Lost a Job? Starting a Business? Here's How to Cope

Principles of Change: The Second of Nine

by Ariane de Bonvoisin

Published: May 12, 2009

Ariane de Bonvoisin

I've interviewed thousands of people going through all types of change -- job loss, divorce, a cancer diagnosis, a baby, a new business -- and I've noticed some very similar patterns, behaviors and attitudes in people who are good at change. I've discovered nine principles, and I'll highlight one of them in each of my columns in the next few months. Here, then, is the next one:

Principle 2: The Change Guarantee: From this situation something good will come. (Write this down somewhere visible!) People who successfully navigate change know that change always brings something positive into their lives. Every change has something good associated with it eventually.

More Principles of Change

PRINCIPLE 1: People who successfully navigate change have positive beliefs.

Often the reason why something is happening is not clear -- and it's certainly not immediate. Sometimes it might take years for you to look back and think "I now see why this happened the way it did."When change hits, the first word that comes out of our mouths is "Why?" Why did this happen to me? Why did I lose the deal, not get promoted, not get the job, get dumped, lose the money? If you find yourself in the "why" mode, consider asking a different question: What for? What could be good about this? What could you go ahead and do differently now? What opportunity is now available? How can you make this be worth it? What did you really learn from all this? The more quickly you answer these questions, the more quickly the situation will turn around. People who are good at change do not earn Oscars in the self pity/poor me/victim/blame category.

Believe me, I've asked people who've lost loved ones, seen their businesses go bankrupt and had their health threatened, and I have always gotten them to answer the question, "What good came from this?"

Life is on your side
Here's where it gets interesting: Most people think life is against them, trying to piss them off, that they are unlucky, that things don't work out for them. Einstein said that "the most important decision we will ever make in our lives is whether we believe we live in a friendly or an unfriendly universe." If you want to get good at change, you must believe life is your partner, on your side, conspiring for greater good coming into your life -- despite the apparent immediate loss it might appear to be. Change isn't there to hurt, anger or annoy you. It's there to bring new things, people, jobs, opportunities. Always.

The mindset of folks who are good at change is one of abundance. There are more jobs, more money, more intimate partners, more deals. You can immediately tell if someone lives in scarcity or abundance. Which one are you? What about the people around you?

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Ariane de Bonvoisin shares her change secrets in a free daily e-mail. Her book, "The First 30 Days: Your Guide to Making Any Change Easier," is now available in paperback.

Endings always yield new beginnings. When you get good at change, you become an expert in letting go, in not clinging, in not controlling how things unfold. In the middle of change, become comfortable with the temporary in-between period. Rushing to fill the void with the first job, relationship or deal that shows up doesn't yield success.

New experiences are important
There is no rush, despite how you feel. Those who can delay instant solutions and gratification are always rewarded.

Here's one last thing to think about: The core of who you are comes from new experiences, not from keeping everything together perfectly.

The very best of you shows up during times of change and what you allow change to teach you and give you next.

A New Marketing Case Study: KFC

Grilled Chicken a Kentucky Fried Fiasco

Off-Brand Bet Sunk by Poor Planning and Oprah-Driven Crowds

By Emily Bryson York

Published: May 11, 2009

CHICAGO (AdAge.com) -- KFC's grilled-chicken launch was to be the biggest in the chain's history. Now it might also go down as a marketing case study in what not to do.

The story starts with a marketer testing the elasticity of its brand. After all, we all know what the 'F' stands for in KFC, so suddenly insisting the consumer associate the fast feeder with grilled chicken, rather than the Colonel's fried version, was always going to be a stretch.

KFC thought the way to meet the challenge was to spend millions on a TV ad campaign from DraftFCB, Chicago. TV is a marketing channel that's worked well for other fast-food introductions, but the creative was simultaneously underwhelming and yet, by telling consumers to "Unthink KFC," seemed to undermine the chain's main game, fried chicken.

Whether it was working or not we may never know, because this was the point at which the marketer brought in the big gun, Oprah Winfrey, and the trouble really started. The company's offer on the daytime diva's talk show May 4 of two free pieces of grilled chicken, two sides and a biscuit to anyone who downloaded a coupon within a two-day period should have been a huge promotional coup. Instead, it turned into an unmitigated disaster when the company was unable to execute and actually had to rescind the offer.

