Posts

CVS and the Paradox of Do-It-Myself Vs. Do-It-For-Me

/in /by

There is a powerful conflict raging in brand management. This conflict reflects how brands define customer service. The conflict is a paradox that most brands have not yet solved: it is the paradox of DIM vs. DIFM: Do-It-Myself vs. Do-It-For-Me. At its heart, the DIM vs. DIFM paradox is about customer control.

Technology, apps, mobility, digitalization, robotics, constant contact, 24/7-time spans and artificial intelligence create everyday customer control issues. For years, data showed that customers are willing to cede control for increased personalization of services.

Kiosks, voice-activated applications, digital wallets, conversing bots, self-tracking of physical and mental functions (the quantitative self), driverless cars, connected cars, connected-smart appliances in the connected-smart home – all of these shift accountability of actions to things other than ourselves, changing our perceptions of what we can accomplish. We may set the parameters, but the operations are no longer ours.

However, we expect the technology to deliver outcomes just the way we want. Wearables track our movements, sleep, health, etc., yet, we set our own goals expecting the wearable to participate in helping us to deliver against our personal strategy.

Robotics and AI (supposedly) make our choosing and using easier. But, can robots or AI deliver humanized ease of mind? What happens when you take the person out of personal? What happens when we take the self out of self-service?

We appreciate the convenience benefits of the digital world. However, we desire the experience of human contact. In an increasingly digital world, we seek person-to-person contact. Of course, each cohort perceives self-control and the relationship of man and machine differently. One challenge for brands is to maximize each customer’s desire for being in control while in many cases not being the controller. In the battle for the soul of control, the best brand experiences will be the optimization of DIM and DIFM: control delivered my way, regardless of who or what is in control.

To understand how at odds are these two sides of branded customer service look no farther than CVS and your local grocery store.

The chief digital, data, analytics and technology officer at CVS, Tilak Mandadi, spoke with The Wall Street Journal about the future of the CVS customer experience. Mr. Mandadi stated that CVS research indicates customers want “accurate real-time status of their order, wanting to know where is their prescription and when that prescription will be filled.“ So, CVS is building a new self-service app. This new CVS app will employ “conversational AI” using natural language. Mr. Mandadi believes the conversational app will be able to answer most customer questions. And, this new self-service will not include “annoying menu-based options such as press 1 for this and press 2 for this, etc.”

In real life, pharmacies are struggling. Profits are at risk. For example, Walgreen’s is closing stores. Walgreen’s dismal reporting to analysts detailed the challenges facing drug stores. Walgreen’s says that its store closings will not entail firing employees, just reassignments. On the other hand, CVS “cut costs and thousands of jobs” according to The Wall Street Journal. Pharmacies including CVS say they are committed to staffing stores but there have been complaints and mistakes. The Wall Street Journal indicates that there are reports of overworked staff and “dangerous” order-filling errors.

Self-service, according to CVS, will place some of the pharma responsibility onto the shoulders of the customer while reducing the need for pharmacists to attend to phone calls. The tacit understanding seems to be that there will be less need for extra personnel.

The CVS app will also test how much trust customers will invest in the CVS brand. After all, this is our personal health and wellness. Pharmaceuticals go beyond aches and pains to life and death. AI, conversational or not, takes the human out of experiences, especially service. Who or what do we trust?

Trust is at the heart of all relationships. Can customers trust voicing their feelings, fears and their human interactions to AI? Is trustworthiness related to degree of technology or to depth of human service? Can trust be digitized? Can pharmacy services be trusted if it is an algorithm? Or an inanimate conversationalist? Is CVS having these discussions?

Trust is earned, not given. Customers must trust the technology to deliver the promised brand experience in a quality manner. Customers must trust the machine to perform the task and without depersonalizing and dehumanizing the task. Doubt damages trust. Damaged trust destroys brand value.

Another challenge for brands is whether trust can be de-humanized. To what degree? Brands must determine how much is technology and how much is human. Then, ensure quality delivery of both. There are going to be areas where human autonomy is needed. Can the app know when to turn the conversation over to a real person?

There is a definition of service as “a set of one-time consumable and perishable benefits. It relies on the human connection aspects of a relationship.” But, the CVS app is allocating the services to a non-sentient operation. Helpful assistance makes life easier. But, each brand experience requires different levels of technological integration. Sometimes it is necessary to have a human on the other end.

