Sponsorship Strategist

A novel approach to engaging corporations in your city or cause

As you head out for the weekend, here's some inspiration on how you might engage corporations in your cause or in your community. Norte Beer of northern Argentina flips social conventions, cleans up towns, and makes girlfriends fall in love with their guys, out with the guys. Enjoy!

3 reasons why cause marketing ROI is low

Earlier this year, I issued a set of predictions for 2011 about causes and corporations, including one that stated that corporate sincerity would be questioned. On Friday, a research study reveals that only 37 percent of Americans have purchased a product tied to a cause, even though 96 percent of Americans note two or three causes important to them.

Researchers cite Americans' "skepticism" that businesses are supporting causes that are aligned with their brands. Seventy-four percent of the individuals surveyed said there is a disconnect between the brand and the cause, while 67 percent believe that businesses are only supporting a cause to sell products.

I agree and suggest two additional explanations:

1. Some causes are undermining their trusted positions by accepting dollars from and full cause marketing campaigns with businesses that are misaligned with their missions. Buckets for a Cure comes to mind. If the corporate partner and nonprofit mission are not aligned in terms of values, among other points, consumers register cognitive dissonance and ultimately distrust, cynicism, and skepticism towards both the cause and corporation.
2. In the waning days of the recession and into the slow economic recovery, we heard lots of news about causes needing our assistance, especially because of the negative toll the economy had on their funding sources and the lives of constituents. At the same time, with corporate and institutional trust down, many corporations turned to cause marketing and partnering with the nonprofit sector or, generically, a cause to build trust, enhance reputations, and ingratiate their brands among consumers. The result? Cause fatigue. 

Cause marketing and partnership between nonprofits and corporations is by no means over, but as a tactic, both parties would be wise to ensure an optimum alignment and clear strategy. 

Nonprofits: does the tie enhance your brand? Foster your mission? Excite your constituents and donors? Or does it make you feel a little uncomfortable, even queasy? If you don't feel good about this partnership, if there is no strategic imperative, do not move forward and do not accept this money.

A nonprofit leader said to me earlier this year, "We don't need policies [around corporate sponsorship]. We'll accept money from anyone." Not for long, you won't.

Corporations: check your intentions. Are your customers and/or employees truly passionate about this cause? Are the opportunities offered by your potential partners' business changing, for your brand and for the nonprofit?  Or are you unclear about why you should work with this cause? Or are your intentions a little more selfish?

A young nonprofit fundraiser asked me whether it was a good idea for her organization, which preserves farmland, to accept sponsorship from a real estate developer. Can you see that it's all about intentions here?

It's not easy saying no to an opportunity, but when it's not a good, solid fit, the tie will backfire, causing more harm than good, destroying trust. It's perfectly acceptable to say, "no."

Gail Bower's interview with ANA Magazine continued

Today's post continues with part two of a two-part Q&A with writer Michael J. McDermott for his article on improving the effectiveness of event sponsorship for ANA Magazine, a publication of the Association of National Advertisers. You'll find Part 1 here.

 Michael J. McDermott (MJMcD): How should marketers measure the success of a sponsorship campaign?  What metrics should they be using and how accessible is the data they need?

Gail S. Bower (GSB): Businesses market for only 2 reasons: to build awareness and to generate sales.  So these are the fundamental metrics.

What many marketers become confused about is how to evaluate sponsorship using these metrics and often resort to one of the only measures they know – cost per thousand – which is inappropriate.

Sponsorship is a qualitative medium – not a quantitative one, like advertising. The most important characteristic of sponsorship is that it is experiential. It allows marketers to have face-to-face interactions with customers or clients in a more relaxed setting and in ways that foster higher degrees of emotional resonance and connection.  Think relationship-building, conversations about products or services, and sensory experiences of a product. Or communicating something highly nuanced.

Therefore, marketers must be very clear about what their objectives are from the outset and work with their partners to co-create the sponsorship opportunity so it is designed to meet these metrics. Don’t make the property guess. (Unfortunately many corporations have silly online applications, which prohibit the quality co-development of an opportunity.)

If a company needs sales results, traffic building (either online or to a retail location), or product usage, for example, as a measure for success, the property (sports team, event, cause, festival, etc.) needs to design the opportunity accordingly.

