When you’re selling hammers, every prospect looks like a nail. You’ve heard the expression before. The loyalty version of this is that many suppliers think every solution has to be currency based because that’s what they are selling.

I can hear the groans now, but don’t worry. I’m an advocate of data-driven marketing strategies that are measurable and, whether you like points or not, having a currency as the center of your loyalty program gives you an easy way to keep score. There are lots of other benefits too, an important one being that consumers who belong to the programs tend to allow the brand a mistake or two as they have a vested interest in protecting the value of their accumulated points or miles.

That said, there are situations that not so much demand a non-points solution, but enable it to the extent that points are not in the consideration set as a solution. I’ve categorized these into three models with a few brands as examples for each one:

• Price Driven: Walmart and Costco
• Brand Personality: Apple, Red Bull, Zappos
• Social Interactive: Tasti D-Lite and Carrabbas

Zappos is the subject of the day and although I had heard all the stories of how founder Tony Hsieh personally answers tweets to help resolve customer service issues (remember the famous tale from Tara Hunt on the subject?), the Zappos story truly came alive for me when I heard Jenn Lim, the founder’s spouse, make an inspired presentation about Zappos and her new business, Delivering Happiness.

Delivering Happiness was named after the 2010 book written by Mr. Hsieh and took on a life of its own after Jenn Lim and a core group of customer fanatic “Zappites” decided they wanted to spread happiness across the nation and across corporate America.

The spring of this Happiness that seems to be a renewable resource at Zappos is their company culture. Zappos believes so much in promoting a specific culture that it takes time to solicit the opinions of its employees, partners and customers in assembling its “Culture Book”. I was able to obtain a copy (all you have to do is ask) of the 2010 Culture Book and was impressed to read the 200 plus pages of testimonies from Zappos loyalists as well as see their culture documented in living color through the pictures in the book.

The Zappos Culture is based on 10 Core Values. You can get your own copy of the book, so I’ll just share my favorites from the list of 10:

1. Deliver WOW through service
2. Be Adventurous, Creative, and Open-Minded
3. Build Open and Honest Relationships With Communications
4. Do More With Less
5. Be Humble

Creating a corporate culture is one thing, having the commitment to really live it out is quite another. Zappos has used its culture as the basis for a business that is set apart from competition and that has created customer loyalty without giving away points, miles, or other formal trappings of a loyalty program.

There’s something to be learned here, especially in the age of Social Loyalty. As another saying goes ….. if the shoe fits ……

Disappointing economic results were reported this week, with retail sales stagnating in August due to less than robust job growth and consumer confidence that continues to waiver. The U.S. Census Bureau reported that median income figures, adjusted for inflation, have declined 2.3% since 2009.

In related news, a report from the Conference Board on World Income Inequality stated that the gap between rich and poor in both the United States and Canada is growing to record proportions. Surprisingly resilient Canada has seen its span between have and have-nots growing at even a faster rate than the U.S..

Recent activity by Walmart indicates they are not only aware of these trends but are ahead of the curve introducing measures to engage and increase share of wallet with customers.  In fact, they added several features to their loyalty program over the past few weeks.

You didn’t know that Walmart had a loyalty program? Here are some of the key features:

• Supporting its brand promise of “Everyday low prices” with weekly price scans of 60 competitors to make sure they deliver on the promise
• A renewed layaway payment plan to ease the pain of major purchases for customers
• Re-stocking it shelves with a broader selection of goods, reversing an attempt to streamline inventory and offering more choice to customers
• Giving attention to private label product lines, focusing on its George clothing line

Walmart doesn’t have an explicitly named loyalty program, nor is it awarding promotional currency or giving away punch cards and key fobs at the register.

It does have a Customer Strategy, however, one that is based on understanding of its competitive environment and the needs of its customer base, while leveraging its supply chain advantage.

The illustration of Walmart’s approach to attracting and retaining customers is an example of how building Customer Strategies contrast from launching loyalty and rewards programs. Walmart is also unique in its market position and their strategy is not easily emulated by Target, Costco, BJ’s or others seeking traction with consumers in tough times. There can only be one low-price leader in a category and when that leader also happens to be the supply-chain gorilla, there are diminishing returns to be reaped as a follower, fast, slow or any speed in between.

When you sit down to create strategy to meet client objectives, keep Walmart in mind. They may be the anti-loyalty enterprise in a traditional sense, but they do represent a valuable case study in building effective Customer Strategy.

Cycling commentators like to quip that the individual time trial is a “race of truth”. In other words there’s no place to hide as the man and machine face off against the clock.

The winner of the most recent edition of the Tour de France was decided on the final day in such a race, as Cadel Evans scorched his rivals and took the overall Yellow Jersey with the second best time of the day. Australia’s first overall Tour de France victor was undeniably better on this day – the truth was told.

Building a brand is much like a “race of truth”. Consumers are either for you or against you. And, there are only so many brands that stand out in today’s market evoking emotional response and nearly blind loyalty from their customers.

Starbucks, Apple, Coca-Cola, Facebook are brands that generate passion. Visa, MasterCard and Google register tremendous awareness but don’t necessarily conjure up “passionate” responses. I worked for Visa in the past and can attest to the fact that many consumers don’t understand the brand. I still get questions from friends asking if I can help fix their credit card problems! That of course is a matter between the issuing bank and the cardholder, not the domain of Visa/MasterCard.

Some brands are strong regionally but invisible outside their core market. Grocers Wegmans and Publix come to mind as do coffee chains Dunkin Donuts and Tim Horton’s. Dunkin is apparently embarking on national expansion, so the name may become more familiar across the U.S. soon.

Borders had a brand that was high profile, but became fuzzy. Some say that the lack of focus led to eroding customer loyalty and ultimately, the chain’s demise. You can read one assessment of Border’s failure here. IMHO, I’m not sure Barnes & Noble is doing a much better job in creating a brand that consumers care about – they just happen to be the last chain standing in the book-selling category.

Luxury brands drive customer loyalty through aspirational messaging, exclusivity, and, if backed up with customer experience that reinforces the brand, are sustainable. Nieman Marcus, Coach, Cartier, Tiffany are all brands that speak for themselves.

Some brands equate ubiquity with success. I wore Nike shoes in my early cross country days but my love of the swoosh waned as I saw the logo plastered on everything from golf balls to swim suits. Under Armour adopted the same approach from the starting gate as their logos seems to show up everywhere.

Does brand saturation create confidence or invite a suspicion of quality?

The brands that trigger emotion and sustain it over time seem to be highly focused. NorthFace and Patagonia have created aspirational brands among the outdoor and adventure travel set. I’m just waiting to see which one introduces the Bear Grylls line first!

Ironman has built a brand that oozes passion, commitment, aspiration, desire. Please write me if you know of another organization that sells out nearly every event it operates one year in advance, registering 2,000 people at the exorbitant price of $625, all for the privilege of torturing themselves through a 140.6 mile race.

With the ever expanding presence of the Ironman brand, it runs the same risk as Nike and Under Armour. The ubiquity of brand impressions in the market dilutes the core message to “best” customers and opens the door for competitors. As Ironman attempts to consolidate its hold on the endurance sport market, new race series have sprung up, most notably the HITS series using 6 time winner Dave Scott as spokesperson.

The importance of brand understanding for Loyalty Marketers is that we have to maintain perspective on the power of our brands to engage customers before any incentives are introduced. Every market is competitive and we need to study the range of customer choice in the market and understand the limits of impact for our loyalty strategies.

Organizations should adopt a holistic approach towards building loyalty strategy. Brand understanding is critical to crafting the value proposition that will complement core branding messages and further solidify relationships with our customers.

Watching the Miami Heat and Boston Celtics kickoff their playoff series this weekend, I saw the latest in gratuitous advertising from a beer company, in this case Miller Light.

I’m not sure if I should be complemented or insulted that I’m among the demographic targeted by the ads. Consistent with past campaigns, Miller clearly trades on the concept that every guy watching the NBA playoffs on a Sunday afternoon is totally defenseless against the sight of 3 girls in bikinis.

If influencing consumer behavior through marketing was this easy, then the entirety of the Loyalty Marketing industry has been wasting its time for the past 30 years. Anyway, I was debating whether to hit the mute or pause button on my TIVO controller, when they wrapped up the spot with a graphic that shouted “Tastepoints.com“.

It smelled like a points based loyalty program to me and I went to the website to check it out.

Surprisingly, this is what I found. Basically, nothing. Nothing that is, except the opportunity to view the bikini girls again and hit the “Get Started Now” button. It is revealing that Miller decided that allowing consumers to connect with their Facebook credentials was the only way to join the program.

