Brand purpose. The biggest lie the ad industry ever told? (author: Tom Roach – Championing the commercial value of creativity in marketing)

I was asked recently to give a talk answering the question ‘does brand purpose really drive profit?’. My very short answer to it was ‘yes it can, but mostly it probably doesn’t’.

And the slightly longer answer to it was ‘it really depends, but on balance brand purpose is over-used in marketing today and its power over-stated, and it’s actually best used as a business tool by companies that are genuinely committed to conscious capitalism, rather than as a bolt-on by marketing teams looking for a quick sales fix’.

I suspect no robust data analysis will ever prove conclusively that it’s better for brands to be ‘purposeful’ than for them not to be. By cherry-picking case studies, you could probably make whatever argument you wanted for or against it: whether that’s highlighting examples that show purpose can drive profit or by cherry-picking examples of brands getting it wrong, in order to suggest it can’t. Or if you want to undermine the whole concept of purpose entirely, pointing to brands pretending to be purposeful, or even highlighting the many highly successful non-purposeful brands.

So it’s quite easy to cherry-pick examples to make whatever case you want. In fact one of the people who made purpose so popular in business and marketing was ex-P&G Global Marketing Officer, Jim Stengel, whose book, ‘Grow’, was founded on essentially a big cherry-picking exercise where he took the top 50 performing brands on a measure of brand strength and claimed that what linked them, and so accounted for their success, was that they all had a brand ideal to make the world a better place in some way – I recommend you look up Richard Shotton’s article and talks on this as he rips apart the data behind Stengel’s book in a way that I’m not going to do justice to. But it’s a very compelling case.

I will pick two cherries of my own though just to show you I’m not actually a purpose sceptic, just a sceptic of certain types of supposedly ‘purposeful’ brand communications. A personal favourite example is Timpsons, a UK shoe repair chain, who do amazing work employing ex-prisoners, and repeatedly get listed as one of the top 10 best companies to work for. They don’t even use the word ‘purpose’, and you’ll never see them running empowering TV ads humbly bragging about the good they do, but by most definitions they look pretty purposeful. An example close to me is Barclays, which has been on a journey of internal transformation since the Libor scandal, that has helped it discover for itself a more positive role in society via fantastic initiatives like Digital Eagles and LifeSkills. Barclays saw a return on investment from its advertising about these societal initiatives far stronger than the ROI for ads talking about current accounts and mortgages. It’s a kind of marketing alchemy that Barclays ‘purpose-led’ advertising about them helping young people with job interview techniques sold hundreds of millions of pounds worth of mortgages. That’s clearly a win-win. But for every Barclays, there’s a handful of other brands with pseudo-purposeful ad campaigns that are clearly just cynical attempts to jump on board a societal issue in order to grab some headlines and turn around flagging sales.

So overall I think there are probably 3 broad types of brands that define themselves as having a purpose that we see in the marketing world. Imagine three concentric circles containing three types. At the bullseye we see brands that are Born Purposeful, often founder-led, often small, niche, usually founded with a societal purpose and where purpose goes across the whole business operation. Toms and Patagonia are perhaps the most often-cited examples of this. No one ever seems to argue about brands like this – very clear purposes, and business models designed to balance purpose and profit. In the middle concentric circle we see a second type, which tend to be Corporate Converts – often larger businesses which have adopted the concept of purpose more recently. They usually seem to genuinely want to make a positive difference to the world alongside making money, sometimes to correct past wrongs or just to become a better corporate citizen. They’re by definition on a journey of transforming themselves and are often more complex businesses, and because of that they may have to make pragmatic decisions that favour profit over purpose in certain instances. They may not have a business model that’s built around their purpose. They may have certain voices internally who are more committed to their purpose than others, and they’re likely not to have a founder present who’s committed to keeping the business permanently in line with its purpose in all its decision-making. So they’re naturally a greyer area. Purpose often becomes a new type of business vision or Northstar for these kinds of brands – they will typically need to find a space at the top of their strategy pyramid for their new purpose.

And there’s a third kind, on the outer circle, which I would call Pseudo-purposeful brands – these are the ones for which purpose is just a new ad campaign claiming to try and solve an issue like gender or racial equality, or toxic masculinity or whatever the most resonant topic is that their social listening data says is trending with their demographic that month. This is the kind of purpose that’s least likely to become embedded across every function of a business, it was probably cooked up in the marketing department, and so is far less likely to take root within an entire organisation, be taken seriously and gain long-term investment. And so it’s far less likely to be profitable in the long-term.

So there are probably three types of purposeful brand: 1. Brands that are Born Purposeful, 2. The Corporate Converts, 3. The Pseudo-purposeful brands doing what’s recently been labelled ‘woke advertising’. And the likelihood of purpose driving a profit probably decreases from type 1 to 3.

And whilst it’s fairly obvious that, like most things, brand purpose sits on a spectrum, the debates about purpose in marketing always seem to be hugely divided, with the industry’s biggest beasts all coming down firmly on one side or the other. Unilever’s Keith Weed and Tesco’s Dave Lewis are believers. But two of marketing’s most well-known Professors, Byron Sharp and Mark Ritson are non-believers, who tend to see marketing’s obsession with purpose as a sign that marketers have lost confidence and pride in their core task – to sell.

The simplest, most no-nonsense view, is this, expressed by Jenni Romaniuk of the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, who when asked about brand purpose said simply: “A brand’s purpose is to sell stuff.”

Mark Ritson, says this: “Brand purpose is mostly nonsense talk. There are a couple of brands, like Ben and Jerry’s…they were founded with purpose first. But for most of the brands in the room, the banks and telcos, these noble purposes that all sound the same – they are not differentiated, customers don’t give a shit.” Ritson tends to see Purpose, with some specific exceptions, as bad marketing practice, unlikely to lead to brand differentiation and lacking in relevance for most consumers. He sees most purpose marketing as failing to help brands create relevant differentiation, help them stand out from the crowd in a way that motivates consumers. He also attacks purpose as a layer of bullshit applied to pull the wool over the eyes of gullible consumers. Writing about Starbucks he said this: Time and again we encounter the lofty, admirable sheen of brand purpose only to discover it flakes off with even the slightest scratch to reveal a darker, more commercial sub-surface beneath. Starbucks’ famous mission ‘to inspire and nurture the human spirit — one person, one cup and one neighbourhood at a time’ is about as lofty as it gets. But it contradicts mightily the company’s abject inability to align its tax responsibilities accordingly”.

Byron Sharp not only sees deception and duplicity going on with marketing’s obsession with Purpose – but also spots something a bit deeper – a level of self-deception, even self-loathing going on here amongst marketers. He says “[Brand purpose] is almost like an apology as we feel marketing is so disrespectful and evil that we have to do this other stuff. I think that’s terrible. If marketers don’t stand up for marketing, who will?

Very few people in marketing seem to disagree with the importance of brand purpose when the examples cited are companies built on progressive business models that successfully share the proceeds of growth in order to help alleviate a societal problem. But when advertising becomes a significant part of the conversation about purpose, things tend to go awry. In fact, my view is that if being purposeful means doing ads to you, then you’re probably doing it wrong.

So that’s where I stand. But how did we get here? How did we get to a place where brand purpose became simultaneously the most pervasive yet divisive concept in marketing? How can we explain the rise and dominance of brand purpose in early 21st century marketing?

My answer to that last question is this.

The dominance of brand purpose in marketing is perhaps the inevitable consequence of advertising people being told by everyone else, for about 150 years now, that they’re liars. That what they do is deceitful, that it’s of little or no positive value to society, that it doesn’t matter. Constantly hearing this view has helped give many advertising people a feeling of self-doubt about the role they play in society.

An Ipsos-Mori poll from 2018 found that ad execs are the least trusted profession in the UK, with only 18% of respondents saying they trust ad execs to tell the truth. That’s worse than estate agents, journalists, even politicians. A long-running study with over six decades of data, suggests that around 70% of the public tend to see advertising as untruthful – and that this number has stayed more or less stable for all of that time. This tallies with a finding from the Advertising Association that trust in the ad industry overall was around 30% in 2018.

And my theory is that perhaps advertising people have subconsciously sought in response – through their eager adoption of the concept of brand purpose – to prove they can be of value to society and that their work can do some good. The great irony here being that a response which has resulted in advertising people pretending, for example, that a brand of carbonated sugar water can solve some of society’s biggest issues, will actually have the opposite of the intended consequence: most of the pseudo-purposeful advertising out there just makes ad people and their output seem even more deceitful.

Advertising people have always sought to present themselves as respectable, responsible corporate citizens in the face of the strong suspicion that they’re not. You only have to look at the agency names DDB, BBDO, WPP, Ogilvy & Mather, J Walter Thompson, to see agencies trying to present themselves as respectable, professional people, to sound like lawyers or accountants. David Ogilvy’s schtick was to present himself as the refined aristocrat of advertising amongst the sharks and hucksters of New York. Despite or even because of the legalistic name, the New York agency BBDO, was nicknamed, by none other than President Harry S Truman, as ‘Bunco, Bull, Deceipt and Obfuscation’. Bill Bernbach built his agency DDB’s reputation on the idea that he was selling ‘the truth wrapped in wit’, in order to stand out against the deceitful salesmanship expected of the time, with ads that themselves told extreme versions of the truth like ‘Lemon’ for the VW Beetle.

