I have been searching for Millennial marketing cases to feature on the Millennial Marketing wikispace. They are not easy to come by.
Several of my Gen-Y focused Twitter buddies assure me that these cases exist and that there actually quite a lot of attention being paid to Millennials by marketers (more on this in a moment). But it’s difficult to point to much of substance in the literature.
As a professor who also practices marketing, I emphasize real world cases when teaching.
In my undergrad class, we study the timeless Principles of Marketing , but my goal is to have students see those principles at work in the marketplace. I use a very recently published text (MKTG3 by Cengage) that offers current cases, via print and video. It features companies like Kodak, Method, Sephora, Red Lobster, Apple’s Garage Band and more. A case analysis is required prior to most classes. Four entire class sessions this semester are devoted to student reports of ‘environmental scans’ – articles analyzed in terms of marketers’ decisions to change the marketing mix in response to changes in the marketing environment.
My MBA class also features cases and the class maintains a blog to discuss current marketing events. The final project required students to create a brand strategy for The HomeMade Pizza Co.
The strategy behind using cases is more than just temporal relevance. Cases are the foundation of marketing knowledge.
Marketing borrows heavily from other academic disciplines. While I might get some pushback from my colleagues on this, in my opinion, there is little in marketing theory that is original to marketing. It draws on Sociology (Diffusion of Innovation) Anthropology (culture & meaning), Psychology (Maslow’s Hierarchy, Laddering), Economics (Price elasticity, Product Life Cycle), Biology (Diffusion of Innovation), even Theology (Word of Mouth marketing & evangelism).
If newspapers are the first draft of history, then Ad Age, Brand Week, the Wall Street Journal and Business Week are the first drafts of marketing text books.
Marketing successes today are standard marketing practice tomorrow. Consumer needs change, market research offers new techniques for understanding those needs and marketers have different options and challenges for addressing their audience. That’s why everyone is watches innovators like BMWFilms, Pepsi Refresh Everything, and even the Burger King Subservient Chicken campaigns. (All of these have been topics of discussion for my classes at some point.)
It concerns me that marketers are not sharing their knowledge. The blogosphere is alive with advice on how to leverage social media, the importance of cause marketing, and more. But with few exceptions (such as Ford Fiesta) there is little hard case evidence to back it up. Despite diligent searching for nearly two years, I have just a dozen cases (with results) featured on the Millennial Marketing Cases page of our wikispace. (Please send me links to others if you have them!)
Of course I understand the concept of corporate secrets and I am not advocating that companies lose their competitive edge by revealing all they know. Scott Hess of youth market research company, Tru Insights, responded to my Twitter plea with this series of comments: (read from bottom up)
Hess makes some great points. But the case for sharing is equally strong. The rules for marketing to Millennials are still being written. Until marketers are willing to share what they know, it will be hard to generalize about the principles.
Comments below are all from @ScottHess of Tru-Insight Research, which focuses on “tweens, teens and twenty-something research”. What do you think?
Has the world finally woken up to Millennials?
Judging by the media attention focused on Gen Y yesterday, it seems we may finally have arrived at the tipping point. On Feb 24 alone, there were articles and segments that appeared around the country, sparked by the new Pew Report on Millennials:
Chicago Tribune: “Millennials Dubbed ‘Always Connected’ in Pew Report”
Washington Post: “Under 30 Americans: The Next New Dealers?”
Washington Post: “Story Lab: Quiz: How Millennial Are You?”
PBS News Hour: “Demographic Profile of a Generation”
Christian Science Monitor: “Great Recession Hits Millennials Hardest”
Huffington Post: “Our Generation: More Confident, Less Employed”
A quick Google search returned 56 ‘related articles’ for a search on “Pew Millennials“. I certainly welcome the attention on this remarkable demographic group, and I applaud Pew for its indepth coverage. But where are the marketing articles? The Pew data so far is mostly attended to by social scientists, political scientists, journalists and academics.
The marketing world, aside from youth-focused marketing firms, as yet are still fairly tone deaf about the coming shifts.
If you are interested in understanding how more mainstream marketers are reaching out successfully to Millennials, you have to dig a little deeper. MobileYouth’s profile of Ten Brands that connect with Gen Y is a good start for profiles of Ford Fiesta, Monster Energy drink and others. But once you get beyond these high profile stories the cases get a little harder to come by. Here are three less publicized, inspiring exceptions:
Houlihan’s: (Fast Company, March 1, 2010)
“Last summer, it created its own social-networking site, HQ, an invite-only “brand community” of 10,500 “Houlifans” to serve as a virtual comment card. Customers appended that a-little-too-cute prefix to all things Houli-, and they’ve helped the formerly stodgy Irish pub rebrand itself as a contemporary suburban lounge-style hangout.”
StarkSilverCreek Web Publication: (PR Web, February 17, 2010)
All Things West Coast, the company’s flagship brand, is one of the fastest growing digital media properties. Readers value inspired and thoughtful coverage of the west coast including arts (film, stage), wine country, travel, and technology. Alexa Internet, Inc. ranks starksilvercreek.com 93,401 in the US and 285,000 globally. According to Quantcast, readers are affluent (28% earn $100K+), highly educated (67% college/grad school). Generation X and Y (Millennials) account for 68% of visitors.
Herbal Essence: (Business Week, July 2008)
“The shampoo and conditioner bottles are curved so that they literally fit together on the shelf. The nesting shape not only helped Herbal Essences stand out from others on the shelf but also encouraged more young women to buy both products, driving up conditioner sales. To appeal to Millennials, the team also updated the language on the packaging. The ho-hum “dandruff” reference gave way to “no flaking away.” Names for different hair styles were changed to more youthful phrases such as “totally twisted” or “drama clean.” “We totally reframed the proposition,” says Lafley. ….soon after the shampoo was relaunched the brand was growing again, with sales growth rates in the high single digits.”
A lot is known now about how to build a more appealing brand that connects more directly with Millennials. It requires a different approach, because as anyone who reads this blog or the Pew Report knows, it’s a different kind of audience. Getting results like these requires a more collaborative approach to research and a more engaging approach to marketing.
Marketers will be wise to begin now. The rewards for early movers in categories like banking, wine, leisure travel, retailing, and media will be great, both in immediate sales lifts (like Houlihans) as well as in better positioning for future consumers. Gen Y trends have a way of migrating up the generations.
Soon it will be more than just the wine industry that is experiencing ‘classic market disruption’, it will be most industries as this 75-million strong demographic recovers from the Recession, and gets about the business of creating homes and careers. Will your brand be ready?
Meanwhile, we are launching a new page on our MillennialMarketing.wikispaces.com wiki to aggregate successful Gen Y marketing case studies. Check it out and feel free to contribute your stories.
I follow quite a few members of Gen Y in social media. It’s surprising to me how little, with a few exceptions like American University student, Chris Golden, they talk about politics.
Of the big three, Sex and Religion get more digital ink than Politics. While Millennials are hailed as possibly the next ‘civic generation’, their engagement seems to be more with making a difference through social causes than via political action.
Two new studies each purport to know where Gen Y’s partisan sympathies lie at this moment in our political history. To my surprise, the results appear to be diametrically opposed.
The first study, by the ever-reliable Pew Research Center, shows support for the Democrats among Millennials took a nosedive in 2009 following the outpouring of support for Obama in ’08.
“The Democratic advantage over the Republicans in party affiliation among young voters, including those who “lean” to a party, reached a whopping 62% to 30% margin in 2008. But by the end of 2009 this 32-point margin had shrunk to just 14 points: 54% Democrat, 40% Republican.”
A quick look at the Pew chart above shows that the ‘shift’ is actually a return to the baseline level of 37% Republican/53% Democrat for Gen Y that was seen in 2007. This ‘bounce’ suggests that the Obama campaign represented an anomaly in Millennial’s political sentiments, not a fundamental shift in affiliation. According to Pew, the weakening may have a lot to do with diminished support for Obama and his policies among Millennials, similar to the waning seen for the general population.
“Obama’s job approval rating slipped substantially over the past year among Millennials as well as among older age groups. … in February 2009, 73% of Millennials approved of Obama’s job performance — the highest percentage in any age group. One year later, in February 2010, just 57% of Millennials give Obama a positive rating.”
The second study by Frank Magid and Associates, which provided much of the data underlying Winograd and Hais’s book, Millennial Makeover, shows Gen Y’s Democrat leaning solidifying in 2009.
“In 2008, Millennials voted more than 2:1 for Obama over McCain (66% vs. 32%) and by roughly the same percentage (63% vs. 34%) for Democratic congressional candidates. Magid’s 2010 data shows this same level of Democratic identification persisting among Millennials who are attending college. Twice as many college students call themselves Democrats as Republicans (47% vs. 24%). Only 15% are independents, with a similar percentage unwilling to identify with any of those three choices.
