性视界

When I lived in New York, I used to walk into my favorite Starbucks shop and always see a healthy stock of Jones Soda in the small refrigerated section near the cash register. Waiting in line, I would peruse through the pictures featured on the label of each Jones soda bottle.

If anyone were to ask what I thought about the images, I would have said they looked interesting 鈥� neither beautiful nor disgusting. Certainly not professional. Amateurish, in a sense.

I knew that each picture had been taken by some regular person in the world, submitted online, and then voted on by millions of people. By crowdsourcing the design of its labels, Jones Soda was supporting budding photographers and local artists, or at least so I thought.

Interestingly, I never purchased a bottle of Jones Soda or ever felt compelled to go online and vote on an image.

Fast forward to today, and here鈥檚 how the company has been doing:

Rough.

Many factors have led to Jones Sodas鈥� demise, not the least of which was the shift in consumer habits towards healthier drinks. Additionally,

• Starbucks stopped selling Jones Soda in US stores in 2007 [1]
• The Seattle Seahawks, which chose Jones Soda as its official drink from 2007-2009, chose to go back to selling Coca-Cola products in 2010 [2]
• Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air also switched to serving Coca-Cola products in 2010, despite their two-year partnership with Jones Soda 聽[3]

What happened

For contest-based crowdsourcing to be successful, two sides must always be considered: participants (people who submit a piece of work to be voted on) and voters. The main problem with Jones Soda was not that it chose to crowdsource its marketing efforts; rather, it was how the company executed its聽strategy. Ultimately, Jones Soda鈥檚 crowdsourcing approach failed due to two principal聽reasons: (1) the company did not attract a large enough fan-base of participants and voters and (2) the company did little to encourage high-quality entries. Unfortunately, Jones Soda鈥檚 community did not have the scale or talent to compel consumers such as myself to purchase a bottle of soda.

Participants

To attract a large pool of participants and high-quality entries, individuals must trust that the contest-based crowdsourcing platform is fair. However, Jones Soda explicitly states that a picture may be chosen to be on a bottle 鈥渋f we like it鈥� (see image below from Jones聽Soda鈥檚 website) [4].

Furthermore, the聽management鈥檚 selection criteria is unclear. How much of a say do voters really have in the company鈥檚 decision on what picture is selected? If participants cannot trust the company鈥檚 platform, how much can they trust its聽mantra, 鈥淛ones Soda. Your Photo. Your Soda. Your Brand.鈥� Is Jones Soda really聽YOUR brand?

Also, there are few聽incentives to having聽your picture selected to be placed on a label (outside of personal pride, of course, which for some may be enough). In fact, Jones Soda聽claims that聽it does聽not even send winners聽a bottle with their聽label on it. Thus, many individuals whose pictures are selected cannot聽see the聽soda bottles with their picture being聽sold in stores.

So what happens when you don鈥檛 have enough high-quality entries? You get this as the photo聽with the most number of votes:

No wonder I was never impressed with the pictures on Jones Soda bottles.

Voters

When you have a contest-based crowdsourcing strategy that participants can鈥檛 immediately buy into, you also face difficulties attracting people to vote. In fact, the above image only received 261,433 votes.

Disadvantages of contest-based crowdsourcing

While Jones Soda鈥檚 failure is partly a tale about a poorly executed marketing strategy, it鈥檚 also one that highlights two broad聽challenges with聽contest-based crowdsourcing.

First, contest-based crowdsourcing can lead to inconsistent brand messaging. Perhaps this is one reason why Jones Soda reserves the right to select a picture for a label that聽may not聽have the most number of votes. Still, by leaving much of the company鈥檚 product labeling to the public, to be changed on a regular basis, Jones Soda risks creating a brand consumers cannot adequately articulate or understand.

Second, contest-based crowdsourcing can lead to product dilution (pun intended). Jones Soda is known to offer obscure flavors, from Berry Lemonade Cane Sugar Soda to Fufu Berry Cane Sugar Soda (all of its products are cane sugar based). It鈥檚 limited edition bottles are even weirder (it is currently offering Birthday Cake Cane Sugar Soda). Many of these flavors were decided on by customers, and many of them were unpopular (see this Time article on , which features Jones Soda鈥檚 line of Thanksgiving Dinner sodas). Today, it it debatable whether customers know Jones Soda more for producing聽great tasting soda or for producing soda that tastes just plain bizarre.

What I would do differently

Strategically

Underlying Jones Soda鈥檚 poorly executed contest-based crowdsourcing strategy is an unclear vision, and so the first thing I would do is revisit, rethink, and reinvest people in what Jones Soda stands for. What does it mean for Jones Soda to be 鈥淵our Soda. Your Brand.鈥�? Who is the customer? How does Jones Soda support her/him?

Tactically

Next, Jones Soda needs to create value for participants and voters by clarifying the crowdsourcing selection process and offering greater incentives for people to submit their pictures聽online. For instance, if the company鈥檚 vision were to support local artists, I would donate a portion of all Jones Soda bottle sales with the artists鈥� picture 聽on the label to the artist. Even if the amount represented聽0.1% of聽sales, any monetary amount would be better than nothing. Jones Soda could also offer winners a lump sum reward, similar to聽what Tongal does. In addition, I would be sure the winner receives a bottle with her/his picture on the label, and I would create a team to post stories via social media about how Jones Soda affects the lives of people whose pictures are featured on the labels.

Lastly, the company must聽find more ways to capture value from participants. As we learned in Weathernews, charging people on a per聽submission basis could result in fewer overall entries. Hence, I would not charge individuals to submit a picture聽for at least some products (for instance, Jones Soda鈥檚 less popular flavors). But聽for its more popular flavors, I would charge customers $1-$2. This would ensure that the popular flavors attract people who take the time to submit high-quality photos. These individuals would be incentivized by a greater monetary award than聽individuals who submit pictures for Jones Soda鈥檚 less popular flavors.

Resources: