Originally published in the March, 1988 edition of BPME Image,
the monthly magazine of the Broadcast Promotion and Marketing Executives.

INTRODUCTION

Your job is to develop an image campaign for the station. You've looked at material from all over the country, analyzed the market research, and come up with a campaign idea you like, and you think you can justify to the General Manager. You get the approval, do the best you can, given time and budget, and the stuff looks great... Maybe even wins some awards. And yet, a year later, it's all over and you're not sure the project really changed anything.

This scenario is all too familiar. It is repeated in over half the stations in the country every year... and it doesn't have to be that way.

Our business is in a state of rapid growth. We are faced with challenges for viewers' time from every direction, and we can no longer expect to get by with bells and whistles alone. The rules of the game are definitely changing.

Spending a sizable portion of your annual budget creating an "Image" campaign for the station using high impact graphics, music and animation still makes a lot of sense. It provides a realistic short-cut to consistency in banging out episodic promos, and provides you with a library of materials for program showcasing and sales promotions. However, if that's all it does, you have missed a critical opportunity to shift, establish or solidify viewers' perceptions about your station, and that is the challenge for the 1990s. To have any real impact on this level requires a change in our thinking about "Station Image" and the role of promotion in the Marketing/Image process.

Television stations often behave like a group of people who decide they're going to cross the street, step off the curb, get hit by a bus, then decide the problem is that they need better looking suits. We often look for answers to marketing questions in production techniques, and wind up getting squashed (or standing on the sidewalk complimenting each other on how great we look).

This article is not a series of production tips for creating better spots and campaigns. There is enough evidence that improvements in technique are not likely to lead to effective communication. The article focuses on the purpose behind the creation of the campaign. The intention of the article is to open up a new possibility for approaching station image development that produces real, measurable shifts in viewer attitudes, rather than simply creating eye-catching visuals.

The quotes featured in the article are taken from the "Planning News Promotion Campaigns" session at the 1987 BPME/BDA seminar in Atlanta. The comments indicate a growing concern for effectiveness and communication in the development of image campaigns.

The broadcasting industry has only recently begun to consider Marketing, and the relatively new area of Station Image, as something more than a promotion function, and we have not yet sorted out everybody's role in marketing. In most industries, promotion is only one component of the marketing process. In television, the Promotion Department is usually expected to supply the marketing focus for the station, functioning as a marketing consultant to the other departments. To provide that level of support requires skills in management and leadership most of us with production or creative backgrounds have never developed.

Successful station imaging is dependent largely on the General Manager's willingness to lead or at least support the process of developing a unified station image. Someone inside the station needs to champion the creation of an overall station image. If you are thinking of taking on the responsibility yourself, you need to be aware of the scope of the project.

When the issue of station image or station identity comes up, everybody in the station gets interested. The perceptions people have about the station have a direct impact on how they feel about their jobs, their co-workers, and themselves. Since audience attitudes have been shown to influence viewers' choices for news and entertainment programs, the image you project also has a major impact on ratings, profitability, and the survival of the business.
 

One definition of Station Image, or Station Identity is, "The sum of ALL impressions of the station held by the audience." Every connection between you and your audience makes a statement about who you are. Everything you produce that is seen by the audience, as well as every interaction between a potential viewer and someone who represents your station, influences that viewer's perceptions of the station. On this level, in varying degrees, everyone in the station has an influence on the station image.

The primary factors that influence station image include:

PROGRAMMING - Program Selection/Style, Network Affiliation, Program Packaging (Opens, Graphics, Music)

NEWS - Editorial Philosophy, Program Packaging (Opens, Graphics, Music), Vehicles & News Logos, Anchor Images, Reporter Images, Franchise Images

PROMOTION - On-Air Promotion "Style," Station "Voice," Station and News Image Campaigns, Generic Program Promotion, Episodic Program Promotion, Generic News Promotion, Episodic News Promotion, Radio Advertising, Billboards, Print Ads, Public Relations, Media Relations

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT - Public Service, Public Affairs, Editorial Positions

BUSINESS IMAGE - Telephone "Voice," Reception, Location, Signage, Stationery & Business Graphics

SALES - Sales People (Attitude), Sales Promotion, Commercial Acceptance Standards

ENGINEERING - Picture Quality, Transmission Quality (Reception)

Dealing with the image aspects of every one of these areas individually is obviously not practical. Building a common focus for the station can produce the desired shifts in audience perceptions, but the promotion department can not do it alone. It requires the support of the General Manager and all department heads, working in the same direction, to make the process work.

