JC Penney: Comeback or Demise?

It was quite an eventful May for classic big box retailer JC Penney. It started out at the beginning of the month with an apology ad that urged JC Penney customers to come back, thanked them halfway through the month for doing so and ended the month with a controversial billboard choice.  JC Penney has made some big decisions, firing CEO Ron Johnson after 17 months to bring back former CEO Myron Ullman. With that came a ‘return to normal’ of sorts to lure back loyal shoppers. However, this has made a lot of people wonder, will this be a comeback or the beginning of the end for JC Penney?

Their apology ad made a splash. Posted to its Facebook and YouTube accounts, and running frequently as a TV ad, JC Penney tried to level with its customer base
http://usat.ly/10K7UPA
. The chain’s ”It’s no secret” ad admitted that it had changed, some for the worse and some for the better, but claimed it was now listening to its customers and urged them to come back. This was step one. These efforts continued on Facebook and Twitter with JC Penney creating an interactive atmosphere and even a #jcpListens hashtag. Slowly but surely, it’s customers were being heard.

Then, halfway through the month around Mother’s Day, JC Penney ran another ad thanking customers for coming back
http://bit.ly/1aSYsKQ
. This implied that they’d completed their efforts to lure customers back and had seen the results they were after. It seemed like they were jumping the gun here. How could customers be coming back that fast? Why would JC Penney be thanking them if their work wasn’t done yet? There’s no way JC Penney completed their return to normalcy and enticed all of its loyal customer base back to stores that fast. JC Penney could have waited a few months on this one, as this was just the beginning. They collected a lot of feedback online that they were beginning to put to use but they had not reached the end goal.

Sales were still down and changes were still in motion, as JC Penney made a return to private label brands among other things. Their ‘return to normalcy,’ an attempt to reconnect with their core audience, to get them to re-identify with their brand. Yet, it’s also no secret that things were not good before the prior CEO change and change of store models. One has to ask, does JC Penney really want to return to normal? Wasn’t normal what got them in trouble in the first place, pushing them towards drastic changes?

Then came the end of the month with their disastrous tea kettle billboard
http://bit.ly/16BZA9h
. Did anyone think to ask for alternate shots of this product? Obviously not but that’s perhaps what should’ve happened. A billboard with a tea kettle was posted and its text read something like ‘all the bells and whistles you deserve.’ The image got all the attention though, as many compared it to Adolf Hitler. JC Penney responded to this claim with a tweet that read “Certainly unintended. If we’d designed the kettle to look like something, we would’ve gone w/a snowman.” Certainly the right way to handle it, but did they handle it with enough style and grace or had they already fallen flat on their face? It definitely wasn’t timely considering their comeback efforts.

JC Penney is trying to move forward, but what it needs is its original look with an edge. It’s hard to define what that edge would be other than something that pushes it ahead of other big box retailers while maintaining what it’s known for. A fine line to walk and a hard balance to achieve. There are many people already calling for JC Penney’s demise in 2014. It’s hard to say what will happen, but we can speculate. Do you see JC Penney making a comeback or digging its own grave? You’ve already heard my take, I’d love to hear what you have to say.

Social Media Sensationalists

Sensationalism is exaggerating and blowing things out of proportion, and it’s quite possibly the worst social media tactic. Doing these kinds of things in person, that’s one thing. Do them on social media and their effects are tenfold. On social media people are apt to take screen shots and post on other sites. Word spreads. It’s also not likely that those comments, shares and retweets will get deleted either, leaving a lasting record. Fighting fire with fire is also a horrible tactic, because escalating the situation just makes it worse and not better. These are the tactics of sensationalists, i.e. people who don’t understand social media.

Take Amy’s Baking Company Bakery Boutique and Bistro for instance, whose reputation already had enough damage done to it on “Kitchen Nightmares”
http://bit.ly/189TLze
. Their first Facebook post after that finale positioned Amy’s in the role of the victim. What they should have posted instead is something like “We are working on making our business better and appreciate your support through this difficult time. We’d love to hear from you on how we can better serve you and we hope to see you soon.” Otherwise known as the “JC Penney approach.” Changing that first post to something more like mine could have stemmed the tidal wave that was launched in their direction. 

Even if it didn’t, as it didn’t change direction after they posted their victim post, the last thing that needed to happen was for them to start insulting customers in response. Another saying comes to mind and that’s “fanning the fire.” All their response postings did was spread the issue to other areas and to more and more people. So much for containment! They later claimed their accounts had been hacked, which is a poor cover-up and nowhere near an apology. When crisis management tactics are needed, there should already be a plan in place so you’re not responding emotionally
http://bit.ly/16RD7nH
. Handle it gracefully, listen, improve, those are all characteristics that will keep you in good graces and in business.