The key difference here may be the words “Millennials who are attending college”. Indeed, if this is the case and student affiliation is stable, it suggests an even greater decline for the Dem’s among non-college educated Millennials.
While the two studies do not appear to agree on political party affiliation, they do agree on liberal-conservative self-identification.
According to Pew, ideologically, 29 percent of Millennials describe themselves as liberals, 28 percent say they are conservatives and 40 percent identify themselves as moderates.
Similar numbers are reported by Winograd and Hais in the Huffington Post for the Frank Magid study: 31 percent of college students 18 and older call themselves liberals or progressives, 20 percent say they are conservative and 30 percent describe their political philosophy as moderate, while “20% haven’t learned enough in college yet to say just what their ideological orientation is.”
What this tells me is that both parties have some work to do.
The Republicans have an opportunity perhaps to win over some of the moderates and undecided’s, or at least give them pause about voting Democrat in the mid-terms. The Democrats need to recapture their appeal by reinvigorating their party with some of the faded glow of the Obama victory. The stakes are high. As Morley and Winograd wrote in their excellent 2007 book, Millennial Makeover, political affiliations tend to persist well beyond young adult years.
“Political behavior resarch has consistently indicated that once most individual, and hence most generations, take on a party identification, they maintain it throughout their lives. As sociologist J.V. Namenorth noted, “Value orientations do not change much during a generation’s life time. Committed during its early stages a generation most often carried its value commitments into the grave”. If the Democrats can maintain this initial generational allegiance during the next two presidential elections, they should gain a decisive electoral edge for decades to come.”
For both groups, the bigger issue is that partisan politics is simply not the biggest issue in the lives of Millennials, at least right now. They are preoccupied today with understanding what their place will be in this changed world, not which party offers the most ‘hope’ for change.
I recently finished reading Elizabeth Gilbert’s best selling book, Eat Pray Love. The book chronicles Gilbert’s literal and figurative spiritual journey toward a deeper relationship with God, but never actually reveals which if any religion speaks to her yearning. Gilbert, a Gen X’er, seems to have a lot in common with Gen Y.
New data released this week from Pew Research on Millennials and religion quoted in USA Today, Denver Post and elsewhere, says one in four Millennials (25%) do not identify with any one faith, instead describing their religion as “atheist,” “agnostic” or “nothing in particular.” This level of non-affiliation is much than was seen for other generations at the same age.
At the same time, the Pew study reveals that spirituality among young adults is undiminished. “Members of today’s Millennial generation, ages 18 to 29, are as likely to pray and believe in God as their elders were when they were young.” This leads them to conclude in their headline: “Young Adults ‘Less Religious,’ Not Necessarily ‘More Secular‘.”
There is other evidence to support the conclusion that the issue is more one of lack of affiliation than a lack of faith in God. A survey of Millennials reported in New Yorker magazine last year found that 43% of Gen Y believes they are ‘as religious’ or ‘more religious’ than their parents. A Marist Institute poll shows over three in ten Millennials define their primary long-term life goal in religious terms (“To be spiritual and close to God”). That figure was higher than for any other age group.
What makes this lack of affiliation especially intriguing to me is that in many other areas of their lives, Millennials are inclined to go along with their parents’ choices.
Within the 25% who are unaffiliated, nearly three quarters were raised in a religious faith tradition and dropped away. This makes faith the outlier as far as decisions that break with their parents. Recall that this is the first generation that as a rule likes their parents and even thinks of their parents as their ‘best friend’.
- 86% say they share their parents political views.
- Every single student in my Principles of Marketing class raised their hand last week when I asked who banks where their parents bank.
- According to an AARP survey, 41% of Millennials with cars drive the same brand of car their parents drive or have driven.
- The American Savings Council found 71% of Gen X’ers and Gen Y’ers turn to their parents for financial advice.
So why make the break here, over something as important as faith?
I think has to do with the strength of the Millennial subculture and its strong, shared ethical values than a fundamental change in their belief in God.
The Gen Y subculture is astonishingly ethical, both in values and in practice. ’Bad behavior’ on a variety of social dimensions from pregnancy to crime to drugs are all down among young adults. Socially, Millennials prize tolerance as a result of their inherent diversity. They are significantly more socially liberal than their parents on issues of marriage, abortion, interracial dating. Millennials are less inclined to believe that church affiliation is necessary to be a ‘good person’. According to a Marist Institute poll, 56% have donated money to a charity in the past six months and 67% have volunteered their time.
