A BLOG ABOUT COMMUNICATING COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE
  • Brian Faulkner
  • Blog
  • CONTACT

Why Airline Travel Should Be More Like Ben & Jerry's.

6/11/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture
- Images © by
Picture
Brian E. Faulkner -
Tags:  NetJets, Yahoo News, IATA, Ben & Jerry's, American Airlines, United Airlines, FlyersRights.org, Delta, Southwest, Jet Blue, Spirit Airlines

I hate flying.  Not the soaring, free kind of flying that dreams are made of.   I’m talking about public conveyance, the cramped kind of flying: commercial airline travel, where you’re imprisoned in a long aluminum tube with your fellow inmates for an insane number of hours.   Which isn’t really flying at all but more a kind of suffering you have to endure to get from one place to another without spending days or weeks doing it.
 "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 only issue is how stupidly uncomfortable the experience is.                                                                                 You’re stuck in a tiny seat from which you can’t get up most of the time."  
“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

0 Comments

A Mercedes by Another Name.

5/22/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture- Image © by Brian E. Faulkner -
Tags:  Mercedes-Benz, Steinway & Sons, Daimler Motor Company, Daimler-Benz
While researching the origin of the current Mercedes-Benz tagline, I was reminded how close the car came to being called something else – at least here in America.

Were it not for a promising young man’s extended illness, Mercedes most likely would have been called by a name that had nothing to do with automobiles, a name known around the world by the time Gottlieb Daimler rolled out his high-speed internal combustion-powered automobile in 1886. Carl Benz developed his own car the same year, but the business entities that survived the inventors didn’t come together as Daimler-Benz AG until 1926.

In addition to automobiles, Daimler built engines for boats and industrial applications.   That caught the eye of one William Steinway, of the famed piano family.  He got in touch with Daimler, and on October 6, 1888, the Daimler Motor Company was organized in New York, where Steinway & Sons had already been in business for 35 years.

Steinway was convinced he could sell Daimler’s engines in the United States and acquired the rights to manufacture and market them for use in such things as cream separators, sewing machines, pumps, ventilating fans, printing presses and other applications that required a single-cylinder stationary engine. 

Picture
In 1893, Steinway experienced Daimler’s “motor carriage” for himself and began to envision a motorized America.  So he set about developing his own automobile, one more adapted to American road conditions because he thought Daimler’s car too light for the “rough cobblestone streets we have in this country.”

“The cars which we intend to produce for the American market will be capable of carrying between two and four people and will be driven by engines with between 2½ and 3½ hp,” Steinway told a newspaper reporter in 1895. “Each car will have four different speed settings: 3½, 6, 9, and 14 miles per hour.”

However, this perspicacious man’s dream was not to be.  He died at age 35 in November of the following year after a stubborn period of undiagnosed illness (probably tuberculosis).  By that time he’d invested a frustrating amount of additional capital in the car company to offset continuing losses, so it’s likely he would have pulled out anyway.  After William’s death, Daimler Motor Company’s holdings, including a factory built on Steinway’s land, was sold to newly organized Daimler Manufacturing Company, which in 1905 produced an “American Mercedes” based on the German model. This car was on the market for only eight years before its factory was destroyed by fire.  

So had William Steinway lived and helped Daimler Motor Company overcome its ongoing financial problems, the American Mercedes just might have been called a Steinway ... which no doubt would have worked out fine, because both brands exemplify the best in their categories to this day. 

Best is subjective, of course, but Steinway & Sons instruments are the pianos on which the overwhelming number of concert artists choose to perform – or aspire to perform, as they have almost since day one.   William’s father, Heinrich Engelhard Steinweg, emigrated to New York from Germany during mid century, founded his business in a Manhattan loft, changed his name to Henry Steinway and set a quality standard that has endured through successive generations.   His maxim was “Build the best piano possible.  Sell it at the lowest price consistent with quality.” 