‘The Adman’s Dilemma – from Barnum to Trump’ is a fascinating book by the cultural historian Paul Rutherford, which for me goes some way to explain why advertising has always been and remains one of the least trusted professions, and why advertising is seen by so many as a kind of licensed deception. It chronicles the prevailing anti-advertising cultural narrative since advertising’s early days in the mid-19th century from PT Barnum right up to the present day. Rutherford starts with Barnum whose skill deceiving a gullible public helped him achieve a reputation as the king of false advertising, ‘the uber-Huckster’.

Rutherford’s book chronicles the public outcry, and subsequent regulatory response, to the advertising of the patent medicine moguls in the US – who for several decades from around the 1880’s used mass communication to deceitfully claim their medicines could cure people of almost every medical problem. The most famous patent medicine born in this era of course being Coca Cola which was introduced in 1886.

The book goes on to discuss how the 1950’s and 60’s saw one of the most famous moments in the anti-advertising movement when a series of bestsellers including ‘The Hidden Persuaders’ by journalist Vance Packard caused a moral panic about the nefarious and deceitful psychological techniques supposedly being used by the newly ubiquitous TV advertisers. There are clear parallels I think between the scares of the ‘50’s and the scares we have now about the use of our personal data by Facebook as well as the use of psychometric targeting for political advertising in elections. Whatever side you’re on in the debate about Facebook, the demonization of Mark Zuckerberg clearly has parallels with this trope of the adman as public manipulator and arch-deceiver.

Perhaps the most relevant anti-advertising episode for a discussion about brand purpose is Naomi Klein’s 1999 global bestseller ‘No Logo’. Klein’s book was an unashamedly anti-capitalist attack on the negative societal impact of advertising, which pointed out the hypocrisy of many of the global brands appropriating social and moral values whilst also engaging in questionable employment and environmental practices, in a fore-shadowing of the critiques of some of today’s more obviously pseudo-purposeful advertising.

By highlighting some of the worse behaviour of global brands, No Logo played its role in subsequent efforts by big businesses to clean up their acts and become good corporate citizens. Which in turn is leading to many businesses becoming more purposeful and taking on the philosophy that’s now called conscious capitalism.

To Rutherford, Mad Men’s Don Draper is the archetypal sufferer of the ‘adman’s dilemma’, of whom he says ‘whatever success he found, he found his life empty, hollow, he searched for some experience more real, more authentic’, and quotes Don Draper’s Stepfather saying to him “You’re a bum, what do you do, what do you make? You grow bullshit.”

So given the way advertising has always been portrayed in culture, it’s not hard to see why ad people would jump at the chance to show they’re respectable professionals whose work can have a positive impact on society. But in choosing to jump so fulsomely onto the brand purpose bandwagon we may just be making matters worse for ourselves.

When what we really need to do to prove our value to society, is to prove our commercial value first and foremost – to have pride in the value we create and so demonstrate the role we play in driving the economy, and therefore society, forwards. There’s plenty of genuine virtue to be had in that.

In the final scene of the final episode of Mad Men, we see Don Draper meditating on a clifftop, and as if in a eureka moment in his meditative state, we cut to the famous 1971 Coke ad ‘I’d like to teach the world to sing’. So we see a fictionalised advertising genius dreaming up a real celebration of peace, love and harmony, an idealised depiction of hippie culture, and appropriating it for a genuine commercial for the world’s most famous and valuable brand. It’s a fittingly brilliant blend of fact and fiction, authenticity and artifice.

It’s simply the most perfect ending for the show to have Don Draper, the archetypal, self-deceiving adman, whilst himself searching for a more authentic, more purposeful existence, dreaming up for a brand of carbonated sugar water, what may well have been the Patient Zero of all the pseudo-purposeful advertising that would follow in the decades ahead.

It’s hard to imagine a more perfect representation of advertising’s complex and uneasy relationship with truth, lies and brand purpose.

ING’s ‘meaningful’ marketing strategy during the pandemic

By Paige Murphy | 15 June 2020


International digital bank ING has been focusing on “meaningful” marketing activity throughout the COVID-19 crisis.

ING head of retail banking Melanie Evans says instead of releasing a statement or an ad that said the bank was “here to help”, the bank took an “actions speak louder than words” approach.ADVERTISING

“Instead of shifting our marketing strategy and our brand spend directly on advertising and more traditional forms of marketing, we wanted to make sure that we really understood what customers wanted from us,” Evans told AdNews.

“When you sit down and speak to a customer, very few people say, ‘I want to see an ad’.”

As a digital-first bank, ING didn’t need to focus its efforts on teaching customers how to bank online or over the phone.

Instead, it began with making more traditional brand acts such as offering customers repayment holidays and bonus savings products.

As the nation got settled into working from home though, Evans says it became clear that people’s behaviours were also changing.

This prompted the launch of a month-long partnership with Uber Eats where ING paid the delivery fee on all orders paid for with an ING card.

ING head of marketing Danielle Hamilton says the results were a marketer’s dream come true.

“In terms of amplifying this offer, we sent one email to our active customer case and that was it,” Hamilton says.

