If so DON'T PANIC 15 million people in the UK are in the same boat as you, suffering from hair loss! Even Jude Law!
This week I have been looking at the 'Helping Hand with Hair Loss' campaign that was put together by a Home Counties South PR agency (Pegasus PR) for their client (Lifes2good/Viviscal) and have been trying to figure out why I think it won GOLD for its campaign. What made it ‘best practice’ in the Consumer Relations category?
Lifes2good (the client) is a Natural Healthcare Company; Viviscal is just one of their brands. Viviscal is a natural supplement that helps hair loss sufferers. I think the immediate challenges they faced when coming up with ideas to increase awareness and product credibility was the fact hair loss is viewed quite negatively by journalists, who grab every opportunity to slander sufferers in particular celebs! A survey Viviscal carried out in 2009 showed 90% of men found women with hair loss or thinning unattractive and 50% of women felt the same! This is a perception Pegasus PR had to challenge.
People suffering from hair loss do not want to shout about it and I don’t blame them, It’s a very personal issue. This is where I think Pegasus where clever with their use of tactics. They secured an exclusive interview with Sue Holderness a well loved TV actress who played Marlene in Only Fools and Horses.
I think this was clever as it added an element of surprise because she is renowned for her ‘big’ permed hair. The second tactic they used I feel helped them achieve ‘best practice’ was consulting ITV’s Dr Chris Steele from This Morning! They produced an expert support and advice video with him and a FAQ for online consumers with any queries.
The campaign was heavily online focused which I think suited the product because that is where most hair loss sufferers seek advice, from the privacy of their own home. What do you think, was it too heavily focused online? Were there other PR Tools Pegasus could have used?
The campaign was only TWO months long yet they achieved:
- 75 items of coverage
- 40 million Opportunities to See
- 5 interviews with Sue covered (e.g. Daily Mail, Sky One and Women Weekly)
- 47,000 views of educational video
- 16 websites streamed the advice video
- 6 Blogs recommended the video
- 2 new High street listings (when the client set the objective of achieving one)
- ONLINE SALES OF VIVISCAL WENT UP 154%
But ultimately I think it comes down to - could they have achieved more with a longer timescale?
What else could they have done, maybe like Movemember, but the opposite? Or even Wig Week!?
Another idea I thought of was a partner with Menopause the Musical (as hair loss is a symptom women can suffer from when going through ‘the change’) PLUS Cheryl Baker, who is a sufferer from hair loss played the starring role in it! This is where I think they missed a trick. They had an interview with her but missed the musical showing in June (one of the two months the campaign ran for!)
Would a partnership with Menopause the music have worked - an event could have been held, with free samples of the product for the cast and bloggers who recommended the video, adding a positive angle that is news worthy? Or am I again just reaching for the PR tools I have learnt to use? Maybe I’m wrong, but I think this idea could have only helped the campaign?
Could it be the short amount of time Pegasus PR had to execute the PR campaign that might have affected its success? Is it a sustainable campaign in the long-term? If not could it be made more sustainable?
Since 2008 every May has been Hairloss Awareness Month; could they have made more of this seeing as Viviscal is the sponsor (and creator!)?
I think Pegasus PR were more than worthy Gold award winners for Consumer Relations category, what do you think?
I don't think Pegasus PR were worthy of the gold award if I'm honest!
ReplyDeleteThe topic of hair loss is a little bit funny at first (I know we laughed when first viewing this campaign) but it does actually effect a lot of famous people. Hello Jude Law?!
And what did Pegasus PR do to utilise Viviscal? Not much.. The link with the TV doctor was a good idea, I liked that. But the link with the Only Fools and Horses lady was poor. Was she just the first relatively famous name that agreed to front the campaign? There are SO many other celebrities that suffer from hair loss that would have been better advocates. I know many of them are probably embarrassed by their condition, but surely someone would have agreed to it.
I think your other ideas are good suggestions too. Linking with Menopause the Musical would have been an exciting extra, Wig Week would also have been fun.
