Archive
Is Andrex’s ‘Scrunch or Fold’ campaign a watershed?
Let’s face it. No one is in charge.
We humans are social creatures and most of us tend to follow the crowd. Fashions come and go as we hustle en masse towards the latest fad or innovation, rarely pausing to look back, take stock of where we are and where we are going.
Only twenty five years ago, pretty much the only personal information we had in the public domain was our name, address and phone number in the Phone Book. And even then it was only shared with people living locally.
Now, we can not only easily broadcast personal information, but also images and opinions.
To marketers this ‘free’ media, combined with the potential of peer advocacy, seems like a godsend. But like so many powerful things, it can be very dangerous if misused.
Brands that entertain us, provide us with enabling or experience enhancing products, or help us say something about ourselves are at a distinct advantage when it comes to engaging with us online.
Old Spice entertained us and scored a hit with their ‘Man your man could smell like’ campaign. PSY gained international fame with the catchy Gangnam Style.
But it’s not a level playing field. For example, it’s far easier for a cool beer brand to start a conversation about ‘good times’ than it is for a third tier bleach brand to get people talking and sharing anecdotes about ‘epic bathroom cleaning’ moments.
Indeed, last year Femfresh found that while feminine hygiene might be an issue, it’s not one that people particularly want to talk about on Facebook.
Inspiration
Great ideas have the frustrating habit of coming to us at the most inconvenient times. Generally they occur when we are relaxed – in a lovely warm bath, the moment just before you fall asleep or even when you are sat upon the toilet.
This phenomenon might explain the latest offering from Andrex.
Perhaps noting that Kit-Kat Chunky had enjoyed success with a voting mechanic when launching their new bars and that Marmite had challenged us to decide whether we were Lovers or Haters, they’ve launched what some have called ‘the worst advert ever’.
In short, they want to start a debate about how you wipe your arse. Do you ‘Scrunch? Or do you ‘Fold’?
The campaign has drawn a response; people are talking about it, people are tweeting about it and even people like me are blogging about it. On the whole, reactions have been a mix of horror and incredulity.
However, despite the overwhelming negativity, some would still qualify the impact as a success. After all, it shows that the campaign has raised awareness and achieved cut through.
To this I would counter, “Maybe, but it hasn’t made me more likely to buy Andrex”.
Defecation isn’t a life choice. In the 21st century, in a developed nation, buying toilet paper is not a discretionary spend. One would have thought that Andrex’s challenge was more about convincing shoppers to buy their product rather than downtrade to cheaper, lower quality brands.
Fame or infamy?
If they were a new brand to the category, looking to make a name for themselves as an alternative choice, one might understand such a bizarre campaign.
But this is Andrex.
If Family Fortunes asked 100 people to name a toilet paper brand they would top the list. They are to toilet paper what McVities are to biscuits, what Heinz are to ketchup and what Kellogg’s are to breakfast cereals.
They have built up fantastic brand equity with their ‘Soft, strong and very, very long’ slogan, their iconic Labrador puppy and ‘Puppy Points’ loyalty scheme. It’s an enviable position, but one they risk flushing down the pan with such ill-judged campaigns.
The open nature of modern society has helped blur the boundary between fame and infamy. Having a load of insects poured over your face in order to win a meal for the camp may briefly raise the profile of a minor celebrity, but mere chatter doesn’t lead to sales, and brands ought to aspire to longevity too.
If in twenty-five years we’ve gone from having our numbers in the phone book to openly discussing how we wipe our backsides, perhaps the true purpose of ‘Scrunch or Fold’ is to act as a watershed, both for brands who seek buzz for the sake of it and those of us who shudder at what might be on the agenda in 2038 if we carry on down this path.
A Seeding Campaign with a Difference
As most products are developed to create or fulfil a consumer need there is rarely a great deal of confusion as to how they should be used.
That is not so say that inventive consumers can’t find extra uses for everyday products.
In some cases these innovators benefit the product and change how it is marketed. Way back in 1924, Kimberley Clark targetted the humble Kleenex to women as a means of removing make-up. It took six years, a persistant researcher and some trial adverts to convince them it ought to be sold as a hygienic replacement for the handkerchief.
In other instances a much less welcome use is discovered such as when ravers found that the innocent Vicks Vaporub could enhance their narcotic experiences.
You butter not eat this
Recently it has been an item given away as part of an on-pack promotion that has caused some confusion and generated some unexpected column inches.
Danish butter brand Lurpak have spent the year inspiring consumers and reminding them of the benefits of paying a little bit more for their butter.
More recently they’ve been giving away seeds for consumers to grow their own herbs. A website supports the promotion with lots of tasty recipes for each herb, including some by Jamie Oliver.
However, some residents of a Dorset care home mistook the slabs of soil for biscuits and nearly choked as they scoffed them down.
Upon hearing the news, Zeitgeist rushed out and boosted Lurpak‘s sales by one.
‘Here are your free basil seeds’
Without the sleeve, things are less obvious
A warning not to eat what is inside the sleeve
The on-pack promotion serves to give the shopper a distinctive reason to choose that product over any competitors, but as we know, the shopper isn’t always the consumer.
