IOC Awards 2016 Olympic Games to Rio. What Went Wrong?

Wow! I never realized how many Americans were interested in the Olympic Games! The media backlash and gnashing of teeth over Chicago's 'loss' was quite impressive, and somehow so unexpected. But honestly, many comments come off as arrogant and uninformed, so typically American in their perspective.

The real question is "What Went Right (for Rio)?"

So let's tally up both:

What Went Right:
1. Timing - Rio was prepared to argue very effectively that the time was right for the IOC to finally award the Games to a country in South America.
2. Economic Conditions - It happens that Brazil was now the largest economy to have not hosted an Olympic Games. Fortunately, the recession was less harmful and recovery farther along.
3. Role of the Government - The Rio bid committee engaged the central government officials early on. This brought personal commitment of leaders AND financial backing of the entire country.
4. Rio really, really wanted it - Not only were they prepared and professional, but the enthusiasm of the country was evident.
5. Chicago Bid Was Well Done - Reports indicate that this was the best US bid in quite sometime. While that is little consolation, it does provide a positive template for the next US city.
6. Linking FIFA World Cup and Olympic Games - This may lead to some true synergies and economic efficiency, and may lead to a positive legacy for the country.

What Went Wrong:
1. USOC's Sad State of Affairs - Where to begin? Flawed USOC Network announcement? Ongoing difficult relations between the IOC & USOC? New leadership, with no NGB experience (and a salary that even made the IOC cringe) that doesn't even show up for major meetings? No US city should even consider a future bid until this leaky ship has been righted, and operating smoothly
2. Fear of Chicago / Anti US Sentiment - It appears some regional concern over Chicago led to the early ousting, despite the Obama factor. The Bush legacy will linger a bit longer.
3. Mixed Signals from the People of Chicago- When the bid committee is distracted in shoring up local support, emotionally and financially, the IOC will be concerned. Lack of a government funding guarante is always a turn off.
4. Star Power - The Oprah factor, while a good cheerleader for media hype, was not effective winning IOC interest. The bids should be based on the ability to execute a major sporting event.
5. Role of Statesmen - Despite the IOC's protest that the presence or absence of political leaders is a factor, the last 3 bids awarded (London, Sochi & Rio) had significant involvement of the leader of each nation. Presidents & Prime Ministers do not have adequate time to be actively engaged in Olympic bidding, but may have to to if they wish to win.
6. IOC & Controversy - No matter how an Olympic Bid voting ensues, it always comes off as a sordid, backroom deal. Somehow the sense of fair play and sportsmanship is overtaken by sour grapes. I guess a few billion dollars can do that. Call me idealistic, but I wish that a bid would be won based on providing the best expression of the Olympic Movement and the needs of the athletes.

I know I was selfishly pulling for Chicago as a way to boost the sports marketing industry in the US. But, Brazil and Rio were certainly 'due' to have a chance to host. It will engage the continent and lift sports and sponsorship broadly. Plus, Rio will be one HECK of a PARTY!


How do you see it?

Was Beijing the Last of the MEGA Olympic Games?

We are only a few days away from the important IOC vote on the 2016 Olympic Games host. Based on the events of the past 12 months, it is an appropriate time to reflect on the scale, scope and legacy of future Games, by looking backward.

I was fortunate to witness the Beijing Games up close, and can tell you that TV could not properly convey the physical scale of the events and venues. China must be experienced in person, to fully appreciate the enormity of anything that goes on there. It dwarfs almost all other countries and is huge in every way – land mass, people and ambition.

So it was no surprise that a mere 19 years after Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government and people were very eager, proud and anxious to show the world that they had arrived as an equal. And they delivered – venues that any nation would be proud of; an athletic performance that every host country dreams of; a television spectacle of unmatched beauty viewership, with much drama, color and entertainment; and for visitors a very inviting host city and people, virtually free of smog and traffic.