Then there’s Nutella, where instead of rewarding their biggest brand advocate they launched an attack of sorts
http://bit.ly/Zhd9Yj
. Ferrero, parent company of the Nutella brand, sent a cease and desist letter to the creator of World Nutella Day (held on Feb. 5th in case you were wondering). The creator of this holiday is Sara Rosso, an American blogger living in Italy who launched this day in 2007. Going back to that whole interconnectivity point I made earlier, well that came into play here too. Ferrero sent their cease and desist letter, Sara posted a note online and the comments came rolling in…to Ferrero of course.

The truth is, the comments weren’t off base. Why wouldn’t you reward someone who’s trying to spread your brand further and advocate on its behalf? Awareness of and love of a product come through many channels and Ferrero has hopefully learned this lesson now. But not before calling its initial response a “routine brand defense procedure that was activated as a result of some misuse of the Nutella brand on the fan page.” Quite the opposite, Ferrero, quite the opposite. Eventually the matter was dropped and they expressed their gratitude for fans like this on their Facebook page
http://lat.ms/Z3YqxB
. Too little too late? Only time will tell.

Good social media tactics reward efforts like those of the Nutella fan, invite customer feedback, listen and use it to improve. Oh…and they respond without getting over-emotional and combative. You’ve seen what bad social media tactics can do, what are your social media tactics like? How can you make social media work for you and not against you?

PR Fail to Communicate

You’ve seen it happen before. A tragic event occurs, someone thinks they’re trying to be relevant connecting themselves to it in some way (i.e. Groupon’s Tibet commercial from a few years ago). Then there are issues you just never parody, and yet there are people out there who find humor in something no one else does and do it anyways. It comes off as insensitive self promotion. It’s untimely, it’s inappropriate and it reflects poorly. Basically, it’s what is known in today’s Twitter-verse as a #prfail. One of the worst examples ocurred in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings.

Food website Epicurious had this to say on Twitter
http://bit.ly/13IzO17
: “In honor of Boston and New England, may we suggest whole-grain cranberry scones!” It followed that tweet up with “Boston, our hearts are with you. Here’s a bowl of breakfast energy we could all use to start today.” These tweets hardly acknowledged what was going on in an appropriate manner. It’s kind of like when your parents tell you, “if you don’t have something nice to say don’t say anything at all.” Epicurious would have been better off playing the silence card, after all, silence is golden. Instead they didn’t, and people called them on their poor communication. Epicurious then offered up the same apology repeatedly “We truly regret that our earlier food tweets seemed insensitive. Our hearts and prayers are with the people of Boston.” Seemed insensitive, seemed insensitive? You think? That statement took no ownership of the situation and did more harm than good. Then they tried to issue a correction “Our food tweets this morning were, frankly, insensitive. Our deepest, sincere apologies.” Epicurious should’ve offered this up in the first place, instead it was too late to fix the damage that had already been done. It’s the perfect case study of “what not to do.”

Another poorly executed piece of communication is a McDonald’s ad that mocks mental illness
http://usat.ly/ZexnA3
. I’m sure you’ve seen those ads on TV. The ones where a single person sits with their hands crossed over their eyes holding their head in sadness. McDonald’s chose this familiar image that is associated with only one thing for their ad. Perhaps if McDonald’s had tweaked some elements or changed the background it could have changed the interpretation. However, they simply borrowed the image and used it to say “You’re not alone. Millions of people love the Big Mac.” Granted McDonald’s has now pulled this ad, but that was not smart. It’s kind of like using the universal sign for choking in an ad to communicate the person’s had too much spicy food and their throat’s on fire. Yeah, kind of like that. Situations like these aren’t funny and relating to them inappropriately doesn’t have the intended effect. It simply doesn’t sell. What it does do is create a crisis management situation that could have easily been avoided if they’d just used common sense.

The same goes for Epicurious. That whole “think before you speak/act” statement? It applies to these kind of situations. The quickest way to tank your reputation is to pull a move like these companies did here. In the case of Epicurious unless you’re someone like Red Cross tweeting about your response to these situations, or Google tweeting about how their People Finder can help, you do not have any relevancy to speak of here. Either you stay silent out of respect or you offer a simple heartfelt condolence. In the McDonald’s case, use creativity before you borrow an image. Originality is much more respected than careless borrowing. In any case, you don’t want to be the one everyone’s talking about as a #prfail.

