Let’s Lead!

I went into a pharmacy the other day to buy some allergy medication. The form for $4.00 off of the Claritin brand was still not working (see my last post) so I ended up buying the generic. The product I purchased was a decongestant containing pseudoephedrine (Sudafed). It is now restricted and stocked behind the pharmacy counter. I had no problem finding it though. I went to where it should be on the shelf and there was a card that told me exactly where to get it. The pharmacist gave me the product and scanned the barcode on the back of my driver’s license. I paid for the product and was on my way.

It wasn’t always this way. A number of years ago Claritin-D and other decongestants with Sudafed were sold in front of the counter like aspirin. Pseudoephedrine is a key raw ingredient in methamphetamine, a very addictive drug. People began making methamphetamine (meth) in their bathtubs. They would buy a couple of months supply of decongestant in 5 to 10 different stores to get enough raw material for meth production while not raising suspicion they were doing something illegal. They sold the meth or used it themselves. The methamphetamine was killing people and meth production was polluting everything it touched. Much of the production was being done in rural areas such as Indiana farm towns where law enforcement was not equipped to handle the problem. Something needed to be done.

Law enforcement and civic leaders suggested that the State regulate decongestants. they suggested that purchases be recorded and individuals could only buy a reasonable amount of medication that they could use over a 30 day period. Any person buying over a certain amount would be placed on an alert list.

The push back was huge. It seemed everyone found something wrong with the new proposal. Manufacturers did not like it because they thought they would sell less product. They claimed people would not buy their product if it was controlled. Pharmacies did not like it because they would be tasked with keeping records of individuals who purchased the product. Many called it an unfunded mandate. Some in government did not know what to do with or how to track the data that would be created. Some people did not like it because they didn’t want government telling them what to do. Organizations lobbied their political officials. Politicians took a "safe" approach. Nothing happened and the meth problem got worse, much worse.

As time went on meth production affected more counties and more individuals. Families were ruined. Law enforcement was overwhelmed. The cost to clean up the problem, catch and convict the offenders and rehabilitate the addicted back into society was staggering.

A title wave had hit and something had to be done.

Store chains such as Target, Wal-Mart and CVS heard the outcry and began to restrict the product. Eventually politicians could not ignore the problem any longer and 30 states passed laws requiring that products containing pseudoephedrine be restricted. Finally the Federal Government passed a similar law in 2006.

So a law passed and the rules changed. You would think that everyone would take pseudoephedrine out of their products. Most had argued that they could not compete with a regulated OTC product. Some manufacturers did.

Only one problem though – the pseudoephedrine product worked and consumers wanted it.

Manufacturers like Schering Plough, the producer of Claritin-D, decided to keep their formula and vary other things to keep market share. Bright marketers put on their thinking caps and figured out how to keep shelf space and make it easy for customers to find their product.

Forward thinking pharmacies tasked their IT departments to develop scanners to take personal information (and conform to federal requirements) off of a driver’s license automatically.

In the end we found that we can have our cake and eat it too. The nay sayers had it wrong. A good product is still on the market with a minimum of inconvenience to the consumer and a deadly misuse has been controlled.

The reality is that industry did not change until it was forced. Voluntary unilateral change doesn't work. The process never would have happened without government intervention ……….

Now I am not a supporter of excessive government regulation. I feel the private market can and should be able to do most things better than government but sometimes, as in the Claritin-D example, rules need to be made to encourage the market to compete in innovative ways and improve society as a whole.

So what are some other examples of how government can encourage industry?

How about increased fuel efficiency in cars and trucks? We all know we need to decrease our dependence on foreign oil. What if the government would set a goal of 80 miles per gallon by a certain date (2017) and give manufacturers tax incentives for meeting those goals. The goal needs to be a breakthrough – not incremental. If we could get a man to the moon in less than 10 years in the 1960’s my hunch is we could come up some fantastic fuel efficient cars in 10 years. If the carmakers really set a priority on making a fuel efficient and powerful car for the US market I think we could do it. These cars would sell not only in the US but lead the world. Take that Iran!