Facebook executives must be delighted over this leading indicator that big consumer brands have capitulated to the idea that Facebook is, in fact, the internet. You might still be debating whether Al Gore invented the internet, but it’s almost a fact that Mark Zuckerberg owns it now.

The fact that Miller didn’t even invest in a landing page offering some program basics, FAQ’s and provide alternative paths to enrollment (email, Twitter at least) speaks loudly. I had to search for the Miller press release to learn the details of how Tastepoints works. Marketers need to pay attention to the implications of this approach to execution by Miller.

Clicking through the “Get Started Now” button, I was presented with the now familiar option to allow an application to connect to my Facebook page, authorize it to have access to my information, be able to post on my wall, and other privileges that I don’t fully understand.

I’ll bet many people immediately authorize the connection shown in the graphic here, just as they mindlessly check “ok” on software license user agreements without ever reading them. The question is, do we really know what we are giving up just to play the Tastepoints game? I don’t understand the nuances of these permissions well enough, and will make that task a personal homework assignment over the next few weeks. If anyone really gets it, please drop a comment to this post.

The bottom line is that Miller took a risk by managing its program enrollment through a single channel, and may have put a dent in its customer engagement strategy. If enough consumers have Facebook accounts (high probability in their targeted demographic) and are willing to blithely give away access to that account (how trusting are we after recent announcements of data breaches?), then it might work out in Miller’s favor.

The risk of this strategy could still be mitigated by taking time to provide more information about the program upfront, and to allow alternate paths to enrollment. Why Miller chose this approach should make an interesting debate for all marketers interested in building social loyalty.

I just saw a preview of the new Morgan Spurlock movie Pom Wonderful® Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold. Spurlock is the raconteur behind the funny but frightening documentary Super Size Me, in which the protagonist ate nothing but McDonald’s food for a month—which caused him to become fat and physically ill.

This time out Spurlock demonstrates the ubiquity of branding messages in our lives, by literally selling out his new movie. In a series of filmed encounters, Spurlock urges brands to sponsor his movie for a price—and is able to entirely fund the film through product placement and sponsorships, including a cool $1 million dollars from pomegranate juice maker Pom for a spot in the title.

This got me thinking: maybe Bill Hanifin should sell out Loyalty Truth. With so many loyalty programs out there, the possibilities are limitless. Consider: Loyalty Truth sponsored by JetBlue TrueBlue or Verizon Business Link Rewards presents Loyalty Truth or how about Hilton Honors, Loyalty Truth & You.

After all, we’ve sold out our ball fields—from my beloved Mets’ Citifield to the Astro’s Minute Maid Park (formerly Enron Field) to the ridiculous sounding Pizza Hut Park, home of major league soccer’s FC Dallas. (Top overseas honors go to Germany’s pro soccer team FC Nürnberg and its Easy Credit Stadium.)

What’s more, we’re now advertising in virtually every space known to man. This includes the walls and stalls of bathrooms, corporate logo tattoos that turn people into walking advertisements, and the latest innovation in advertising space sales—entire homes turned into billboards.

With that backdrop, why shouldn’t Loyalty Truth sell out as well? I hereby declare myself Bill’s agent. Bidding starts at $100K. Any takers?

Editors Note: The answer is NO, we’re just having some fun here. But as @tomrapsas points out, product placement is trendy and even the makers of Bud Light are poking some fun at the idea in this video.

It was recently reported in the trade press that Pepsi had slipped to the #3 soft drink in sales, behind Coke and new #2 Diet Coke. But most interesting was the speculation behind the drop. In an Ad Age article titled “How Pepsi Blinked, Fell Behind Diet Coke”, it was hinted that Pepsi had put too many of its marketing eggs in the social media basket.

Some background: In 2010, the company launched the Pepsi Refresh Project. As I reported in a previous Loyalty Truth post: This Web-based initiative asks customers to submit ideas that they think will have a positive impact on the world, including everything from building community playgrounds to caring for wild cats. Consumers vote on ideas they think should be funded, and to date Pepsi has committed over $15 million to nearly 400 winning ideas.

The Refresh Project was backed by a big social media presence and its launch coincided with Pepsi’s move away from traditional advertising channels, including an ad boycott of the Super Bowl and other major marketing events. (By comparison, Coke is ubiquitous, sponsoring everything from the NCAA tourney to NASCAR to the hit TV show American Idol.)