And although the company has passed through a number of different owners since it was purchased from the Steinway family by CBS in 1972, Steinway & Sons remains at the top of the piano hierarchy and is the brand to which other fine pianos are most often compared.   The company now is owned by American hedge fund manager John Paulson, a long-time admirer of its products.   His stated goal is to assure Steinway & Sons’ "continuing greatness."

Henry and William clearly would have agreed on that.

Mercedes-Benz’ latest tagline also reflects the philosophy of its founder, as well as the quality bedrock on which the brand stands as it moves deeper into the 21st century.  

You may recall the TV spot where Gottlieb Daimler nods off at his desk and dreams about the Mercedes-Benz of the future, with its now-familiar look, technology and style.  As Daimler is awakened by a lovely assistant, we see a handwritten phrase scratched on the notepad beside him: The best or nothing -- underlined with a flourish.   Though Mercedes-Benz has experienced some quality issues in recent years (not unlike Steinway), the brand is still held in high esteem, evidenced by frequent references to the “Mercedes of this” and the “Mercedes of that” as the marketers of other high-end product seek to compare their offerings to the car with the three pointed star.   

“In the end, all any of us has is our good name,” a Mercedes print ad declared a while back.   That’s true of Mercedes-Benz and true of Steinway & Sons.   The two vaulted brands that nearly became kissin’ cousins a hundred-odd years ago have prospered -- and will continue to prosper -- in large part because of the quality foundation put in place by their founders.

TakeAway:  Build your brand on bedrock quality and your reputation will follow, helping smooth the way over the inevitable bumps you encounter on your road to success.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner


0 Comments

Don't Mess With Your Brand Story.

4/29/2015

0 Comments

 
PictureImage © by Brian E. Faulkner
Tags: Microsoft, NPR, George Zimmer, Men’s Wearhouse, Joseph Abboud, Jos. A. Bank, Ford Motor Company, GM, Cadillac, Buick, Ford, Lincoln, Apple, Coca-Cola, New Coke
Every brand, company, product or service has a story – just like people.  People’s stories are a combination of image and reputation, which can be anything from well focused to wildly irresponsible.   Some businesses may be well-positioned (in a controlled, strategic sense) while others cast their reputation to the wind, allowing the marketplace to define who they are and what they represent.   Call it default positioning.   The example that most often comes to my mind is Microsoft, which hasn’t done a great positioning job.  There are many “Microsofts” out there, depending on who's doing the talking.  

Heard an interview with George Zimmer on NPR this morning.  His topic was paying people more, even at the expense of company profits.  But what grabbed my attention was his distinctive gravelly voice, the one he used on television when he was boss of The Men’s Wearhouse – you know the one:  

“You’re going to like the way you look. “I guarantee it!”  

Every spot had a story, and as leader-spokesperson, Zimmer was deeply imbedded in the Men’s Wearhouse image -- along with that famous tagline.  I can’t help but notice that the Men’s Wearhouse strategic positioning has become less distinctive since Zimmer was forced out, supposedly because of management disagreements.  Something’s missing from their advertising, and it’s not just Zimmer.   Despite the few recent Men’s Wearhouse spots featuring signature suit designer Joseph Abboud, their marketing seems focused more on price, like their long-time competitor, Jos. A. Bank, which Men’s Wearhouse purchased early in 2014 after a turbulent takeover battle.   

The takeaway here is that a strong brand story should not be discarded so readily, although I’m sure the Men’s Warehouse board thought long and hard about the strategic consequences of dumping Zimmer.   I find it discouraging, however, that they’ve fallen back on price advertising after such success with set-apart positioning, although it must be working or they wouldn’t do it.  But I’ll bet their margins aren’t as good as when Zimmer was hawking the wares, because price was hardly mentioned in his spots and, as I recall, Wall Street liked the stock.