“There was no traditional spend. That organic goodwill and share of voice led us to having over 100,000 customers apply for the promo code.”

Spun together in 10 days from concept to delivery, Hamilton says it was the right time and right proposition that helped make the offer so successful.

For ING, partnerships only make up a small part of its marketing mix.

“I don’t want to sponsor the cricket, but if I can actually add value to a customer [like with Uber Eats] that is a really compelling partnership proposition,” she says.

Likewise, Evans says the partnership was the perfect alignment with ING’s brand promise and focus on providing real utility and financial value.

Following the partnership and some of the traditional brand acts it had executed, the next phase of ING’s marketing strategy was to launch a content series, Real Talk, with the help of one of its agencies CHE Proximity.

“It’s all about helping Australians navigate uncertainty – whether that’s about employment, saving, renovation,” Evans says.

“Instead of using typical banking types, we’re partnering with more reputable financial advisors and lifestyle influencers to try and break through the jargon and actually give people some meaningful tips.”

Among those to feature in the series are Glen James from podcast My Millennial Money; DJ, TV host and social media influencer Flex Mami; Australian cook and Masterchef winner Larissa Takchi; and financial planner and founder of Sugar Mumma TV, Canna Campbell.


Building upon Real Talk, the bank is soon to launch Real Support which will see it offer customers free one-on-one financial counselling for customers under significant financial strain.

Evans says the bank recognised that many of its customers are going through financial hardships at the moment that wouldn’t have been if it wasn’t for the pandemic.

“We can help them put together a budget with a money coach or a financial counsellor and give them practical help in getting themselves out of the pick that they might find themselves in,” she says.

“Now, would anyone have ever thought that a marketing budget would go towards offering customers one-to-one money counselling and coaching sessions?”

While the idea for Real Support was born initially from the pandemic, she says it is something the bank will continue to offer customers for the long-term as part of its ongoing brand promise.

With the foundations of its meaningful brand acts now fully laid, Hamilton says the bank finally felt it was the right time to release an ad.

“We felt like we had demonstrated enough tangible brand acts and gestures,” Hamilton says.

“And it was a really nice moment to remind our customers that we’re by their sides, sitting in a similar spot to them.”

Throughout the pandemic, ING has been conducting human-centred research to inform its decisions on all marketing activity including for Real Talk and Real Support.

One thing the research revealed was an increasing desire for customers to talk to a real life human during these periods of self-isolation.

This was backed up by feedback from its call centre that noted customers were spending more time on the phone just to “have a chat”.

The bank used these insights as the basis to launch a TVC, created by Ogilvy, to put a face to its digital business.

Evans says all the people featured in the commercial are staff members who are based out of ING’s call centre on the central coast of New South Wales.

“We have a wonderful group of humans on the central coast of New South Wales who were not only going COVID as people themselves, but they had the added complication of having to do their job from their living room or kitchen table,” Evans says.

“We just thought it was a really great opportunity to put a human face to our very digital bank.”

ing-tvc-behind-the-scenes-2.jpgBehind the scenes shooting the ING TVC.

From sisters who live together to babies bouncing on laps and furry friends, the ad takes viewers inside the homes of those people they are actually speaking to on the phone, alongside the ING contact centre where another team member is still working.

The campaign has rolled out across digital and social channels as well television with media handled by UM.

It will also be featured across ING’s owned channels and will be used to support the bank’s other activity like Real Talk, Real Support and some of the other brand acts it has made during this period.

As it continues to make brand acts, Evans says the bank has been well-placed to stand out among competitors as it had been prior to the pandemic.

While other banks have been focused on regaining trust, she says ING has been able to continue living up to its promise of being customer led.

“Our brand promise is different. Our culture is different. Obviously we’re a smaller, more agile organisation and essentially we’re Australia’s first fintech,” she says.

“So, I would say those points of differentiation are exactly what they were before COVID. COVID has just amplified them to some extent.”

Pub – speedtalk@home / Nouvelle réalité et continuité !

PUB continue à garder ses distances mais est plus proche que jamais du secteur, avec son populaire speedtalk@home. En mai 2020, nous avons laissé la parole à de nombreuses régies, maintenant c’est au tour des agences médias. Aujourd’hui, c’est Hugues Rey, CEO d’Havas Media qui répond à nos questions :

  1. Que signifie la nouvelle normalité pour vous et votre agence ?
  2. Aujourd’hui, que vous demandent vos clients ? 
  3. Quels nouveaux services proposez-vous depuis le début de la crise ? 

Innovation dans le secteur des études : quatre tendances qui se précisent en 2020 (Source:

Publié par Barbara Haddad le 24 juin 2020


Les marques doivent être capables de changements rapides pour s’adapter aux nouveaux comportements et attentes de leurs clients.
Les instituts d’étude ont donc dû, eux aussi, faire évoluer leurs offres pour délivrer des insights plus opérationnels, au plus près de la réalité des consommateurs.