In the Ad Age article, John Sicher, editor and publisher of Beverage Digest, expressed his concern about Pepsi’s marketing efforts saying, “In the cola wars, the Refresh Project by itself isn’t enough to market Pepsi’s cola brands.” Sicher believes that in addition to Refresh, the company needs “more product-oriented advertising and marketing. I think that the 2010 results are probably a wake-up call for Pepsi.”

In an Ad Age editorial, Rance Crain chimed in “there’s also the danger that consumers could conceivably tire of causes or decide that Pepsi, a marketer long known for its ability to amuse and entertain, is taking itself too seriously. After all, we’re talking about fizzy soda water here.”

Julie Rohem, the ex-marketing chief of Wal-Mart, also expressed her doubts about Refresh in a recent blog post:“the message had nearly nothing to do with the product or the sale of that product. It was altruistic and admirable but it did not engage people with the drink itself—only the endeavors that the campaign supported. Pepsi at the end of the day is a mass brand and that means appealing to the masses on the product first.”

So was the Pepsi Refresh Project a mistake? A qualified yes—if the company really thought it could abandon its more traditional advertising efforts for one that pitched good vibes instead of good taste. A message of corporate benevolence is all well and good, but it feels like the company forgot the primary goal of any marketing department: move the product.

That said, Pepsi should also be commended for doing something a lot of bottom line-focused companies have ignored in recent years—giving back to the community. Handing cash to initiatives like “supporting the rescue and care of injured and orphaned wildlife ” and “getting the lowest income students in our community into college” is truly a noble endeavor.

It’s enough to make this bleeding-heart chug a cold bottle of Pepsi or two. If only I drank cola.

Tom Rapsas is a regular contributor to Loyalty Truth. You can follow him on Twitter @tomrapsas

When I first saw a QR code, I shrugged my shoulders and thought “one more piece of technology looking for a solution”.

I’m not cynical … I’ve just lived through years of expectation for smart cards and contactless cards only to see the technologists and vendors more excited about the product than consumers ever were.

Now I found myself staring at a black and white digital pattern slightly more intriguing than a bar code, and wondering what all the fuss was about. My disdain for QR codes has grown into mild fascination as I have experienced their use on a personal level and have witnessed how brands are using them to efficiently engage customers and grow their business.

Newspapers have made good use of the codes, allowing readers to instantly shift from print to online sources of content, in the process bringing a print story to life with a video or blog. Promotions and offers have been mixed in with content delivery to award readers for taking time to read the codes and explore an online version of the publication.

Retailers, especially local merchants fighting to win mind-share from the national brands, are using QR codes to effectively keep the store open “24/7″ by highlighting featured inventory or take viewers to online stores where they can shop at their leisure.

I’ve also seen the use of QR codes stretched beyond what consumers can digest. A local realtor comes to mind who substituted codes in a monthly print ad for the usual four color pictures of listed properties. The presentation was a bit too obscure and I noticed that the realtor reverted to pretty pictures the next month with one QR code in the corner directing readers to a web site.

Speaking of web sites, the most common use of QR codes I have seen in business so far is the inclusion of a code on a business card or online profile offering another way for visitors to link to a web site home page. Even though I created the code in this post with the same linkage, it’s an unimaginative use of the technology.

QR codes are much better used to send visitors to micro-sites, videos, or other dynamically changeable content that serve a specific business purpose. They could also be used in single-use format to enable reward redemption at point-of-sale.

With Nielsen projecting the penetration of smartphones in the US to exceed 50% by the end of 2011, more people will be able to easily access the information available. It might be merely an anecdotal commentary, but I’ll bet that the people who do have smartphones today represent an audience willing to take a digital shortcut to view useful content and get needed information from their phones without having to type clumsy URL’s into their browser.

Like most technology, the real fun starts when people apply their imagination to use applications in ways not anticipated by the inventors. QR codes have high potential for imaginative use and we expect to see more of them in both B2C and B2B settings.

The customer has escaped. We can no longer control the process of how and where they get information. ~Marjorie Kalter

There’s a sea of change taking place in the way we communicate with customers, and these changes are rewriting the definition of advertising as we know it. In fact, I believe that as marketers we now two choices: swim with the tide or have the new communications wave roll over us.