I have several friends and acquaintances, each with a business in the same retail category.  Two of them ride a high-price wave supported by a brand story that's more than 150 years old.  They don’t have to sell on price and, as a result, get high margins.  Another friend sells the same type of high-end merchandise at market prices, although different brands.  His business story has been established for well over 50 years; customers seek him out because of his quality reputation.  Still others I know in that same business always seem to be wrestling with price.  They don’t command the margins they could because their business stories are indistinct.  They don’t have a Marketable Truth© to stand on. 

Both Ford Motor Company and GM currently are wrestling with their image stories.  GM is in the latter stages of rebooting its Cadillac brand to compete with the best German luxury performance sedans; they've had enough success that Cadillac is no longer seen as exclusively for oldsters seeking a luxury nameplate and plush ride.   Buick, another GM brand that used to have a fuddy-duddy image, is experiencing a surprising sales renaissance driven by rising demand in China, where the brand has become a status symbol.  Different time, different story.

Ford also is into a bit of image retooling of late.  Lincoln (finally!) is thinking about abandoning its confusing alphabet soup model designations in favor of real names like Continental and possibly even Zephyr.   All while Ford grapples with a negative quality blip brought about in recent years by a dashboard communication and entertainment system that has proven troublesome and hard to use – so much so that auto enthusiast Web sites are recommending that people wait ‘til a redesigned system comes out on the 2016 models later this year to purchase their new Fords and Lincolns.   

When I think of brand image, however, I think most often about Apple.  They were an upstart at first, but gradually built a business, operating system and reputation that out-shined the king of personal computers at that time, the venerable IBM.  Will gutsy moves into new product categories like luxury watches and even automobiles sour Apple’s reputation?  Not likely, because they’ve told and retold their brand story so well – and so long – that they’re as close to invincible as any business or brand out there.

Even so, in this day of social-driven media, there are new voices everywhere, and some percentage is quick to broadcast bad news.  One exemplary misstep marketers are quick to recall is the New Coke debacle of 1985, when Coca-Cola almost lost its way -- and that was before the Internet became so widely available.  This very day, April 29, 2015, online rumblings are afoot about a second brand of listeria-laden ice cream and a major beer maker’s label that seems to make light of rape.

Reputation or image -- call it what you will -- can bite you in the backside any minute … but also can help lead you to greatness.  All the more reason to consider whether your brand, business, product or service is solidly positioned in today’s uber-competitive, uber-critical world.

 TakeAway:  Shape your strategic position carefully.  And guard your brand story for dear life.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner        
Marketable Truth © by Brian E. Faulkner




0 Comments

"Quality" Razor Doesn't QUite Cut It.

1/28/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture
I’m a sucker for quality.  A finely polished product surface will get me every time.  I love the satisfying sound a car door makes when it closes properly (and the window operators don’t rattle like they did on some older American cars).  Not to mention underwear T-shirts that don’t shrink with their first wash (even using cold water and a low dryer setting).  And razor blades that glide smoothly over your face while effortlessly removing that morning’s growth.

So I was pretty excited to hear about Harry’s Razors.  They’ve been around going on two years and have popped up recently online.  Read their well-crafted ad copy and you’d think you’ve found shaving Nirvana:

Like most of you, we’ve long had to choose between over-priced,
over-marketed razors that disrespect your intelligence,
and low quality, cheap razors that disrespect your face.
We knew there had to be a better way,
so we created Harry’s as a return to the essential:
a great shave at a fair price.
I wanted one - right away.  Problem is I no longer shave, thanks to a 5-year-old beard I trim once a week – if that.   But during my many decades of shaving, I mostly used the cheap blue grocery store blades that lasted about three days before they reared up and tried to bite my face off. 

