Here is the text of my article published in MARKETING earlier this month (in case you missed it in the print version).
-------------
I’ve been fascinated by Starbucks’ recent experiment in unbranded, “local” stores. One minute I think it’s a brilliant idea and a return to the company’s “third place” promise. The next minute I think the day they consider their brand a liability is the day they’re done. So I’ll be watching this one with a lot of interest. That said, one of the interesting sub-plots included in all the press coverage concerned how Starbucks went about observing their competition. Essentially, local coffee shops complained about not-so-covert Starbucks employees idling in their cafes with folders marked conspicuously with the word “Observation.” Another purveyor noted that he had to ask large groups of Starbucks employees to leave his store when their sheer numbers overwhelmed the space. Of course, these local coffee shops know Starbucks as a competitor, and who wouldn’t be at least a little uncomfortable with your rival spending so much time in your space? But here’s where you can’t fault Starbucks: competitive auditing is a basic component of strategic hygiene. As marketing professionals, we have to know what’s happening in the competitive landscape. Purposeful differentiation is not possible without that knowledge.
But what's the line between gathering competitive intelligence and industrial espionage? How can you keep tabs on your competitors in a responsible manner?
A decade ago, I was tasked with photographing construction signage as part of a project for a general contractor. I was rightfully chased from a competitor’s site because I was trespassing. My activities were thrilling, but not legal. So I’m not going to address bribery, hacking, B&E, and other crimes clearly on the no-no list. Instead, here are three “nevers” I think should guide the ethics of gathering competitive intelligence:
Never Create an Excessive Expense for Your Competitors
An ethical audit never costs a competitor critical time, money or talent. That is, an audit should not cause economic harm, either in the expenditure of resources or the loss of opportunity. Of course, the term “excessive” is open to interpretation, but the guiding principle is important. For example, I think it’s okay to request corporate overview literature, but definitely not okay to request a proposal or other customized document. The former is existing collateral that likely exists in large quantities and will cost a few minutes and some postage to secure. The latter is essentially hijacking a human resource under the pretenses of an opportunity that does not exist. Another example: it’s okay to visit a competing restaurant chain so long as you order enough food to be consistent with a typical customer, and your presence doesn’t preclude ordinary customers from their patronage.
Never Allow an Insider to Compromise Their Ethics
You have a friend who happens to work for an organization you’re tasked with auditing. It would seem reasonable to have them secure materials and just skip the request for information forms on the Web site. Whether or not their willing to do this, you’ve now allowed them to compromise their ethical responsibilities. The person or mail house sending you corporate collateral doesn’t know what you’re really doing, and that’s a good kind of ignorance. A friend or acquaintance does know your agenda, so their compliance definitely violates their obligations as an employee. Worse, if they hand over materials it could, technically, even be considered theft. That also means you’d be in possession of stolen materials. Yikes. Steer clear of involving insiders.
Never Misrepresent Who You Are Unless You Absolutely Have No Other Option
One of the advantages of an increasingly networked and transparent world is the ready availability of all sorts of Web-based information. And modern retail environments are “brand destinations.” So peeping on the competition requires a lot less sneaking around than it did just a few years ago. An online sleuth and keen observer can secure most competitive intelligence. In B2B scenarios, some information can be harder to come by than in consumer categories. Even there, however, all-out deception to gather marketing materials is typically unnecessary and certainly to be avoided if at all possible. You’re a marketer, not a spy.
What do you think? Send your thoughts and guiding principles on the subject to devinl@pbdh.com and I’ll post them to a follow-up blog. Or, perhaps I’ll just claim them as my own.