I'm sure Pegasus PR could have thought of many more promotional tactics to further this campaign and achieve results even better than this. I don't know what the other entries into this category were.. but I'm surprised that this won the gold.
Oh, I should also say that.. if I started losing my hair I would be ABSOLUTELY DISTRAUGHT. So I don't actually find the topic funny. And if I did suffer from hair loss, I would definitely want to know about this product.. Therefore it's in Pegasus PR's best interest to get this product recognised!
ReplyDeleteAhh Thanks for your comment Charlotte, you raise an interesting point of view, I like your honesty!
ReplyDeleteI hear what you are saying about Sue as the chosen face of the campaign, but realistically you aren't going to be able to achieve a celeb like Jude Law (although we would all like them to!)
I think they used her because of the age range she would appeal to. In all honesty the campaign is targeted at an older audience don’t you think? So maybe she was appropriate... Do you know her from Only Fools and Horses? Only because in that she is very outgoing and well known for her appearance and massive hair! Therefore I think it somehow fits and makes people stop and take note – a surprise factor so to speak. Using her removes the stigma of the issue as it’s quite a private problem so acts as more reassuring for the consumers (all a bit more normal - mother/friend figure).
The main aim of the campaign was to give online consumers somewhere to get their questions answered. Lifes2good found that no-one was filling this gap in the market (online) so wanted to reach out to people through Pegasus PR and give consumers online support. The exclusive interview with Sue and the ed. Video by Chris did this, which in turn pointed the consumers in the direction of Viviscal, pushing up sales by 154%!
What other promotional tactics do you think they could have used then to make it more ‘fun’?
I reckon it could have been a fun campaign that raised more awareness, but it also could have put people off the brand, if they carried out ‘fun’ tactics in the wrong way, people with the condition may have taken offence or felt mocked. It wouldn’t have fulfil the client brief either as they wanted to help and advice consumers (just in a clever way that then directed them to their product, this is where Pegasus came in). The Client wanted to offer advice to consumers and ultimately be the person they turned to for advice, first port of call. So for this reason I think they deserved the award.
Have I managed to sway your views?
I think the selection of Sue Holderness was a good choice considering their target audience.
ReplyDeleteI think the results that they achieved in that short amount of time were brilliant, but their tactics definitely had an 'expiration date'. If they wanted to carry on the campaign for longer they would have needed to continue with new, fresh ideas. They definitely should have used hairless month more effectively.
I agree that it could have been more fun and like the idea of 'wig week'. But it would have to be promoted very delicately as hair loss is a very sensitive issue and people will not want to feel made fun of.
Personally, I'm not too sure about the partnership with menopause the musical. If over publicised it could make men believe that this product is specifically for women and put them off slightly.
Hope the comments help. I would be grateful if you could follow my PR blog at http://2plus2pr.blogspot.com/
thanks
Hi Tom - thanks for your comment. It’s nice to gage a male perception on the subject.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you totally about a delicate approach when implementing tactics like ‘wig week’, Hair loss for sufferers can be a very traumatic thing causing lifelong psychological effects e.g. reduced self-esteem, emotional stress, anxiety and depression. The last thing you would want to do is pee people off or upset potential customers!
I have to say I understand where you are coming from about the partnership with menopause the music. However the idea wasn’t meant to be a ‘leading’ tactic, just an extra event they could have really utilised. They already had influential bloggers encouraged and involved in the campaign and bringing them together with the cast could have given Pegasus PR a news worthy, positive publicity angle, something quite difficult to achieve on the subject of hair loss. Along with more online recognition from bloggers if the event goes well! (doing some of Pegasus's work for them, always a bonus!)
That’s a very valid point about men potentially being deterred from the product, but I think it could have really worked because the majority of Viviscals consumers WHO don’t actively seek advice or shout about their problem are women. With men hair loss is kind of accepted even expected, do you know what I mean? Whereas with women it’s not really thought off let alone talked about. I think it could have been a really nice way of highlighting their struggle in a positive way, in the public eye.