So the Harry’s ad caught my eye.  It had a quality look and made quality promises:
We spent over a year meticulously crafting our first Harry’s line.
Our blades are made by German engineers with decades of experience honing high-grade steel.
Our handles were designed to blend timeless simplicity and modern ergonomics.
Our shaving cream comes from the same chemists who make creams for high-end brands.
The result: a set of modern shaving products made with respect for the tradition of a good, clean shave.
Since I was not going to try them myself, I consulted razorpedia.com for Harry’s Razor reviews.  

Some men liked them and credited Harry’s for eliminating razor burn.  Others did not like the product for reasons that ranged from “dull after three days” to rust on the blades, slippery handles and poor value compared to products available at retail – not to mention Harry’s shave cream, which nobody seemed to like.

I, too, was disappointed – that so many of the reviewers were disappointed.  Because I like Harry’s sell.  It's creative, credible and makes you want to try the product.   But as one reviewer opined, the company seems “more concerned with marketing brand association and identification than with how their razor works.”

Harry’s differentiation is threefold:  (1) a great shave, (2) a fair price, and (3) direct sales.  Unfortunately, razorpedia reviewers suggest that the product needs refinement and isn’t always the best value.  That leaves direct selling as the lead dog pulling this sled, which likely will be enough to establish a market beachhead for Harry’s while they improve the product. 

I hope so.   Because I want to see these entrepreneurs succeed.

As for me, I’m still on the lookout for an underwear T that won’t shrink with that first wash!  Don’t you just hate how they ride up on your tummy?

TakeAway:  Don’t make a quality claim unless your product absolutely, positively lives up to it.
     
Content © by Brian E. Faulkner 
 

0 Comments

Does Coach Have An Image Problem?

1/8/2015

0 Comments

 
PictureImage © by Brian E. Faulkner
Got to thinking about Coach, Inc.’s brand image today after reading an article that questioned the company’s potential acquisition of fashion footwear brand Stuart Weitzman to complement their own nascent shoe line, reportedly the first of an array of “lifestyle” products to take them beyond handbags. 

Krystina Gustafson speculates in her CNBC.com article that, while Weitzman will add to overall Coach sales, it may not do much for the brand’s image, which needs some propping up.  She also quotes Robert Konik, an analyst with the global investment banking firm Jeffries, who suggests (in a note to investors) that Coach has, indeed, lost some of its pricing power. 

The brand may have at long last fallen out of favor with high end shoppers, Gustafson adds, because of “stale product, over-distribution and damaged brand equity from its high presence at outlet malls.”

Back in the late ‘80s, I helped their president, Lew Frankfort, with a Coach positioning speech he presented to an audience of marketing and sales reps.  Frankfort led development of the Coach business from the early ‘80s until his retirement late last year as executive chairman, during which he was instrumental in expanding the fashion leather handbag’s company’s revenue and global footprint by many orders of magnitude. 

My brief connection with him occurred during the company’s Sara Lee days, when the Chicago-based food and apparel giant was making acquisitions and launching initiatives in direct retail.  The corporation’s desire back then, via their Sara Lee Direct division, was to maximize the potential of its well-known brands, and what they discovered through research (if I recall correctly, conducted by McKinsey) was that if Coach products were sold in high end department store boutiques as well as Coach-owned retail stores, aggregate sales would increase.  That appears logical enough at first glance, but the fear was that department store sales would eat into Coach store sales – and begin eroding their price premium.  At that time, their flagship Manhattan store was said to do more sales per square foot than any other retailer in America.

But department store sales of Coach bags did not cannibalize sales in the company’s own stores.  And soon, the logic went, why not try outlet malls, since Sara Lee Direct already was knee deep in building off-price stores for its Hanes, L’eggs and Bali brands.  So Coach stores began turning up at the better outlet malls, a presence that remains today.