Then it will likely take time to build equity into the effort, refine and evolve the execution, and see truly meaningful results. Marketers should build quality relationships with their partners and intend to grow and evolve the sponsorship over time. Conversely, investing in a one-day or one-weekend event and expecting sales miracles is unrealistic. All internal parties – from the C Suite to the retail level – should be educated about what to expect, how to participate to really bring forth the results, and why being passive is ineffectual.

The marketer should expect the property to have an understanding of its audiences, hopefully based on research; a solid branding and marketing strategy and operation; and competence to assemble its assets in a way that addresses the marketer’s objectives. In addition, the property can provide documentation of how the sponsorship was executed, but it’s really up to the marketer to measure results.

MJMcD: Can you suggest an example of a sponsorship opportunity that has worked well for the sponsoring marketer and discuss why it has been successful?

GSB: Automotive sponsorships are great examples. I’ve worked with Subaru, Toyota, Mercedes-Benz, Chevrolet, and others over the years, both directly and indirectly. It’s no secret that people can have an aversion to the whole car-buying experience – pushy sales people; big, costly investments for which many people lack sufficient knowledge to make; and it can be stressful (fear of buying a lemon etc.). Most people I know do not relish the idea of going to a car dealership.

However, when an automotive company sponsors an event, if it’s executed well with an onsite experience of the car – ranging from displays to actual test-drives – the dynamic changes entirely. Eventgoers want to sit in the car, look under the hood, touch all the doodads in the car, and even ask the representative questions. The eventgoer may not buy the car on the spot, but the marketer has enhanced its chances for consideration when the big purchase time comes around. It’s very powerful.

MJMcD: Can you provide an example (real or hypothetical) of a sponsorship campaign that has not (or probably would not, if hypothetical) work out so well and discuss why?

GSB: Sponsorships that don’t work are in one of the following broad categories:

1. Poor alignment of strategy and/or branding. One example that comes to mind is KFC’s recent breast cancer sponsorship, Buckets for the Cure. In this cause marketing effort, consumers were encouraged to buy pink buckets of grilled or fried chicken. Neither is a particularly healthy eating choice, and the benefactor organization had information on its web site stating that midlife weight gain can contribute to higher risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. I wrote about this on my blog: here and here. [NOTE: Since the interview occurred, a new KFC example has come out: buy a $2.99 "mega jug" of Pepsi at KFC and $1 goes to Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. Wow!]
2. Confusion about sponsorship. Marketers are inundated with sponsorship requests, thus the online application process. I’ve heard recently about companies sending all such requests to philanthropic/foundation offices, even if the sponsorship is marketing in nature and/or executed by a for profit entity. Marketers need a better understanding of what sponsorship is and how it differs from a corporate gift. If it’s marketing-driven, execute it as I’ve mentioned above and in the previous post; if it’s a gift or strategically philanthropy execute that appropriately.
3. Failure to execute; being passive. Building on what I just said above and earlier, sponsorship or philanthropy can each drive business results in particular ways. Many corporations send off checks, do little else to take advantage of their investments, and then seem confused about ROI.

MJMcD: In brief, what would you say are the four or five (or whatever number) of best practices marketers should keep in mind when considering, executing and evaluating the performance and ROI of a sports/event sponsorship?

GSB: See this PDF of Best Practices for Corporate Sponsorship:  Download Best practices for marketers

 

The Greatest Sponsorship Film I've Ever Seen: Morgan Spurlock's "POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold"

In 2004, shortly after seeing Morgan Spurlock's first film, Supersize Me, his cinematic experiment eating nothing but McDonald's three meals a day for 30 days, I headed off to New Orleans to the Essence Music Festival. I served as managing director for the daytime activities at the New Orleans Convention Center of the festival, the "Purpose" part of the "Party with a Purpose."

McDonald's was a major sponsor (and still is) and that year focused its activation on promoting its new healthier menu options. According to news reports at the time, McDonald's new menu had nothing to do with the film, and the company's history notes the introduction of Premium Fresh Salads to its menu in 2003. Still, I imagine not even company spokespeople could deny the synchronistic timing.

The vague trepidation I felt heading off to the 2004 Festival, wondering what impact the film might have for the Festival and its sponsor – would people rally? would festivalgoers protest? would there be a firestorm of media condemnation? – returned for me Thursday night when I went to see Spurlock's newest film, POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold. What would Spurlock say about marketing and sponsorship, the fields I'm in? What impact would it have?