Image is Everything

Image management, managing customers’ impressions of you, is perhaps one of the most important parts of public relations. An image is the foundation for a business, upon which its success or failure is built. In customer-service businesses, based on the image you give off, people will either be flooding through the doors or running for the exit (usually not to return). It takes communication and active management to maintain image and it can be fatal if it’s mismanaged or strays too far from common association. One type of image management is store identity.

Take the fledgling world of big box department stores for example
http://ti.me/ZjATZe
. Once renowned anchor tenants with sturdy reputations, big box department stores now crumble as they scramble to find a foothold in a vastly different marketplace. Their current method of defense? Boutique “store within a store” concepts. At the beginning of April, Best Buy introduced its Samsung Experience Shop. JCPenney has mini shops, sections within its stores that each focus on a specific brand. Target, for a while, had “The Shops at Target,” mini collections from boutiques around the country. When successful, this concept provides an increase in foot traffic and sales, sometimes even outselling the main store. When it goes wrong, stores lose their identity. It’s too soon to tell for Best Buy, but it has affected JCPenney and Target. Loyal JCPenney customers have already started to drop off. Target’s boutique offerings were so obscure, and under-publicized, that the entire concept died a quick, quiet death last month (you were wondering where those went right?). It would be nothing short of ironic if the very concept invented to save the big box store ended up being the final nail in the coffin instead. My thoughts? If you need other stores to sell your store, than you need to better manage your original store image. Stores within a store are simply a band-aid, and a distraction from the main problem.

Another type of image management is customer service, and for this there are two examples. Target recently made a large blunder (pardon my unintentional pun) when its separate ”missy” and “plus-size” teams failed to collaborate on color names for a dress on its website
http://onforb.es/10VWjdb
. The “missy” size colors all said “Dark Heather Gray” while the plus sizes all said “Manatee Gray.” Although the latter is a color name found across a variety of product lines on Target’s site, this is no excuse for what happened. They did manage to save face though, communicating via Twitter with an apology and promptly fixing the problem. Proofreading and better communication in the first place between groups, known as teamwork, could have prevented this from happening in the first place. The second example is McDonald’s, whose slow decline in friendliness and fast service has alienated customers
http://on.wsj.com/ZUVOOe
. Part of the problem is that the McDonald’s franchise is a large one, and there is poor communication of standards to each franchise owner. Failure to maintain standards is the surest way to get customers up in arms, and the barrage of complaints related to these issues is proof. McDonald’s is placing a greater emphasis on service, boosting staffing at peak hours, and launching a “dual point” ordering system nationwide. Will it be enough? Efforts that come earlier stand a better chance at fixing a problem and saving face, and tackling problems as they’re happening is always better than waiting till it’s too late, but the effects remain to be seen.

Collectively, these companies face a weaker image for various reasons. What they all have in common is their poor image management.  Strong store identity and customer service are of utmost importance, never has it been more important to maintain an image than it is in an economy like this one. The important thing to remember, is that image really is everything.

Trayvon Skittles Crisis Signals Sticky Situation

Recently Skittles has seen a huge jump in profits, all because it happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Trayvon Martin, the teenager killed by a crime watch volunteer in Sanford, FL, had on a hoody and only a bag of Skittles and a can of ice tea on him at the time he was shot. As a result, those protesting his death have attached new meanings to these items, elevating his hoody and Skittles to the level of symbols. These symbols have become part of Trayvon’s identity and the identity of the movement used to protest the injustice of his death. Especially Skittles, which have been stuffed into T-shirt orders, resold to raise money for the family, handed out at rallies and sent and piled up as symbols of protest. Brands elevated to the status of symbols can take two paths. Either they receive positive brand equity, elevating them to iconic brand status, or negative brand equity because of negative press attention, recalls, etc. In this case, the circumstances surrounding Trayvon’s death have brought negative brand equity on Skittles. Kim Severson notes that on Twitter, people suggest that Wrigley is profiting greatly and should donate money made since his death to the family or causes helping with racial reconciliation in underprivileged communities
http://nyti.ms/HzOrbC
. Others say that people should boycott the candy until the company gets more involved.

