Tag

Uber

Browsing

By Krystal Overmyer.

A hot-tempered CEO. A sexual harassment lawsuit. A federal investigation. A political controversy followed by a viral campaign to boycott the company.

Uber, for all its brand recognition, just can’t seem to avoid PR disasters (and it appears to be affecting its bottom line). Amid the fallout, one has to wonder: Would stronger brand storytelling enable Uber to move forward from the crises, or perhaps even avoid them?

Even Uber admits it has a brand voice problem. Uber general manager and head of cities Fred Jones noted that the company “never really had a brand voice in terms of what we stand for and what we believe in,” according to Marketing Week. Honing in on that brand voice and communicating it to users is a top priority this year, Jones notes.

It’s not a new goal for the company. In 2015, Uber CEO and cofounder Travis Kalanick underscored the company’s need to do a better job at telling its brand story, Marketing Week notes. In 2016, a graphic rebrand was supposed to “change not only how (Uber) is perceived throughout the world, but how it perceives itself,” according to Wired.

Yet despite these attempts, Uber’s brand story remains elusive. Yes, Uber has achieved dominance in the ride-share industry, but its meteoric rise and laser-like focus on expansion and profit may have come at a cost. If the only story your brand can tell is “we’re cheaper than the competition,” it may not be enough to keep your consumers loyal, especially as the scandals continue to grow.

Uber’s storytelling troubles foreshadow long-term problems. If the company can’t define what it stands for or the story it wants to convey, how can it connect with consumers? And as the #DeleteUber debacle proved, it’s all too easy for consumers to jump ship when they realize a brand’s values are bankrupt.

How Crises Impact Storytelling

Despite a brand’s best efforts, PR crises happen. An adept response can mitigate the damage, but a poor response can make the situation far worse.

Brands that have honed their storytelling ability have an advantage in this arena. For one, brands that have a long history of living and sharing their values through content may be better able to explain a snafu as a one-off event, especially if they show appropriate contrition and a willingness to fix the problem.

A very damaging crisis, however, may require rethinking an entire brand. Again, brands with a content focus have the advantage here with their ability to adapt messaging quickly to the current environment. Crises demand that brands evolve; strong storytelling can reflect that positive evolution. In the wake of a crisis, a brand’s content strategy needs to alleviate the damage while also signaling that the brand has rectified the situation moving forward.

BP’s response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010 marks one example of shifting content strategy following a major incident. After the disaster, BP built messaging around accountability and learning from mistakes, as the Content Standard has noted previously. By 2016, the pitch had shifted, focusing on how gas and petroleum products are useful and relevant in our everyday lives. While the new campaign doesn’t reference the oil spill directly, it does offer a prime example of how brands evolve in response to crises. It’s not hard to imagine that BP’s softer, more emotional tone comes out of a desire to leave the incident behind while distinguishing itself from competitors.

Uber now finds itself in desperate need of a similar branding overhaul. Increasingly, the company’s perceived lack of empathy is threatening its bottom line. Over 200,000 users deleted the app following public outcry over Kalanick’s participation on President Trump’s economic advisory board, according to the New York Times. The #DeleteUber campaign eventually forced Kalanick to step down from the council.

Many times, brands can lean on leadership to serve as brand ambassadors. In Uber’s case, this approach has been a liability. After Uber CEO Kalanick was caught on camera lashing out at a driver, he issued a statement essentially admitting his immaturity (Kalanick is 40).

“To say that I am ashamed is an extreme understatement,” Kalanick wrote. “It’s clear this video is a reflection of me…. I must fundamentally change as a leader and grow up. This is the first time I’ve been willing to admit that I need leadership help and I intend to get it.”

When your brand story pivots to your CEO needing to grow up, you may have a problem.

Taken together, these incidents weave their own damaging narrative: That of a callous company, too focused on profits, too dismissive of the people that ultimately drive the business. That oversight has opened the door for competitors, like Lyft, to tell a more compelling story.

Lyft brand storytelling

Image attribution: Lyft

Uber vs. Lyft: A Tale of Two Brand Stories

As far as market share goes, Uber dominates competitor Lyft. Nonetheless, underdog Lyft appears to be positioning itself as a more palatable alternative to Uber via its brand storytelling efforts. On the surface, the companies aren’t that different: Both are privately held and do not offer benefits to its drivers. Their brands, however, tell very different stories: Lyft deliberately seeks to position itself as the socially conscious alternative in the ride-sharing space.

“There’s more of a story to tell about a company that puts people first, a company that focuses a lot on experience and making sure we demonstrate how we treat drivers and passengers really well,” Lyft CMO Melissa Waters told the Wall Street Journal.

While Uber floundered amid the #DeleteUber scandal, Lyft promoted “Round Up and Donate,” a program that allows riders to contribute to partner charities by rounding up their fare to the closest dollar. The more Lyft can show off its values, the more it can siphon socially aware customers from Uber.

If Uber had cultivated a similar story, would it now be better able to withstand the storm of bad PR? And if the company better understood its own values, would its leadership be more compelled to behave in accordance with those values?

Maybe Uber’s self-inflicted wounds were inevitable. Maybe not. What is clear is that the scandals make Uber appear soulless at a time when consumers are keenly attuned to brands that share their values—and the company continues to struggle to communicate what it stands for. In time, these snowballing problems could erode consumer and investor trust and seriously damage the company’s prospects.