 

ON COMMITMENT "What happens when they say they agree, then when it's time to follow through, they don't live up to it?... then you go back into meetings, and they say they agree again, but nothing's different, and the whole thing starts all over again."

Effective image campaigns are built around the station's commitment to a common purpose, shared by everyone in the station. Now, every time I see words like "commitment," "Excellence" or "Vision" in an article, a little red light goes on in my head. While it's easy to use the words, there is a lot of confusion about what they mean. Since the station's "Commitment" and its "Vision" for the future are the foundation of all effective campaigns, we need to spend some time in that area.

After working on station commitment for the last ten years, one major confusion we see is a lack of distinction between "Commitment" and "Agreement." In countless sessions with stations, people say they get a commitment from the other managers, then the other managers' actions don't back it up. Peoples' actions are always consistent with their commitments. When their actions are inconsistent with what they say, you may have a soft agreement, but no real commitment.

Likewise, because your station sends out a continuous stream of images all day, a few words about the station's commitments in an image campaign are simply not enough to make any shift in viewer attitudes. If the words are not backed up by action, they have no meaning whatsoever for the viewer. In contrast, when real commitment is there, it shows up naturally, in all aspects of station presentation.

VISION

The "Vision" for the station refers to a possibility everyone at the station wants, for its own sake. It is an end, rather than a means to an end. When we work with stations, we ask people on the staff where they would like the station to be in two years. As you might expect, their answer is often, "To be Number One." When we offer them a scenario of the General Manager opening the door and saying "We just got the book in, and we're Number One!" and ask them if that's what they wanted, they usually think for a second, then say "No, it isn't... I guess I'd like to feel like we earned it"

Being "Number One" is the natural result of a commitment to providing something of value to the audience. When Walt Disney started his entertainment conglomerate, his commitment was simply to being "The Best" at what he did. We believe that the financial and creative success of the Disney organization can be traced to Walt's understanding of the business he was in, his commitment to being "The Best," his ability to select people who shared his vision and to inspire them to create on that level.

FINDING THE STATION'S COMMITMENT

 
Most of us in the promotion field think of ourselves as creators and producers. The biggest "problem" we often face is how to get everyone else to go in the direction we know is best for the station. What we often fail to recognize is that our point of view is just that, our point of view. Other people in the station see things very differently, and with equal clarity. (See sidebar: "Perspective: Getting The Whole Picture")

The process of "enrollment" is one of providing everyone with a perspective on the situation that includes their personal point of view. You need to understand what everyone in the station really wants, and is willing to support.

In large part, when we relate to the other departments in the station, we are functioning as in-house marketing consultants. Like all consultants, we can not force people to go in the direction we want to go. In his book "Flawless Consulting" (Learning Concepts, Austin, Texas), Peter Block states two principles of the process of getting people enrolled in a common direction.
 

1. "People readily commit themselves to things they believe will further their interests. If no link is seen between what a person is asked to do and what a person wants to do, the probability of getting an all out effort is not likely. You can order people to do things and ordinarily they will comply (at least while you are watching). But if you want them to apply themselves, internal commitment is required."

 
2. "Making decisions is easy. Making decisions that people will support is not so easy. Organizations seem to work better when people get an opportunity to influence decisions that have a direct impact upon their work. When people feel that something is important and they have some control, they will be motivated to exert the effort to make things work. When they believe that something is important but they can exert no control, the common tendencies are to become cautious and defensive, to play it safe, to withhold information and to protect themselves from blame."


Attempting to get people to accept your point of view as their own almost never works. You can beat people up, and get them to agree to an idea, but there is no way to get people to truly support something they don't feel is in their own best interests. If they don't see their point of view reflected in the campaign, they will hold back, and give it less than their best. In contrast, if your image efforts reflect the common factors of everyone's points of view, their actions will reflect a real commitment to the "Vision" of the station.

It is important to remember that in any teamwork situation, you have an option, other than making compromises which are unsatisfying to you, or to other members of the team. While team members will often disagree on the ways to get things done, if we take the time to understand what is truly important to them, choices can be made which support everyone's intentions for the team.

 

ON RESEARCH "We need to find out how viewers perceive us, but I can't get the management team to see that. They think we should just believe what we want, and the viewers will buy it. How can I change their perceptions? It's hard to get them to pay for research to tell you something they think they already know."