Of course, only the organizers know the true costs and impact of hosting the 2008 Games, because it does not appear that any budget was ever created, as virtually no expense was spared. Chinese citizens already endured displacement of their homes, jobs and endless construction and disruption. Most assuredly, they will be paying for the opportunity for many decades. But can anyone judge whether it was a shrewd investment? No doubt the people of Beijing will utilize many of the athletic facilities far into the future, and China may assume a broader global role, with further economic and social growth. But, already the Bird’s Nest is bit of a white elephant. Too large for C League football, economic times have slowed down international tours of major European football teams and the NFL has yet to sign up for a game. It sits promise unfulfilled, longing to the throngs of fans from August 2008.

It is my firm belief that Beijing will be the last of its kind Olympic Games. First, the sheer expense and investment made was astronomical. Few if any countries will be willing or able to take that on. Second, the economic meltdown we experienced in Fall 2008 has made us all realize how far out of touch things had grown, on all fronts. Spending untold billions on a sporting event now seems so out of proportion. Third, China was the last of the large economies remaining to join the ‘world stage’ through the affirmation of hosting an Olympic Games. The pattern was set decades ago as Japan (Toyo 1964) and Seoul (1988) were used as coming out parties for those countries. And just like China, they made sure it was a suitable event, regardless of cost or economic sense. Lastly, the IOC and popular opinion will force a more reasonable, affordable and sustainable approach to future Games. They have too or risk alienating the audience they hope to retain.

The IOC has hinted that the selection process will favor host city bids and proposals that have a core principle of reuse of current facilities and only building with a plan for use AFTER the Games. We will see in the 2016 selection if they hold to these principles. If not now, will they ever?

A modest venue plan can and will work. Atlanta 1996 is such an example. They used primarily the ample supply of existing venues – Georgia World Congress Center, Omni, Fulton County Stadium and Georgia State University. Those built new had a clear path for the future – Athlete’s Village became dorms for Georgia Tech; the aquatic venues also became part of Tech’s facility; the Olympic Stadium was resized to become Turner Field, etc.

The new Olympic Legacy will be one of affordability, reasonableness and suitability for the future. So I hope you enjoyed Beijing, it will not be repeated anywhere, anytime.

What are your thoughts?

EXECUTING SPONSORSHIP IN CHINA: LESSONS LEARNED

I’ve had the opportunity to work two major sponsorship events in China. In doing so, I accumulated an appreciation for a very different way of doing business. It requires great patience, a broad perspective and time - things which most Western brand marketers are chronically short of.



The 2008 Beijing Olympic Games were expected to ‘open’ up China as a market for a range of sports and other commercial ventures, only to be blunted by the global economic decline. The great success of the country as a host and event planner will no doubt lead to future activities. For those who will take the plunge, I offer up a few thoughts and guidelines.

1. Understand the Sources of Power & Relationship: All things lead to the Government
• Obtain the maximum government support possible
– It can make things easy or hard, and is mandatory in executing anything significant
• Be skeptical of anyone promising government connections
– “Guan Xi”: everyone in China has “relationships”
– Before investing time and effort, identify the key players and true power
• Try to Understand where real power lies
– Many and often confusing government layers
– Decision-making sources are not always intuitive
• Don’t look for direct government intervention in commercial

2. The Law & Contracts: Chinese Solutions Abound
• The government is the law in China
– It is not unusual to learn that laws have ‘changed’ or that the Chinese were ‘unaware’ of existing law in conflict with agreed to contracts

3. Negotiating in China: “Hidden Signals & Time”
• Be attuned for hidden messages
– Not always a straight line from Point A to point B
• Negotiation is Never Over
– Signing contract is often prelude to negotiating terms
• Face to Face Negotiation is Expected
– 90% of negotiation is done in person
– Don’t rely electronic communication until you close the deal
– Written correspondence should be formal in nature
• Time and deadlines are often used as a negotiating

4. Chinese Business Customs: “Protocol is Paramount”
• Be sensitive to the importance of protocol and ceremonies
– Be sure to have a hierarchical negotiating team
– Titles are critical; only send an “equal” to deal with government officials
– Anticipate and follow the formal Chinese protocol on seating, writing and gifting
– Understand the Chinese sense of national pride

5. The Importance of Legacy
• So they can develop skills and expertise, Chinese want to be as involved as possible in an event

This list is far from exhaustive, so also strongly suggest that a local business partner is needed. The cultural issues, unspoken rules and business style are so very different from any other country they cannot be mastered quickly.