I’ll go out on a limb here and speculate that some of the lack of affiliation is due to a desire for ‘authenticity.’ The Gen Y subculture is unusually sensitive to phoniness. It’s unlikely they will go through the motions of attending church just because it is ‘the thing to do’ if they have questions about their own sincerity.
In the final analysis, reaching Millennials and getting them to re-affiliate with any one ‘religion’ may be unrealistic as a ‘marketing objective’.
Gen Y is accustomed to choices, and there is some evidence they may feel confined by a denominational label. In December I noted that Millennials are ‘auditioning’ faiths the same way they would look for a college, a spouse or other major decision (“For Millennials Belief Is A Choice“). This represents a huge generational shift and as with so many other Gen Y trends, may start to migrate into the thinking of other age groups. The Pew research shows that like Millennials, most Americans are embracing ‘multiple faiths’, with beliefs that do not ‘ fit conventional categories’.
It would be hard to find three more different brands in three more diverse categories than Google, Under Armour and Trader Joe’s. Yet each appeals strongly to Gen Y.
Google: According to blogger, Sam McRoberts, aka Samantics, Google is the ‘Millennial deity’. “While search engines in general have had a major impact, Google is very nearly the deity of Gen Y. They are dedicated to providing as much information and tools as possible, absolutely free. Sure, they charge for some things, but they have done more to bring down the cost of music, news, movies, games, and data in general than any other company.”
Under Armour: Under Armour is the brand my students pick most consistently for their semester marketing projects. According to Gen Y blogger, Greg Rollett, “those that play (or played) high school sports, or college for that matter, know that the majority of players choose Under Armour as their performance wear.”
Trader Joe’s: Trader Joe’s was one of the 15 brands named by Outlaw Consulting’s trendsetter panel as being loved precisely because they do not fit the conventions of being hip. Like Napoleon Dynamite, it is an unapologetically “dorky alternative to cool”. Other brands that fit this description? In N’ Out Burger and Jet Blue.
What makes their appeal even more remarkable is that they have accomplished it by rejecting the usual trappings of big brand marketing.
None of these big brands has a significant advertising presence. All of them are famous for not behaving like, well, a ‘big brand’. What characteristics do these three brands share that can help marketers understand what gives a brand “Millennial Appeal”?
For starters, there are qualities all three are not!
- They are not known for their overt sexiness. Is there anything less sexy than a search engine, a Hawaiian shirt or a hoodie?
- They are not known for Apple-like bleeding edge design. Trader Joe’s signs and web site have a homely, handmade appearance. Google’s simple home page has been more or less the same since day one.
- They do not have an irreverent attitude. None of these brands are known for their youthful sass.
In each case the foundation of the appeal lies more in who they are, and how they deliver value rather than what they do or their clever youthful take on marketing. Here are three qualities they all share:
1. They Are All ‘Trailblazers’.
All three brands creatively tried to do something that had not been done before. And each continues to go its own way, with little acknowledgement that they even have competition. They are originals, with a one of a kind identity. Millennials resonate with this go-your-own-way individualism. They do not feel a need to respect tradition. Here’s Sam McRoberts again:
“We detest mindless tradition. If you want us to do something, you better have a very good reason, not to mention the good sense to get out of our way and let us innovate and improve the process…”just because” doesn’t work for us, and neither does inefficiency.We epitomize creativity.”
2. They All Exhibit a Low Key Style of Marketing
Google just ran its first television commercial in the 2010 Super Bowl. Until now, it has relied almost entirely on word of mouth to support its consumer-facing and largely free services.
Likewise Trader Joe’s does little advertising and sells nothing online. It’s web site is purely informational.
Under Armour relies heavily on product placement for publicity. Despite its presence on the athletic apparel at the Olympics, it is not running Olympics-themed advertising.
The absence of overt marketing serves to heighten credibility with Gen Y. According to Outlaw’s Strategic Analyst, Holly Brickley,“Generation Y trendsetters are more drawn to brands that speak to them in a straightforward and stripped-down way, use plain packaging, and avoid excess,and stripped-down way, use plain packaging, and avoid excess.” Not shouting their message allows Gen Y to feel as if they discovered the brand on their own, enhancing their sense of ‘ownership’. Discovery is a key part of the appeal of each of these brands.
3. They All Have Strong Gen Y ‘Lifestyle Relevance’
While each brand has a pedestrian side (sports apparel, non-branded groceries, search engine), each transcends its category and has come to symbolize a way of life and a system of values that resonates with Millennials. These brands’ values are strongly aligned with Millennial values of simplicity and appreciation for the ‘non-corporate’.