While the person who bought the butter for the care home would most likely have known what was stuck to the side of the tub, once the sleeve is removed there is no explanation as to what it is.
While this incident seems to be isolated and lighthearted it highlights the need to consider how a product is used once it leaves the store.
With reports suggesting that there are 12 million illiterate adults in the UK and around 10% of the population aged 7 or under perhaps a written explanation on a sleeve isn’t always enough.
As our photographs show, the slab could be mistaken for a cookie by someone unaware the wider campaign.
Perhaps in these difficult financial times an opportunity exists for an entrepreneur to set up a panel consisting of the young, the old and the illiterate to test promotions to make sure such confusion is avoided in future.
They think it’s all over. It never even started.
The lessons marketers can learn from Englands World Cup bid.
One of the things Zeitgeist likes to do when not identifying first class insights is finding inspiration in the real world that can be brought into the world of marketing.
Sometimes it is as simple as this deconstruction of the Rolling Stones Gimme Shelter that demonstrates how a fantastic creative execution is made during the fusion and collaboration of individual genius contributing their own part to the mix.
However over the past week one half of Zeitgeist has been lucky enough to be given an insight of their own into the pitch process.
Last week I was lucky enough to attend the excellent APG Battle of Big Thinking which pitted planners from around the industry against each other as they debated their big thoughts.
In the semi-informal atmosphere of the architecturally interesting British Library the style and charisma of the presenters was often more influential that their actual idea.
Trapped by the snow and a lack of faith in the UK rail infrastructure, Zeitgeist was able to watch the doomed English bid for the FIFA 2018 World Cup from the comfort of the sofa.
It is rare to be able to watch another team pitch and in the much more serious arena of the Messe Zurich it provided a few more lessons that we can bring into our own business.
Lesson One
The most important of which is to understand the criteria against which you will be judged. This isn’t always as simple as looking at the brief. You have to understand what your audience really want and why you are there.
England received a glowing report for infrastructure and facilities and a 100% rating by McKinsey. They were even acknowledged as being the only bidders who could ‘hold the World Cup tomorrow‘.
However a quick look at previous World Cup hosts suggests that much of that is irrelevant and what FIFA want is to enter new markets and leave a legacy.
Up to 1990 the World Cup was alternatively hosted between South and Central America and Europe. In the 90’s with the break up of the Eastern Bloc and growth of technology like the internet and mass broadcasting the world and the world of football changed dramatically.
By the time those changes began to take effect the 1994 and 1998 World Cups had already been awarded to USA and France respectively.
Then in 1996, FIFA awarded the 2002 World Cup to Japan and South Korea for what was the first Asian World Cup.
The 2006 World Cup went to Germany but was supposed to go to South Africa. The influence of Kaiser Franz Beckenbauer and other shenanigans saw to that.
In 2010 the World Cup was indeed held in South Africa breaking a new frontier.
In 2014 it will be held in Brazil, the nation that puts the ‘B’ into ‘BRIC’. They haven’t hosted it since 1950 and it will be the first time the event has been hosted in South America since Argentina invited the world to sample the delights of a military dictatorship in 1978.
So with this knowledge at hand the question arises as to whether England really thought they stood a chance of winning the 2018 bid. All the attributes that would have made them a stand out candidate as hosts before 2000 now count against them. The irony is that before then, the Taylor Report had only just forced clubs to upgrade their dilapidated facilities so they wouldn’t have been ideal candidates for earlier World Cups either.
The pitch itself was excellent.
If FIFA president Sepp Blatter was a balloon he’d have popped as he introduced the future King, current Prime Minister and icon David Beckham to plead with him and his mates for the right to host the World Cup.
Opened by the excellent Eddy Afekafe the presentation answered exactly what England would have wanted to see if they were choosing the venue.
Unfortunately FIFA’s criteria was different and that’s why the bid failed.
So what other lessons can we learn that will help us when we pitch to prospective clients?
Lesson Two
It doesn’t matter how well you present if you don’t tick their requirements.
Lesson Three
It doesn’t matter who pitches if you don’t meet their requirements.
Lesson Four
It doesn’t matter how in love you are with your own solution if it doesn’t meet their requirements.
For all the claims of corruption and a stitch up, England were fighting a losing battle from the beginning. In any case, the idea that good Olde English values of fair play would somehow infect an international cabal of sports administrators when national and personal fortunes are waiting to be made does seem naive to say the least.
With the newly branded St George’s Park finally getting the go-ahead after years of delay it looks as though we might finally be investing in training a team of World Cup winners rather than trying to get home advantage. Maybe our efforts should have been spent getting it finished sooner instead of chasing impossible dreams.
And that’s the fifth and final lesson for agencies. Next time you get the chance to pitch, stop and think about whether you actually really stand a chance.
Does this company always appoint local or global agencies? Is the pitch just an excuse to justify giving it to the incumbant? What is your role in the process? Are they just after some new ideas? Who is actually making the decision?
Be brutally honest. If you don’t think you stand a chance, work out how much you would have wasted pitching and instead invest it in developing your own staff and boosting their morale. They already believe in you and will service your existing accounts all the better for it.