Another area may be carbon reduction. We know carbon levels are increasing and also know a major source is the burning of fossil fuels. Some people ignore the problem or suggest very minor reductions. Why not go for a real breakthrough target and ask for a 50% reduction in carbon emissions over 20 years. There are processes available today that will take carbon out of the air. We need to make them cost effective. There are resins available now that are sprayed on or molded into precast concrete that cause dirt to react with sunlight and disappear. It is self cleaning concrete! How about a similar resin that when exposed to sunlight will convert carbon to something else? How about a carbon converting resin that can be applied to the blade of a fan. Every household’s air conditioner compressor can now become a pump to pull carbon out of the air. Manufacturers could get tax incentives from the government for building and using these carbon reducing fans. If a company invented such a technology their products would be in high demand. They would hire lots of people. We need to make sure it is a US company, with US workers.

A key strength of the United States is our ability to solve problems. Let’s set some challenging goals, create an environment for innovation and solve them before anyone else. It can be done. Let’s lead.

Until next time – All the best!

RolandB

Make sure your website works

I was doing some research yesterday and needed to look up the ingredients in Claritin-D. I googled Claritin and went to the Claritin website. Schering Plough must have spent a ton of money on it. There is an animation containing 3D pictures of simulated characters telling their stories. All animations direct one to a button that says “take the Claritin-D tour.” This brings up a pop-up window with a bunch of text with another button that says “ask your pharmacist now” but the button doesn’t do anything.

I’m still trying to find out what is in Claritin-D! It took me a few more minutes but finally I found a “read the box” link and got the answers I needed. Whoever designed this site must not feel that the ingredients of the product or the directions for use are a priority.

I see another button “Get a $4 off coupon” Well OK, I buy allergy medicine and occasionally buy Claritin or a generic. I click on the button, get a new screen, and fill out my name, email and mailing address. Under “State” the form has a dropdown menu but no individual states are listed and I cannot type in a state. There are two more buttons “usual brand” and “also tried” and both of those buttons are similarly designed. No brands are listed and there is no way to provide the information. I clicked the submit button and got a reply that my request could not be processed because I have not provided all of the information.

Attractive site, interesting graphics but the information I needed was hard to find. Even then Schering Plough got me to in type my name and contact information but I could not submit it. My time was wasted. Instead of a positive experience I now have a negative experience with the brand.

I wonder how long this form will be posted before they figure out that no one is completing it. What is the return on investment of a negative sales number?

Bottom line. Write down what you want your customers to do on your website. Figure out the simplest way for them to do it. Document how you will know the website is performing up to your expectations. Test it then test it again before it goes live. Once it is live tell your friends. Hopefully one of them will tell you if it doesn’t work.

Until next time – all the best!

RolandB

Change the Rules

I follow college football and have been a HUGE fan of the University of Michigan football team since my days as an MBA student. I’ll pull for Michigan over anyone except maybe Minnesota where I received my undergraduate degree. I was shocked recently (along with most of the country) when Michigan, ranked at #5 nationally in a preseason poll, was defeated by Appalachian State (a division I-AA team) in their opening game 34-32. Last weekend they followed this “fluke” by being humiliated by Oregon 39-7. It was the first time since 1959 that Michigan has opened a season with 2 losses at home.

The post game critiques were ferocious. Many announcers / sports writers called for Coach Lloyd Carr to resign or be fired. Some questioned the passion of the team which is usually beating up early season opponents especially at home. The consensus comment was that Michigan was not used to or ready for the “spread” offense.

What happened?

A team with a spread offense thins out the defense by positioning eligible receivers across the entire width of the field instead of packing them in the middle for protection. If the quarterback can get his receiver the ball quickly there is less room for error for the defense. The players are extremely fast and the play is accelerated. Appalachian State runs without a huddle. Michigan’s defensive line couldn’t keep up. Appalachian State got one touchdown, then another. It was 28-17 at the half. Sports Illustrated reported “it was obvious to everyone that the Wolverines had no answer for the spread.” Mitch Albom wrote after the Oregon game “they have played two games now and the defense is apparently still checking into the dorms.” The TV announcers said Michigan liked to play “smash mouth” football. They were out of their comfort zone.

