Here’s three reasons why Domino’s sales are up 14.3% since their re-launch:
- The science says that we gain credibility when we argue against our own perceived self-interest. Saying, “we need to get better” is strong stuff for a brand. This is source credibility and it’s a powerful motivator. It taps our decision triggers and moves us, all things considered, to listening with more of an open mind.
- They never said, “Our crust tastes like cardboard” – they said that some of their focus group customers said their crust tastes like cardboard. There’s a huge difference here. We all know what people are like when they have no skin in the game. What Domino’s showed us, though, is that instead of ignoring the occasional nay-sayer, they listened and acted.
- While I’d love to throw a few statistics at you to prove my point, I’ll bet you a pizza or two that the majority of Domino’s customers didn’t think their crust tasted like cardboard. They probably thought it tasted “fine.” “OK.” Maybe “good enough.” And yet, Domino’s improved on what was “good enough” without having a national scandal break out over their quality. If they had a BP-sized ingredient catastrophe linking them to knowingly using tainted produce or something, this campaign would have gone a lot worse. They didn’t. This was their idea: improve the product that you’re not complaining about. This is a great example of being the fastest guy on the field – of leading from the front.
What makes this corporate make-over such a success is that Domino’s didn’t have a crisis on their hands.
Re-launching a brand is supposed to be like this.
[Photo courtesy of Flickr via Creative Commons.]
I guess because it’s low-risk for the consumer to order Domino’s again, it was worth it. If it still tasted like cardboard they’d only lose $10, though the online backlash would have been huge.
Wouldn’t work for every kind of company, but definitely seems like a smart move for Domino’s.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Carri Bugbee, Tom Asacker and StephenDenny, William. William said: Three Reasons Why Domino's Re-Launch Worked – https://www.stephendenny.com/2010/06/three-reasons-why-dominos-re-launch-worked/ […]
Plan B, it is low risk – this isn’t a come in and give our auto brand another try sized investment – but more importantly, Dominos did something that cost money (cost of goods, processes, re-training, not to mention marketing expense) without having to be shamed into it first.
I know, this shouldn’t be a shock – but in this day and age, it is.
How many brands do this sort of work without a sting having to expose their shoddy practices up front? What if McDonalds shut down all of its restaurants for 48 hours, publicly stating that they are going to rigorously clean absolutely everything under their rooves and have a grand re-opening on the third day? They’d lose money for 2 days. And we’d think, “they were pretty clean before – they’ll be spotless when they’re done.”
Take this all with a grain of salt, of course, but the point remains the same. Doing something painful like this without having to be told to do it builds credibility! Thanks for your comment!
Yes indeed a good strategy to relaunch itself but what to do if another focused group of customers say that the new crust tastes like cardboard. We should not forget that every consumer is unique and to match to everyone’s expectation is not so easy.
Abhishek: there will always be nay-sayers! No question and no argument from me on that. I see the real learning here is that Domino’s proactively – without a “spill,” without a “scandal” – said, “We’re weren’t good enough, we weren’t happy about it and we did something about it. Now look – very specifically – at what we’ve done.”
Arguing against your own perceived self interest – “Some people said our crust tasted like cardboard and our sauce like ketchup” – strips away the impression that you’re only telling us the good parts. It strongly sends the signal that you’re honest. This is a needed first step to building credibility and trust.
Thanks for your comment and for stopping by –