But there’s the rub.   Without denying the considerable growth of Coach, Inc. over the years, a portion of which clearly must have come from its outlet mall business, one does wonder whether their exalted brand name has been diminished by its continued presence in discount retail settings, where the merchandise isn’t always the same as that you’d find in New York, Beverly Hills or Tokyo.  For instance, in the third quarter of 2010, “87-percent of the merchandise at Coach outlet stores was manufactured for the outlet,” according to a 2011 article at palmbeachpost.com. “The rest was made up of items that came from the retail stores - perhaps excess inventory, or returns, or items that were no longer in season.”

“The outlet bag is just not the same quality, won't have the same details, as the one at the retail store for $1,200," noted Howard Davidowitz, chairman of national retail consulting and investment banking firm Davidowitz & Associates Inc., in the article -- although you still can cop a deal at your nearest Coach outlet store from time to time.  “A pink Mia handbag from Coach’s Madison collection was found on discount for $175 recently at the Vero Fashion Outlet," the same article noted,"plus an additional 20 percent off that was being offered on everything in the store for a final price of $140. That same handbag was available by special order at the Coach retail store in The Gardens Mall — still at the full original price of $358.”

Even so, I must admit that seeing a Coach store in an outlet mall these days rather disappoints me.   

The CNBC article notes that a pair of Stuart Weitzman pumps sell at a considerable premium over a Coach branded pair (assuming equal product style and quality, one would think).  So apparently Coach does, indeed, have some pricing headroom to make up because of the downward pull on their premium image, an opportunity that they’ve created for themselves by associating the brand with outlet settings for so many years.  

Meanwhile, I will continue to enjoy use of the Coach Bleeker Flap Briefcase I acquired back in the ‘80s.  It’s been through the wars -- including one minor flood that devastated its contents, and it still looks and performs great.  Let’s hope the company’s image does that well over the long run as Coach grows into those “lifestyle” products.

TakeAway:  If you’re marketing a premium product, stick with a price that commands -- and builds on -- your brand’s premium positioning.   

For additional discussion about sticking to premium product pricing, using Godiva chocolates as an example:  http://www.brianefaulkner.com/blog/godivas-alluring-words-enduring-promise  

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

Sources:  http://www.cnbc.com/id/102314069
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/business/outlet-stores-are-you-getting-a-good-deal-or-just-/nLpgZ/


0 Comments

THe Real Thing: (not Coca-COla)

12/20/2014

0 Comments

 
PictureImage © by Brian E. Faulkner
Popped into a music store yesterday to buy a gift for my guitar-playing son and hadn’t been there more than a minute before I spied what looked at first glance like a Martin D-45 marked down to around $300.  If so, that would be the deal of the century, and should I have stumbled on such a rarity, its purchase, no doubt, would have made me feel less bummed over having sold my '63 Martin 00018 twenty years ago to buy an alternator for my old Chevy Celebrity.

The D-45, for those not acquainted with premium-quality guitars, is C. F. Martin’s flagship model, complete with abalone inlays, fancy purfling, East Indian rosewood sides and back and a sound that stands up and speaks with both sweetness and authority. 


The pretender in that guitar shop didn’t even come close, although it did have some attractive inlay work.  Apparently, a previous shop owner (now deceased) had a bunch of guitars made up in Korea to look like the best of the best American instruments and had his name put on them.  The guitar on display was one of the few would-be Martins or Gibsons or Fenders that hadn’t been sold over the years.

Guitars, like pianos, invite you to play them – or not.  It’s either a match made in heaven or a block of wood with strings on it (a guitar-shaped object, as the derision goes).   This particular guitar felt heavy, played thick and did not sing.  It was more of a decoration than a serious musical instrument – something you’d hang on the wall of a Nashville-themed restaurant.

Brands are a lot like that.  The best ones sing.  They wrap you into an experience that you look forward to – whether you buy a product for pleasure, utility or both (like the Black & Decker rechargeable lawnmower I finally bought last year).  I never have been much of a guitarist, but I always looked forward to playing my Martin.  I liked its song.  And it made me feel more accomplished than I actually was.   