Digest this CVS story along with another story from The Wall Street Journal about the issues surrounding self-service check-out in grocery stores. Self-service check-out in grocery has not turned out to be the panacea grocery store owners envisioned. Many stores are eliminating their self-service kiosks. Even Amazon has stepped back from its people-less, smart-cart stores. Amazon’s lesson is described as not grasping the desire for human interaction in the supermarket.

Regarding self-checkout, as with all technology, there are always glitches. This necessitates an employee standing by for assistance. There is theft. Just like the behaviors on National Geographic’s How To Catch A Smuggler, self-service check-out seems to attract those with sneaking and cheating behaviors where certain items can be manipulated to lower prices on larger items. California has a new proposition ready for a vote that would post one employee for every two self-check-out registers. The only function for these employees is to assist customers and, hopefully, spot the sneaky ones. Self-checkout is supposed to be an efficiency provider: fewer employees at registers. Now, those employees are still on payroll, just doing a different job.

As for customers, only 26% of shoppers over 60 like self-service check-out. Under 45 year olds are most likely to approve of self-service, with a little more than half of the under 45-year olds saying the preferred self-service. As with everything, age matters. Brands need to find ways in which to satisfy customers of different cohorts without trespassing on the brand’s core reason for being.

Furthermore, new data in an article in Harvard Business Review reveal that for office personnel AI can make office workers feel lonelier and less healthy. Is there a possibility that grocery and pharmacy customers, looking for assistance and solace will feel the same way as office workers from frequent interactions with a conversational bot? Will cashiers and other grocery staff start to feel lonely?

So, with contradictory needs of Do-It-Myself and Do-It-For-Me, what happens with brands like CVS? All brands must continue to build and nurture a strong, adaptable, flexible intelligent and empathetic corporate culture. Digitized does not mean dehumanized. Yet, the technological changes in the workplace should not allow a dehumanized personal experience. CVS may be treading a fine line. Brands must determine by customer set where the line is between machine and me.

At the same time, brands must deploy self-service and control within the framework of their mainspring fundamental ethos. Don’t allow technology to impinge upon the brand’s core essence and reason for being. As the executive vice president and chief information and technology officer at CarMax told a Deloitte interviewer, “We’ve done a lot of cool things through machine learning and AI. I’m now focused on ensuring that whatever we deploy as a company is being used responsibly and in ways consistent with our core values.”

Tupperware: Trapped in Tendencies for Trouble

/in /by

We may soon have a world without Tupperware. Recently, there have been numerous doom-laden reports on the sad situation for this iconic American brand-business. In fact, a brief Nexis search of Tupperware-demise articles for the past week alone turned up 13 pages of commentary. 

Pundits and analysts identified the many reasons for Tupperware’s dire straits. There is the lack of innovation. There is the lack of focus on the changing roles of women. There are the two-year Covid-19 restrictions on gatherings. There are the supply chain issues created by Covid-19. There are the price increases on materials. And, so forth.

Tupperware has yet to die. But, what is clear is that the brand-business fell victim to several brand-business tendencies for trouble. Not every brand-business enmeshed in troubling landscapes dies. Brands such as Lego, Campbell’s, McDonald’s have all been in trouble and managed to claw their way back to incredible success. Even Toy R’ Us is actively seeking rejuvenation with its stores inside of all Macy’s stores. Unfortunately, others such as Blackberry, Nokia, Sears, Avon, Kodak and Bed, Bath & Beyond have left the scene, are leaving the scene or are shadows of their former selves. Sometimes brand-business decline is a fast, free fall. Sometimes it takes decades. Some observers indicate that Tupperware’s current troubles were years in the making.

Tendencies for trouble are the result of brand mismanagement. Tendencies for trouble must be considered as “stop-now” behaviors and attitudes. When it comes to brand-business revitalization, brand-business teams need to eliminate these “stop-nows” as these are impediments to invigoration. 

Tendencies for trouble have financial consequences. Anything that stops a brand-business from growing customer-perceived brand value has financial consequences. Customer-perceived brand value depends on renovation, innovation and relevant differentiation. Without customer-perceived brand value, there is no shareholder value.

Tupperware is a poster child for several corporate tendencies for trouble. The jury is out as to whether Tupperware will find a pathway back to success. However, in order to do so, Tupperware will need to reverse its engagement with the behaviors and attitudes that have forced the brand-business into its downward spiral.

First, Tupperware became complacent. Complacency is comfortable but it is a hindrance to success.