Google famously strives to ‘do no evil’. Its services make life easier and more efficient, a core Gen Y value. What’s more, Google provides its services free of charge.
Trader Joe’s web site talks about itself as ‘your neighborhood grocery store. It emphasizes that its products are ‘unbranded’, ‘unconventional’ and ‘a shopping adventure’. It has a designated person in every store to handle charitable donations.
“At Trader Joe’s, you won’t find a lot of branded items. Instead, you’ll find unconventional and interesting products in the Trader Joe’s label as well as everyday basics. We buy products we think are winners and that’ll find a following among our customers. Sometimes it’s a product we intend to stock as long as it sells well; and sometimes we buy a product which is in limited supply, sell through it, and you won’t find it again. It’s all part of the shopping adventure at Trader Joe’s.”
Under Armour relied on the authenticity of real players wearing its products from its earliest days. According to Business Week, Kevin Plank, UA’s young founder spent four years tireless pitching his product to college and NFL teams.
“We convinced these big tough football players to start wearing tight-fitting synthetic shirts, which was completely new and different,” he says. In addition to stars such as Jeff George, Jerry Rice, and Plank’s Maryland teammate Frank Wycheck, big names in other sports, such as pitcher Roger Clemens, became Under Armour fans. The pros’ acceptance brings Under Armour an authenticity that advertising alone can’t create.”
Other brands with similar bases for appeal among Millennials include Zappos, Jet Blue, In N’ Out Burger, Red Bull, Target, Vitamin Water, and more. All of these brands rely less on advertising — network or viral — and more on their innate authenticity to connect with Gen Y. They don’t do things ‘by the big brand book’ and ironically that is their secret to becoming big brands.
The lessons of these three brands? Becoming ‘big’ with Gen Y is more about restraint than overt action. By avoiding many of the trappings of a mainstream brand, they become mainstream. This may be the ultimate paradox of Millennial Marketing.
It was a special thrill this morning to find myself quoted in German. Eike Wenzel blogged today on the differences between German and U.S. Millennials. His post featured this chart (in English). It’s fascinating to see that U.S. Millennials lag those in Germany and China in their willingness to share details of their personal lives online.
This chart shows how working Millennials around the world use social sites and blogs, and especially their willingness to ‘share information about myself or my friends online’.
In the United States, only 8% agree completely with the statement “I love to write about myself and my friends in blogs and on my social sites.’
This compares with 23% in Germany and 32% in China. Other countries with high levels of agreement that they love to share were Brazil (22 %), Japan ( 17 %) and Italy (17 %). The only countries with a lower level of agreement than the U.S. were Australia (5%) and Canada (7%) with the U.K. coming close (11%).
The relative reticence of American Gen Y’ers to share came as a surprise to me. According to Fast Company’s analysis of Pew data on online behavior, “the Internet isn’t just prevalent in our lives, it is our lives.” According to Pew, 72% of young adults (18-29) have social network profiles. Others show the figure as high as 96%
Yet there are some hints that the days of total transparency are waning.
Just 15% maintain a blog, down 9 percentage points in two years. And with the growing awareness that parents, job recruiters, potential employers and even professors are looking at their online profiles, many Gen Y’ers have started to moderate their posting, even causing one Millennial, Kyla Butterfield, to question whether her Facebook page even represents her real personality anymore, or is just an extension of her resume. Here is an excerpt from her post on TheNextGreatGeneration blog.
“All of my friends are beginning to look for jobs and cleaning up their Facebook, Myspace and Twitter accounts to make sure they fit into the cookie cutter mold companies are looking for. Honestly I am not excluded. It seemed so easy for me to adjust my interests after the parental clean up. I have realized my Facebook is just another place for me to list my accomplishments instead of express myself. Has Facebook become Linkedin? For me it has, and I’ve found myself on it less and less. Just FYI employers, you can no longer trust Facebook to be a fair representation of your potentials; for those who have wised up these are just an extension of their resumes.
If you spend much time online and it’s easy to be seduced into thinking all young people are blogging and sharing openly. Yet I know from my students this is not the case. Most do not maintain a blog and few think Twitter is worth the time. The idea of ‘personal branding’ is not something they have given a lot of thought to. Facebook is more of a utility, a tool for planning one’s social life, and sharing photos, not maintaining a Proust-style journal.
In fact it’s the over 30 crowd that is doing more sharing online these days.