I paid $300 for that guitar in 1970.  Today, it would bring around $3,000, maybe more.  A big D-45 from the same era could fetch upwards of twice that (the first one was custom made for Gene Autry in 1933).  These days, MSRP on a D-45 fresh from Nazareth is close to $11,000 -- and worth every dime.

I once had an acquaintance with a D-45 for sale.  He advertised it in the classifieds (in the part of North Carolina where a D-45 could be considered a six-string holy grail).  No takers.  So he doubled the price.

It sold lickety-split!  That guitar was the real thing – and (finally) priced accordingly.

It’s tempting to suggest that in order to sell something lickety-split it needs to sing like a Martin D-45 and be as costly, but ain't necessarily so.  A satisfying experience (like I used to get from my old Martin 00018 and still get from my lawnmower) can occur in all product categories and at all price levels. With guitars, that ranges from collector instruments on down through a student’s first guitar, which should NOT be a block of wood but have a sound that draws the ear in and strings that play with enough ease to encourage.  Too many parents make the mistake of buying a “bargain” instrument for their child to learn on and then wonder why the thing ends up stuck back in the closet after a couple of months. 

Quality, of course, can be maddeningly difficult to get a grip on.  One of my least favorite definitions is the industrial-bland “conformance to requirements.” 

Bah!

True quality should delight and amaze.  It should make you want what it’s got, whether resident in a fine guitar, a beautiful set of gears for a transmission or something as simple as a flashlight that feels good and works every time, a tool that you can use with confidence while searching for that old guitar you know must be back there in the closet somewhere …

TakeAway:  Be the real thing, the brand or product that people look forward to using (or building into the things they make) – no matter what you’re selling.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner 


0 Comments

The Customer is Culture at this Successful Company.

11/10/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Bob Tiffin gets up every morning a happy man.  After early meetings with his management team, the genial founder and CEO of Tiffin Motorhomes takes to his office, phone to ear, eager to speak with his customers. 

He knows he’ll get the calls, first because he invites them.  And second, because motorhomes are complex products and they need service from time to time.  An array of different systems must work as one to keep 30-48 thousand pounds of vehicle, 100-150 gallons of diesel fuel, 90 gallons of fresh water, 100+ gallons of waste water, plus cabinets, furniture and personal belongings (not to mention driver and passengers) rolling down the road. 

“A motorhome, first of all, is a home,” Tiffin points out. “It has everything a home has, but on wheels.  It also has hydraulics and a diesel engine – like a backhoe.”  Not to mention the finest TV and electronics packages available.  Plus a fine kitchen, an air conditioning system and two electrical systems, including a generator.  And it all has to operate properly at sea level or at 11-thousand feet and accommodate a variety of climate and road conditions.  From chassis to engine to handcrafted cabinetry to exceptional fit and finish, the company’s quality standard is high, whether an owner vacation travels or lives full time in their motorhome.  

“Our customer sets the standard,” says Tiffin.  “The customer is the culture of our company.  We think about them when we design our products.  We think of them every minute of every day and do everything we can to help them.  We have 200 employees in our service department.  Fourteen techs each take 30-40 calls a day.  And CoachNet takes the calls after hours and on weekends.” (CoachNet is a leading provider of 24/7 technical and emergency roadside assistance for motorized and towable RVs with a network of more than 40,000 service providers throughout the U.S. and Canada.)

“My three sons work with me in the business, and we meet every day with our engineers to go over each problem we got a call about the day before,” notes Tiffin.  Many of the fixes to those problems find their way into the company’s six Class A motorhome lines, which range from Allegro Breeze, the smallest rear engine diesel coach on the market, to the lavish Zephyr, “45 feet of sumptuous grandeur loaded with more features than we’ve ever put into a motorhome,” including a residential style fridge, two bathrooms and a stacked washer / dryer combo.  