Another critical area in the image development process is the use of research, and here we often stop halfway. Two kinds of data are needed to clearly understand current perceptions, and locate possibilities for a unique station image.

1. OBJECTIVE DATA - The cold hard facts about what has happened or is happening. Includes: Ratings, Audience Flow Studies, News Research, Objective Market Surveys

 
2. PERSONAL DATA - The feelings, thoughts and points-of-view of people both inside and outside the station.


While both are needed to understand and shift market perceptions, the personal data is often more valuable in that it reflects whether people really care about the direction you are thinking of going. To make a difference in audience perceptions, that perspective is critical.

Between ratings information and news research, most stations have several years of objective data which is more than sufficient for the marketing process. What is usually missing in the decision process is the personal data needed to target the campaign in a way that can actually make a difference.

Obtaining personal data is neither mysterious or complicated, and it does not need to be expensive. The process is quite different from obtaining objective data. In order to get honest reactions from people on the staff, or in the community, you must give them a "safe" environment to tell you what they feel... what they really want to see from the station. When people are aware that they are being studied, they usually guard their responses, answering the way they think you want them to answer. When you are genuinely interested in their feelings, and it is OK for them to feel however they feel, they will provide you with personal insights that can serve as the foundation for a station campaign that speaks directly to their personal needs and wants.

Beyond the necessary qualifying questions, wherever possible, leave questions open-ended to allow people to express their deeper feelings. While it is much tougher to condense and interpret the data, you learn a lot more from "What do you like (or dislike) most about (our station)?" and, "Why is (our station) your favorite station?," than you will from "On a scale of one to ten, how would you rank the importance of the following...?"

If you don't have the budget to hire an outside company, do the research yourself, or work with a local college. Ask people questions anywhere you find them... on the bus, in restaurants, in taxis, or stores. You might try spending an afternoon at a shopping mall. Your connection with the station makes it fairly easy to get permission to conduct impromptu interviews in malls, and the people you'll meet there are more likely to represent a cross-section of the audience than those you normally socialize with.

Outside researchers do have several advantages, beyond their experience in obtaining unbiased personal data. They are generally less likely to see the market with pre-conceived notions of how things are, and therefore more able to see the possibilities. Inside the station, they are less likely to be viewed as a part of any particular faction.

Whether you use an outside company, or do the research yourself, you need to create a "safe" environment for people to communicate their feelings, and get your own point of view out of the way of the process. Using this approach, after a relatively small number of interviews, patterns begin to emerge that will point the way for your imaging efforts.
 

Effective campaigns speak directly to the needs and wants of the target audience. To communicate effectively requires an understanding of exactly who your target audience is... how they "feel" about your station and the competition... and what they want to, or are at least willing to hear.

The station's Marketing/Image communications speak to three distinct groups of people. Everything you produce that reflects the station's commitments has a direct impact on all three groups.
 

1. STAFF - If it is seen by the staff, it has an impact internally. This area is listed first, since the internal reaction can impact the pride people have in their work. Contributing to the pride of the staff, in a way that is meaningful to them, has an impact on ALL other areas of the station's image.

 
2. REGULAR VIEWERS - These viewers are already comfortable enough with the station to watch frequently. Image campaigns should treat them with respect (and reward them for their obvious good judgment).

 
3. OCCASIONAL VIEWERS - These viewers aren't committed. They are not likely to change their feelings about the station unless your campaign says something of value to them personally.


Station campaigns often forget one or more of these groups. Perhaps the most important group is the staff. Carefully targeted image campaigns, when used in conjunction with efforts to improve internal communication, have a remarkable impact on the front-line people inside the station. Some stations have said they felt the expense involved in the campaign was justified by the improvement in internal pride alone.

Another group that is often overlooked is the station's regular viewers. Unless you're willing to lose this group, the impact on them should be considered. Campaigns that exclude regular viewers like, "Find out what you've been missing," can actually have a negative effect on a large segment of your audience.

 

ON COMMUNICATION "We just realized we weren't getting where we wanted to be, and we realized there were communication problems, and we worked on those first. We realized once we established the communication within, we could do a better job of communicating to the people out there. And it seems to be working, because the ratings keep going up."

When I worked for local stations, we often joked, "Considering that we're in the communications business, you'd think we'd know how to communicate." All too often, we really don't. We spend a lot of time talking, writing memos, having meetings, keeping our asses covered, and attempting to "get on the same page" on issues... but there is little or no attention paid to the quality of our communications.

The quality of the station's communication with its viewers, and the resulting increase in the numbers, is a direct extension of the quality of communication inside the station. A commitment to effective communication is also needed to establish a common "vision" for the future of the business.

The process of determining a direction for the station can be a powerful tool. Asking yourselves questions like, "How do we want the audience to perceive us in two years?," gives management and staff the chance to look directly at their common "vision," for the future... providing the foundation for the station's image, and the motivation for improving the quality of the station's internal communication.

 

ON PURPOSE "We developed a statement of purpose for the station. It was a very simple thing... I think it was less than 25 words, and decided exactly what we wanted to be, and we had all the department heads in on the meeting, and found a single consensus on how we could honestly present ourselves to the viewers. Over the last two years, that's exactly what we've done and it's worked."

There's an old Chinese saying, "When you don't know where you're going, any path will do." More often than not, station personnel are in the dark about why they're doing the campaign at all, or how the campaign relates to the station's overall marketing and management objectives.

All of us have an inherent reluctance to address why we're doing something, but it is the single most important question. Start by focusing on the motivation behind the campaign. The foundation of the campaign is agreement on the purpose, or direction for the station.

The management staff needs to agree on some fundamental areas.

• What business are we in?
• Who are our "customers?
• What sets us apart from the competition?
• What is our responsibility to the community?
• Who is responsible for marketing the station?

It is surprising how often campaigns are launched without agreement on these basic issues. Reaching agreement here goes a long way toward determining objectives for the campaign that people are willing to actively support.

Lack of internal clarity on purpose generally results in campaigns that fail to say anything of any real value to the viewer. If it's not clear what you're saying, the communication is certain to be misinterpreted, or disregarded by the audience.

In contrast, once you're clear about the purpose behind what you're doing, the answers are obvious. A strong, concise statement of purpose guides the entire image process from concept to completion. Campaigns produced with a clear understanding of their purpose take on an almost effortless quality, and production decisions which were once agonizing become relatively easy.

In broad terms, the objective of any station image project is to shift, establish or solidify market perceptions. When you are clear about the current market perceptions, and the perceptions you intend to have after a prescribed period of time (usually one or two years), create a twenty-five-word-or-less Objective Statement for the campaign.

Five years involvement with the BPME Awards Competition, has shown that there is a fair amount of confusion about what an objective statement should be.

The Objective Statement should focus on the intended results of the campaign, and not on the process for achieving those objectives. Objective Statements which specify process, like, "To show the station's anchor people out in the community," provide little support or guidance for the creative process. Statements which focus on results, like, "To establish the anchor as someone you know, someone you like, and someone you would like to get their news from every day," or, "To establish the station as the most experienced and committed news source in the market," can be valuable in determining concepts, copy, camera angles, shot pacing, music, tag lines, and the hundreds of other decisions that must be made during the production process.
 

1. So what? Who cares?   Is it clear why you are doing the piece at all?

 
2. What's in it for the viewer?  Is there a specific viewer benefit.

 
3. What results do you expect from the campaign?  Short AND long term

 
4. How do you want the viewer to feel about the station after the campaign? And how is that feeling different from the way they feel now?

 
5. Is "Impact" important to achieving your objective?  If it is, does the statement reflect that?

 
6. Is it do-able?  Given staff capabilities, time and budget, is the objective within your reach?

 
7. Is the objective specific to the strengths of your station and your current position in the market?

 
8. Will it set you apart from your competition?  Or could anybody run it with equal success?

 
9. Does everyone involved with the project agree that it is possible to meet the objectives, and that the objective statement is accurate and complete?

 
10. Is everybody involved willing to actively support the achievement of the objectives?


The Objective Statement should represent the interests of all members of the team in a way which is fully acceptable to them. It should be complete, accurate and do-able within the time-frame. Once everyone signs off on the Objective Statement, treat it like a contract. Changing objectives without telling people usually causes problems later.

The Objective Statement should stay with the project from concept to completion, including brainstorming, writing, design, shooting, directing, post-production, and scheduling the spots.

When you communicate the purpose and objectives of the campaign with your suppliers (researchers, creative services, music composers, graphic designers, animation and spot producers), they can become valuable allies. The supplier's talents and experience can add to the station's internal capabilities, rather than simply replacing the staff in areas where you consider them, or yourself to be inadequate for the job.