For brand-businesses, complacency must be avoided. Complacency stops ideas and innovation. Complacency allows brand-businesses to stop focusing on changing customer needs. Complacency permits employees to keep on doing what they are most comfortable doing, lulling people into laziness and inaction. Complacency crushes curiosity and creativity. 

Complacency gives brand-businesses permission to stop looking at the changes in the world and in its specific market segment. Specifically, complacency takes eyes off new entries in your category and in identified segments. Complacency blinds a brand-business to the forces of the changing world. It creates a “staying alive” mentality rather than a “moving forward” mentality. Complacency supports the static mind-set that keeps the brand away from risk. As the Frederic Forrest character Chef says in Apocalypse Now, “Never get off the boat.” 

Complacency is simply brand-business mismanagement. Brands are not passive; they are promises. Brands are active promises of an expected, relevant, differentiated experience. Brands can be soft, quiet, traditional, laid back, and chill. But, they have to move if they want to deliver a relevantly differentiated experience. Complacency is anti-movement creating inaction and, eventually, irrelevancy. 

The more powerful and successful the brand, the easier it is to walk off the complacency cliff. Complacency leads brand-businesses to believe that there is now nothing left to do but live off past success. 

Brand-businesses that fall into complacency due to their belief in their historical power lose because other brands in the competitive set are innovating all the time. Complacent brand-businesses are so enamored with their success that they stop looking outside at new entries and new threats.

Complacency is a culture flaw. Brands need leaders who fight complacency. Complacency is satisfying. But, from a brand-business perspective, it generates inaction supporting the trajectory of continuing to do what has worked in the past instead of what will work in the future. 

Second, Tupperware fell for the belief that what worked yesterday will continue to work today and tomorrow.

Customers change; the world changes; brand reputations change; competition changes. Doing what once worked when the current landscape is different makes no sense. Standing still while changes rage around you is a formula for failure. 

Peter Drucker, the marketing guru, recognized the pitfalls into which so many great brand-businesses fall when it comes to doing the same thing over and over again. His lessons include these: 

  • Environments change. Continuing strategies and actions that created past successes will eventually lead to failure. 
  • Being defensive and unyielding will also lead to failure. Brand-businesses must be willing to (quickly) abandon formerly successful approaches. 
  • Believe that change will happen and that sometimes the change will be revolutionary. Brand-businesses should create the future by making changes even though it means “obsolescing the products or methods of its current and past success.” 

Leadership is critical. Brand-businesses need leaders who are able to change their minds and switch direction when necessary. Leadership must be able to ditch a no-longer-viable strategy. At some point, leadership must be able to say that it knows as much as it can know and is capable of making an informed judgment call, even if it seems to be a leap of faith. 

Markets and customers change quickly. Brand-businesses must be flexible, agile and quickly decisive. This is why it is important to have leadership that is willing to look outward rather than backward. Just think of all the brand-businesses that had to quickly rethink and implement new strategies when Covid-19 restrictions changed people’s lives.

Building a culture that is not afraid of letting go is critical. This does not mean giving up the brand-business’ core values. It does mean being ready to take leadership in a fast-moving, changing world. Staying out of trouble hinges on how willing the brand-business’ leadership is to recognize when it is time to move on and jettison a strategy that is holding the brand back. 

Third, Tupperware disregarded the changing world.

 Not paying attention to core customers and their changing wants and problems means the brand-business is not up to speed. Disregarding the changing world means not understanding and attracting prospective, like-minded potential new customers. Disregarding the changing world means not renovating or innovating a brand-business. This means not thinking about the present or thinking about the possibilities for tomorrow. Disregarding the changing world means the brand-business is looking backward, trying to reproduce the past. The brand-business is not evolving with the changing times.

Tupperware missed adapting its in-home party model when women quit staying home and went to work in an office. Tupperware turned a blind-eye to the behaviors and attitudes of new younger cohorts. Tupperware did not pay attention to people’s lack of free time.  Tupperware missed competitive entries.

Covid-19 was just a fraction of Tupperware’s problems. Tupperware’s problems started a while ago. Like Avon, Tupperware suffered from lack of recognition that women were no longer at home all day. Additionally, Tupperware did not recognize that younger cohorts were less interested in plastic than previous generations. These younger cohorts were interested is more eco-friendly products and services. SodaStream built its business on consumers’ dislike of buying so many bottles of sparkling water. Recently trending is the idea of reusable containers for take-out foods and restaurants.