According to Pew, blogging is on the rise for adults over 30, who increased to 11% by December 2009 from 7% in 2007. 47% of adults now use social networking sites, up f10% from a year ago. Perhaps social media is something younger adults will grow into as they mature. (How ironic is that?!)
Over the past week, I have graded nearly fifty student case analyses of MTV. Make no mistake, Millennials love this brand. It’s iconic. It is part of their growing up years.
So it was with great interest that I read of MTV’s logo update announced last week, the first update in its 28-year history.
According to The Brandchannel and articles in MSN and Ad Age, the move is intended to align with the fact that MTV is now better known for reality TV shows than music videos. There seem to be at least four different motivations for the change.
1. Better align with what MTV does today
The MTV brand has represented more than “music television” for many years, and now – appropriately – the words “music television” are no longer part of the official logo. In addition, the original logo has undergone a slight morphing. When MTV launched, the upside of the logo was that it communicated the very specific, targeted business of the brand to a potential audience that had never heard of it. Of course, the downside of the logo is that once the brand diversified to include material beyond music, such as, say, Jersey Shore shenanigans, the logo became confusing, or even absurd.” - The Brandchannel, Feb 10, 2010
2. Better appeal to Millennial target
“It represents a new visually defined MTV, stimulating its past, present and future and embracing its diversity. Everything from Jersey Shore, to the VMAs to collaborations with the MoMA. The logo is part of MTV’s re-invention to connect with today’s millennial generation and bring them in as part of the channel.” – MSN, Feb 10, 2010
3. Put greater focus on MTV’s stable of talent
“The new logo is meant to put the focus on MTV’s current slate of talent — the stars of mostly reality shows like “Jersey Shore,” “Teen Mom,” and “The Buried Life.” Since the logo (which seems to have a shorter “M” than the original) is also available in a see-through model, it can change when new stars come into the fold. Tina Exarhos, a spokesperson for MTV’s marketing team, explained the change to “The New York Daily News”: “If you watch the channel, you’ve seen that it’s definitely going in a new direction. We really wanted to see the logo featured in a new way, and this was really meant to be able to house all the great things that are happening at MTV at any given time.” PeaceFM, Feb 10, 2010
4. Increase brand recognition
“Mr. Friedman said MTV has also had a problem with brand recognition among viewers who would love certain shows but had no idea they aired on MTV. “The way the logo frames it makes it a simple reference point,” he said.- Ad Age
The move has been questioned publicly on several fronts: Why now after all these years? Is it enough of a change? Is tweaking enough? Is it too mainstream/not irreverent enough? So I put the question to my Brand Strategy MBA class at University of Notre Dame.
Based on the case you just read and your experiences with MTV, what do you think? For the most part, students felt that the change was not big news.
Jonathan: “I think it’s all much ado about nothing. The change is so minor, I initially thought there was simply something wrong with my cable when the bottom of the logo was cutoff.”
Michelle: “I actually had to Google the MTV logo to get an idea of the changes that they made. I don’t think that there was much change at all and I guarantee that many of their teen viewers won’t see the change either.”
Suzy: “The changes are subtle, and not very noticeable among viewers. If anything positive comes out of this initiative, it is the publicity and buzz that was created as a result of the change.”
The larger issue for these students is that the change probably doesn’t go far enough in explaining what MTV means today.
Several acknowledge that the brand’s emphasis on reality shows may not have the resonance for them that it did when they were growing up. They understand the brand has changed, but what does it stand for now?
Marissa: “I think MTV needs to reinvent their brand identity. Their programing has changed with the times as they now focus on reality shows and docudramas like “Teen Mom.”
Rob L: “I think there is no substantive difference other than dropping “music television” which was long overdue. It was the source of a lot of irritation, even to those that didn’t watch the channel, because it caused confusion given that’s not a core part of their programming. If I had a dollar for everytime I heard someone complain about “back when MTV played videos” I’d pay off my student loans. As it stands, they seem to have no identity, no focus. At least Tru TV is direct about their showing reality shows, you know what you are getting into and are not disappointed by their 2nd rate reality entertainment.”
Rob: “Changing the logo doesn’t do much to change the disconnect between ‘music’ and whatever they want to call what they’re showing now.”
Amy: “For those of us who remember MTV when they used to play music videos, the “M” stands for music. Simply dropping the explicit reference to ‘music television’ does not change anything.”
The folks at MTV no doubt understand that their brand is in transition and that is probably the main reason for the logo update.