Of the above, the importance of time and perspective. Things just do not happen quickly (unless the Chinese government is running it) and you have to plan for something totally unexpected to happen. Also, don’t be surprised by a previous agreement to suddenly be reversed, with no warning or explanation.

My experiences in China have provided many long lasting memories. It is a wonderful country of striking contrasts and awesome scale. It affords many opportunities and potential for wonderful things. Good luck and best wishes!

Key Marketing Facts for Sponsors of the FIFA World Cup

So, the US unexpected performance during the 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup raised soccer awareness in the States for a few days. As important as that is, it also served as a good reminder that the FIFA World Cup is only 11 months away. We’ve heard the rumors and echoes whether South Africa was even going to have the chance to host the event. Clearly, the show will go on, albeit with some added attention to hotel accommodations and transport.

And yes, those annoying vuvuzellas!

Most American fans and marketers place greater emphasis on other sporting events ahead of the World Cup, however for most of the world; it is THE competition like no other. Given that I offer some ideas and perspective on FIFA World Cup marketing:

• It is HUGE - everywhere but the US. Football/Futbol/Soccer has the highest awareness and affinity of any sports brand across the globe. More people play, follow and watch it than any other. The sport has an everyman appeal – it is simple and universal – requiring only a ball, pitch (field) and 2 goals; the rules are not overly complex. Fans cut across the spectrum of demographics.
• It’s Mass & Niche. The TV audience is very large - 2006 Cumulative TV audience of 26.29 billion (24.2 billion in-home viewers, 2.1 billion out-of-home). Yet, local marketing opportunities abound, in each of the 32 countries participating and especially so in the host country. Keep in mind that the World Cup mark/logo has much lower audience recognition and awareness than the Olympic Rings.
• It's not easy. Few sponsorship relationships ever are, but working with FIFA and the local organizing committee can be a very taxing exercise that will test the patience of anybody. Success will require that you be clear on your objectives and requirements, know the rules, know when to be flexible, and know when to stick to your guns.
• Everything is Al a Carte. A World Cup sponsorship doesn’t come with much in the way of out-of-the-box strategy or activation programs. The rights to use the event marks are valuable, but pricey. Sponsors are largely on their own to create and leverage activation programs that drive business value. FIFA has a few standing programs (Fan Fest public viewing, Global Trophy Tour & Domestic Trophy Tour) that can be leveraged on a buy-in basis.
• The FIFA Calendar is Marketing Friendly. With a very defined four year schedule of qualifying matches, milestone events (Final Draw, etc.), Confederations Cup, plus a full month of World Cup competition, there is ample opportunity to build and execute cohesive and timely programs over an extended period.
• Broadcast advertising does not work. If you don’t know, world soccer is not very TV advertising friendly. The game action runs for a continuous 45 minutes per half – no commercial breaks, no timeouts. There are on screen presence opportunities, but like sponsor field boards, they don’t deliver a message. Ad dollars may be better utilized on-line and in non match settings.
• Outstanding customer hospitality opportunities, but tricky. World Cup hospitality is among the most aspirational of all sports. Done well, a World Cup hospitality program can help a company enhance valuable business relationships in ways that will have lasting, positive impact on its business. But it can be complicated. Typically matches are played in 10 -12 cities in the host country. Guests often desire to see the ‘major’ matches Semi-Final or Final, or want to see their home country play, which makes good coordination and client management critical. Matches are not schedule for everyday of the event, so sightseeing and cultural activities allow for a great experience.
• It’s the World Championship of Football/Futbol/Soccer. The athletes are all well paid professionals who compete for various clubs around the world who join the national team for this event. Unlike the Olympics, there are few athlete hardships and no great societal causes. So don’t expect to wrap yourself in corporate responsibility. FIFA has some charitable activity, but it is not a sponsor thrust.
----
Kevin Hanft has first hand experience activating and managing FIFA World Cup programs in 2002 & 2006