Tupperware missed the decline of leisure time. Having or attending a Tupperware party carves out precious time from individuals’ time banks. Tupperware parties may be a luxury in a world of time-deficient people. Tupperware time might be the only time a family has for being together. This is a trade-off that most people will not make.

And, then there is the competition. Tupperware missed plastic food-container products from grocery stalwarts in the plastic bag business such as Glad and Hefty. Tupperware missed competitive food container products from take-out deliverers and restaurants. Tupperware overlooked the food containers from delicatessens. 

Lots of brand-business observers believe that there is a natural brand-business life cycle from birth, to growth, to maturation, to decline, to death. This is wrong. Brand-businesses do not inevitably die. They can live forever. Brand-businesses get into trouble due to self-inflicted actions of brand-business owners and leaders. Brand-businesses die from brand-business mismanagement.  Tupperware neglected staying relevantly differentiated. Having the lid make a ”burp” sound when closing is just not enough in today’s world.

And, then, there is the name. Some analysts are saying that Tupperware allowed its name to become generic for the category. It is true that Tupperware has become the category definer. However, other brand-businesses have managed to maintain the integrity of their brand-business while becoming a catch-all name. Kleenex and Scotch Tape, for example, have well-defined, relevant, differentiated positions in customers’ minds.

Bloomberg BusinessWeek ran an article indicating that a transformation at Tupperware will take another Brownie Wise, the woman who inaugurated and ran the hostess parties. Maybe this will work. 

Tupperware has the opportunity to revitalize its brand-business. It will be a challenge. But, it can be achieved. However, in order to do so, the Tupperware brand-business will need to extricate itself from the trap of the tendencies for trouble.

whirlpool branding

Whirlpool And The Need For Ease Of Mind

/in /by

Whirlpool makes home appliances. A lot of these home appliances are “smart.” This means the appliances can be connected to your in-home WIFI and stream your behaviors and your appliances’ “health” back to Whirlpool. 

Unfortunately for Whirlpool, it appears that customers are not buying into this “relationship.” Customers have either disabled or not synced the connection. This worries Whirlpool. 

Whirlpool believes the disconnectedness is due to education. Clearly, customers do not understand how beneficial it is for Whirlpool to know what you are doing when you do the laundry. This is a manufacturer’s POV. It is always a problem when the brand believes customers care about your strategy.

As reflected in The Wall Street Journal, Whirlpool wants to reinforce customer bonds with the brand in a category that sees repurchase about every 12-15 years. Whirlpool believes that if the brand messages you with advice or recommends a new part be installed, you will be a customer for life and will consider other products and services from the brand. 

There is nothing wrong with this idea. It is good brand management. But, the connectedness that Whirlpool has created perhaps crosses the privacy line. The lack of “attachment” to the brand could be the uneasiness of knowing that you are being continuously monitored by your washing machine. Recent third-party research indicates that people do weigh the costs of loss of privacy relative to the benefits of being an open source of personal data.

Trust plays a role. People expect the brands with which they do business to be vigilant with personal information. Perhaps customers trust Whirlpool to do the laundry but do not trust Whirlpool with their in-home behavioral data. It is a possibility. People are willing to accept risks up to a point. Data show that only around 30% of consumers believe brands take personal data protection very seriously. Additionally, 58% of people fear they will be a victim of a data breach.

Further, even when people are willing to provide some personal data, they are less willing to do so when it involves their children. And, laundry involves children, albeit indirectly.

Whirlpool is asking their users to keep the channel of information open 24/7. This is like having a security camera from Walmart in one’s home. Except in this case, the data are not for safety purposes but are being sent to a brand that seemingly wants to use it for their own advantage. Consumers do not see the benefits of having this unwavering eye spying on them all the time. Not hooking up the system is the user saying, “You do not have my permission.”

But, there is possibly more to this story.

Part of what drives this disconnect is how we perceive ease. Ease is a multi-dimensional concept. Brands such as Whirlpool must deliver against all three dimensions of Ease: Ease of Choice, Ease of Use and Ease of Mind. 

Whirlpool may do well on Ease of Choice and Ease of Use, but its failure with 24/ machines is 7 monitoring may be due to overlooking the power of Ease of Mind. 

Ease of Choice

Choice should be easy. We want more choice, and more personalization. But, we want choosing to be simple. Making a choice should be easy. It should require a minimum effort, and not take a lot of time. We do not want to spend a lot of time on a choice that should not take huge amount of energy to make.  In other words, we do not want increased mental and physical effort.