In both cases, my trepidation was unfounded. No one protested McDonald's or the Essence Music Festival, and whether the film had any influence or not on McDonald's menu, who cares? The film raised excellent points; McDonald's has evolved its menu; and we each, as individuals, still must take responsibility for our own eating and nutritional information-gathering habits.

The new film is hilarious. Every industry has absurdities about it, and marketing is right up there. Spurlock pokes fun at it all – including at himself. POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold is the story of Spurlock's attempts to secure sponsors for the film while bringing us a glimpse behind the scenes of the sophistication of modern day marketing and uncovering the dark side.

What a different film this would have been in the hands of another filmmaker, like Michael Moore, for example. Consistent with his own branding profile, Spurlock is equal parts "mindful" and "playful" about the story and issues, right down to the musical score. Sergei Prokofiev's Peter and the Wolf, about the hunter and the hunted, couldn't be a more perfect composition. Take a look at the trailer.

The film takes us through the whole process of sponsorship development, though in this case in the form of "brand integration," modern lingo for product placement, a tactic used by major brands to have their products embedded into the storylines of films and television shows. (Seinfeld was a master at this. Can you name all the brands, from Rice Krispies to Junior Mints, woven into the storylines? Sometimes the scripts read just like the press releases, making it even funnier.)

Throughout the sponsorship sales and execution process, Spurlock shares with us, the viewers, and his advisors his concerns, especially where to draw the line between selling out and not. Of course Noam Chomsky and Ralph Nader portend a dreadful future of Corporatized Morgan Spurlock, imploring him to rise above. With a mischievous sparkle in his eyes, Spurlock counters by hawking his sponsored shoes, Merrell's, to Nader. (Film tip: don't leave before the credits end for a great interaction with Nader.)

Spurlock keeps it light and defines the line quite clearly for his own work. In a post-screening discussion on Thursday, the closing film for Philadelphia's Cinefest, Spurlock said he pushed back on sponsor requests to approve the film before it opened and to see a financial return. 

"Being in the film" was the sponsors' return, he said. Exactly!

Overall, I found the film thoroughly enjoyable, laugh-out-loud funny, with plenty to learn for both sponsorship buyers and sellers, as well as life-long students of marketing. It opens next weekend, and I urge you to see it.

I will say, however, that one critique I have is also where Spurlock did sell out. Or rather, enabled someone else's sell out. One of the more serious threads in the film is about marketing messages in places where maybe they don't belong – public schools.

"Schools should be sacred," a Broward County school representative says, while she discusses with Spurlock the challenges of balancing a decreasing budget with demands for new programs. Banner advertising on the school fence line and truck fleet and in school buses is one solution. By the end of the film, POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold joins the ranks of the district's advertisers by purchasing all three vehicles. 

(It also bought the naming rights to the city of Altoona, Pa., home to another sponsor, Sheetz. The filmmakers reportedly purchased the rights for $25,000, and for 60 days, a drive through Pennsylvania, 130 miles west of Harrisburg and about 40 miles southwest of State College, will take you to POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold, Pa. As the New York Times reports: “Clearly, the people of Altoona have a sense of humor,” Bill Schirf, the mayor, said in a statement, “and an asking price.”)

 

Apparently Google doesn't know about Altoona's temporary name change; as of this writing, you can still find Altoona.
View Larger Map

By advertising through the school's banner and bus billboard program, the filmmakers stepped on those sacred grounds at the same time they exposed the problem. Wouldn't it have been better for the film to simply have made a contribution to the school system, even an anonymous one? Or developed a cause marketing campaign? 

Perhaps this seems like a minor infraction in an overall enjoyable film, but a donation or cause marketing campaign would have been more aligned with the point of the film's social side. 

POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold opens next weekend. Go see it, have fun, and feel free to share your thoughts by clicking on "comments" below to let me know what you think!

[In honor of transparency: I paid full price for movie tickets for my friend and me, and I own several pairs of Merrell's that I paid for on my own. I have drunk POM Wonderful I paid for, eaten foods from Amy's I bought, have been in the airport on Aruba enroute to Granada on business, never worn Ban (that I'm aware of), don't own Carrera's, never shopped at Solstice, never heard of Get It for Free Online till now, have paid for my own rooms at Hyatt, don't live in a city served by jetBlue, never purchased a KDF car wrap, never purchased Mane 'n Tail (nor do I have a kid or Shetland pony to try it on), have purchased a few items at Old Navy, have never shopped at Petland, have purchased my own Seventh Generation products, have purchased my own gas and snacks at Sheetz, own no clothing by Ted Baker, may have dabbed at teenage blemishes with Thayer's Witch Hazel purchased by my mother, and was not influenced by any of these film sponsors while writing this blog. I did just enjoy mentioning them all however!]