New Business Pitch – Tough Times Require Fundamentals

I recently participated in a new business pitch for a major branded sports property. The agency team pulled together and did a great job, developing a thorough presentation and exciting creative. It’d be a great account to have on agency roster, in any economic environment.

It struck me that we should approach more of our professional lives like a new biz pitch. For those in agency or consulting businesses, you are constantly in this mode so it may be old hat. But folks in other corporate roles who lead projects or have responsibility for matrix management, you too are pitching. Clearly, anyone in career transition, every interaction is a new biz pitch.

During an earlier fact finding conference call, the client commented on how other agencies had ‘missed the point’ and did not seem to be in synch. Given the tough markets, it’s hard to believe that they were not all over it. Now, more than ever you must be sure to absolutely nail the basics and pay attention to details, regardless of the business you are in.

Listen to the Client/Customer. Usually, they will provide you with the answers or at least the kernel of an idea. Read the brief and be sure you understand it, fully and thoroughly. Be sure to ask insightful questions about the business, organization, customers and environment. Observe everything in their offices, people and mood. Don’t forget to pay attention to all that is not written or spoken.

Do the bookwork. There is no excuse for not being fully versed in the client business and market. The internet provides so much information and affords access to ideas, people and input. Shame on anyone with huge gaps in their knowledge and command of it.

Prepare well and have your credentials ready. Your business case, creative, facts or presentation has to be well conceived, thought out and clearly communicated. Be sure to have summarized your experience, expertise and knowledge that provide your authority. Be sure to practice, especially when many folks are part of the presentation. The interaction of your team must seem natural, confident and genuine.

It may come down to chemistry equation – 1+1=3. Creating an appropriate emotional connection is generally the tie breaker between winning and losing a pitch. Credentials, client references and team experience all matter, but ultimately they will be adding you to their team. Both must be comfortable that style, approach and philosophy are a good match. There are no magic bullets for this; my advice is to be honest and true to your identity. A veneer front to win the business won’t last long.

Sell yourself. You cannot be shy about pointing out your skills and accomplishments; just don’t overdo it and assume your past will carry the day. You still have to close the deal based on what you can do in the future. Be sure you make the client know you sincerely want the business and will work hard on their behalf; but don’t fawn or sell past the close.

The END of Sponsorship Marketing?

Thankfully, we have seen the end of the populism trend of bashing every company that had a sponsorship, ran client hospitality or rewarded its employees for working hard. I understand the sentiment that people cannot walk away rich for failing or manipulating the markets. But, where accountability exists and results can be demonstrated, I support most any activity that makes solid business sense.

Clearly sponsorship took it on the chin for a while in 2009, with auto makers and financial services firms as leading sponsors, it is hardly a surprise. Other industries have been affected too, but in a less public way. Their shareholders and industry watchers are rightly asking about the contribution and investments in sponsorship.

Let’s be honest, spending in sports & sponsorship grew explosively from the late 1980’s until 2007. It was a great period to be in property and rights sales, as brands fell over themselves to match competitors and gain advantage. Look at the growth in sports, leagues, teams and networks, nearly uncontrolled. Yes, much of this is related to the growth of media and the need for content. It also reflects the increasing fractionalization of the market and niche interests.