Whenever a brand takes on an identity that is larger than itself it becomes a sticky situation and a good lesson in crisis management. Stephanie Childs, former crisis manager for ConAgra Foods, and others say the company stands to take a hit however it responds. If Wrigley donates, others will claim they did not donate enough money. If they speak publicly, they will be criticized for capitalizing on it. For now, Wrigley has taken a neutral response. Their statement mentions they are sorry for the family’s loss, respect the family’s privacy, and decline to get involved or comment further as they would never wish their actions to be seen as an attempt of commercial gain following this tragedy. A smart move considering that a crisis in today’s media fares much better than in the days of traditional media. Today, fiascos like these are merely a flash in the pan.

PR experts have three reasons for this, and according to Francesco Guerrera they are “the shiny object,” “the loyalty issue,” and “the lack of choice”
http://on.wsj.com/HyZfr2
. The first has to do with shorter attention spans that prevail today. Investing and consumer publics move on faster than traditional media so there is little impact on the brand’s bottom line. Next, customer loyalty helps dispel negative attitudes about the brand and restore positive brand equity. The last, lack of choice, is about a lack of alternatives. Other related companies are usually facing similar issues, so often there is no better choice out there. If it were a bigger crisis, this would be where a rebranding along the lines of Burberry’s would come into play. Burberry softened and lessened their iconic pattern when it became trendy among gangs. Granted, that’s a more serious crisis and a worse comparison to be made than what Skittles faces in this case. Profits and reputation may take a hit, but it will be quite minimal and Skittles should bounce back fast. After a while, Skittles’ brand identity association with this event will not be its primary identifying factor. In some cases it’s better to do nothing at all. Skittles has played it smart from the start and, because of that, they will reach the pot of gold at the end of their rainbow and come out alright on the other side.

After Groupon Ad Disaster, What’s Next?

I was not planning on another Super Bowl ad post so soon, but after reading about the controversy surrounding Groupon’s series of Super Bowl ads I felt the need to comment. Many of you saw the ad where Groupon juxtaposed the human rights crisis in Tibet with their brand in one of their ads during the Superbowl. There were two others in this series, before and after the game, that made for a bad first impression for Groupon. One features Cuba Gooding Jr. lamenting the dwindling whale population and then praising a discounted whale-watching cruise. The other features Elizabeth Hurley’s distress over the endangered Amazon rainforests and then promotes a Brazilian wax deal. According to CNN Wire Staff
http://bit.ly/fvhHut
 the controversial ads have been pulled. Now the question is, what’s next? Some, like Liz Strauss
http://bit.ly/gd2vRm
, say an apology is necessary. I would like to take that concept one step farther, because I believe that it will take more than an apology to set things right for Groupon. This was their introduction to mass society, which means they need a reintroduction. In short, I think this reintroduction should come in the form of a rebrand. Rebranding is something that a lot of successful companies have had to do at some point or another, just look at Old Spice. Sometimes rebranding gets a bad rap as a death sentence, but if done correctly it can restore a company’s reputation. Judith Aquino’s “The 10 Most Successful Rebranding Campaigns Ever”
http://read.bi/hkjt48
 showcases lessons that could prove useful in determining the right moves for Groupon’s endeavor.

McDonald’s rebranding lesson was “Pay attention to what the public says about you and respond with products and services that counteract those accusations.” Groupon is accused of trivializing the causes it actually cares about. What Groupon intended to do was tie their brand back to charitable giving, as they have a donation website for the charitable causes related to their Super Bowl ads. Part of their rebrand should be focusing on the seriousness of their connection to charitable giving to counteract the humorous take that drove people away. Old Spice’s rebranding lesson is that “a clever ad + smart use of social media can produce a fresh identity.” Instead of a clever ad, Groupon needs a new commercial that introduces Groupon and ties it to those charitable causes in a straightforward manner. Then, Groupon needs to utilize social media to drive people to its donation site. Burberry’s rebranding lesson is that “brands can be successfully revamped by adapting current styles while celebrating its history.” Christopher Heine
http://bit.ly/hnO5TY
 cites Groupon’s origins as “ThePoint.com” and a place of “collective action and philanthropy” and reveals that Groupon was poking fun at their own roots. Instead, Groupon should celebrate their roots by drawing positive attention to themselves. Earth Day is April 22, and Groupon could easily use this as an opportunity to do that by offering special Earth Day deals and donating a portion of the proceeds. Then, to build trust, they could devote a YouTube channel to showing how those donations made an impact on the charitable causes Groupon supports. Naturally these are simply a jumping off point. Groupon may decide to do something totally different and that is their choice, as long as it brings about the same end result. The fact remains that there is a lot of relevance between these rebranding lessons and the steps that Groupon must take to repair their reputation and make good on their bad first impression. To put it in golf terms, Groupon needs to take a mulligan. However you look at it, Groupon needs to establish a fresh image and rebranding is a critical component. The next move is Groupon’s.