1/ La rapidité pour une plus grande réactivité

” Face à une transformation des marchés et des comportements, la priorité pour nos clients est de garder le sens du consommateur. La plateformisation des dispositifs d’étude, l’activation des cibles et l’analyse prédictive sont alors trois moteurs majeurs d’innovation pour les accompagner dans une approche consumer-centric en temps réel”, déclare Yves del Frate, CEO CSA et Data Solutions Havas. Il n’est donc plus question pour les marques d’attendre plusieurs mois avant d’appréhender de nouveaux enseignements sur leurs cibles ou de voir comment est accueillie la dernière campagne marketing. La tendance est plutôt à une adaptabilité des offres des instituts d’étude pour répondre au besoin d’agilité et de réactivité des annonceurs et de celui qu’ils ont de développer une connaissance fine des consommateurs, au plus près de leur quotidien.

” Pour que les entreprises puissent faire preuve d’adaptabilité, elles doivent d’abord identifier les nouveaux courants sociétaux grâce à des études simples dont les résultats sont vite accessibles mais aussi grâce à une plateformisation des dispositifs d’études pour proposer une remontée des insights en temps réel”, explique Luc Balleroy, directeur général d’OpinionWay. L’institut YouGov a ainsi lancé l’offre BrandIndex qui donne accès à un tableau d’indicateurs que les marques et entreprises vont pouvoir piloter au quotidien : ” Nos clients peuvent voir comment évolue une sélection d’items en temps réel et continu comme ceux liés à la notoriété de la marque ou encore les intentions ou préférences d’achat etc.”, confirme Alexandre Devineau, General Manager de YouGov France.
Ce à quoi Stéphane Panot, directeur général de Kantar Analytics précise “Cette datavisualisation via des plateformes en ligne permet non seulement la remontée d’items bruts mais aussi agrégés dans une logique d’hybridation des données pour accompagner des décisions métiers. Cela rend aussi possible une démocratisation de la donnée à tous les services de l’entreprise pour que la data ne soit pas uniquement cloisonnée à un service d’experts”. Quant à l’institut Harris Interactive, ce besoin de rapidité s’est traduit par le lancement d’une gamme de solutions dites “Express” qui couplent la technologie de Toluna QuickSurveys à l’expertise méthodologique de Harris Interactive. La dernière a avoir été lancée est “Hi Brands Express” : “Cette offre renouvelle les trackers d’image de marque en conservant les KPI traditionnels tout en y ajoutant trois dimensions : l’aspect prospectif et la capacité de la marque à évoluer dans le temps, sa capacité aussi à attirer et donner envie aux consommateurs de rentrer en contact avec elle et enfin l’axe collaboratif avec la propension de la marque à faire appel à l’avis de ses clients et à la co-création. La marque bénéficie ainsi d’un bilan complet “brand health” réalisé en moins d’un mois”, détaille Renaud Rouffiac, directeur adjoint du département Grande Conso & Cosmétiques chez Harris Interactive.

2/ L’immersion dans le quotidien des consommateurs

L’institut Ifop a lancé un nouveau dispositif de “Self Vidéos” afin de mieux rendre compte du quotidien des consommateurs. Pour chaque étude, des personnes (maximum 100 par pays) sont invitées à réaliser différentes missions proposées sur une plateforme en ligne en se filmant puis à poster leurs vidéos pour qu’elles soient analysées. Il s’agit donc d’une étude ethnographique de masse en ligne : ” Ce protocole permet de faire ressentir les différences d’attitudes et de comportements face à une catégorie de produits ou dans une situation donnée au-delà du déclaratif, de capter aussi du non verbal et des comportements dont les personnes n’ont pas conscience”, expliquent Martine Ghnassia et Isabelle Grange, fondatrices d’InCapsule by Ifop, entité dédiée aux tendances marketing et au conseil en innovation. Autre possibilité, pour s’immerger au plus près des citoyens-consommateurs, celui du conversationnel.
Ainsi Jam, qui est un média à destination des millenials est uniquement diffusé sous forme de chatbot au sein de Messenger. Les équipes entrent quotidiennement en conversation avec la communauté pour discuter de sujets conso ou d’actualité “Ceci nous a permis de lancer une offre d’insights à destination des annonceurs : nous recueillons les avis de notre communauté de façon spontanée puis diffusons les enseignements découverts sur notre plateforme en ligne Jam Trends. Les annonceurs ont aussi la possibilité de commander des études ad hoc”, présente Marjolaine Grondin, co-fondatrice de Jam. Les études sont donc de plus en plus intégrées au quotidien des consommateurs, au moment où ils discutent ou réalisent une action.

3/ L’écoute des micro-communautés en ligne

” Si on écoute tout le web, on n’entend rien, il faut d’abord identifier des communautés d’intérêts que l’on va ensuite écouter. C’est cette écoute microscopique qui va permettre d’identifier de nouveaux comportements émergents, de façon plus précise que par l’observation des macro-tendances. Les tribus ne sont ainsi pas représentatives des consommateurs par contre elles sont prescriptrices de nouveaux usages et attitudes. Nos clients utilisent les tribus pour faire de la prospective à 3 à 5 ans pour comprendre vers où vont les tendances de consommation mais aussi pour savoir comment communiquer aujourd’hui sur les médias sociaux et au mieux utiliser ces tribus comme relais d’influence”, explique Guilhem Fouetillou, co-fondateur de Linkfluence, société spécialisée en social intelligence. Linkfluence a ainsi lancé fin 2019 un nouveau moteur de recherche nommé “Tribes” qui permet aux marques d’accéder à une cartographie de plus de 200 millions de comptes publics sur 6 millions topics. ” Les marques peuvent créer des cibles très affinitaires, en croisant plusieurs centres d’intérêt pour toucher par exemple les femmes runners sur un angle beauté”, précise Guilhem Fouetillou.
L’institut BVA a aussi développé une démarche d’écoute affinitaire et communautaire du web en s’alliant à l’agence Uptowns spécialisée dans la détection de micro-communautés en ligne pour créer l’offre Shoots for Change. Elle consiste à croiser social listening et ethnographie digitale pour détecter l’émergence et la généralisation d’une micro-tendance en ligne. Stéphane Marcel, chief growth officer de BVA détaille : “Seule, cette offre à une valeur d’observation mais la valeur ajoutée est celle de l’hybridation des données en associant les premiers résultats à d’autres sujets d’étude comme l’amélioration du parcours client ou la création d’un nouveau produit”. Le dispositif se décompose donc en deux phases, une première d’inspiration dont ressortent des micro-tendances autour d’une thématique puis une seconde d’accompagnement-conseil pour les faire converger avec des processus métiers : prototypage de nouveaux produits, stratégie de communication etc.

4 / Le retour au sens et à la raison d’être des marques

” La raison d’être des marques est un sujet de réflexion qui prend de l’ampleur dans les entreprises, au moment même où les citoyens sont en attente d’engagements sociétaux plus forts de la part de ces mêmes entreprises et qu’ils font le constat d’un désengagement de l’Etat et des institutions”, constate Delphine Martelli-Banégas, directrice du département Corporate de Harris Interactive. Harris Interactive a ainsi créé un dispositif d’études innovant pour aider les entreprises à élaborer leur raison d’être en co-construction avec l’ensemble de leurs parties prenantes (clients, partenaires mais aussi collaborateurs de l’entreprise). “Auparavant nous étions sollicités trop tard dans le processus de réflexion sur les stratégies RSE etc. alors qu’avec cette démarche de co-création, nous intervenons très en amont pour délimiter les contours de la raison d’être et les conditions d’une bonne réception par les différents publics destinataires : clients mais aussi collaborateurs”, précise Laurence Bertea-Granet, directrice adjointe du département Etudes qualitatives et Responsable du Hi Lab !. Des ateliers en intelligence collective sont réalisés pour faire émerger les contours de la raison d’être. Celle-ci, ainsi définie, ainsi que les communications qui l’accompagnent ne sont alors pas décorrélées de la réalité mais bien en continuité de ce que vivent et souhaitent les clients et collaborateurs.Les instituts d’étude sont donc amenés à endosser plusieurs fonctions, à savoir celle de fournisseur d’insights mais aussi celle d’agrégateur de données afin de regrouper les différents enseignements remontés et servir à la fois des réflexions à court et long terme.

I #choosecycling because … #Rapha. From social hibernation to societal change, we are all presented with an opportunity

At this unique moment in time, as we transition from social hibernation to societal change, we are all presented with an opportunity. A chance to choose cycling. To inspire as many people as possible to make the switch, we are celebrating the stories of those who already have. Captured during lockdown, the motivations of some of those who have chosen to ride in recent months will be shared across our channels over the coming days and weeks, to be joined in time by your own cycling stories. Next time you ride, take a selfie, tell the world why you ride and tag it #ChooseCycling to help us show how broad, diverse and truly transformative our sport can be.

Carrefour mise sur le Voice avec Google (Source: MM)

En France, Carrefour et Google ont présenté un nouveau service commun d’achat en ligne permettant à l’utilisateur d’opérer tout le parcours d’achat par le biais de Google Assistant, depuis la liste de courses jusqu’au paiement et le choix du mode de livraison (à domicile ou en drive). Il s’agirait d’une première mondiale selon les deux groupes et pour l’heure, ce partenariat ne concerne que le marché français.


Le système fonctionne en trois étapes. Après s’être adressé à Google Assistant – “Ok Google, je veux faire les courses” -, il suffit d’énumérer les ingrédients génériques ou spécifiques (fromage ou feta) ou les marques, que l’on souhaite ajouter à sa liste. Ensuite, Google va traduire cette liste de course en suggérant des marques ou produits spécifiques qui conviennent le mieux au consommateur. La dernière étape est la finalisation de la commande par le paiement, étape au cours de laquelle le consommateur pourra spécifier de quelle manière il souhaite récupérer ses courses. Il est également possible de partager la liste de courses avec les autres membres de sa famille afin que chacun puisse y ajouter ses produits.

Une fois la liste de courses effectuée, la sélection du panier de produits proposé par Google repose sur deux cas de figure. Si le client a amorcé son expérience en reliant au préalable son compte Google Assistant et Carrefour, l’algorithme va se fier à son historique d’achats. Si le consommateur ne bénéficie pas d’historique, Google Assistant va prendre en compte les meilleurs prix disponibles dans les magasins Carrefour, mais aussi en fonction des meilleures ventes du moment.

Selon Carrefour, l’algorithme est donc censé apprendre au fur et à mesure de l’expérience du consommateur. Il est aussi possible de dissocier ses comptes Carrefour et Google. Le partage de l’historique d’achats est alors interrompu, et Google supprime les données transmises ; idem si l’expérience n’est pas utilisée pendant 30 jours.

Shared Electric Bikes Are Being Destroyed – Just When They’re Most Needed

Dave KeatingContributorEnergy

Dockless Bikes

Videos circulating this week of Uber electric bikes being destroyed have infuriated people across the world.

The leaked videos show piles of the bright red bikes from Uber’s failed Jump shared eBike scheme being crushed and recycled, because the company has reportedly been unable to find a buyer for them after the scheme was shut down.

Uber last month sold its money-losing Jump scheme to shared eScooter company Lime, as part of Uber’s investment in Lime. In theory, their bikes are supposed to be painted green and transferred to Lime, which has already operated limited bike schemes in cities like Berlin. But Uber confirmed in a statement that it is “recycling” many of Jump’s older bikes and scooters after transferring “tens of thousands” of the newer models to Lime.Most Popular In: Energy

The videos have touched a nerve at a time when “micromobility” solutions are disappearing just when they’re needed most. As Coronavirus lockdowns end across the world, authorities are telling people to avoid public transport and travel outdoors as much as possible. The new eScooter and eBike sharing schemes that were launched in the year before the pandemic might have provided a perfect solution. But instead they were yanked off the streets at the beginning of the crisis, and many will never return.

Cities were already cracking down on shared eScooters last year, after complaints about them cluttering sidewalks and posing a danger to both riders and pedestrians. Some places banned the scooters entirely, while others limited the number of companies that could operate. Now, several places are rapidly trying to undo the restrictions they put in place last year and lure the scooter companies back. The U.K. has done a u-turn on scooters and is now investing on bringing them into cities.

Not all shared micromobility providers shut down during the lockdown. In Brussels, while the Jump bikes and eScooters were removed from the streets, local company Billy Bikes stayed open. But they are not relishing Jump’s demise.

“You would expect to see me cheering at the sight of these images,” Billy Bike founder Pierre de Schaetzen said in a post. “But quite frankly, I feel disgusted. As our company is raising funds to produce enough bikes to match the growing demand of our users, Uber decides to destroy tens of thousands of bicycles that haven’t even been on the streets for a full year. Besides the ecological disaster, the timing couldn’t be more insensitive, as bicycles have become the go-to mode of transportation in this post-corona world and worldwide supply is struggling to keep up.”

The sight of so many bikes and scooters being destroyed is particularly angering given Uber’s claims about its micromobility schemes being environmentally friendly. That claim was already being challenged because of the significant energy needed to construct, service and charge the bikes and scooters. Electric bikes cost at least $1,000 and use raw materials that are difficult to procure and recycle.

Others are criticising what they see in the video because the bikes could have been donated to charities. Lime is insisting that they are not the ones destroying the Jump bikes. But the cycling advocacy organisation Bike Share Museum says that 20,000 to 30,000 bikes are being scrapped, and that in reality Jump isn’t really passing to Lime but being totally scrapped.

“The JUMP bike is still dead – even if it exists for now, in certain markets – while Lime is going to be left trying to figure out how to plug the wires back together,” they say. “We can’t emphasize enough how disgusting it is for UBER to scrap 20,000 bicycles in the midst of an unprecedented pandemic where bicycles have literally become an object of survival. Heavy as they are, these could be transportation for the many who have been brought to financial ruin during COVID-19.”

La RTBF investit près de 14 millions d’euros dans la culture (Source: Strategies)

La RTBF présentera mardi 9 juin un plan de soutien global aux acteurs culturels belges de 13 à 14 millions d’euros.

Sur 360 millions d’euros de budget, 8,1 millions seront dégagés en ressources nouvelles, le reste étant le résultat d’une politique éditoriale refléchie vers des opérations éditoriales et culturelles. Un appel à projets est lancé dans la fiction, le web-documentaire, des documentaires, des séries, les court-métrages ou des podcasts. Le groupe de 1900 salariés (ETP), qui a la caractéristique de produire essentiellement en interne, entend ainsi relancer une activité à l’arrêt. Il travaille sur une cinquantaine d’initiatives ainsi que sur sa plateforme numérique, Auvio, afin de monétiser les captations de spectacles.

Les principaux annonceurs de la RTBF sont invités à être les parrains de ces initiatives culturelles: «Avec des balises déontologiques qu’on ne bougera pas, on a l’intention de pousser les programmes soutenus, a déclaré à Stratégies Jean-Paul Philippot, l’administrateur général de la RTBF. Je suis convaincu que c’est par l’alliance des acteurs privés et des médias qu’on réussira une relance rapide. » 

Réorganisé en pôles d’affinité et non plus par médias depuis deux ans, le groupe entend profiter de sa solidité financière – 29 millions d’euros d’ebitda en 2019 – pour mener à bien la construction de son nouveau siège à Bruxelles, dès cet été, et pour se redéployer afin de soutenir les industries culturelles belges francophones. Quelques millions d’euros d’économies sont prévues, selon l’administrateur, mais elles ne passent pas par des réductions d’effectifs.

Le Baloise Belgium Tour va se courir en version alternative et digitale: Toute personne qui aime faire du vélo peut s’inscrire pour devenir l’équipier et le lieutenant d’un des leaders féminins ou masculins – Strava, Garmin, Fitbit ou Energy Lab Connect

L’épreuve, dont la DH est partenaire, était prévue au calendrier du 10 au 14 juin, mais malheureusement, elle n’aura pas lieu.

Ou du moins dans sa version normale car ses organisateurs, la société Golazo, met sur pied une belle et originale alternative.

Pendant cinq jours, vous pourrez rejoindre les leaders du peloton professionnel et former avec eux une équipe. Au soir du 14 juin, celle qui aura parcouru le plus de kilomètres durant cette période remportera le premier Virtual Baloise Belgium Tour.

Douze championnes et champions, quatre femmes et huit hommes, formeront les différentes formations participant au Virtual Baloise Belgium Tour.

Jolien D’hoore, Sanne Cant, Ceylin Alvarado et Ellen Van Loy sont à la tête d’une équipe exclusivement féminine, tandis que Remco Evenepoel, Greg Van Avermaet, Oliver Naesen, Victor Campenaerts, Laurens De Vreese, Xandro Meurisse, Toon Aerts et Robbe Ghys sont les autres capitaines de route.

Car l’originalité du projet est que chaque équipe sera composée de beaucoup plus que des six coureurs habituels.

Toute personne qui aime faire du vélo peut s’inscrire pour devenir l’équipier et le lieutenant d’un des leaders féminins ou masculins. Keep Moving enregistrera votre inscription et affectera tous les participants aux 12 équipes de façon aléatoire. La veille du départ de la course, vous recevrez une carte de coureur de la part de votre capitaine dans votre mail box. Les femmes seront affectées à l’une des 4 équipes féminines. Les hommes, à l’une des 8 équipes masculines.

Chaque jour, chacun parcourt individuellement ses kilomètres, vous ne roulerez donc pas aux côtés de vos leaders mais en les soutenant à distance.

Grâce aux différentes applis (Strava, Garmin, Fitbit ou Energy Lab Connect) auxquelles les vélos sont connectées, tous ces kilomètres accumulés forment le total de l’équipe et donc chaque jour, celle qui totalise le plus de kilomètres gagne l’étape. Après cinq jours, nous connaîtrons le vainqueur final.

Chaque kilomètre compte, qu’il soit plat ou pentu, couvert plus lentement ou à toute vitesse !

“Cela nous a semblé une excellente occasion de combler le fossé entre la course, les pros et les cyclosportifs et cyclotouristes “, explique Rob Discart, le directeur de course du Tour de Belgique. “Le leader encouragera son équipe tous les matins, comme le directeur sportif le fait dans le bus de son équipe. Nous attribuerons des maillots tous les jours grâce à nos fidèles partenaires. Le capitaine de l’équipe gagnante obtiendra le vrai maillot de leader du Tour de Belgique et celle de la formation féminine recevra le sien également. Pour les équipiers, il y a une belle gagnotte avec de nombreux prix qui seront tirés au sort. Nous avons même prévu d’autres classements comme le combatif, celui qui restera le plus grand nombre d’heures sur le vélo, ou du meilleur jeune.”

Vous pouvez vous inscrire gratuitement à cet événement et ensuite, du 10 au 14 juin, couvrir vos kilomètres au profit de votre formation.
Renseignements et inscription :

© D.R.