KFC's offer sent the chain skyrocketing to the No. 1 topic on Twitter. By Wednesday, blogs began reporting "riots" at New York City KFCs. On Thursday, local news crews interviewed fuming customers getting turned away in other markets, including Chicago. Consumers complained about rude service, and media complained about a PR team that seemed asleep at the wheel. By Friday, the day after KFC pulled the promotion, NPR was calling KFC "the James Frey of fast food," referring to the author of a memoir praised by Ms. Winfrey that was later exposed as fiction.

In the end, KFC managed to strain relationships with three core constituents: consumers, the media and franchisees that swallowed the cost of the free food themselves. "This is going to damage their brand," said Gene Grabowski, senior VP, Levick Strategic Communications.

Just how did things go so far awry?

Multiplication
KFC spokeswoman Laurie Schalow maintained that the chain prepared thoroughly, given the time constraints. After months of seeking Ms. Winfrey's approval, she said KFC wound up with a one-week window to execute its promotion. KFC accepted Ms. Winfrey's projections for response, based on other offers from her show -- and doubled them. About 10.5 million coupons were downloaded, but in what might have been a twist unexpected by KFC, many were also photocopied.

There was also a report at the website Consumerist that some KFC franchisees did not participate in the promotion because they were not reimbursed for the giveaway by corporate. KFC told Ad Age the company did fund the promotion for its own stores and franchisees were expected to pay for the free meals at theirs, but stressed that franchisees have been happy to participate in the promotion -- despite numerous reports to the contrary.

In all, KFC gave away 4 million meals in two days. That sounds like a lot, but it pales in comparison to the 4 million pieces of grilled chicken it doled out April 27 alone when it declared a national "Unfry Day" in ads featuring Mr. Eaton. By the time KFC realized it wasn't keeping up with demand -- and there were 6 million or more coupons outstanding -- the chain pulled the plug on the promotion and issued rain checks to consumers willing to go back to a KFC, fill out a form and wait for another coupon to arrive in the mail. They'll be rewarded with a free Pepsi. The chain never called in a crisis firm.

News of the bungled giveaway became so widespread that Mr. Eaton appeared on Ms. Winfrey's show May 9 and offered this spin: "We had very big projection numbers on this, but not in our wildest imagination could we believe the response we've gotten," he said. "It's been absolutely fantastic. But in fact, it's been so big it's been overwhelming. Yesterday and the day before, some of our stores, our lobbies were full, the drive-throughs were packed, we had crowds everywhere."

Negative feelings grow
KFC did accomplish one thing -- a sea of buzz for its product. But the chatter got nasty when the promotion ceased. According to Zeta Interactive, which monitors blog chatter, KFC generally popped up in about 538 blog posts daily, with 72% of mentions positive. During the promotion, that number soared to 1,319 mentions, 89% of which were positive. But cutting the cord on Thursday had an immediate effect, with 772 posts. Negative ratings shot up, to 33%

"The free-chicken promotion created a sense of enthusiasm within online communities and enhanced KFC's online reputation," Al DiGuido, CEO of Zeta Interactive, said in an e-mail. "However, as soon as KFC decided to halt the promotion, their brand suffered a brutal backlash, plummeting down to 67% positive buzz. With this overwhelmingly negative response, KFC did more damage to its brand by running an incomplete promotion than if they had just not launched the campaign in the first place."

KFC begs to differ. "We have never had more positive customer response," said Ms. Schalow, noting that about two in four grilled-chicken customers it's attracted are new or rare visitors to the chain. However, Technomic President Ron Paul said that's the group easiest to alienate.

Some potential candidates for 76ers coach

By PHIL JASNER
Philadelphia Daily News

jasnerp@phillynews.com

It's virtually impossible to handicap a race before we know who's running, but the 76ers' president is compiling a list and checking it twice.

Ed Stefanski, the Sixers' president/general manager, needs a coach for next season. That became clear yesterday, when Tony DiLeo, 32-27 as the in-season replacement for the fired Maurice Cheeks, withdrew his name from consideration.

Who might make it on to Stefanski's list?

* Doug Collins: Through John Langel, Collins' agent, it has become clear that Collins has a real interest in coaching here, in part because of his passion for the city in which he played his entire career and because he would be close to family members. Collins, regarded in the highest echelon of TV analysts, has coached the Chicago Bulls, Detroit Pistons and Washington Wizards and has what some people believe to be a virtual photographic memory for game details.