Sponsorship Realities: Gail Bower's Predictions for 2011

If you’ve been operating at a frenetic pace, trying to outsmart the economy, you may not have stopped to look around and notice what’s going on in the world around you, the sponsorship world, that is. This special report provides you with five observations I’ve made that absolutely will have an impact on organizations’ abilities to generate revenue through partnerships with the corporate sector. Consider this insider intelligence to help you plan your 2011 sponsorship strategy.

Download Sponsorship Realities 2011

P.S. A day after I wrote the special report, I read this post. To me it's an indicator that my prediction #4 is happening sooner than later.

The Code Words of Breast-Cancer Awareness - NYTimes.com

“Oh, yeah,” she said, vaguely, when questioned about it. “It’s for breast cancer.”

via www.nytimes.com

If you are involved with a cause or cause marketing campaign, check out Peggy Orenstein's story in today's The New York Times Magazine, linked above, on pink, the slogans and products we see annually in October, and what this means from the perspective of someone who actually experienced breast cancer.

I recently had a conversation with a woman who, like Orenstein, had experienced the disease. We talked about pink, ribbons, breast cancer, awareness and sponsorship. She told me that she disliked the annual reminder and being called a "survivor." Her feelings about the issue were moving and humbling.

Orenstein provides a broader cultural view. In the process of destigmatizing the cause – a topic I just wrote about for another cause – Orenstein and others she references argue that we've gone too far:

1. In terms of educating about a self-exam, she says "there is little evidence of its efficacy," and one group "erroneously tout[s] mammography as 'prevention.'"
2. "Fetishizing of breasts" through certain irreverent and brazen campaigns disconnect the body parts from the body, mind and spirits of the individuals;
3. Worse, they don't actually provide catharsis or meaningful space for discussion by those who have suffered breast cancer. Orenstein says: "Rather than being playful, which is what these campaigns are after, sexy cancer suppresses discussion of real cancer, rendering its sufferers – the ones whom all this is supposed to be for – invisible."

So perhaps the pink campaigns are really serving people who don't have breast cancer. As humans, it's natural for us to want to have control over our lives. But, let's face it, there is much we have no control over. Perhaps celebrating pink in ever more outlandish ways is a form of hubris.

What do you think?

The case for sponsorship strategy

On my morning walk today, this little piggy stopped me in my tracks.

 (And don't worry. It's actually not nibbling on that man's head; no humans were injured in the taking of this photo.)

I don't know where this little piggy was heading (though I hope home), how it will be used, nor what the business goals could possibly be. But symbolically this is a disaster and a sure sign that sponsorship strategy is missing.

Pink

The Susan G. Komen Fund has done an exceptional job at not only raising awareness levels but also engaging individuals and businesses, emotionally and financially, through the power of pink. In fact, in her new book, due out tomorrow, Nancy Brinker, who founded the Komen Fund, honoring a promise to her sister Susan who succumbed to breast cancer, credits corporate sponsorship and the way the organization leveraged partnerships with the corporate sector for the organization's early success. An article in yesterday's Dallas Morning News is worth the read, especially if you're wondering about the power of sponsorship for your cause or organization.

The article and readers' comments reference the the pink 'naysayers.' With all due respect and admiration for all Komen has accomplished, I am one of them. There is such a thing as overdoing something, and we've reached that point with pink. I've commented before that while Komen harnesses individuals' energy, emotions, and passion in outstanding ways, Komen does not represent a stand-out opportunity for sponsors. Pink is overdone; people have pink fatigue.

Here's why I think it's no longer effective. Like everyone these days, I have a lot on my mind. I'm a pretty big picture person, but sometimes life is all about the details. I have several systems for helping me keep track of them all, honed over my adult life time. The biggest key I've found to getting me to remember something, no matter how important, is to create a new habit (like getting a mammogram every year) or doing or placing something where I don't expect it. For example, I'll put a video to be returned on the floor in front of the front door. It's not supposed to be there, so it gets my attention.

When the pink ribbons started to hit the street, they were novel and powerful. Now they – and every other color and pattern of ribbon – are everywhere. Enough with the ribbons already. They don't remind us of anything except how mainstream and banal they are. Our eyes glaze over.

Komen, of course, thinks otherwise. More pink – or engaging more women to protect their health, more businesses from which to generate more revenue, etc. - is needed, Brinker notes in the article. They've recently begun alliances with some odd partners, such as KFC in the Buckets for a Cure promotion even though Komen's web site references the link between obesity and high risk of cancer. Komen's director of global corporate relations defends the partnership as a way to reach more people, especially those who are at higher risk who could really benefit.

Another partnership is with the Dallas Cowboys, described in the article above as a $1 million promotional partnership. While I'm not sure how the Cowboys will sell more tickets or gain more viewers through their investment, I do find the pairing interesting. And the commonality in both partnerships, with KFC and the Dallas team, is that they both stand out as unusual, which gets our attention. Besides reaching women fans, the Cowboys can raise awareness for men's breast cancer and the need for loving support from and for the men whose lives are touched by women's breast cancer. 

The KFC partnership would work better for me if no product or only a healthier product sales were tied to the message. Instead, Bucket buyers are encouraged to buy just the food – and bucket loads of it – that could do them in. That doesn't sound like a Cure to me.

Nevertheless, perhaps an evolution is beginning to take shape for Komen. With the organization's scale and clout internationally, is Komen poised to take another step in making real and permanent change in the lives of women? If so, the strategy involving pink and ribbons also will have to evolve so we take notice. And it should definitely not include a pink pig.

Deli

Like KFC, where could the association with Deitz & Watson, a pink pig, and Komen possibly be going? Ham for a cure? BLTs for a cure? I hope there are messages about healthy eating choices, like maybe a low-sodium Deitz & Watson offering.

Banking

I get the association between piggy banks and banking, and indeed this piggy is intended to be a piggy bank, real or symbolically. However, after all we've been through during the recession, is this the right image? Here are some messages underlying the symbol:

• When we think piggy bank, we're thinking about saving small change, which takes us right back to childhood, which feels like starting all over again. Who wants to feel like we have to start at square one with our savings plans?
• If it doesn't take us back to childhood, it takes us to the Great Depression. Again, do we want to go there? We have electronic currency now. Do you want to work with a bank that's thinking in piggy bank terms or 21st Century terms?
• During the TARP days, if you'll recall, the Obama administration charged bankers everywhere with greedily paying themselves too much. OK, that's really being a "Fat Cat," but greedy and piggy have also been linked.

Surely none of these is the message that Bankcorp Bank wishes to send. (Also, by the way, the pig's face was rather mean looking, another negative message none of these organizations wishes to send.)

When you engage in corporate sponsorship, either as a property and rights holder or as a sponsor, you must develop a strategy. Without it, you run the risk of sending the wrong messages.

Sponsorship nightmare

More than 1.5 million people around the world will Race for the Cure this month and into the fall to raise funds and awareness for breast cancer. The 27-year effort has been a tremendous success, rallying communities everywhere to think pink.

As I've noted previously, however, over-saturation and overkill of the color pink with seemingly every business jumping on the band wagon cause no business to really stand out. With so much pink, consumers become numb to corporate involvement.

Until now. KFC has launched Buckets for the Cure(TM), attempting "to make the single largest donation in the history of Susan G. Komen for the Cure®." On its home page today through an RSS feed is news that "Midlife Weight Gain Increases Postmenopausal Breast Cancer Risk." As others have pointed out, KFC is no diet food, so why would KFC and Komen partner?

Now we've reached a new problem, and nonprofit organizations and corporate leaders would be wise to take notice. Check out this initiative: the Think Before You Pink campaign, complete with an outreach initiative to KFC and Komen telling them to "stop the pinkwashing." What a nightmare.

Select your partners wisely. Consumers are not idiots, and they are counting on nonprofit organizations to have integrity, to stand for their causes and missions, and to partner with companies in alignment with the organizations' values and brands. 

I tell clients and workshop attendees all the time that it's OK to say "no" to a potential partner who may have a check in hand but whose goals and agenda are not in sync with the nonprofit goals. The sponsorship will not be successful; the nonprofit will damage its credibility; and worse, imagine the impact of a social media campaign, like the Think Before You Pink, aimed at your two organizations. 

Think before you partner.

 

Spring & Corporate Sponsorship at the Flower Show

 After a couple blizzards, trudging around in snow, pretty at first, gets tiresome. This week, I headed to the famed Philadelphia International Flower Show to remind myself that spring indeed will arrive. 

The beautiful show did not disappoint, even if some of the displays reminded visitors of the cold.  Walking into a fantasy land of flowers, I can't wait  for warm weather.

 Another reason I attended the show was to check out the sponsorship activation. The Flower Show is one of the best sponsorship developers in Philadelphia, and I always appreciate the obvious guidance and hard work of their staff.

If you're in Philadelphia or plan to be here for this closing weekend of the show, I'd love to hear your thoughts about how the show's sponsors took advantage of their opportunity to partner with one of the top flower shows in the U.S. Here are some thoughts I had.

PNC gets a round of applause from me for their dedication to Philadelphia's arts & cultural scene. The financial institution whole-heartedly supports important arts organizations and invests philanthropic dollars to nurture the passions of future arts and culture lovers. At the Flower Show, they benefitted from a strong association through their presenting status and did a good job tying philanthropic messages and business goals. 

At PNC Park, you could stock up on green. PNC tied a different green message into a floral and waterfall display, next to which event-goers could enter their votes for the People's Choice Award, plus get a free tote-bag.

  

 

Knowing banks, I imagine (and hope) PNC is hosting customers with tickets to the show. Their display may have benefitted by more of a human touch, besides two young women handing out tote bags. The banking and financial industry still faces a cynical, distrustful consumer world out there. Banks would benefit from a human-centric approach to their marketing these days. However, all in all, a nice effort from PNC.

Subaru, also a major sponsor, was right in the middle of all the action and used the opportunity to promote another flower angle: their sponsorship of the Cherry Blossoms Festival here.

I overheard a snippet of this Subaru representative's conversation with this woman, telling her about Subaru's VIP program. Wise car salespeople love sponsorship because customers want to talk to them.

I've long admired Discover Ireland's sponsorship strategy – to support golf and gardening events, to attract lovers of key attractions in Ireland – having worked with them at a PGA Merchandise Show where they sponsored an international travel area by PGA Magazine. I was disappointed at the Flower Show, however, to see what a missed opportunity their investment was.

Discover Ireland sponsors a garden display, to promote their gardens and has a large booth, with vast real estate. But what do you notice?

Need a closer look? 

Where's their staff? Why is no one taking advantage of this great opportunity to tell International Flower Show enthusiasts about a country with great gardens?

Corporate readers of Sponsorship Strategist, take note. Corporate sponsorship is all about the experience, the face-to-face opportunity your brand, your product, your staff, your service gets to have with audiences of the event or opportunity you partner with. 

Why spend all the money to invest in the sponsorship, to build a booth, create promotional value, and then not follow through? It would be like an Olympic skier getting all the way down the 2-mile run and slowing down at the finish line. Seize every moment of the sponsorship opportunity. Make it work for you. Don't waste your money. And definitely don't complain that your sponsorship investment "didn't work."

The surprising Best of Show to me was Acme. I haven't visited Acme's retail locations yet to see how they activated in-store. At the Show, Acme had a simple but attractive booth where they sold flowers. Simple, right? But wait. There's more.

 

Among the bouquets Acme sold was the Official Flower Show Bouquet, with a portion of the proceeds benefitting the Philadelphia Horticulture Society and its programs – which, by the way, benefit all Philadelphians.

 
 The Unsung Hero of the Show is EB Henry. They, like many other businesses, could benefit from greater knowledge about how to really leverage sponsorship. 

EB Henry donated 3 truck-loads of hardscaping to the show, creating beautiful displays everywhere.

All around the show, you experienced their products and handiwork.

When I asked the EB Henry representative about their participation in the event, he quickly acknowledged valuing the partnership. All the materials are incorporated into gardens the Horticulture Society creates with partnering organizations throughout the city after the Flower Show. What a great story.

However, I wondered if EB Henry maximizes their participation. The young man said they "hope people will start thinking about their gardens." With all the snow we've had, surely people are thinking about their gardens, I thought. But he didn't seem to have a strategy to engage Flower Show attendees, to track related sales, to encourage them to visit their showroom. At least he was there, eager and enthusiastic to talk about their products and humbly share a great story.

Corporate sponsorship is a powerful medium. If your corporate brand is only using it to stick a logo on a banner or brochure, you're wasting your money. Take full advantage of every opportunity, and make sure you're doing your part in achieving a return on your investment. 

If you need assistance developing your brand's corporate sponsorship strategy, corporate sponsorship consultant Gail Bower can help.

More on Bailouts & Politics & Sponsorship

Earlier this year, politicians, the media, and just about everyone with an opinion, it seemed, publicly flogged Northern Trust Bank for proceeding with the second year of its five-year commitment to PGA Golf because it received TARP funds. According to the bank's CEO, no public dollars funded the sponsorship, and fiscally sound, doing quite well, the bank went forth with a sponsorship program its leadership clearly values. Furthermore, they participated in TARP at the government's request, not because they needed the money. (You can read more about it and the effect this event had on sponsorship in my guidebook How to Jump-start Your Sponsorship Strategy in Tough Times.)

I respect Northern Trust for honoring its commitment and for stating clearly its position in doing so. Corporate sponsorship is a marketing vehicle that gets results. Period. If executed properly, corporations of all sizes benefit from incorporating sponsorship and event marketing into their overall business or marketing strategies.

After that incident other banks actually refused TARP dollars to avoid government and public scrutiny of their business decisions. And, of course, we all know that by June, ten banks, including Northern Trust, exited TARP, repaying the public funding plus dividends and other fees.

Some banks and financial firms have not been so bold. The New York Times reported on various corporations' "'stealth spending,'" as one source phrased it, on event marketing. These companies are paying five- and six-figures to entertain clients, sans branding and identification of any kind. And also without a speck of luxury.

I have no problem with the luxury piece of it (though the article does describe an extreme example which, though almost absurd, should serve as a cautionary note to event planners and other sponsorship sellers). After all there's a way to entertain clients and there's a way to entertain clients. I know many corporations that have had great success entertaining clients, employees, vendors, and other VIPs, without A-level musical talent at their receptions.

I do have a problem with the lack of transparency, with the sneakiness about the whole thing. Entertaining others works. It's a legitimate way to build relationships with clients, employees, vendors, and their guests.

If you don't believe me, take a look at this example. Have you ever heard of Terry's El Mariachi Supermarkets? If you live in or near Dallas, probably you have. Terry's Supermarket is a chain of 13 stores that embraces the multi-cultural city it and its owner's family call home. It sells products from other countries, especially Mexico, and serves the Latino community.

Terry Yu, the owner, invested $175,000 in a suite at the Dallas Cowboys' fancy new stadium to reward employees and vendors, with whose support and loyalty his business has grown. He told the Dallas Morning News about what a "great investment" the luxury suite has been for him to provide a perk to staff and suppliers. (One of the first NFL franchises to broadcast in Spanish, the Cowboys have a large fan base in Texas and the Southwest's Latino population, primarily from Mexico. So, imagine what a great perk this is.) 

If entertaining employees and vendors works for Terry Yu, imagine how well it works for companies that entertain clients and customers.

So, as a corporate sponsor, there are only three ways to go in these times:

1. Discontinue sponsorship and be clear with stakeholders about that decision.
2. Acknowledge that particular sponsorship investments work, meets your goals, provide value towards meeting your business objectives, and be clear with the public, the media, and politicians about that decision. Follow Mr. Yu's example. Help educate the broader world about why you entertain clients or participate in other forms of sponsorship. But don't sneak around pretending to not be entertaining clients.
3. Be bold. Acknowledge that sponsorship works and figure out new ways to do it that are not only acceptable for the times but that push the bar higher. Take a stand in support of a cause with strong brand alignment and entertain your clients in a day of service. Or in a cause marketing campaign to support your charity. (A February study on consumer perceptions on American corporations, which noted a 69 percent drop, revealed that corporations that invest in a nonprofit organization or cause will win the favor of those consumers by 41 percent.)

Then shout it from the roof tops. And build your business at the same time.

If you're working with corporations in the sponsorship of your opportunity, be sure your communications, internally and externally, are supportive of corporate partners. If you uncover anti-corporate sentimentality, bring it to the surface and allow people to talk about it. Educate them without being dismissive, blundering, or breezy. Create parameters and policies that the staff, board, and other stakeholders will feel comfortable upholding.