Lesson 1 in advertising: where does it go wrong?
It was once referred to as "the Even Apeldoorn Calling effect": fantastic commercials that advertise the competitor, or at best the category. Because not from the beginning, but only at the end, it was made clear who the sender was. In this case, Centraal Beheer.
For decades, several reputable studies have shown that it is necessary to make it clear early, and then frequently, in a commercial what brand it is about. It's all about recognizability. This is lesson 1 in advertising, I recall from a SWOCC meeting. And yet it often doesn't happen.
"We learn from history, that we learn nothing from history ....., and not even that!" (Justus van Oel; sometime)
You still see a commercial in every commercial break that flouts this rule. But that rule is there for a reason. It is for the world of advertising. For the world of advertising, not against it!
"Wait a minute," it is now up to the advertising world, "is a researcher, by the way, going to lecture us here? Surely, as a researcher, you also know that a commercial has to touch emotionally and that you have to put a message in it?" Advertising is more than airtime for your logo; totally agree.
It's all about the combination. But remember: a beautiful commercial that touches emotionally, even stays with you and conveys a message is important, but if it is not recognized as yours, and yours alone, it is still literally worthless. Recognizability is crucial, a prerequisite.
So yes, by all means keep making beautiful, surprising and engaging commercials, but don't forget to be recognizable. And the good news is: showing a brand immediately and frequently does not adversely affect how appealing consumers find a commercial. Just read the book Building Distinctive Brand Assets, by Jenni Romaniuk. Several studies show that.
Objection! So why did Centraal Beheer flout that all-important lesson 1, why did they continue with it, why are they successful with it? They must have been confronted with it often enough, including by researchers. Well, what about that?
Good point. Here's the thing: recognition benefits from consistency. So with patience, and especially budget, you can create a new element of recognition. At one point, the storyline of the Even Apeldoorn Bellen advertisement became so iconic that it became a distinctive brand asset (DBA) in itself. The same kind of realization is behind OHRA's recent reintroduction of the purple crocodile.
If you are dealing with less patience (call it vision) and budget, then it is still advisable to show the brand quickly and regularly.
Where it goes wrong? The lack of patience and vision. Perhaps prompted by the turnover rate of marketing and brand management. But also: the lack of knowledge of the laws of marketing. And also: the fear of research.
Granted, bad and seed-killing research happens too. But how simple and useful is it to know what are those landmarks of a brand. Do you always have to mention the name? Or can you get by with a logo, a storyline, a color, a jingle, a spokesperson, etc.... How great would it be to know how strong your brand assets are? From €1K per asset, you know. How nice it would be if you could do a good pre-test overnight! From € 1K you know. I will not mention a name here, only a color: Blauw.
Featured
expertise(s)
Branding & Communication
Good branding and communication is essential to be successful as a brand. To stay future-proof, we examine your brand, its position and your communications.