One final note on purpose. Esoteric discussions about "purpose" are far removed from realistic discussions of your purpose on a specific project. The former might be an interesting exercise, if you're into that kind of thing. The latter is a vital step in the creation of effective communications.

 

ON TESTING "The first thing we did before we ever put our campaign on the air was test it in house... the concept and then the final ads and spots, to see how they felt about it. They're the best focus group you can have..."

It's a relatively simple matter to take completed spots and campaigns out into the community, or to people inside the station, and watch people's reactions yourself. If you have any questions about the campaign, run it for small groups before you start them on the air. Find out what kinds of feelings they bring up for the viewers. A few simple changes can sometimes make a big difference in effectiveness. Even if the worst happens, and the campaign generates unwanted negative reactions, it's better to have it happen in a small group, than the entire market.

In-house testing of the campaign has an additional advantage of further involving the staff, as long as you identify opportunities for them to contribute to the project.

To evaluate long term success after the campaign has aired, repeat some of the same "objective" and "personal" research you used at the start. Ask the questions the same way you did the first time, and look for any shifts in the quality of the responses, as well as any opportunities to move the campaign to new levels.

I would caution you that projects that produce remarkable shifts in market attitudes often fail to take first place in your favorite awards competition. In general, advertising awards are a better indication of impact than effectiveness. While efforts have been made to change some competitions (like BPME asking for statements of objectives to accompany award entries) it is still almost impossible for a judge to measure and reward the attitude shifting power of an image campaign without a personal experience of the station and market for which it was created.

SUMMARY - BALANCE OF PURPOSE & IMPACT

The best campaigns are a balance of purposefulness and entertainment. Proper development is essential, but the other part of the formula for success is to back up the strategies with concepts and production appropriate to the objectives for the campaign. We work in an audio-visual medium which requires a certain amount of "Show-Biz" to reach the audience. However, most campaigns are built backwards. They start with an interesting piece of production, either original or borrowed from another market, then try to mold it to their situation. Not bad, maybe, but not very likely to produce effective communication.

A more powerful approach requires making a commitment to FIRST determine the purpose for the station, and the objectives of the campaign, then build audio-visual elements which communicate the purpose clearly to the audience in a way that means something to them on a personal level. Many of us, with production backgrounds, can easily reverse the priorities, and wind up with "great stuff" that doesn't sell. The most difficult question is often, "Are we willing to produce something less than the slickest piece we're able to produce, when that's what's needed to communicate effectively with the audience?"

When you want to communicate with your audience on a personal level, unnecessary "glitz" puts considerable distance between you and your viewers. Using production techniques which are more appropriate to the project can move you a great deal closer to your overall marketing objectives.

A big advertiser on a station in San Diego once told the General Manager, "TV stations are the worst place to go to produce commercials, because you guys know how to do everything but sell something." It's true. We've learned more about making things flip, spin, flash, glow and sparkle than we have about communication. We can dazzle the viewer with our technical abilities, leaving them entertained, but with little or no understanding of what we are trying to say.

Right now, we have the opportunity to change the image of television stations as masters of non-communication, by committing to the creation of campaigns which "communicate" even better than they entertain.

KARL SJODAHL is President & Creative Director of SjöCom Inc., San Francisco. SjöCom creates image and identity campaigns for Broadcast stations and corporate clients, and works with them to improve their ability to communicate more effectively with their audience. Karl is considered to be a pioneer in the application of long-range marketing strategies to station image projects.

SPECIAL THANKS TO:
Mac Carter, Organizational Development Consultant, Mill Valley, CA
Carl Bauman, Director of Advertising & Promotion, WREG-TV, Memphis, TN
Richard Scott, Producer/Director, Berkeley, CA

© 1988 - Karl Sjodahl & SjöCom, Inc. - All Rights Reserved

A variation of Karl's "Ten Tough Questions to Test Your Objective Statements," appears in the college level media communications textbook, "Broadcast/Cable Copywriting" by Peter B. Orlik. (Book Review, From Book News, Inc.)  "A text on broadcast/cable copywriting that instructs the reader on the special requirements of this form of writing, focusing on shorter pieces--particularly commercial writing--so the basics can be mastered." Annotation copyright Book News, Inc. Portland, OR. Purchase "Broadcast/Cable Copywriting" at Amazon.com