I’m pleased to report that I haven’t gone on holiday recently.Yep, I’ve been right here in London – happily
going from SE to E (and back again) via train, bus, tube or my own two feet. Ah land based travel. You just can’t beat it, can you?
Well, flying sure can’t. All you have to do is blink these
days and a volcano erupts, cabin crew go on strike or taxes triple that ‘oh so
tempting’ fare. Frankly, it’s no surprise so many Brits think flying is more
trouble and money than it’s worth.
That said... all this palaver does have its upsides. Because
now, we can sit back and watch the airlines get creative. And let’s face it; they’ll have to be if
they want to coax us back to a 30-inch seat in
time for the all-important choice – chicken or beef?
Personally, I think this little gem from low-cost carrier Germanwings does just that.
It’s pretty obvious that the Germanwings viral is a real
departure (sorry I couldn’t help myself) from the way airlines usually
advertise. Low cost carriers generally focus on price for pretty obvious
reasons. But here, Germanwings make sure we know that they’ve got another thing
many of their competitors don’t – the chance for a family to actually sit
together. Isn’t it funny how easily we are impressed?
To be fair, I think they’ve achieved a lot here. They’ve put
the message across really creatively and got a dig at the competition to boot. Most
importantly, though, they got my attention. Because before I knew it, I was on
the Germanwings website, checking out trips to Berlin, Zurich or St.
Petersburg.
And presuming I’m not the only one that has had this
reaction, well, that’s not bad for a viral that cost them four tickets on
EasyJet (a guess - orange headrests), right?
Essentially, the money Germanwings spent went mostly on
their flash mob style
concept, because the execution was so inexpensive. And by allocating their
spend this way – rather than throwing money at flashy design – the viral stands
out a mile from the competition.
As for charities, well the logic really need not deviate too
much from what Germanwings have done here. Because once you’ve got that great
idea, you can still stand out, get attention and engage donors without spending
a fortune on gimmicks, giveaways and graphics.
A case in point is the series of press inserts Bluefrog
recently created for our client, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF).
In the first round we ran two inserts. One was, as we say,
very ‘inside track’ – it looked like it was sent directly from the field, from
an MSF nurse. And believe me, when I’d finished the interview, I had a feeling
we were onto a winner. Her experiences were so compelling.
So, we typed the insert in courier, used real handwriting,
printed on a very inexpensive stock, and put it all in a cost-effective ‘no
bells and whistles’ layout. The finished product was convincing. The other
option, although also straight from the field, was much more designed and
glossy.
When the results came in, our initial hunch was right. Just
as the Germanwings viral has done, the MSF insert really grabbed donors’
attention. And at the end of the day, it was the inexpensive looking insert that
fought off the competition and convinced donors to sign up to a £20 a month
Direct Debit. Not bad.
So where do we go from here? Well, in round two, we’ve taken
that learning, built on it, and created two brand new inserts. One ran in the
Guardian two weeks ago, and the other may have dropped out of your Sunday copy
just this past weekend. If you missed them, here’s a look:
This insert (based on the winning insert last time) is about kala azar.
One of the inside spreads
This is a new approach about Fistula
This is the first spread.
So far, it looks like our new inserts are creating
the same positive reaction as the first one. In fact, Nick Nunn of the
Lancashire Telegraph has already blogged about the first of our two inserts, and
I think his headline says it all... One leaflet that put things into perspective.
You can read Nick’s full post here,
but this is just a taster:
“A LOT of printed material has come through the letterbox in the past
week.
“Some is extremely boastful and it’s all designed to appeal to
self-interest usually by suggesting we will be better off financially if we
vote a particular way...
“...But
one item, a few pages of cheaply printed, A4 paper, was none of the above. It
was all about kala azar.”
I’ll leave it there for now. But I suggest keeping copies of
the MSF inserts... they may come in handy next time your brand team say, “but
that’s not one of our agreed fonts/colours/insert whatever you like here”.
As the election draws ever closer, the major political
parties are really vying for our attention. So, as my doormat slowly disappeared
under countless leaflets and flyers...
...I had a thought...
...Why not have a closer, more critical look at a very
important election battle: the battle of party direct marketing?