To understand the quandary of choice, stand in front of the snack food aisle at the supermarket. Unless you already know your favorite brand, size of package and variety, you will probably become overcome and dazed.  There are potato chips, corn tortilla chips in blue, red yellow or white corn, cheese snacks in puffs, twists, baked or fried, and pretzel sticks, nuggets, twists (tiny or large, cheese or peanut butter filled) along with the chickpea, soy, lentil, gluten-free and black bean chips. There is popcorn – kernels or already popped – in a variety of salts and flavors next to nuts, also in a multitude of flavors. 

Forget trying to make a quick confident choice in the pet food aisle. For cats and dogs, it used to be just wet or dry, bagged or canned. But, now you can purchase food in pouches, fresh food in the chill-case, food by age of pet, breed of pet, size of pet, health of pet, weight of pet, bad breath of pet, mental health of pet and combinations of these ingredients.  There are snacks for pets, fried, soft or filled.

As for appliances, washing machines have differing and multiple menus of cycles, fabric care, water temperatures, times or sensors. How does one choose what is best? We all wish to make the best purchase decision. Too many options can lead to making a satisfactory decision over making the best decision.

Ease of Use

We want to live in a user-manual-free world. Service options should not require a lot of explanation. Once we easily choose, use of the product or service should be easy. People have enough happening in their lives: they do not need to waste precious time and energy on learning how to use or navigate a product or service. It is the role of the provider to take the complexity out of choice as well as the use. Further, overly complicated products and services cause us to feel inept or inadequate, and, sometimes, cause us to feel stupid.

Something as simple as a washing machine can cause a user to feel unintelligent.  The rinse-soak-wash choices require too much thinking. There are multiple temperature options. The options for the wash cycle do not match my natural language.  In attempting to provide rinse-soak-wash options for all sorts of fabrics and levels of dirt, the washing machine beomes too complicated. The more complicated, the more stupid the user feels. Why am I having trouble with this? Yet, with fewer options, the user believes the machine is not doing a good job. The question became, “Is it better to have multiple options or a simple one-button machine?” 

Ease of Mind

It is not enough to be easy to choose and easy to use. People want to feel comfortable with their decision.  They want to feel reassured that they made the right choice. “Am I comfortable with the decision? Now that I am using this product or service, am I satisfied with the choice?” Am I doing the right thing for me? Am I doing the right thing for my family? Am I doing the right thing for my pet? Am I doing the right thing for the community? Am I doing the right thing for future generations? 

People want to feel right about their decisions rather than feel regret. And, people want to know that the brands and organizations with which they do business are doing the right thing. Are employees treated properly? Is the company a good global citizen? Is the brand or the company a decent contributor to my communities? Are the brand and corporate leaders making ethical decisions?

As for the connectedness of the appliance, people question whether the brand has their best interests in mind. Is the brand-business managing my information with care? Do I trust this brand as a data manager of my personal life? How are my data used? Do I approve of how my data are used? Does the brand use my data for my personal advantage or to theirs?

Not understanding and implementing against Ease of Mind is brand-business mismanagement. Research indicates that people believe brand-businesses will take advantage of the public if the brand-business believes is unlikely to be found out.

Whirlpool is not alone is its problems with consumers and connections to smart machines. LG faces a similar problem. As The Wall Street Journal points out, Whirlpool and others continue to seek “new lines of revenue” due to weakening demand. Users may not be comfortable with the brand’s revenue desires coming from perpetual peeping. Statements such as “We want to continue to leverage the technology in the product,” do not help users feel comfortable about the day-in-day-out monitoring of their behaviors.

Looking at this issue from the manufacturer’s perspective will only exacerbate the issue.  The manufacturers think this is all about educating users. Sure, users need to know the benefits of this behavior monitoring. But, manufacturers also need to do some soul-searching. 

Brands must understand the emotional and social ramifications that can violate the user’s ease of mind. Gaining permission depends on users feeling that the data collection is justifiable. Unless the user feels comfortable and implicitly trusts the brand, there will be no further “leveraging of the technology.” 

Success with the customer is not like a horse race. There is no prize for being second or third. Brands must win on all three dimensions of ease. when it comes to the three dimensions of ease, brands must win, place and show. Not marketing against all three dimensions of ease is perilous for brands.

The Phoenix Brand: Toys “R” Us

/in /by

Guess what? The iconic world of Geoffrey the Giraffe, Toys “R” Us, is back. 

Toys “R” Us is a Phoenix Brand. 