The truth is that the effectiveness of old-fashioned “push” advertising, whether it’s a TV spot, print ad or e-mail, is waning. More and more customers, especially in the under-40 demographics, are ignoring traditional advertising altogether, and turning exclusively to the Web and social networking tools for product and service information and recommendations.

Some have labeled this change “Advertising 2.0”, but one of the movement’s philosophical godfathers, Edward Boches, simply calls it “the evolution of advertising”. Boches is the long-time creative leader at Boston-based ad agency Mullen, which in the past couple of years has transformed itself from a traditional ad agency into “a firm that blends digital, social, media, creative, mobile and direct response”.

I’ve been looking at some recent slide presentations and blog posts from Boches, and he has a number of compelling insights about the changes taking place in the industry. Here are a few choice ones:

• Customers don’t want to watch and read and consume. They want to participate, share and respond.

• Once we were in the business of telling stories. Now we are in the business of getting others to tell stories for us.

• User experience and engagement are the new art and copy.

Boches also sees changes in the future of traditional advertising, believing that as brands become less dependent on advertising and messages, they will focus on ways to become more relevant and useful. Think of it as advertising that does less selling and more connecting.

A prime example currently in the marketplace is the Pepsi Refresh Project. This Web-based initiative asks customers to submit ideas that they think will have a positive impact on the world, including everything from building community playgrounds to caring for wild cats. Consumers vote on ideas they think should be funded, and to date Pepsi has committed over $15 million to nearly 400 winning ideas. Does the site sell Pepsi? I suppose so, but in a very indirect way.

Will this advertising change effect loyalty marketing? It already is.

In loyalty marketing, it’s time to think about going beyond the everyday communications of postcards, e-mail and statement inserts. It’s time for a full-throttled commitment to an idea I first began talking about in 2002: starting a dialog with customers. (Not that I can take credit for the concept, it was the brainchild of Frequency Marketing’s visionary founder Rick Barlow.)

This means communicating with your customer base when and where it works best for them, via the social media channels where they congregate—which these days is sure to include Facebook and Twitter, and possibly Foursquare. It also means opening up the lines of communication via your company Web site and blog.

There are also marketing opportunities galore in leveraging your current customer base, by giving them perks that encourage them to spread the good word about your product or service. For instance, when restaurant chain P.F. Chang’s introduced its Home Menu frozen meals to grocery stores, its first communications target was the brand’s loyal customers.

P.F. Chang’s selected members of its loyalty program and customers engaged in the brand’s social media channels (Facebook and Twitter) and asked these fans to raise their hands and tell why they loved the brand so much. Those who participated in spreading word of mouth were entered into a sweepstakes to win one of 50 home dinners for two, complete with custom table settings.

The bottom line is that, like it or not, the way we communicate with customers is changing. The question is, are your clients or your company changing with them?

Tom Rapsas is a creative director and writer and can be reached via Twitter @tomrapsas or at tomrapsas@gmail.com.

A few questions about Brands

Why do some brands dominate and others just compete?

Can brand value be created solely on perceived value and word of mouth hype, or is there a prerequisite that the brand promise be walked-out through customer experience?

Does our always-on world that glorifies multi-tasking and accepts information waterboarding as the norm make it easier or more difficult to establish a brand that dominates?

Is there tangible value associated with brands that are established as wholly above and apart from its competitors?

World Triathlon Corporation, Apple, and Nike give us some answers

Racing the Florida Challenge a few weeks ago had me pondering each of these questions. The mere fact that I was standing on the starting line of a long distance triathlon having registered only 2 weeks prior was an answer in itself. There are  four commonly raced distances in the sport and two of them have been branded by World Triathlon Corporation. WTC owns the Ironman brand and created the “70.3″ series renaming races generically referred to as Half-Ironman.

Ironman has become the ultimate aspirational brand for people marking off items on their bucket list. North American IM events typically sell out one year ahead of time in a period of 6 hours. I’ve been shut out trying to register online as events sell out on-site. The demand for entry into a tortuous race that offers the privilege of jumping into the ocean or lake with up to 1,400 others to start the race is so high that people now attend events as volunteers to ensure their entry and some are willing to pay well beyond the $550 entry fee by purchasing community entries at prices exceeding $1,000.