Now, throughout this election campaign I’ve received
numerous leaflets and flyers telling me to ‘make a change’ and ‘do the right
thing’ (watch out if you do the wrong thing – big trouble). But rather than dissect every piece today, I thought
I’d stick to the (slightly) more personalised packs I’ve received – one
Labour and one Tory.
Both packs came as a surprise because I’ve never registered
my interest in any particular party. One was hand delivered to my front door
(!), whilst the other was addressed to me and dropped off by the postman.
Of course, as an Art Director here at Bluefrog, I was
excited to tear them both open and see what impressive tactics were about to be
employed in gaining my support. Below you’ll find a few quick thoughts on the ups and downs
of the packs. I’ve left out letter content simply because critiquing those is
another blog post altogether.
Let the games begin!
The Labour pack.
A • C4 envelope.
Big envelope. Makes me feel important. Good work.
B • Address label
stuck on. Someone’s gone to the trouble of hand printing these and placing
them on by hand. Swoon.
C • Image. Helping
to give the letter a voice. Shame Jim’s face is a bit red. A quick bit of
photoshop could have sorted him right out.
D • No letter
personalisation. By using handwriting then calling me ‘Resident’ has broken
the illusion of personalisation. Plus, Jim seems to have forgotten my
name, but remembered it on the outer. Hmm.
E • Strange headline.
Both in position and content this is odd. Since ‘Dear Resident’ is rather large, it’s lost up there on its own.
F • Indentation.Eyes are drawn here again but since
it’s such a large chunk and makes me not want to read the first two paragraphs.
G • Two sheets of
paper. This isn’t a long letter; it’s just two sides but printed on two
sheets of paper. This appears incredibly wasteful!
H • Printed colours. Both
sheets are four colour prints but the reds at the header and footer are
different colours. This adds to an increasing sloppy feeling of this pack.
I • Signature scan.
Looks rather messy but, more importantly, doesn’t look like it was done with the
same pen as the ‘Dear Resident’.
J • Poster. It’s
presumptuous that I’ll want this, but very eye catching. I’ll remember that Jim
Fitzpatrick is a Labour candidate – it’s imprinted on my retina in neon yellow.
K • Return form. Well
well, this freepost A5 response device is rather bizarre. It’s a heavy, coated
stock (of about 300gsm), asking for my details to be written on the reverse
(for the world to see) and returned. It also slyly asks for a donation
therefore I’d have to go find an envelope myself. I wonder what the response
rate is for this?
L • ANOTHER response
device. Asking for me to apply for a postal vote on a photocopied
application form that I’m supposed to fold up and glue together. Oh Jim, you
really are expecting a lot from me.
The Conservative pack.
A • C5 windowed
envelope. Official looking. Best open it. Might be a bill!
B • No letter
personalisation. Oh dear, my name is printed a few centimetres above but
not in the letter. This also means Dave knows what constituency I’m in, but
fails to mention it or who is running for MP.
C • Image. Again,
making it obvious who is writing the letter.
D • Orphan. Poor
layout. Poor orphan.
E • High-vis pen. David
Cameron’s been raiding his kids’ pen sets.
F • Response form. This
incredibly short survey has free form space for me to share my opinion. Nice.
G • BRE. With
space here for a final bit of communication/branding, leaving this blank seems
like a missed opportunity.
Quick questions.
So it seems Labour have tried to show me that they’ve spent
a bit on my pack, and want to encourage me to self-define by putting a poster
in my window. They’ve also tried to speak with me on a local level. The
Conservatives have gone for a cheaper, letter and survey approach with
information based almost solely on national issues.
Both, however, seem to have missed the mark. It might well
take a little longer (and cost a little more) but with a more thought, care and
attention to detail both packs could have really have given me some clear
thoughts about what they were trying to say.
The devil really is in the details.
So, before you cast your vote on who won in this particular
election battle, a few comments on some other DM pieces directly addressed to
me – that have since dropped through the door. One was a fold out flyer from my
local Conservative candidate (featuring some incredibly low resolution images
and an image of David Cameron with half a neck – seriously!); another was an A5
letter from a ‘neighbour’ urging me to back my Labour candidate (with a blue C5
outer, light blue A5 letter, dark blue ink and the slightly confusing name,
Bernie Cameron); and finally, I received a fold out flyer from my Lib Dem
candidate (including some horrifically out of focus photography).
It seems the lack of
care in the first two pieces I reviewed, weren’t just a one off...