Picture
Image © by Brian E. Faulkner
Picture
http://tiffinmotorhomes.com/
Picture
Image © by Brian E. Faulkner
Bob Tiffin’s customer service passion is rooted in values instilled in him by his father, Alex Tiffin, whom Bob watched do business in the family lumberyard and general store in rural northwest Alabama from the time he was a little boy:
Build it well.  Make it better.  Back it with good service. Treat customers the way they    would want to be treated.  And always answer the phone.
These days, if Bob Tiffin isn’t in his office taking with a customer on the telephone, he’s more than likely talking to a customer in-person, at the Tiffin plant in Red Bay or on the road somewhere.

“If you can’t look your customers in the eye, you can’t do business with them,” Tiffin believes, a maxim that goes back to the Tiffin Supply Company days and has stuck with them since the family acquired and developed a motorhome manufacturing business after one of their customers went bust forty-odd years ago. 

The product may be more sophisticated these days, but Tiffin’s attention to the basics remains the same – in fact, it’s at the nexus of quality and service that Tiffin Motorhomes really shines.  The company is known not only for meticulous attention to design and manufacturing but also for Bob Tiffin and his legendary customer service, all of which combine to set Tiffin apart in a business where the competition isn’t shy about contending for market share.

“There used to be something like 100 motorhome manufacturers,” Tiffin says.  We’ve survived four major economic meltdowns since we started in business, and now there are only 6-7 manufacturers left.”  Which says a lot about his company’s products and the people who build and service them.

Just ask a Tiffin owner.

“Our customers talk about us around the campfire,” he points out. “We want them to say that we try our best to help if there’s a problem.  We don’t sugarcoat the fact that motorhomes can be challenging.   If there’s an issue, we ask our customers to call us, contact one of our 85 dealers, or drive to the factory.  Ninety-nine percent of the time, we’ll fix whatever needs to be fixed.  Because it’s our name that’s on their motorhomes.”   

Bob Tiffin gets it.  He gets it that the promise of quality begins on day one of the manufacturing process, continues through sale and delivery (by a limited number of carefully chosen Tiffin dealers) and extends through the entire ownership experience.  His team gets it too, understands that integrity is the foundation stone on which their current and future business success rests.  The promise Bob makes to Tiffin owners, the promises his sons make, and the promise that every associate in the Tiffin family makes is part of each motorhome that heads up the road from Red Bay.

“Customers invest from $100,000 to more than $500,000 in their motorhomes,” the founder says.  “Sometimes that’s their whole life’s savings.  And keeping them happy is our job” -- a Marketable Truth© deeply embedded in Tiffin’s long-time tagline:

“Where You Go, We Go!”

TakeAway:  Live your integrity.  A reputation for excellence will follow, and your customers will brag on you.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner      Marketable Truth
© by Brian E. Faulkner   

0 Comments

A Small Steinway With A Big Message.

11/4/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Flipped through the November Music Trades magazine the other day and came upon a picture of a miniature art case piano based on an elaborate Steinway given to the people of United States during the first Roosevelt administration.  Detailed marquetry on its side portrays the thirteen original American colonies, while nine lavishly painted muses adorn the underside of the lid. 

From intricate carvings to ornate legs, the 1903 White House Steinway (now at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History) is a richly decorated example of turn-of-the-previous-century piano design and craftsmanship.

But this White House Steinway – the one in the magazine -- isn’t a real Steinway.  Is it?

Steinway says it is – and has declared it so.   But this Steinway is only 15-inches long.  You could probably hold it in your outstretched hands (if they let you).   It’s priceless.  And perfectly proportioned, down to the most obscure piano detail.   It’s not a model.  It’s a “real” Steinway, according to the company.

As piano folks say, it’s actionable.  It plays!

Each tiny key, wippen, hammer, damper, string and bridge pin works in perfect synchrony with all the other 12,115 grand piano parts to produce real musical notes.  A Lilliputian pianist could sit her miniature self down on the instrument’s gilded stool, lift the fallboard and play a concert!  And it probably would sound good (in a smallish sort of way), although the article doesn’t say that. 