Nestlé, iPhone 4 Antennagate: Lessons in Crisis Response

Two recent pr crisis situations that have made the news recently bear striking similarities. The first of which is Nestle and its palm oil crisis. PR Week’s article “Nestlé Faces Facebook Crisis Over Greenpeace Rainforest Allegations” by Gemma O’Reilly and Kate Magee
http://bit.ly/aXsux7
 discusses the situation and its negative response. Reports that Nestlé has been sourcing palm oil from Sinar Mas, an Indonesian company accused of illegal deforestation of rainforests, has resulted in negative connotations for the company’s image. This has prompted intense criticism on Facebook and Twitter, which has been handled the wrong way. Initially a Nestlé employee was answering critiques on Facebook, but doing so in a way that lashed out at consumers. Now that employee has ceased and no one is attempting to placate. Instead they just ignore comments posted and continue going about business as usual on Facebook by posting positive image news. This does not make the problem go away, as just last week I looked at their Facebook page and discovered the negative comments have continued.

Apple iPhone 4′s ‘Antennagate’ crisis is similar in this respect, as Reuters’ article “Defiant Jobs stands by iPhone 4, dishes out cases” by Gabriel Madway and Poornima Gupta reported back in July
http://bit.ly/cM3MSS
. Apple first told consumers to just not hold the phone that way, and later Steve Jobs vehemently denied that the iPhone 4 reception was a problem. He remarked “”This is life in the smartphone world. Phones aren’t perfect. Most every smartphone we tested behaved like this.” So instead of dealing with the problem they entered a state of denial, stating its reception was comparable to other smartphones. After this and blaming the user for holding it this way, they shifted the blame to a hardware glitch that overstates signal strength. It was a long process of denial before customer service kicked in with free cases on behalf of Apple to iPhone 4 users. The moral from both of these is that a prompt acknowledgement to customers and a fast and appropriate solution are essential to good crisis communications and a business’ image. Both Nestlé and Apple neglected the core of what makes them successful: their customers. The last thing you want to do is blame, negatively respond to, or alienate your customer base in a crisis situation. These were big mistakes and will surely become two more scenarios for the crisis communications case study book.

BP PR Blunders Harmful to Tourism

The most current website update claims the cap on the well is holding, but the fact remains that the damage has already been done. This damage has negatively impacted the environment, the people, BP’s image and tourism. However, the damage is not as widespread as some may think. There have been many reports about beaches on the Gulf Coast that have been hit by oil, and people tend to assume that all the beaches in and around those areas are affected. That is not the case with Florida, where the Manatee and Sarasota beaches remain pristine and unspoiled. A recent article I read called “Our beaches are just fine; PR pros use web to get word out” by Sara Kennedy talks about this fact and how PR professionals have had to cope with the aftermath and its effect on tourism. In this specific case they put up live web cams and used social media to get the word out, which has boosted their bed tax collections (charged on accomodations). Yet, while they are benefiting, other areas remain damaged and tourism has slowed tremendously. BP’s bad PR and crisis management skills are responsible for this harmful outcome.

A New York Times article titled “BP’s PR Blunders Mirror Exxon’s, Appear Destined for Record Book” by Anne C. Mulkern of Greenwire focuses on how these two incidents occur and also points out specific BP blunders. The most obvious mistake made was that they did not have a plan in place, which is the most essential rule of crisis communications. Even my college textbooks emphasize that fact, making it a part of Crisis Management 101 (or perhaps the most important and basic step of crisis management). BP has also emphasized science over people, showing little to no remorse for people and emphasizing the attempts of containment over everything else. In doing so they have gained few sympathizers and any positive PR has been drowned out by one attempt failing after another (at least until now and only time will tell if this solution proves to be permanent). BP has been throwing money at the problem, and focusing so much on an immediate solution that they have forgotten about focusing on PR depicting a positive response from people about cleanup efforts. This is an example of PR that would show a concern on BP’s part, and this has been lacking in their current strategy. It is almost like BP has become an acronym for Bad Pr. They have not done enough yet to help the people and environments within these tourist areas that have been impacted. It is my belief that if they had a plan in place a lot of the damage, both physical and emotional, could have been limited or even prevented. A better response to people and the environment has been needed since the spill first started and is especially needed now. Only then can BP begin to move forward.