Eagle-eyed readers of this blog will notice that I am employing
the ‘Felix’ today. (If you’re unfamiliar with this technique, you can catch up
by paging down to the final post here).So I owe a debt of thanks to Rhys Alexander for saying exactly what I wanted to say, several years before me.
And I’d like to follow her words with a confession. I love
detail. I love detail in much the same way I love fig rolls. Fig rolls are a neglected pleasure (albeit a slightly dry one). So is attention to detail.
Instead, it’s usually the ‘big idea’ that gets lauded and sometimes I can't help feeling ‘big ideas’ are over-exposed.
And shouty. And flashy.
Behind the scenes, it’s
the hard-working details that determine whether that initial big idea becomes a
success. And I think that applies whether you’re writing a pack, an email, creating a website, organising an event – anything really.
But let’s go through an example – chosen because it’s a cold
pack that beat the control in an incredibly difficult time financially. And
although it was created to an exceptionally tight budget, it has a few nice
details. So hopefully useful to you to look at how and why it works.
The beginning
A winning pack starts with inspiration. And in this case,
that came from the fantastic staff at Barnardo’s project with young people who
are ‘sexually exploited’. @markyphillips and I spent a few hours visiting the centre
and asking questions. We were looking for the things that would excite donors.
And when I say ‘things’, I mean ‘details’. There were loads.
Here, for example, is a detail that helps you understand
what ‘sexual exploitation’ really means. Several of the young girls at the
project had met their much older ‘boyfriend’ in the following way. The men had
been waiting outside their care home in a flashy car. That’s how they identify
the most vulnerable girls (they are in care) – and a flashy car is enough to
attract them. Awful.
It’s because these girls have never known real love (not
even from mum and dad) that they easily fall into ‘relationships’ that are
immensely damaging. Their ‘boyfriends’ introduce them to drugs, pimp them out,
give them STDs and unwanted pregnancies. I could go on.
But here’s another detail that moved me.
Whenever it was a girl’s birthday, the staff would club
together to get a card and a cake. For many girls, it was the first time in
their lives that anyone had done anything to celebrate their birthday.
And another.
Because the girls had so little, the staff would buy
multi-packs of soap, shampoo etc and create ‘survival kits’ of supplies. They’d
even add in donated clothes.
Needless to say, all these and more went into creating the pack. Because a good project visit is about details - finding the ones that show how amazing the work is.
The pack
The pack itself was made to look like it came direct from
the project (as all the information had). It asked the prospective donor to
give £15 to buy a kit of essential supplies of a girl at the project. And it
asked them to write them a greetings card wishing them good luck.
This is what it looked like.
But here are some of the
details I like most in no particular order. (Apologies if the formatting is awry - Typepad hasn't liked what I've tried to do here).
Card: Lightweight and low cost, the card invites the donor to share a few kind words. I like the back best. A small touch that shows the donor what their support means.
Outer envelope: this envelope wears its green credentials very clearly. It
was one of our charitybloggers, Red Cookie,
who told us how irritating it was to rip out the windows of letters because
they couldn’t be recycled. But they can…
Letter: blue signature, underlining and annotation make the pack
feel more personal and like someone has put some effort into producing it (Page
down to the second post on this page to read why this is important).
There’s also a picture of the gift you could buy a child (I wanted it on the
front).
Donation form: Repeating the image of the card here underlines that the
request to send back the card is not a gimmick, but something that is actually
used. Oh and A4 donation forms are worth the extra expenditure because of the
higher response.
Donation form back: It’s perhaps the nature of this disturbing issue that means
there’s a great deal of jargon used by social workers. This is a photocopy
taken directly from a handout we got at the project. It explains how a child is
‘groomed’ for ‘exploitation’, but the hand-written notes break down the jargon
to communicate how a child actually feels.
We don’t over-simplify – we enable the donor to explore the complexities of
this type of sexual abuse.
And now to the most important details of all.
This pack beat Barnardo’s long-standing control pack –
doubling the response rate against the charity's long standing survey control
pack. It also beat the campaign targets with a 14% increase in average gift and
income. Funnily enough, I got it through my letterbox again yesterday morning so I'll let you know how it gets on second time around.
I didn't get round to talking about the copy much, but what Rhys Alexander says is absolutely true. It's the real details - the things you'd never even think to make up - that make copy good to read. More on that another time.
