The Scotts/Scotsman Paradox

I’ve been enjoying the recent campaign for Scotts Lawn care from the Richards Group because of its completely irrational foundation, a lawn care product whose only point of difference is its Scottish spokesperson, or as the Richards Group calls it the “Scott the Scot for Scotts” campaign. 

To understand why this sort of mnemonic work so well it helps to know something about how memory works and what psychologists have dubbed the  ”Baker/baker” paradox.  If a researcher shows two people the same photograph of a face and tells one of them that the guy is a Baker and the other that his last name is Baker, chances are that a few days later when the researcher shows the same two guys the same photograph and asks for the accompanying word, the person who was told the man’s profession is much more likely to remember it than the person who was given his surname.

Why does the same word result is such different levels of memorability.  When you hear someone is a baker, you immediately associate it with multiple memories, bread, flour, white hats and good smells.  In contrast, the name Baker is only associated with that person’s face, and with only one link, its easier to forget than the multiple linkages associated with the baking profession.  

The same for “Scott the Scot for Scott’s” campaign.  There’s a lot of lawn care brands out there and they’re always shouting that they’re the best.  Chances are the brand you remember best is the one you’ll end up going with, if only because we’re hard wired to trust things we’re more familiar with.  

The crazy smarts of this campaign is that while Scotts the brand name is only associated with Scotts Lawncare, Scott the Scott comes with lots and lots of associations, from Disney’s Scrooge McDuck to Caretaker Willy on the Simpsons.  With all these associations, Scott the Scott for Scotts makes their brand more memorable and in the battle for market share that’s all that matters.  If you’re more memorably, you’re more trustworthy, and as a consequence, more likely to be purchased.

There’s a nice articulation in today’s New York Times of why great creative is great for business.  An Anti-hunger campaign could have done the tried and true, a picture of a hungry child.  But Bruce Henderson the CCO of G2 New York undestood that predictability would just enables ignorability.

 “As we move through the magazine, it becomes easier to skip over the ads,” Mr. Henderson said. “We wanted to create something people had perhaps not seen before.”

So they’re images are deliberately dissonant.  One has a large pizza box holding a tiny pizza, the other is of seven paper dolls, with the middle doll, a stick figure.  They’re not what you expect, so you stop to learn more.  That’s what great creative is, something unpredictable, and that’s why its great for business, it gets people to stop and look.

There’s a lot of carping in the article about whether this is the right image, but what I see is a campaign that realized that the first thing they needed to do was to get people’s attention.  Nice job.

Why is a $24 bottle of tequila taking on a $44 bottle of tequila?

I’ve always liked the 1800 tequila spots with Michael Imperioli, very simple, clear point of differentiation with Patron; a more masculine alternative to the leading high status tequila, Patron.  But in the liquor store today I was struck by the price difference, $24 for 1800 Silver, $44 for Patron Silver, a price difference so huge as to put Patron on a different planet to 1800.

But maybe 1800 is being more clever than I think.  The 800lb gorilla of the tequila category is Jose Cuervo, not a brand that lacks macho credentials, but one that is losing customers to more upscale tequilas (its priced at $18, far closer to 1800).  Perhaps 1800 is anchoring its comparison with Patron, to win the masculinity argument, as a way of improving its macho cues so that it can capture those macho Jose Cuervo customers buying up the tequila ladder.  1800 is in a sweet spot for cash strapped milennials wanting to buy better tequila.  Its price says its better than Jose Cuervo, its ads say its in the same league as Patron, but way more masculine.

Behavioral Economics Principle:  Anchoring

WASTING WATER IS WEIRD

I love this wasting water is weird campaign.  Its hard to remember to use water well, but this creppy, sweaty guy who both sneaks up on you and takes great pleasure in wasting water is attention getting, memorable and very persuasive, it weirdo’s like him like wasting water, then I shouldn’t.  Nicely done.

Why are we so bad at preparing for the future?  Sometimes its because we aren’t as interested in helping out someone who doesn’t look like they have much in common with ourselves today, even if its your future self.  Taco Bell and Lincoln Financial show how this insight can be used to act today or prepare for the long term

Given all the hype about the marketing potential for behavioral economics, its interesting to look at the effies as a good barometer of how pervasive behavioral economics is in driving great effectiveness and creativity.

http://www.effie.org/winners/showcase/2011

A couple of observations.  First the majority had little to do with behavioral economics, most, like the Old Spice, Kia Soul, or Toyota Sienna campaign, tapped into great cultural trends and left it at that, but about seven by my count were driven, either unwittingly or not, by applying a great behavioral insight to a marketing problem.  Here they are:

1.  The mini vs porsche:  Classic anchoring, don’t compare yourself to your natural category competitors, but take on someone out of your league.  Even when they beat you by 2 seconds, you’re in the same league as a porsche only $30k a second cheaper

2.  Norton Anti-Virus:  Maybe a bit of a stretch, but by making the threat of virus attack malevolent, vivid and encouraging viewers to choose an action, they made virus attack seem more likely and choosing Norton something people had already virtually agreed too.  Interesting that this came from Leo, home of Mayhem, which didn’t win any Effie awards (?), but clearly someone at Leo knows a thing or two about the psychology of fear.

3. A simpler way to ship:  How do you take on Fed Ex and UPS, when you’re the United States Postal Service.  Talk about a brand problem!  But by making their product all about the first step being simple, CE delivered 1200% above plan, not bad.

4. US Census:  Why should you take the time to fill out the census?  By invoking the norm of fairness “we can’t move forward until you mail it back” Draftfcb invoked community solidarity to trump individual selflishness.  The result $1bln in savings to the taxpayer.

5.  Walgreens:  Why should you get a flu shot?  The certainty of spending time and money for the 1 in 5 chance of avoiding the flu.  Instead of promising future protection, Arc delivered immediate rewards, making the flu shot about “arming yourself for the ones you love” and becoming a badge for who you want to be.  Nice.

6.  Southwest airlines:  We’re irrationally attracted to the power of free, so a campaign around “bags fly free” when every other airline is sure to be nickel and dime-ing customers, was sure to be a winner, but a $1bln in share gain?  Wow!

7.  Verizon “Map for that”:  If it rhymes its more likely to be true!  Make sense, no, but that’s how we’re hard wired, enabling Verizon to beat AT&T by making their competitive claim so simple it rhymed.  

Why are we irrationally attracted to free? Adding a free extra to a product that is relevant but unexpected decreases risk. Marketers from Southwest Airlines, to KFC to Disney all show the success to be had in tapping into this irrational appeal.

This week, we show how making the first step fun can leverage our addiction to now, to doing something that is good for us in the long run, be it saving for retirement or checking out a new internet browser

Loyalty marketing is frequently thought about what products and services we can give to customers, but what’s even more compelling and rewarding, is giving people social rewards, via the opportunity to connect with their social network