For marketers, the Uber example serves as a cautionary tale. Ignore brand values—and how you articulate them—at your peril.

By Krystal Overmyer.

Krystal Overmyer is a socially-savvy writer and editor who is passionate about telling stories. In the past few years, Krystal has written about higher education, the new french bakery in town, online dating, labor market trends and tourism. The subjects may be diverse, but Krystal feels her role as a writer stays the same despite the topic: She tells the story and makes it matter. Her goal is to make the words sing, so that main messages are clear and accessible to readers.

Sourced from skyword

By Eric Newcomer.

The ride-hailing giant is using data science to engineer a more sustainable business model, but it’s cutting drivers out from some gains.

Uber drivers have been complaining that the gap between the fare a rider pays and what the driver receives is getting wider. After months of unsatisfying answers, Uber Technologies Inc. is providing an explanation: It’s charging some passengers more because it needs the extra cash.

The company detailed for the first time in an interview with Bloomberg a new pricing system that’s been in testing for months in certain cities. On Friday, Uber acknowledged to drivers the discrepancy between their compensation and what riders pay. The new fare system is called “route-based pricing,” and it charges customers based on what it predicts they’re willing to pay. It’s a break from the past, when Uber calculated fares using a combination of mileage, time and multipliers based on geographic demand.

Daniel Graf, Uber’s head of product, said the company applies machine-learning techniques to estimate how much groups of customers are willing to shell out for a ride. Uber calculates riders’ propensity for paying a higher price for a particular route at a certain time of day. For instance, someone traveling from a wealthy neighborhood to another tony spot might be asked to pay more than another person heading to a poorer part of town, even if demand, traffic and distance are the same.

The change stems from a feature Uber introduced last year called upfront pricing. By guaranteeing customers a certain fare before they book, the company said it provides more transparency. But it hadn’t previously said how Uber was estimating those prices and continued paying drivers using the old model.

In an attempt to ease drivers’ concerns, Uber will start reporting the price a passenger pays on each ride, though it will stop breaking out the percentage Uber takes of the fare. The company will also send drivers an updated terms of service agreement reflecting the new fee system. Route-based pricing is currently limited to 14 U.S. cities where Uber offers its carpooling service.

The difference between the calculations of rider fares and driver pay could be the future of Uber’s business. The company said it pockets what’s leftover and could parlay this mathematical framework into moving closer to profitability.

Graf said Uber’s pricing techniques have grown incredibly sophisticated. He oversees a team called marketplace at headquarters in San Francisco that’s staffed with economists and statisticians. Graf, a former Google and Twitter Inc. executive, sees financial engineering as a competitive advantage, one way that Uber can stay ahead of Lyft Inc. and other ride-hailing operators. Uber said it began experimenting with route-based pricing late last year.

“Google search is very simple to do; it’s very complex what’s happening behind the scenes,” Graf said. “The same thing here. Taking a trip is easy. To make this all work in a whole market, and sustainable, is really, really hard.”

In the process, pricing became something of a black box for passengers and another source of tension with drivers. Drivers accused Uber of cutting them out of income they were entitled to and misleading them about what the company was up to.

During the last year, Uber had attributed price discrepancies to the uncertainty around estimating fares, even as it was experimenting with techniques designed to exploit the imbalance between what customers were willing to pay and what drivers would take. The Rideshare Guy, a popular blog among drivers, conducted a study in New York City published in May, finding widespread disparities between rider fares and driver pay. Workers weren’t happy. “It is immoral and unethical behavior,” said Chris Estrada, who drives for Uber in Riverside, California.

Uber has faced a torrent of scandals this year, including a trade secrets lawsuit, sexual harassment allegations, a brief boycott over its ties to the Trump administration and a video showing the chief executive officer arguing with a driver over falling fares. Two of the longest-running criticisms of the seven-year-old company are ones that are sometimes at odds: It loses too much money, and it pays drivers too little. The company told Bloomberg in April that it lost $2.8 billion in 2016, not including its China business.

In the case of upfront pricing, Uber may move closer to resolving investors’ concerns about losses but could alienate drivers along the way. “You know our numbers,” Graf said. “We do want to run and operate a sustainable business.”

Uber said it isn’t hoarding the additional revenue generated from route-based pricing. The company said it reinvests much of it into increasing the number of trips, subsidizing UberPool usage and paying bonuses to drivers. Christian Perea, who writes for the Rideshare Guy, said drivers will appreciate the added transparency around how much passengers are paying. “That is a big deal,” he said.

As Uber experiments with pricing models, complexity could introduce new problems. “Society is more willing to accept wealthy people paying higher fares,” said Chris Knittel, a business professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “But if the repercussion of lower fares in lower-income places is longer wait times, that’s probably what they want to keep an eye on.”

With such a dramatic change to pricing, it’s not just drivers Uber has to worry about upsetting. “They could really lose the trust of the riders,” said Glen Weyl, a senior researcher at Microsoft Corp. who is studying Uber with the company’s cooperation. Microsoft is an investor in Uber. “It’s a very dangerous moment for them, but there are good economic reasons to do it.”

Uber is a company filled with over-optimizers, who will continue to futz with prices and hope to find equilibrium. “If things are not balanced, we create levers to motivate people to make it balanced again,” Graf said. “There’s choices, right? Always. There’s never, ‘I have to use Uber.’”

For more on Uber and its relationship with its drivers, check out the Decrypted podcast:

 

By Eric Newcomer.

Sourced from Bloomberg Technology