Other tactical approaches could then have been geared towards the male consumer audience. Another event or viral for instance with bald caps or something could have been done to highlight the male struggle with hair loss?
All in all, as long as the campaign is consistent at portraying its key messages about the product and the fact it’s for men and women they would have been ok.
Convinced?
Obviously I'm a terrible person and I missed this presentation, but reading through your write-up I'd say my main problem with the campaign is actually that they tried to target two different genders at once, and that seems like a pretty big mistake.
ReplyDeleteMaybe that's a problem with the product marketing as much as it with this specific campaign, but as a dude losing my hair I wouldn't want to be picking up something that was featured in Woman's Weekly or looked too focused towards female consumers.
I feel silly enough buying hair dye with pictures of sexy ladies on it, buying a product associated with, as you suggested, a musical about the menopause? No thanks, I'd like to keep some of my male pride!
Using celebs is a good idea as it takes away some of embarassement that I'm sure comes with hair loss for most genders, but again without trying to sound too sexist I think it's a tactic that's more like to work on women, who are, in general, more interested in world of celebrity and more likely to associate with Cheryl Cole than I am with Jude Law. I do like Jude Law though.
As for the length of the campaign, wouldn't the be decided by the client and probably a budget consideration? I thik they did well in the time frame in terms of pure media coverage. The sales jumped up, but as you suggest, how long that will stay like that for seems debatable.
Overall it seems like this was a bit up int he air. I agree with Tom, you can't really run a campaign for this targetting both genders and expect full success. As you say, female hair loss is a much touchier subject than male hair loss in general, so if you try to take the comedy approach to far, you risk alienating your female audience, too.
I really agree with Rob, with a topic as sensitive as hair loss I think a more focussed campaign for each gender would have been really important.
ReplyDeleteUsing Sue Holderness as a spokeswoman was a good idea based on the shock it would cause, but it does narrow down the target audience quite significantly.
I personally had no idea who she was, and think they would be better off using someone more well-known who had suffered with the same problem. From seeing your presentation I know they piggy-backed on a Gail Porter interview?
Although her condition is slightly different, who better as an advocate for women's hair loss?!
The campaign was rightly focussed online - most people turn to Google before their GP's now when it comes to health problems, but targetting the National Health Service as a B2B market may be a recommendation I would make, given that it's such a common problem.
I think they did as best they could given the time and constraints of the subject, but sadly still don't think they deserve Gold, sorry!
Yes they piggy-backed an interview with Gail Porter on GMTV and secured a link to the Viviscal website - following this, the website hits went up 1,537%!! This is something I forgot to highlight in my post actually! Thanks for bringing it up Tina!
ReplyDeleteI think it is actually one of their most significant successes as it shows they were proactive and reacted quickly as soon as they knew the interview was going ahead, ensuring they got coverage on the show. (Which thousands of people would have seen) In-turn helping Pegasus gain the awareness, one of their key objectives.
Dont be sorry, it’s nice to hear different opinions!
I agree with Tina and Rob - I think the campaign should be focused on each gender. And I had no idea who the spokeswoman was so maybe they should have chosen somebody better known. But anyway, in my opinion they did well considering the fact that this is a sensitive topic and it was probably hard to find celebrity endorsements. Moreover, they had only 2 months.
ReplyDeleteYes, I think it’s really interesting this idea of targeting the specific genders.
ReplyDeleteI’m guessing Pegasus didn’t go about it this way because of the limited time they had to run out the campaign and they probably didn’t want to ostracize one gender over the other.
This is definitely a recommendation that could be made though!
Brilliant point about the difficulty they probably faced in getting a celeb endorsement.
I totally agree!
The ‘average Jo’ suffering from hair loss doesn’t even want to talk about it because it is such a sensitive and personal issue, can you image a celebrity always in the public eye, as famous as Jude Law (for instance)doing it? I just don’t think it is realistic someone younger and more famous would act as the campaign ambassador for reputation reasons if nothing else!