A Phoenix Brand is a brand that has been burned to death yet attains new life and rises the next day. The mythology around the Phoenix is that it is a symbol of renewal. 

If any brand in the last ten years deserves the Phoenix Brand label it is Toys “R” Us. Toys “R” Us’ rising from the flames with renewed life supports the principle that brands can live forever if properly managed. And, now that Toys “R” Us is in the capable hands of a brand-focused firm, your toy shopping just became easier and more delightful.

It is an extraordinary turn-about. Five years ago, the Toys “R” Us brand was in a conflagration.

In 2017, an extraordinary debt load of $5 billion pushed the storied brand into Chapter 11. Reports are that 33,000 people lost their jobs. The 2017 bankruptcy filing set off a months-long effort to restructure the company in bankruptcy court. But, sadly Toys “R” Us liquidated. 

To make matters worse, creditors brought a lawsuit against Toys “R” Us executives claiming that the executives misled their suppliers about Toys “R” Us’ dire financial condition while the company tried to stay afloat in bankruptcy. Then, executives left these suppliers with more than $600 million of invoices. Furthermore, the creditors allege that millions of dollars of bonuses were dished out to 117 Toys “R” Us executives and managers just prior to the company’s 2017 bankruptcy. The suppliers allege that this was a breach of the former executives’ fiduciary duty. Former Chief Executive Officer David Brandon received the largest bonus totaling $2.8 million. The trial of the former executives is slated to begin now in 2022 after several years of legal wrangling.

The bankruptcy judge’s opinion supported Toys “R” Us creditors because sufficient questions surrounding the payment of executive retention bonuses and advisory fees to the company’s equity sponsors – including Bain Capital, KKR & Co. and Vornado Realty Trust – do appear to require the legal proceedings to continue.  The bankruptcy judge said:

“The evidence submitted by the trust, if proven, is sufficient to establish a prima facie case that the defendants violated their duties of loyalty and good faith in addition to their duty of care,” Judge Phillips wrote in his opinion, referring to the retention bonuses paid to 117 Toys “R” Us executives before the bankruptcy filing.

“Payment of the advisory fees was not endorsed by court order, as the payments were made prior to the bankruptcy filings. The evidence offered by the trust supports a finding that the defendants were not constrained by their contractual obligations to the sponsors and had other options available.”

From the ashes of this ugly situation, the Toys “R” Us brand is currently in revitalization mode. And, in a very clever manner.

The brand’s owner, WHP Global, partnered with Macy’s, another iconic retail brand, allowing Toys “R” Us to place Toys “R” Us shops inside all of Macy’s stores. Press reports indicate that by mid-October 2022, Toys “R” Us will open shops in all of Macy’s stores. When Toys “R” Us closed its stores, Walmart, Target and Amazon saw and leveraged the opportunities. Now, Macy’s sees an opportunity to sell toys increasing traffic and loyalty while Toys “R” Us sees the opportunity to rebuild its brand back to enduring profitable growth.

What both Macy’s and Toys “R” Us are implementing is a Combination Branding strategy; more specifically, a component brand approach to Combination Branding. With the component approach to Combination Branding, both brands maintain their own source of their promises. Combination Branding using a component brand approach is “a brand within a brand” not a brand with a brand. The latter would be a co-brand approach where the two brands share the identification of the source of the promise.

For Macy’s, having an iconic, beloved toy shop brand inside its stores provides the ability to compete for holiday shoppers and year-round shoppers in a retail environment currently led by Amazon for online purchases and by Target and Walmart for brick-and-mortar purchases. Toys “R” Us offers Macy’s (as the host brand) and Macy’s customers an additional benefit of a glorious, enchanting world of quality toys and toy shopping. 

For Toys “R’ Us, the partnership provides instant brick-and-mortar facilities, a reliable stream of shoppers and the ability to reinforce its brand with old and new customers. The benefits of Toys “R” Us do not replace Macy’s benefits; Toys “R” Us just enhances Macy’s with a new benefit. Toys “R’ Us does not delegate its brand management to Macy’s and Macy’s does not delegate its brand management to Toys “R” Us.

The chief merchandising officer of Macy’s told investors, “Macy’s cannot wait to bring the Toys “R” Us experience to life in our stores. We hope Toys “R” Us kids of all ages discover the joy of exploration and play within our shops and families create special memories together. The customer response to our partnership with Toys “R” Us has been incredible and our toy business has seen tremendous growth.”