The 1:7 scale Steinway was created by Canadian artist Paul Gentile, who is famous for making other astonishingly accurate small scale musical instruments.  In his quest for perfection, he even fashioned a small version of Steinway’s 19th century rim press to help create the piano’s case (it wouldn’t surprise me if he used precisely the number of hard rock maple laminates and the correct glue and procedure to assure authenticity).  He even had Steinway’s foundry cast the instrument’s golden plate.

His particular genius and level of obsession clearly qualify Gentile to make a piano, one of the most exacting (and emotionally gratifying) undertakings in the world.  

Of course, Steinway has created instrument after instrument for more than 160 years, ever since the company’s German immigrant founder, Heinrich Engelhard Steinweg, built the first one in his Manhattan kitchen.  To this day, each Steinway has an individual allure that must be matched to the player, although all Steinways share the same exalted pedigree.

Gentile’s gilded miniature, apparently, is no exception.

But what’s so eminently instructive about the mere existence of this miniature art case piano is the gilded reputation Steinway & Sons has crafted for itself over the years.  Through times of uncertainty and change, they have built their brand on a foundation of excellence, as described initially by the man who became known as Henry Engelhard Steinway.

“Build the best piano possible,” he instructed.  Then “sell it at the lowest price consistent with quality.” 

That price has continued to rise, to the point where a Steinway concert grand can set you back around $150,000 (closer to  $200,000 with certain veneered cases).  Steinway prices increase by a predictable chunk every year, but there’s no shortage of discerning buyers willing to invest in new Steinways or plunk down the cash for quality rebuilt ones, especially those restored in the company's own shop.

Quality is a difficult notion to put your finger on because it’s experienced in the eye (or ear) of the beholder.  Even so, through a combination of old world craftsmanship and diligent brand building over the years, Steinway & Sons pianos have managed to become the quality standard to which others are most often compared – particularly at the concert performance level, whether the grand on stage is a New York Steinway or a Hamburg Steinway.  Of course, other exquisitely-crafted pianos from low volume (mostly European) makers also are available to performers, each with its unique appeal and devotees.  But there’s still only one Steinway.

It’s just that now one of them is very, very small.

TakeAway:  Build your brand brick by authentic brick.   In time, perhaps you can become the standard by which your competitors are judged.  And maybe then some famous artist will take the time to honor you by creating a working miniature of your product.


0 Comments



    sample blog:

    This is a sample blog  for writer Brian E. Faulkner.   It presents stories about brands that do a good job communicating competitive advantage. Stories have been gleaned from the business press, personal experience and occasional interviews. Updates are made from time to time, and every so often there will be a post of general interest -- about things like success, passion, social trends, etc. 

    Author

    Brian Faulkner is a writer and strategic communication consultant who helps business clients explain their competitive advantage in compelling and enduring ways.
     
    He also is a five-time Emmy award winning Public Television writer & narrator for a highly-rated and well-loved magazine series.

    Picture
    Image © by Brian E. Faulkner

    Categories

    All
    Advertising
    Authenticity
    Brand Branding
    Brand & Branding
    Brand Names
    Business Culture
    Competitive Advantage
    Competitive Advantage
    Competitive Factors
    Content
    Creativity
    Culture
    Customer Satisfaction
    Differentiation
    Experience
    Flexibility
    Future
    Innovation
    Key Message
    Leadership
    Luxury
    Marketable Truth
    Marketing
    Passion
    Politics
    Positioning
    Price
    Quality
    Sales
    Service
    Small Business Marketing
    Story
    Strategic Thinking
    Taglines
    Team
    Technology
    Trends
    Values
    Vision

    Archives

    July 2019
    January 2019
    November 2016
    February 2016
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2012
    October 2011
    March 2011

    RSS Feed

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner.   All rights reserved.