I have to say I think Pegasus were right to use Sue. I believe she was the best person to represent the brand, as she herself has suffered with hair loss and has used the product. I believe more in the product knowing she hjas used it successfully. I don’t think a bigger named celeb would have been any better as I think the brand message would have been lost.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think they did deserve the Gold, as they increased awareness that hair loss doesn’t just happen to men, so in this case I think using a female celeb was better than using a male. They were sensible in getting both a celebrity ambassador for the product but also directed consumers to seek advice and provided FAQ’s with a well-recognised TV doctor. The team also worked hard to get a good online presence targeting influential bloggers, which I think many campaigns forget about or struggle to do.
I don’t think that they should make the campaign longer as it fitted in with the hair loss awareness month. Yes there was obviously a massive peak in both sales and hits on their websites around the campaign if the campaign was longer I don’t think this number would increase greatly. I think they did a great job in increasing awareness of the issue and as a consequence, sufferers would remember Viviscal and I’m sure if you were experiencing hair loss then you would try it, right?
Oh and I would be interested in knowing the gender of people buying the product online as sales increased massively! Maybe Robs right and guys wouldn’t go to the counter with Viviscal, but would maybe buy it online?
I think using a younger, more popular celebrity would have been effective, but this could be utilized in the future to make it more sustainable. Also many of the people who suffer with hair loss will know the celebrIty featured. I liked the video with the Dr that was very effective however this could maybe have been pushed more maybe on to prime time TV programmes such as 'embarrasing bodies' and have Dr.Chris as official spokesperson for the brand. The coverage was extensive though and i definitely think it deserved gold as it was measured effectively and sales went up LOADS!
ReplyDeleteLooking at the results I can definitely say they did incredibly well and deserved to win gold.
ReplyDeleteIt is always a superior tactic to involve celebrities, and most important the right celebrities for the target audience…
I personally don’t know celeb’s they involved in the campaign, but it worked, so it’s all that matters.
I still can't decide if I think they are worthy of winning the gold award for this campaign. I do think the results and coverage they achieved in the short amount of time that the campaign ran for were realy good. The campaign obviously caught the attention of the the right people as online sales of Viviscal went up by 154%. I think using Sue in the campaign was effective because although the younger generation are not very aware of who she is, for a large number of those that are slightly older they will know exactly who she is after starring in Only Fools and Horses. I also think that without her the campaign wouldn't have managed to have secured as much coverage as it did, particularly nationally as generally hair loss is not a subject that is seen as 'interesting' but by showing 'celebrities' that suffer from it I think people want to know more about it. I think to make the campaign stronger they could have also used a male well known face that also suffers from hair loss and used the same tactics that they did with Sue in order to target males.
ReplyDeleteHi Everyone. Thanks for all your comments and suggestions on our Hair Loss Awareness Month campaign for Viviscal – it was interesting to read through your posts! We’ve executed an annual PR campaign for the client since 2008 and we’ve enjoyed working on them all, but every PR campaign has it’s challenges. This campaign was very much directed towards women rather than men and our key challenge was to get over the stigma associated with hair loss and give the media a reason to want to write about this not-so-sexy subject. Sue was recruited as our celebrity ambassador after extensive research (and I mean extensive!) as it was important to find an ambassador that our core target consumer would recognise and relate to. While Sue isn’t an A-list celebrity, she had a genuine and compelling story to tell that we knew women (i.e. the reader) would connect with, making her an attractive proposition for any journalist writing for this audience. Some of you have made some great suggestions for additional activity, but as we’re sure you’ll all appreciate, any campaign has to be delivered within a set timeframe/budget and unfortunately there are always a million ideas left on the brainstorm board that you simply don’t have the resources to execute. Thanks again for your interest!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'm really glad the comments and suggestions generated by my blog post where interesting for you to read. As you can see it generated a good debate gmaxey!
ReplyDeleteI still think the celebrity ambassador you chose in Sue was perfect (great effort with the extensive research! Can I ask who else you considered as the face of the campaign? were there any other favourites you had?)
I stand by the fact I think the campaign deserved Gold and enjoyed reading all about what you did and how you ran it out, so thanks to you too!