpoint.
Special care should be given to the points of failure. Here is my real life example:
I found a coarse, black and white hair in my Quizno’s Torpendo sandwich. This was from an animal (I know, I have dogs). Along with a nonchalant attitude I was handed a new sandwich and as an after thouht, an ‘Oops, we can do better’ card. Free sandwich, right? Wrong. Phone number and name of the manager or franchise owner asking me to let them know if I was satisfied with the resolution? No.
Incredibly, the card was for 50% off my NEXT sandwich. Right…you screw up, then invite me back to your store to spend more money with you.
We all know people talk more about what you did wrong than all the times you operated flawlessly. So what’s needed, are different levels of ‘Oops cards’. Failing to put cheese on my sandwich doesn’t rank with finding a hair.
Each customer has an expectation for treatment and for me, I just wanted the franchise owner to know and care about what happened.
Maybe brand ID should include the emotional exposure of failure and the operational process (expense) they’re willing to undertake to toward customer trust building. Will the words be followed with specific actions?

]]>