The rules had changed.

Appalachian State and Oregon had proactively changed the rules of the game. They did not try to run up the middle against Michigan's big line or drop their quarterback into a traditional pocket. Michigan seemed unprepared and could not compete.

Why?

Didn’t Coach Carr know these two teams were on his schedule? Didn’t he know they both ran the spread? Shouldn’t he have been preparing for these two games since January? Yes, yes and yes. For some reason either he didn’t do a very good job of planning and/or his team didn’t implement well. He was outcoached. He commented after the Oregon loss “maybe the game’s passed me by.” - WOW

So where am I going with this? How can David kill Goliath or at least create havoc?

As a marketer I try to put myself into the shoes of my customers, my suppliers, my distributors and finally my competitors and then play a “what if” game. I play to win. If I implement a certain tactic how will it be perceived by these key groups? How will they react?

In the military they call it out flanking your enemy. Rather than going head to head against an opponent’s strength (or competing the way everyone else is) figure out a weakness of the opposing army and exploit it. Appalachian State and Oregon proactively chose not to play traditional “smash mouth” football against Michigan. They apparently had a stable of smaller, faster players and used them to their advantage. They took a risk, changed the game and won. Michigan was caught off guard.

Now tie this back to your product, your service, your company or maybe even you as a person. How can you publicize, promote, sell and/or distribute your product in such a way that your competition won’t have an answer for how to compete? Think out of the box. Your competition may be so invested in the current system that they can’t or won’t change until it is too late.

How do you change the rules of the game? It probably will involve taking calculated risks since few companies in your market are successfully doing it now but the potential rewards are huge.

Now I hope Michigan can turn it around against Notre Dame this weekend. At least the Irish don’t have a spread offense. Go Blue!

Until next time – All the best!

RolandB

Stay Connected

I started this blog a couple of months ago after I heard a talk by Andy Sernovitz on word of mouth marketing. The topic that stuck in my mind is that people are already talking about you and your company and products. Your only option is to join the conversation.

I think 80% of the stuff on the web is junk. Many will argue it is close to 95%. It seems like there are many blogs and micro sites that are operating for the sole purpose of selling you something or trying to get you to click on a Google Ad. I wonder how successful they are. There are individuals however that are publishing some very good information about specific topics. It doesn’t take a lot of research to separate the good from the chaff. People will link to a good blog and share the information readily with friends, family and co-workers. Information is spreading with the pace of a wildfire in a windstorm. Some information is accurate. Others is not. For example I find it amazing what some people are doing to treat their children’s head lice. It seems the more frustrated they are the more extreme the remedy.

I’m not that old, at least I don’t think I am (just don’t ask my boys). I like to think of myself as informed on current events and trends in the marketplace. That said if you would have asked me 6 months ago where monitoring blogs about industry trends fit in on my priority list I would have ranked it very low. Heck blogs are for kids. Well not anymore. It seems like there are blogs popping up everywhere on every topic. The scary thing is that one upset customer that is properly connected can create havoc for a company very quickly.

Michael Snyder, managing partner for the MEK group published a very good piece on this topic this morning. His article titled Ignoring Blogs: A Recipe for Reputation Disaster outlines why we must at the very least monitor what is being said about us. Then we can decide if we want to join the conversation and what we should say.

Sernovitz talks about dealing with the negative. The best defense is a good offense. The first point is to know what people are saying. Go where they go and read what they write. People are blogging and most likely they are talking about you. Then show that you are listening. Reply, respond and identify yourself clearly. Many individuals (bloggers) are pleasantly surprised to find out that a company is reading what they write. Convert critics when you can. Treat critics like valuable customers. Finally don’t try to win. Tell your side of the story. People will give you credit for being honest. Maybe that is the last and most important point – be honest. If you are not, people will find out and then watch out!

Until next time – all the best!

RolandB