The Ironman brand exacts a price premium at all points of contact;  entry, merchandise, venue hotels and restaurants but participants don’t mind because WTC delivers a consistent and fabulous experience during each race weekend.  During my race in Clermont Florida, I had to search for a porta potty before and during the race, the drinks at the aid stations were all at room temp (on a 90 degree day) except for the last stand, and overall execution of sponsor tents, awards, and post game grub were pedestrian at best. Not so at an IM event. Everything is executed with the athlete in mind and all is delivered on a first class basis.

The shelves at Best Buy, Target, and Walmart are stocked with MP3 players, but most consumers walk through the doors looking for an “iPod”. Like Kleenex, Xerox, and FedEx, Apple has been able to establish its product name as the category designator. I’m not entirely sure if kids under the age of 15 understand that the MP3 category has products manufactured by companies other than Apple.

Apple’s brand was built on innovation, creating an irresistible appeal for people who had to have the next new thing. Apple backed up innovation with execution as the products worked and allowed people to interact with music in a way never before possible.  Apple has benefited from price premiums and the ability to maintain standardized pricing across an otherwise discount crazed retail distribution network.

That history represents powerful capital in consumer minds that serves to offset even the recent design challenges for the latest version of iPhone. There’s a limit to how many product snafu’s will be tolerated by consumers, and Apple would be testing limits should the next round of product fail on some wide ranging level.

Nike founded its shoe company on the vison of Bill Bowerman and the cinders of the University of Oregon track. Nike may be the best example of how a brand, once established, can extend beyond it roots to dominate an entire category of related products. I don’t think Bowerman and Phil Knight envisioned having the Nike swoosh emblazoned on golfs balls and swim suits, but it has happened. It wasn’t that long ago when I heard kids say they needed to go “shopping for some Nike’s”.

Nike is widely distributed in retail, heavily discounted at times, and has assumed a role of universal appeal rather than a quality product line that appeals to passionate users. Today the Nike brand may lean a little too often on perceived value, celebrity endorsement, and past achievements while product quality and good function is left wanting.  That’s my opinion as a guy who buys 2-3 pairs of running shoes per year as well as clothing and accessories for the running sport. You might have a different opinion if you patronize their golf or tennis lines.

My brand musings have a purpose. Nike, Apple, and WTC probably care little for my opinion of their well established brands. My purpose is to understand how we can create a dominant brand in our own business. What does it take to make your credit card, your loyalty currency, your marketing agency, or your new product become the name that creates demand and even defines a category?

As you engage in planning for next year, elevating your brand should take priority on the strategic planning map. Before you get distracted with mandatory elements of budgeting and forecasting, remember that the price premiums and customer loyalty that comes from a dominant brand pays lasting dividends.

You have to get to that starting line if you are to finish the race. Get started now.

I saw a TV commercial for the Discover credit card the other day and they made a claim that caught my eye. It was one of those “we’re #1” declarations, in this case: We’re “#1 in customer loyalty”.

The claim was not explained during the commercial and it got me wondering: to a consumer, what does being #1 in customer loyalty really mean? Is there a benefit, implied or otherwise?

Now I’ve worked in loyalty marketing for several years, and don’t think of myself as jaded—but my initial reaction to the claim was, “who cares?” It actually got me wondering if Discover was #1 in loyalty because they had retained a lot of long-time cardholders with monstrous balances who couldn’t switch cards during these tight financial times.

So I did a little research on the Discover corporate Web site and found some substance behind the #1 claim. There it said that: “Discover Card ranked #1 in customer loyalty among leading credit card brands according to the 2010 Brand Keys Customer Loyalty Engagement Index Report.”

Okay, as a loyalty insider I know a little about Brand Keys. But what does this mean to a consumer? I did a little more digging on the Brand Keys site and read they measured loyalty over several categories with a “combination of proprietary psychological assessments and higher-level statistical analyses, allowing us to statistically fuse the “emotional” values with the “rational” attributes that identify the bond that exists between brand and consumer.”

Hmmm, I was still scratching my head. It didn’t appear to be anything that could remotely be translated into consumer-friendly language. Which got me questioning why the claim was made in the first place.

Customer loyalty is an end result, a desired outcome of the great product and service you offer. So rather than tell me your customers are loyal, tell me why they’re loyal—amazing customer service, lower fees, a unique add-on benefit—and how this will benefit me.

Sure, being #1 in customer loyalty sounds nice, and we do know that Discover puts a happy face on lots of consumers, but these days most people don’t want to hear corporate chest bumping, they want to see the brand promise lived out transaction by transaction.