Since Macy’s has been selling Toys “R” Us toys online and with the cascading in-store Toys “R” Us shops, Macy’s CEO, Jeff Gennette, said during its second-quarter conference call that first-quarter toy sales were 15 times higher than the comparable period prior to the Toys “R” Us partnership.

As for Toys “R” Us, the CEO and chairman of WHP Global, told CNBC, “We’re in the brand business and Toys “R” Us is the single most credible, trusted and beloved toy brand in the world. We’re coming off a year where toys are just on fire. And, for Toys “R” Us, the US is really a blank canvas.”

If all goes according to plan, this partnership should be a boon to both Macy’s and Toys “R” Us. Press reporting indicates that brands such as Hasbro are already stocking up inventory to avoid any supply chain issues this holiday season. Hasbro’s CFO confirmed that Hasbro is “well positioned” this year when it comes to inventory. Very good news for Macy’s and Toys “R” Us.

A component brand approach is gaining strength with retailers due to the pandemic. It does not always work out, however. J.C. Penney had a partnership with beauty brand Sephora. But, that relationship is ending to be replaced by J.C. Penney Beauty, an offering with more “mass” brands.

What is clear is that Toys “R” Us is alive and well and focused on rebuilding itself after years of fire and brimstone. Its partnership with Macy’s has a lot of brand potential. And, finally, the Toys “R” Us brand is being properly managed. Toys “R” Us is a story about a brand that is renewing itself. Toys “R” Us is today’s Phoenix Brand.

Larry Light: Brand Insights on Pandemic Impacts & More

/in , /by

Take These Actions Now Or Lose Your New Customers Post-Pandemic

Packaged goods food companies are performing beyond expectations. Will this sales lift last into the future? For enduring profitable growth, brands must not only build their quantity of sales but the quality of their sales. Here are four actions to help the fortunate sales lift endure post-pandemic.

Personalization Will Change Your Car Dealership Experience Forever

Hyper-personalizing the car purchase experience will be a path to auto dealer success. Personalization is about making the customer feel special. Hyper-personalization is focusing on an audience of one for each and every customer, each and every day.

Harley-Davidson: Adore Your Core

A turnaround strategy is different from a growth strategy. When a brand is in trouble, the priority is to stop the hemorrhaging of the customer base. CEO, Jochen Zeitz is making a radical strategic shift to put Harley-Davidson back on the road to enduring profitable growth.

Coronavirus Spurs Brand Innovation

As a result of the Covid crisis, there are a lot of innovative ideas being tested in the restaurant industry to keep businesses alive. For example, many restaurant brands now provide meal boxes that offer more than just meals – they are cooking lessons.

Guitar, Pet, Bicycle: Our Need For Therapeutic Experiences

Home-based therapy experiences that help us feel better are the new normal. Loving a pet overcomes loneliness, which has been exacerbated by being stuck at home, away from friends and sometimes away from family. Financial Times calls this feeling “lockdown loneliness.”

Environmental Decency Makes Money

Sustainable leadership and business practices influence customers’ brand decisions. In today’s environment, data show that environmental decency “significantly impacts” brand preference and purchase.

Old Is New, Denied Distinctiveness & More: The Latest from Larry Light’s Forbes.com Column

/in , /by

Larry Light sheds light on interesting marketing and branding news in his Forbes column on a weekly basis. Below is a roundup of some of his latest insights. Read them now!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrylight/2020/08/31/old-is-new-erewhon-the-whole-earth-catalog-loop-and-blueland/#1a13769571e9″ target=”_blank”>Old Is New: Erewhon, The Whole Earth Catalog, Loop And Blueland

In 1966, a year before the Summer of Love and two years before the original Woodstock, two gurus of the macrobiotic lifestyle, followers of the great George Ohsawa, opened a health food store called Erewhon. Erewhon is meant the title to be understood as the word “nowhere” backward even though the letters “h” and “w” are transposed. It came from the Samuel Butler book about a utopia. One of the fictional Erewhon’s tenets was that everyone was responsible for their own health and wellbeing.

Read more.

Land Rover And The Case Of Defender’s Denied Distinctiveness

In January of 2016, after 67 years, Jaguar Land Rover (JLR), owned by Indian company Tata, ended production of the iconic and beloved Land Rover Defender four-wheel drive vehicle. The first Defender, aka Land Rover Series, began sales in 1949 post-war Britain. The intended use was for agricultural purposes. The design was similar to the WWII Willy’s Jeep (manufactured by Willys-Overland Motors). Over the course of its 67-year history, Land Rover Series and Defender vehicles reportedly sold just over two million vehicles. As a point of interest, at its 1949 debut, the Land Rover Series was the first four-wheel drive, mass-produced civilian car with doors.