* Eddie Jordan: The assumption is that Stefanski would be interested because he worked with Jordan when both were employed by the New Jersey Nets. Stefanski said yesterday that he didn't necessarily have to have a history with a candidate, but that he did have to have a comfort level. Jordan has been strongly rumored as a candidate to return to the Sacramento Kings.

* Mark Jackson: He's on the list because of his skill in directing teams as a point guard. He has shown a strong interest in coaching, even though he has remained in the TV booth.

* Mike Fratello: Pencil in his name because speculation has been that he would very much like to resume his coaching career. He was interviewed here once before, but showed little inclination to want to coach Allen Iverson.

* Jeff Van Gundy: Like so many coaches, he's a different person in the TV booth. Relaxed, affable. Like Fratello, when the Sixers looked into him before he was put off by the team's centerpiece. But like all former coaches, there's always the lure of coming back.

* Tom Thibodeau: He's respected as the defensive guru of the Boston Celtics, but even though the Celtics won a championship in 2007-08, Thibodeau - a young Sixers assistant during the long-ago John Lucas era - stayed in place.

* Avery Johnson: He's tough, demanding, controlling and would bring a different dynamic to the bench.

* Jay Wright: I'm not even comfortable writing in the name of the Villanova coach. Certainly not now. I think someday he'll take a look at the pros, but not now. *

With PR on the Rise, Here's a Refresher Course in the Basics

Earned Media Isn't Paid Media and Five Other Principles to Keep in Mind

by Jonah Bloom

Published: May 11, 2009

Marketers are spending more on PR and getting excited about it, too. Talk of "earned media" has gone from conference rooms at PR shops to center stage at the Ad Age Digital Conference, where it was given a big shout-out by Unilever CMO Simon Clift and venture capitalist Fred Wilson.

Veronis Suhler said that U.S. spending on PR rose 7.1% in 2008. WPP noted PR was the fastest-growing discipline, and the holding company was up 17.3% in the discipline in 2008.

That's great, because PR is underused and underfunded. But based on much of what we see and hear, there are a lot of marketers out there who don't seem to understand the principles or ethics of the discipline. So here's a refresher on the rudiments of PR. Even if you don't need them, I know you know someone who does.

Earned media isn't paid media. Any place that'll take cash for editorial credit isn't worth your time and isn't credible. (The fashion mags are a possible exception to this rule, unfortunately.) What's more, your pay-for-play approach may end up hitting the headlines for trying to deceive the public.

Earned media requires being interesting and open. You have to have a story to tell -- a real, meaningful story that a journalist, blogger or tech-empowered consumer will think is worth listening to and sharing.

Listen to the people you paid to help you. Don't hire a PR person or agency and then ignore them when they tell you that the story you're presenting is either too boring, a lie or, even worse, a lie that'll get found out. I've heard 100 PR people say "yes, I know it's bullshit, but it's what they wanted to say." Not only is going against their advice a waste of your money, but it's also going to undermine your PR people's credibility and therefore your ability to earn media when you do have something to say.

You can't control the message. Despite the popular tabloid moniker, your PR person isn't a doctor and shouldn't be spinning. PR helps you communicate something demonstrably true. If you need to know how the message will look when it is shared with the public, stick to ads. When it doesn't come out quite like you'd imagined, don't scream at the PR person or the journalist or blogger in question. You'll just make influential enemies. If your message comes out exactly as you'd hoped, make a note that the journalist in question has no integrity and will soon have no readers, or thank your stars that you got lucky. (Note, however, lucky ain't scalable.)

PR isn't cheaper than advertising, or more expensive, just different. PR agencies have done little to dispel this common misconception, for obvious reasons. But it's like saying that throwing a party is cheaper than renting a fleet of trucks.

PR doesn't replace advertising. Sometimes you need one, sometimes the other. Ideally, you probably want both operating in harmony, orchestrated by the same conductor. Also note: Without advertising, there'd be no "editorial publicity" or, indeed, editorial. Unless, that is, you're assuming that Mark Zuckerberg is going to find another way to fund Facebook, while the state-funded BBC and nonprofit NPR carve up the rest of the media world between them.

On that note, let's also remember that the idea of the media isn't to cheer for you, your brand, your company, your industry or even the country. The media's job isn't to be positive or negative, it's to bring skepticism and questioning to the issues of the day. If it had done a little more of that, and a little less cheerleading, over the last two decades, not only might it feel a little more relevant today, but we might just have rooted out some of the financial and regulatory idiocy that got us in this mess in the first place.

Glass blowing video at Artists For Artists