Iconic brands need to speak into the culture to remain iconic. Standing still is not an option in youth marketing. Perhaps the logo change is just the beginning? With hit shows like the “Jersey Shore” leading the way, I think we may only be seeing the beginnings of how this brand plans to connect with Millennials.
“This is Gen Y” video by Weber Marketing Group
Banks and credit unions are scrambling to understand their future market, Millennials. Much of the dialog has focused on technology-enabled services, but service may be the key to attracting Gen Y.
Research by Microsoft suggests their needs are actually different from their Boomer parents, with Gen Y placing a greater emphasis on mobility and online access.
“(Millennials) are much more likely than baby boomers to use Web banking (49 percent versus 35 percent) and to find online service capabilities to be very important when researching a new bank (54 percent versus 42 percent). Baby boomers, on the other hand, are much more likely to prefer banking transactions in person at a branch (44 percent versus 32 percent), and half (50 percent) report that they never bank via the Web using a personal computer or phone browser.” – “Millennials and Baby Boomers Banking Channel Preference Survey 2009″, Microsoft News Center, November 3, 2009.
A December 2009 study by Fidelity confirms that Gen Y indeed wants online access. “Most Gen Y individuals are using mobile technology to stay updated on their cash flow situations with 64 percent reporting that they typically check their balances online before making a purchase of $300 or more.”
However, Gen Y’s needs and bank selection criteria may lie more in the area of customer service than technology.
Three remarkable videos posted on the blog, “TheFinancialBrand“, all suggest how little Millennials really understand about banks and credit unions. They have no idea how banks make money (fees?) and many bank where they do simply because that is where their parent’s bank.
Moreover, they are not happy with how banks treat them. The video above (4:06 and worth watching) shows interviews with five young adult banking customers, ages 17-25. Here are some excerpts:
“When I go in to talk to [my bank], they aren’t friendly or helpful whatsoever. They talk to me like I’m stupid, pretty much.”
“I bought a quesadilla and overdrew my account. And then I… overdrew overdrew overdrew and I owed them tons of money. When I went to talk to them, they weren’t nice to me, so I switched.” (Woman, 23)
“I’d have to say a lot of my friends do get overdraft fees, cause it’s hard to know how much you’re spending. I don’t keep track of that too well…” (Woman, 17)
“They’re not open all that often. If I get my paycheck late on Friday’s and they close early, I’ll have to wait for the weekend.” (Woman, 23)
“When I go to an ATM to take out money, it’s rough to have to pay a couple of dollars just to take out money.” (Woman, 17)
Millennials expect to be treated nicely and fairly. They want to feel good about the places they do business and are happy to reciprocate.
Gen Y’er Laura Hurlbut provided this perspective on customer service in her blog post Monday “Cafes, Spain and Customer Experience“:
“As a customer, I want to do business with individuals and organizations that respect my humanity—a preference, I assume, others share. In four years living in Spain, I often frequented bakeries and cafes where the owner took my order, asked me questions, listened to my responses, and generally interacted with me in a pleasant, and completely genuine, manner. In these small, charming establishments, I never felt like a number, a potential profit, a potential promoter, or a potential detractor: I was simply Laura, the foreign girl with the funny accent. As a result, I always wanted to get coffee, pastries, and tapas at these same places—because I like doing business with someone who genuinely respects me as an individual, and whom I genuinely respect.”
Granted, most banks are not all that interested in customers who have to check their balance before buying a quesadilla. But someday these young consumers will have real jobs, direct deposit paychecks and need additional services like auto loans and mortgages, maybe even a business loan.
A little respect now could pay dividends with interest later.
The premise of generational marketing is that each generation assumes a characteristic set of values and behaviors. While it’s not everything you need to know to market effectively, it provides a cultural foundation and helps avoid the ego-centric mistake of thinking other generations are just like you, only younger or older.
While Millennials are socially more liberal than other generations, their values are fairly traditional.
(For more on this see earlier posts, “Millennial Values: Back to the Future?” and “Millennials More Upright than Kids 20 Years Ago“.)
They value family, personal connection, and loyalty.
They seek out the genuine and are repulsed by phony.
They are famously optimistic and believe in the possibility of change.
They advocate for the environment and social justice.
They treasure tolerance and diversity, teamwork and balance.
They seek spirituality and are open to the possibility of the divine.
There’s nothing revolutionary here, I could be describing my grandmother’s generation. It would be very easy to be fooled into thinking nothing’s changed because what has changed is not the content but the dedication to those values.
Millennials can be defined both by their strongly held values and their strong intention to live by them. Generation Y is passionate about making a difference in the world. This is a common thread through dozens of values studies conducted globally.
