Campbell's Paul Alexander: Brand emotion, product integration and agency collaboration

Paul Alexander

Paul Alexander is Vice President, Global Advertising for the Campbell Soup Company and is responsible for all advertising, media and commercial production. He started with Campbell’s in February of 2001. Prior to that, he spent 15 years in Brand Management and Advertising Development with Procter and Gamble in Cincinnati and London. Paul serves on the Ad Council board and is a member of the ANA. He received both his undergraduate and MBA degrees from Harvard.

Here, Paul talks about reaching the consumer, using new and traditional media combinations for brand objectives, agency collaboration and a bit about the importance of strategy communication.

Tell us about your product integration strategy, as with NBC’s “American Dreams” a couple of years ago.
Well that was one where we really weren’t looking at doing more than traditional product placement. We’re really trying to become more organically integrated into the story arc. What was great about that was Jonathan Prince’s desire and enthusiasm about really writing Campbell’s into the story arc. That was one of the things that made it unique—it didn’t feel forced, it just felt more natural. That, combined with the arrangement with Scholastic where the promotion “What is your American Dream?” got students to write in and submit their American Dreams. I think it was just a very nice tie-in that was very authentic. I think the piece that most manufacturers or marketers struggle with in these types of opportunities is does it come across as really being authentic versus being forced? Considering the work that Jon and others have done with education with Campbell’s over the years, I think that integration was really almost seamless in tying in with something that’s important for Campbell’s but was also a way to make our brand that much more contemporary.

Do you find product integration deals seem to be driven more from inside Campbell’s?

I’ve been here five years, and five years ago I would have said it would be from others coming to Campbell’s but I think now with the marketing teams and the managers understanding the value of this as another touch point, the ideas can come from anywhere. What’s great about being here at this point is that you’ve got continuity so everybody understands the strategy and the objective—the marketing team, the agencies, the partners who bring us ideas. So really the ideas can come from anyplace and the creativity comes from the linkages. The continuity, I think, creates a greater degree and better linkages than we’ve ever seen.

Do you find integration seems to be more of a focus than just standard spot and network commercials?

No, I think it’s a constant analysis of what’s most effective. So our traditional network, cable, spot, TV, radio, print, those are still incredibly effective for us. But we know that there are a lot more touch points and ways to interact with our consumer. It really is the genius of the “and”—it’s how do you do both effectively versus saying I’ve got to choose from one to do the other?

What is the future of advertising with digital convergence?

I think there’s going to be sort of a combination of new school and old school. What I mean by that is old school marketing used to be that you had an existing campaign but you always had something in test. I think with convergence and new media like mobile technology for example, the ability to measure that is still in the very early stages. I think for a lot of brands, Campbell’s included, we’re going to need to pick the places where we test very carefully.

However, we’ve got to be open to the fact that being able to measure it is going to take time and effort. So I think as long as we go in with our eyes wide open, in this convergence world you’re going to have to take some smart risks but know that you’re ability to measure it is going to take time. It is not going to be instant.

Can you sum up the top marketing and advertising objectives that you pass down to your employees?

My top marketing objectives are really to make sure that our strategies are clear, they’re succinct and they are differentiated. And continue to push that our advertising ideas are really distinctive, that they are mind- and heart-opening and that they are meaningful to the target. From an objective standpoint we’re really pushing, pushing, pushing to make sure that first and foremost our strategies are clear and that they are differentiated. When you do that and then from a creative standpoint you really focus on the advertising idea, then you can extend to all of these other marketing vehicles and convergence. All of those things are so much easier when you’ve got the strategy and the idea right.

What media mixes have you seen the best success with?

I think because of Campbell’s rich equity—both functionally as well as emotionally—I think television has obviously worked incredibly well for us. We’ve invested more in print over the last few years and that seems to be paying off. Radio, specifically weather-triggered radio, has been a very smart investment for us. All of the traditional pieces of media have worked very hard for us. I think what you’re seeing now is that online and new media are becoming increasingly invaluable and as we learn more about its effectiveness, we’re investing more money behind it.

Many of your brands do include radio in the media mix but some don’t. Is the lack of the visual element a concern?