But just like real estate and Wall Street, there was an extreme case of exuberant optimism running amok. I say this based on the continuing din in the industry regarding metrics and ROI. Given the noise, it is clear that many brands engaged in sponsorship are using a compass and sextant in a GPS world. To me it is not about the magical ‘black box’ everyone is waiting for. Rather, it is about sponsorship managers rolling up their sleeves and engaging with marketing peers to decipher what matters and how to account for it – as simple as that. (Clearly it is not THAT simple – but most make it far too complicated and hard)

Returning to my argument for the day; Sponsorship will continue to be a viable and important marketing tool. Why? Simply because when it is done well, there is no more effective way to reach, influence and move customers through the relationship cycle – faster and with more commitment. The intersection of a brand, a sport and consumer passions is hard to beat.

Now it will never be the same as the ‘90s, and thank goodness. We will see a more measured, strategic and smart application in marketing plans. Properties will be better prepared to aid partners in proving the value and may take on accountability, too.

If you were Saturn and looking for a way to convince the market of the engineering expertise, sophistication and durability of your cars, would you look to an ad campaign, viral web, social web or sponsorship of a racing team? Probably some of each, but only by taking your cars onto the track will demonstrate those qualities and truly bring the brand to life.

Moving Towards a True Integrated Marketing Philosophy

Raise the topic of integrated marketing among marketer and watch heads nod briskly. It is not so clear if it is in acknowledgment of the fundamental soundness and pragmatic value or in application. It seems that few brands and companies really understand and embrace the practice.

Why is this? Surely we have moved past the naive understanding that ‘integrated’ meant all creative executions looked similar and were delivered to the market around the same time. Despite the rational support for implementing integrated marketing, there are some institutional boundaries that restrict it.

I suspect that many CMOs grew up in business with TV as the pinnacle of brand marketing activities; just now are we seeing senior marketers who have been “digital” for most of their life. These factors are not easy to overcome, but will as the next generation of CMOs emerges. In addition, the advertising world still portrays the big general agency who does TV and Print with greater reverence and esteem. These factors, plus agency compensation models have made true integrated marketing difficult.

So what is wrong with this approach, you ask? Let’s examine a typical approach for a brand campaign.

1. The general agency (as the lead agency) participates in developing or tweaking the Brand Positioning, from which the Big Idea is established.
2. The general agency develops TV Story Boards and Executions, with CMO and Senior Marketing staff involvement.
3. Other media leads (digital, direct marketing, PR, shopper, sponsorship, etc.) are then tasked with adapting the TV idea; too often via awkward agency to agency briefings.
4. Media planners is left to stitch together a cohesive plan by sequencing buys.

Rather than the waterfall cascade from TV to other communication, would it not be a better use of resources to have all agencies and marketers participate in the brand positioning and big idea development? With today’s multi-touch media and multi-channel distribution model, it is necessary to include broader viewpoints than just that of the TV audience. This will also enable media centered ideas to emerge upfront; critical with the plethora of social web choices available.

By engaging broader agency and brand resources to participate in evolving the campaign ideas, a richer and more vibrant discussion will ensue. The potential of having smart creative people build upon each other and create synergistic and linked programs is significant. No one agency or media form has a lock on good thinking, if we are open the possibilities. And, given the new media horizon the traditional approach has to be scrapped, since niche to mass is becoming a more common pattern.

No doubt, this will require advertisers and brands to take a very clear and firm stance with their agencies that all planning will be done in a collaborative and integrated manner. (Not to mention the ego soothing and hand holding needed). But the biggest challenge may lie with agency structures and compensation.

An ideal scenario might be one where a brand works with an agency holding company and defines the types of resources desired. It is up to that holding company to provide a ‘virtual team’ of the best and proper people at any given time to meet the needs. This could involve a mish-mash of people from general, media planning, digital etc. across their organization. Many boutique agencies follow this pattern now – working with strategic partners to supply critical resources a project requires, but not charging the client when not needed.

I expect the agency issue is not easy to resolve, but when enough client’s demand that approach it will be. The most critical opportunity is for clients to make the move to true integrated marketing for it is a better approach in meeting customer needs and maximizing the relationship and ultimately shareholder value