It’s easy to dismiss their “unwavering commitment as still too young to understand the harsh realities of compromise/capitulation”, as suggested by my Twitter friend, J. Maureen Henderson. And it’s true that their values are not that evident, at least so far, in their shopping, voting and volunteer behavior. Most Gen Y buy green products when it suits them and volunteer rates are no higher for Gen Y than Gen X. They did not turn out to vote in Massachusetts last month.
Certainly, time will tell, as this clever video from a 20-year old Gen Yer implies (be sure watch to the end, the whole thing is a Palindrome). They will either be a generation remarkable for its accomplishments, or one that is notable for its disillusionment.
Personally I think that disillusionment is unlikely. Young adults understand that ‘not everyone grows up to be Gandhi’. Leading a purposeful, life consistent with one’s values is reward enough as Henderson suggests in her Brazen Careerist blog post, “You’re Not Going to Change the World, and That’s Okay.”
“Those of us who grew up as part of the middle-class North American majority learned that we could be anything we wanted, but somewhere along the way, we got it twisted around in our heads that we had to be everything the world wanted/needed in order to be successful. Money wasn’t enough, nor was the love of family and friends, we wanted to matter, to make a difference, to prove ourselves, even if we couldn’t define exactly what this entailed. …..The desire not to hide our individual lights under a bushel is a laudable one, but not everyone is going to be a game changer. And there’s no shame or failure or inadequacy in working an “ordinary” job, in leading a quiet life, in surrounding yourself with a handful of close friends and family. In fact, those are the lives most of us end up with, with the smarter of us realizing that they’re every bit as meaningful as the marquee existences we feel we ought to aspire to.”
For marketers, whether or not Gen Y does or does not change the world doesn’t matter. Values representing the overriding, governing motivations for decision-making, and they matter a lot.
A deep understanding of values is critical to creating desirable products and meaningful communication. Employers who take Millennials seriously will be more attractive to the best and brightest. Marketers who take Millennial values seriously are better positioned to win with the consumer of the future.
Okay, I’m a little late to weigh in on the topic of Millennials and the Super Bowl, but I have a great excuse – I was busy teaching two marketing classes today. Both classes kicked off with a brief discussion of whether or not the students watched the game (they did!) — and what they remembered and liked about the advertising.
The results are a little different than other Gen Y Super Bowl reporting (e.g., YPulse’s astute observations by Dan Coates). The results were also slightly different between my MBA Brand Strategy class and the undergraduate Principles of Marketing class.
In both classes, funny commercials were the first mentioned, with Doritos (child slaps would-be suitor), the Snickers’ ad starring Betty White, Monster.com and the E-Trade ads are at the head of the list.
Although it wasn’t funny, both groups also liked the the Vizio spot featuring Beyonce Knowles– and especially the fact that you weren’t sure what was being advertised until the end. The MBA’s also liked the Dodge Charger “Man’s Last Stand” commercial and the Google Parisian Love spot, but the undergraduates did not mention the Google spot until prompted. They liked it, but it didn’t stand out for them. Interestingly, both groups first attributed Google’s decision to advertise to the popularity of the spot on the Internet, not competitive pressure from Bing.
The MBA’s also mentioned the Dove for Men ‘Manthem” spot, and Hyundai which never came up with the sophomores. Several commented that the Dove spot was refreshing in contrast to the ’pants-less’ (taste-less) ads featured in adjacent spots for Dockers and CareerBuilder.
I think it’s notable which widely admired ads which were ostensibly targeted to Millennials were NOT mentioned by the students: Megan Fox for Motorola was barely mentioned. Coke, Focus on the Family, and Audi “Green Police” (my personal favorite) never came up. Go Daddy was the hands down favorite for worst commercial in the Super Bowl.
What does this tell us? First and foremost, in the hoopla that is the Super Bowl and young adult viewing situations, funny wins over subtlety. Why even enter the Super Bowl unless you intend to evoke a very loud laugh?
I also think it provides confirmation a Super Bowl ad can be a good investment. How could Snickers possibly afford the buzz they are receiving today any other way? Finally, I think it calls into question the wisdom of Pepsi’s decision to sit on the sidelines this year. No one is talking about Pepsi, despite the good advance publicity. A single spot on the Super Bowl featuring “Refresh Everything” would have given that effort extra attention and probably not diminished the good will that motivated the decision to invest the marketing dollars differently.
To see all the spots, visit Creativity magazine’s Super Bowl 2010.