Not so much a lack of the visual, but can you create theater of the mind effectively with radio—that’s the objective. I think for brands like condensed soup where music is such a key element, radio works remarkably well. When you’ve got weather-triggered radio, which is very strategic, that works incredibly well. For many of our brands where humor is an important element of the execution, radio works very well. So I think they’re not so much worried about the lack of visual but they’re concerned about, “Can I create theater of the mind either with music or with humor, or with other executional elements so where radio works best we can make it work for us.”

Some marketers say that for radio it’s not so much the medium, but just a lack of good creative. Do you see that, or is there plenty of creative to go around for radio?

I think there is plenty of creative to go around. What happens is we don’t make it a priority from a client standpoint. I think print is the same way. How many times have you been in a situation where after you get the television execution, then it’s “Oh yeah, and where’s the print ad?” and “I think we need to do radio.” But when we come at it from, “I want to see all of the executions of the creatives—devote the proper time to it,” you get great work. I think we create some of the problems ourselves on the client side because we don’t ask for it concurrent with the other elements.

Are you concerned about the fractionalization and the fragmentation of time spent or are you just happy to have more choices?

In the food business where people are consuming our products every day and our household penetration is above 90%, I look at the fractionalization as incremental opportunities for us to reach our consumer. I don’t worry about it so much because I think we will test our way to finding out what are the best vehicles. If our strategy is right then our chances are good.

Last year you spoke to the ANA Agency Relations Forum crowd about the importance of training and collaboration with agencies. Can you sum a bit of that up for us here?

I believe they are and I believe the foundation of that is long-term relationships. I was reading someplace that the average client/agency relationship now is about three years. We’ve been with BBDO for 55 years and we’ve been with Y&R for ten. I think when you have those types of relationships where the agency feels confident that they can bring you big ideas, different ideas and they won’t get cut off at the knees or they’re not at risk of losing the business, to me that’s when you have an opportunity for breakthrough.

So they are bringing us better ideas and they are putting the pressure on us as their client to really take advantage of those and put our money where our mouths are.

Do you think marketers and advertisers that seem to put their agency account in review every year or so can sometimes be harmful to a long term creative flow of ideas?

I think it can be but every situation is unique. Putting agencies or businesses up for review can create competition and big ideas, new ideas. We just awarded the Godiva business to a small agency, Sugartown, this past year. It was very fertile ground for new ideas, but I think over the long term as Doug Conant [Campbell President/CEO] says, the definition of extraordinary is “sustainably good.” If you want to be sustainably good, I think long-term relationships really are the foundation.

What do you wish research companies, planning and buying agencies could provide that they’re not right now and why?

The piece that qualitative research always helps me with, if quantitative sometimes is more difficult, is being able to measure the emotion that’s evoked. So what you’re trying to do with your advertising is number one understand whether or not the strategy is being communicated. But if you’ve got an emotional component to your strategy, we often look at it as am I showing that emotion? So if I want happiness am I showing happiness? What we don’t have a real handle on is am I able to measure the emotion that’s evoked? Sometimes positive emotions evoke positive emotions. Sometimes negative emotions evoke positive emotions and I think from a research standpoint we can get even better at trying to measure the emotion evoked. That’s really what you’re trying to understand, to the degree that emotions are and will continue to be important in differentiating. The research is still more of a blunt tool.

What would you like to see radio and television provide more of to accomplish your marketing goals?
Certainly accountability. The ability to measure the return on investment—that’s important. I think finding a solution to the whole upfront purchasing cycle that still feels tremendously inefficient is another area that is important. But I can say for Campbell’s, traditional media—radio and TV—they’re working very hard for us. We’re trying not to fix what isn’t broken, but at the same time take advantage of new opportunities. For us, the traditional is really working and we want to just make it that much better by focusing on what’s important in food communication—strategy, ideas and appetite appeal.

What about the upfront would you like to see improved?

I think like most marketers, the transparency of the process. More of the emphasis on the real discussions versus the glitz, the glamour and the parties. I think just getting down to the brass tacks of what are the objectives and what we are trying to accomplish. I think greater focus on that would serve everyone. Inevitably we’re going to get there. It’s happening slowly and I think the marketers are going to continue to demand that as accountability becomes more and more important.

The traditional media is still working so the upfront will still be important, but I think to the point of convergence, as new technology comes into play it’s going to put pressure on the upfront and it’s going to create more of a market for the client. It’s going to be less about the show and the publicity.

--by Carl Marcucci

Editor’s note: This was archived from 3/07.