B2B advertising does NOT have to mean 'Boring 2 Boring'
Apply not only the similar planning principles of Business 2 Consumer marketing, but get some of that personality too
The following image is all you need to know about the problem with so much B2B communications :
I wanted to start here by making the point; it is clearly dull, non-aspirational and sterile, and definitely not the convivial vibes of the Coke brand with which we are familiar, yet the commercial marketing strategies have somehow defaulted in perpetuity to this style. feature and research led USP advertising. It makes sense given the pragmatic ‘businessy’ decisions that need making. Then again why does the above make us cringe so much?
Because we are all human in business or as consumers when making purchasing decisions. Without overplaying the Human 2 Human cliché peddled everywhere, there is a truth in it, albeit with variance and different expectations, especially with buying cycle differences and oftentimes multiple stakeholders, but it does not have to always be this clinical way!
Last week I attended an interesting webinar between creative comms behemoths Ogilvy and the thinktank LinkedIn’s ‘B2B Institute’ cannily titled ‘The Contrarian Marketer’, much of which of course was not overly provocative nor contrarian, however there was a useful and robust mix of research and insight reconfirming fundamental truths and adding some colour to business communications that I had not always considered.
The following are some of my favourites from the talk for your consideration, along with my own thoughts :
The 95-5 Rule
Indeed, this is not unique to B2B either, although the finite in-market number may well be. The notion that at any point in time 5% of a target audience are potentially right to buy your product given sales cycles, and the other 95% are future potential buyers. Most buyers are not ready to buy immediately on receipt of your comms e.g. consumers alone switch to a new bank every 5 years, their computer every 4. This and some in business. They require a different approach in terms of planning, not necessarily a radically different comms look and feel.
Professor John Dawes of the Ehrenberg Bass Institute adds colour to this below:
As Dawes reaffirms along the other scholarly research, relying on the action is not enough, you have to build that mental availability and familiarity, something which flies in the face of a lot of B2B demand gen focussed wisdom in the ‘lower funnel’ - and complement it with real brand building work. Those of you familiar with Binet & Field’s work The Long and the Short of it will of course already know the over-arching principle for this!
Summarised - you can’t just reach right person at right time such is the marketing flagship - they have to know you in advance! Use this as an opportunity to be creatively brilliant.
Maximalism - 1m once or 500k twice?
Its one of the old debates from a media planning perspective, spent all money to hit larger audiences once, or same amount to reach half the audience but twice. Which is more effective?
Based on this - the research suggests 1st touchpoint is most effective, then it is incremental gains thereafter based on above. Not wildly different from B2C, although it does reaffirm the above point about really investing in that 95% audience!
The importance of ‘Situational Recall’
‘if you learn something underwater you are more likely to recall it again when underwater’
Similarly with B2C is situational alignment. B2B a little different - a few more touchpoints - and obviously because there is a greater danger of letting others down; it is not always like buying a can of coke for yourself. Therefore it is useful to understand the situation and the psychographic of the buyer.
Now I do not always love frameworks for frameworks sake - but this ‘Ws’ one for B2B kind of makes good sense. Considering the multiple touchpoints and the nuances of a B2B purchase it kind of pays to think about the following
WHY - what are the motives and benefits (e.g. get promoted?)
hoW (now this is a tenuous ‘W’ I happily admit) - to feel sense of achievement
WHEN - timing issues (e.g. end of the financial year)
WHILE - co-activities (e.g. when in a meeting)
WHERE - location (e.g. working from home - need to make stronger point)
WITH/for WHOM - other people (e.g. board would approve)
WITH WHAT - co purchased/ consumed categories (e.g. with add-ons)
Arguably rudimentary - but provides an excellent 7 point starter to think about how to position. Thinking about motivations, oftentimes to alleviate a problem or to make someone look good as opposed to feel good in B2C. The solution sell is predicated on this, and the idea of bundling. e.g. You are not just selling a Coke but quenching the whole thirst and sugar hit!
Creative ‘character’ grows mental availability as well as sales
As we know from Meerkats and Milk Tray men, characters and fluent devices drive double recall eg mascot. and they place the brand front and centre of your mindset. Cast your brand front and centre with such a device.
How else do we get B2B brands to loosen up? Give them the courage to be contrarian is a business decision world. Salesforce recently did it with a fun ad.
There’s characters, and then there’s having CHARACTER. What personality you are looking to convey? How can you flip a stale industry and formula on its head?
Going back to the Coke example - if B2C took B2B’s lead things would be grim - but in terms of levity and character, what can we do other way round i.e. to get B2B working more like B2C?
Be humourous and embrace the happy vibes. If you want to read more on this, BMB Agency did a great downloadable guide on how to be funny and the importance of humour with some canny personas to consider, and Creative veteran, partner and all round good egg Paddy Gilmore has just started his Brands & Humour series - well worth a subscribe!
This is not merely the preserve of the large businesses either. A great example springs to mind. Gasp!, in partnership with their client law firm Langley’s, wanted to land the fact that they indeed make ‘law easy to understand’. And boom… Langleeeasy!! A true brand differential.
Finally - fight the fatigue!
Great creative compounds and is key for perennial success. Don’t fuck about with the brand too much. Typically, brands wear IN not wear out despite much conjecture otherwise…
Coke as a brand is worth tantamount £81.5bn without changing brand assets for years. Many will know the story of an old advertising brief i.e. if the Coke bottle was smashed everywhere you would know who they are still (thanks to the distinctive asset i.e.. the bottle). Well they have been true to that, and would definitely have a lower market cap if they messed about too much.
SUMMARY and Key takeaways
Have hardly reinvented the wheel with this update, but wanted to share the things which are of most prevalence and will get some thoughts provoked, otherwise what is the point right?
Maintain the fun contrarian part for the future to be memorable - 95% of other non buyers are your future 5% buyers, so create that Front of Mind availability now!
Devices like animations have them front and centre - and own them!
In lieu of no characters, have CHARACTER! (Langleeeasy style).
Do not toy too much with key brand assets - wear IN not out.
After 2nd touchpoint incremental growth is small so focus on initial reach to start mental availability for the 95%, not just the sales.
Its important not to oversimplify what is tricky, and despite key research findings or pithy frameworks, B2B selling is a long slog at times and will take a period of testing and learning for your brand to do it right. That said, remember the audiences aren’t the logos or the big buildings, but humans like you and I - beguiled by similar behaviour and memory patterns, so have character!
SA
PS. I hope you are getting a semblance of value out of this. If so, and you think any other marketeer or business owner would, feel free to share/forward this to them and encourage them to subscribe. Also, follow me on LinkedIn, Twitter or my company page. Thanks!