Question

Topic: Strategy

Help Needed With Usp Clash!!

Posted by Anonymous on 3/3/2011 at 5:50 AM ET 250 Points
I work for a large global organisation we are just about to launch some new marketing materials with new USPs on. At the 9th hour we have found out that a competitor has launched a campagin with virtually identical USPs.

Theirs:
We listen to your challenges.
We understand your needs.
We deliver value.

Ours:
We UNDERSTAND your operational objectives.
We KNOW HOW to tackle complex challenges.
We DELIVER global success stories.


How can we change the USPs to differentiate ourselves with out going back to the drawing board?

By changing to a third person (understanding your operational objectives, knowing how to tackle complex challenges, delivering global success stories) I am concerned that we will loose the personal feel that was created with the 'we' ...

This is somewhat urgent as we have the design agency and printers waiting on a response. Help and guidance would be most appreciated.

Thanks!

To continue reading this question and the solution, sign up ... it's free!
SUBSCRIBE
Or, SIGN IN

RESPONSES

  • Posted by michael on 3/3/2011 at 8:43 AM Accepted
    I fell asleep after "We listen..." These are things that are expected of anyone in the market place. You need something UNIQUE. Only you know that and a USP should be geared toward the PAIN you're solving.

    "90% of our consultants have actually worked in organizations like yours"

    Michael
  • Posted by Jay Hamilton-Roth on 3/3/2011 at 9:19 AM Accepted
    I agree with Michael - your USP isn't unique to your business - it's "business as usual". Instead of telling your prospects about you/your company, tell them how you "win" for them - Saving money, saving time, improving efficiency, etc. - and anchor it with a story of how you've made a difference. That's more likely to be remembered and repeated.

    Also, be sure you clarify who exactly you're targeting - what type of company, located where, doing what, with what typical need, etc. That'll make it easier to fit the message to those people, rather than having people guess if the USP applies to their needs/problems.
  • Posted by Markitek on 3/3/2011 at 10:07 AM Accepted
    A fix here is to refocus the USPs with some drilling down (BTW I think that making a distinction between listening and understanding is dangerous, but that's another fettle of kish.)

    Here's one drill down:

    "We listen"
    "So what"
    "That means we understand what our customers want"
    "So what"
    "That means we don't take wrong directions"
    "So what"
    "That means our customers don't get frustrated"

    So now maybe "frustration free zone" becomes the USP, explained by the methodology you use to listen, understand and formalize client requirements.
  • Posted on 3/3/2011 at 12:13 PM Author
    Many thanks for the many insightful comments. On further discussion it was agreed that whilst we are calling these statements USPs, they are more accuratly described as 'catchy statements to make the client feel warm and fluffy' -okay not really. However as many of you state there is nothing unique about them.

    We have come to the conclusion that as it is a hugely diverse / disparate organsation it is virtually impossible to apply a unique, relevant, catch all statment at a headline level. Equally different elements of the business call themselves different things (with one common name throughout), so the strength of these (so called) USPs will be dillouted by the application of individual business units using different -although relevant to them, statements.

    At the lack of agreement internally we are currently debating removing them altogether, but I wonder if we are missing a trick if we do so? Any thoughts on the importance of leaving them in? Or benefits of taking them out?
  • Posted on 3/3/2011 at 8:11 PM Accepted
    Only knowing what you've told us so far, I'd drop the lines altogether. Then regroup and address the whole positioning issue once the time pressure is off.

    The lines you've suggested, as others noted, are not unique/distinctive, and they will almost certainly look "me-too" given the competitor's use of similar statements.

    Time to hire some outside expertise to guide you through a positioning project so you can come up with a long-term solution that will build real equity in your brand. (Hey, when you're a hammer every problem looks like a nail!) ;)
  • Posted by amelia on 3/3/2011 at 8:39 PM Accepted
    Hi there. I had the same reaction as pretty much everyone else but understand your second message. We all know these sorts of statements are just so much fluff – yet we’ve all used them. As much as we cynical 21 Centuryons revel in our cynicism, words like this can break through. Anyhow now you are considering either changing your “USPs” or canning them – I suggest you leave your bullet points in, but change the focus and use single word concepts to bullet point your brand values. You are sticking with ‘corporate – elegant’ in your communications so as two suggestions you could say:

    • EXPERIENCE
    • KNOWLEDGE
    • BRAVERY

    Or
    • KNOWLEDGE
    • IMAGINATION
    • SUCCESS

    That way you continue with your basic concepts and collateral while differentiating your communication and positioning.
  • Posted on 3/4/2011 at 2:27 AM Accepted
    Regarding Amelia's suggestion: An interesting way to seem a little different, but "lipstick on a pig" comes to mind.

    What she's suggesting doesn't address the real issue. And my experience has been that "just so much fluff" rarely sells anything or changes customers' minds. They're not stupid, and they will recognize fluff when they see it. Then you're training them to discount whatever you say and your credibility is shot.
BACK TO TOP

Post a Comment

Related Discussions

Community Info

Top 25 Experts
(Strategy)