Read more.

Home Depot, Alexa And The Paradox Of Do-It-Yourself

In a world of meal-kits, parking assist vehicles, wearable heart monitors, voice-recognition devices, connected homes, networked transportation services, farmers’ markets, delivery of practically everything, Bluetooth, and Task Rabbit employees who assemble your IKEA purchases, what does “do-it-yourself” mean?

Read more.

Nextdoor, Brands And The Need For Neighborhood

Neighborhood is more than a geographic descriptor. Neighborhood is a mindset… an amalgam of attitudes and behaviors. Whether it is Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood, or the Cheers bar neighborhood is a powerful force. Financial Times once described a New York City, Upper Westside neighborhood toy store that had lasted beyond the demise of KB toys, FAO Schwartz, and Toys R’ Us. The store lasted because their neighbors owned the store and their neighbors worked in the store.

Read more.

SpaceX, The Pursuit Of Quality And The Law Of The Diagonal

Elon Musk’s SpaceX company was founded in 2002 to revolutionize space transportation, with the ultimate goal of “making humanity multi-planetary.” SpaceX designs, manufactures, and launches the world’s most advanced rockets and spacecraft.

Read more.

Larry Light Dials In On Domino’s Success in 2020

/in , /by

In Larry’s latest piece in Forbes, Domino’s Six ‘Can-Do’ Actions Lead To Increased Sales, he lays out the 6 critical actions to Domino’s 2020 success.

Read his latest thoughts now, here.

Larry Light’s Forbes.com Column Roundup

/in , /by

Larry Light’s latest pieces in Forbes have collectively been read by over 54,780 readers. They cover an array of marketing topics including the impacts of Covid-19, Ease of Choice, and more.

See his latest headlines below.

Macy’s And The 100th Anniversary Of The 19th Amendment

At this 100-year anniversary for women’s right to vote, we should be respecting brands that stood up for women, especially working women Macy’s is one of those brands.

Six Rules To Plan Now For The Post-Coronavirus World

When the economy starts up post-coronavirus, many brands will need to be reenergized. How to plan now for post-coronavirus revitalization?

What’s Next For The Whole Foods Market Brand?

Amazon is focused on building Whole Foods Market into a trusted source for organic, healthful, eco-conscious, ethically-sourced offerings with a reputation for quality, leadership, and trust. The singular desire is to build loyalty to Whole Foods Market rather than sharing it with the “365” brand.

In This Complicated Uncertain World Ease Of Choice Wins

Right now, why add more uncertainty to our lives by selecting an unknown or new brand? This is not a time for new brands. It is a good time to build on the strength of brand familiarity and trust.

After The Quarantines, We May All Sell And Buy Used Cars The Carvana Way

Carvana is turning the used car business on its head and in doing so has the potential to utterly change the way car dealers do business. As with Uber, Tesla, Airbnb, Amazon that forced established brands to change, Carvana is causing a sea change in one of the most ubiquitous industries in the US.

To Innovate and Generate Market-Winning Brands, Change The Culture

/in , /by

In his latest piece in Forbes, Arcature CEO Larry Light explains why brands must adopt Internal Marketing to create and reinforce a cultural commitment to the new direction. 

Read his latest piece now for some valuable insight and practical tips: The Do’s And Don’ts Of Mindset Change

You can follow Larry Light on Twitter here: @CEOLarryLight


––––––

Photo Credit: pjs2005 from Hampshire, UK

Advertising, Brand Impact And More In Larry Light’s Forbes Column

/in , /by

In Larry Light’s recent Forbes pieces, he takes on the marketing mindset that ignores the true brand impact of advertising as well as the laziness of today’s ad creation.

Marketers Ignore True Brand Impact At Their Peril

Marketers are confusing “clicks and listens” to buying. Marketers seek reliable data on how many people have viewed or heard particular advertising messages. The “view/hear mindset” is captivating for marketers. Clicks feed egos. [Read This Piece]

Lazy Advertising Thinking Is A Deadly Sin

Enterprises that own multiple brands have the opportunity to reach different customers with the same needs and the same customers with different needs over all the stages of their lives. Each of the brands in a brand portfolio has a relevant, differentiated promised experience that receives added trust and authority from the corporate parent. [Read This Piece]

See Larry’s Forbes Column here and follow him on Twitter here.