For some time now, I've been aware of -- and impressed by -- Liberty Mutual's Whole New Light TV campaign.  Every time I see one of their spots, which feature everyday folks musing by a shoreline with the Statue of Liberty in the background, I pay attention. The ads work because of their simplicity, because of  story, because of the “real” talent they’ve chosen and because each spot presents a common insurance frustration that viewers can identify with immediately:

“You’re driving along, having a perfectly nice day, when out of nowhere a pickup truck slams into your brand new car.  One second it wasn’t there, and the next second – BOOM! – you had your first accident.  Now you have to make your first claim.  So you talk to your insurance company, and – BOOM! – you’re blindsided for a second time: They won’t give you enough money to replace your brand new car. 

        (pregnant pause)

Don’t those people know you’re already shaken up?”

I love the reference to “those people”.  We all know who they are.

The story goes on:  Liberty Mutual not only replaces the new car but also includes the value of depreciation.  Another spot in the series offers to replace a policyholder’s older car with one a whole model year newer. 

“You should feel good about your choice of insurance,” Liberty Mutual’s Web site informs us.  “That’s why our new campaign aims to shine a light on this otherwise confusing category.”

Amen to that!   Insurance, whether auto, health, homeowner or life, all too often seems like a costly crap shoot, despite the assuring words used to sell us our policies.  So it’s refreshing to see a straight-talking sales pitch based on credible slice-of-life situations – without yammering on so much about price (the up to $423 you can save to switch is slipped in toward the end of the spot -- frosting on the cake compared to the main benefit). 

If I hadn’t experienced such consistently good customer service from my State Farm agent over the years, which is a personal rather than corporate competitive appeal, I’d be tempted to give Liberty Mutual a shot at my business because of their common sense advertising – but would be less likely to change companies for a 15% price difference, even if offered up by a cute green gecko. 

Pure and simple, Liberty Mutual has done a superb job of communicating their competitive advantage.  Their tagline is so strong that price may not even matter: car insurance seen in a whole new light. 

TakeAway:  Create an authentic and credible competitive advantage.  Then, present it in terms that people can rally around; they will be more likely to want to buy your product or service.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

 "Flying commercial” brings up all sorts of mind pictures, most not all that appealing:

* waiting in lines
    - ticket agent lines
    - security lines
    - gate agent lines
    - boarding lines
    - baggage line
    - lines to get in other lines
* overbooking
* carry-on hassles
* cramped aisles
* cramped carry-on space
* cramped seats
* the seatmate crap shoot
* quarrels over seat backs
* make believe food
* bad air
* restrooms that are anything but restful
* weather delays
* crew delays
* tarmac delays
* late arrivals
* missing connections
* sleeping in the terminal

And that’s assuming the technical part of flying goes perfectly – all the doors get closed, the wings are securely fastened and somebody checks to see if there’s gas in the tank.

If I had a NetJets budget, I wouldn’t be concerned about such things.  But I don’t.  And most of us don’t.   Which made me perk up and take notice of this headline on Yahoo News:

           Airlines struggle to please the modern passenger.

According to the article, here are some of concerns expressed during this year’s meeting of the International Air Transport Association (IATA), a trade group for airline execs – keeping in mind that these weren’t complaints from passengers but observations and comments by the execs themselves:

• More passenger info is needed, especially on mobile devices.  One suggestion was to “offer passengers a behind-the-scenes view of their suitcase as it moves through the airport machinery,” although methinks that could create more concern than certainty.
• Give people a “nice, reliable experience at a normal price,” one exec said.  Another added: “Make my life easy,” which sounds great except that airlines appear to staff for ordinary flying conditions in a world filled with extraordinary events, the least of which these days is the weather.
• “Don’t give me a vanilla experience”, one panelist told the IATA gathering.  But is that so bad?  Because  when I buy a pint of Ben & Jerry’s vanilla ice cream, my expectations are met every single time.
• Another exec spoke of “managing” expectations, which seems like an especially worthy goal – as in no surprises!    Just over half of meeting participants thought the airlines weren’t “doing a good job meeting passenger demands.” 

What are passengers demanding?   Here’s how a reader named Mike put it in the comments section:

“THE DAMN SEATS ARE TOO SMALL,” agreed Mr. B (dramatizing his frustration by writing in all caps), “and the answer isn’t smaller carry-ons,” even as the IATA proposes new industry-wide standards for carry-on bags.   The small places in which we now are asked to stow our carry-ons seem to be getting more restricted while people are becoming more frustrated (sometimes even rude) as they seek a spot to stow their briefcase or backpack, often rows away from their seat, causing that much more confusion when it comes time to get off the plane.   And as dissatisfaction increases, seat room and restroom room appear to be shrinking.  

It seems absurd, but perhaps not altogether illogical,that “the two most profitable airlines — American Airlines and United Airlines — have abysmal customer service satisfaction scores,” according to a recent Forbes article, quoting Kendall Creighton, spokesperson for FlyersRights.org , which advocates for air travelers.   “An airline’s customer satisfaction levels appear to be inversely related to profits,” she says.  “The higher the profits, the worse the scores.  The more modest the profits, the higher the customer satisfaction.”   And now the government is proposing new emissions standards for aircraft, which would put additional pressure on price and profit.

According to the Forbes article, Jet Blue has the highest passenger satisfaction scores and the lowest profit margin.  Spirit Airlines, whose ironic tagline is Less Money. More Go, had the highest margin and lowest customer satisfaction, while “Delta and Southwest have managed to strike a balance between profits and happy passengers.”

I have a suggestion:  In the interest of communicating clear competitive advantage, each airline could post a simple graphic at critical passenger touch points, from ticketing through to the baggage carousel.  The graphic would consist of ten stacked rectangles, one each for the top 10 measures of airline customer satisfaction.  Each rectangle’s color would change as customer satisfaction ebbs and flows, from angry red for poor performance through shades of yellow to leafy green for superior performance.  Data could be gleaned from in-flight customer surveys taken every day, on paper, through passenger devices or even later online.   The information should include date of service, flight number / seat number and accumulate over time.

I challenge each of these airlines, in fact the entire airline industry, to put their heads together and create what might be called the Airline Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI), a numerical way of communicating the same info the colored rectangles do.   Perhaps the IATA will choose to lead the way.  Such measures surely will be more effective in raising airline industry expectations – and performance -- than making “standardized” carry-on bags even smaller!

TakeAway:  If your business, brand or product satisfies – even delights – customers, let the world know about it.  

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner