The retail giant's new slogan suggests Wal-Mart is part of a higher standard of living. There's more than one problem with that claim, from internal policies to a lack of marketing vision.

In its ongoing effort at improving public perception, Wal-Mart has abandoned its decades-old slogan, "Always Low Prices," in favor of a new, friendlier, more emotionally rich claim: "Save Money. Live Better."  

This sort of move was needed, but as crafted it is simply another wrong step in the "reinvention" of the world's largest retailer. Remember the disastrous blog backfire? Or the DOA social network hub? Or the embarrassing foray into more "fashionable" merchandise?

The slogan is simply one expression of a brand trying to find a core identity that is modern, mass and worthy of continued belief and growth.  Here's why the statement simply doesn't work:

1) The leader has become the follower, again. "Save Money. Live Better" is a syntactic parroting of Target's brilliant value equation "Expect more. Pay less." With its new slogan, Wal-Mart tracks Target but can't live up to the claims. Target delivers on higher expectations; Wal-Mart can ensure only half of its equation -- the low prices it has always had. Nothing new here, except the high likelihood of a broken brand promise.

2) The slogan suggests that Wal-Mart is part of the "trade up" phenomenon. The theory goes, in brief, if we save money on staples by shopping discount, then we will have more disposable income to enjoy things like Coach bags or BMW cars. The Wal-Mart shopper is not the trade-up consumer; the low prices are, generally, a budgetary requirement, not an acquisitive strategy. Target's consumers, however, closely overlap those who also shop at Nordstrom's or Williams-Sonoma. Target's consumers do trade up.

3) Brands are about operations. Ask FedEx. The promise of overnight, worry-free delivery is the result of everything from weather forecasting to labor relations. Wal-Mart's new slogan suggests a higher standard of living. If you save money here, you can live better out there. We get trickle down economics, thanks very much. What makes no sense, however, is the glaring conflict with Wal Mart's own policies and practices. The facts are compelling, if hotly political. The arguments aren’t new: Wal-Mart drives small companies out of business, pays wages that equal less than the poverty level, refuses to adopt reasonable health insurance policies, and treats employees inhumanely (no meal breaks as required by law; locking workers inside of stores, to name but two examples). The company does not stand for a better quality of life. It actively creates lower standards of living for individuals and communities. Wal-Mart’s own internal operations are not in line with its new public voice. It’s not enough to make promises; companies have to be  machines that keep and deliver promises every day to all constituencies.

In the end, Wal-Mart continues to give evidence that it is a master at logistics, leverage and mass discount. It does not really understand how to market to the (even slightly) more sophisticated consumer. Perhaps the company should play to its strengths, and go even lower – competing in a bloodbath for the bottom feeders? There are more than 13,000 dollar stores in America now. Wal-Mart can use its strengths to win in that battle.

Try to out-Target Target? Forget it. Find your own leadership again.

Hope to win the trade-up consumer? Their identity is all about rejecting Wal-Mart, not embracing it.

Raise the standard of living for consumers? Start at home, or keep the false promises to yourself.

Such a successful company missing so many of the basics is hard to watch. Then again, the drama in the marketing department – and the terrible "advice" of so many of America’s (b)ad agencies – are likely part of the problem. There is simply no marketing leadership around Wal-Mart these days.

Comments (7)

Name

Title

Comment

Add Comment