Reinventing Kohl’s

Kohl’s local makeover somehow slipped up on me.

Because one of the company’s stores in Lincoln, Neb., is located very near my house, it is a fairly routine stop for me for purchases such as young men’s jeans and shorts for my son, junior tops for my daughter, and candles and sterling silver earrings for me.

I never ventured much beyond those base purchases because, frankly, I haven’t been a fan of the other categories sold at Kohl’s.

However, the company is making headway toward changing my mind.

I stopped in over the weekend and, though I had been vaguely aware of some facade updates (I remember skirting some outdoor tarps on a visit a few months ago, but I was in a hurry and didn’t pay much attention.), I hadn’t noticed much going on inside.

Until this weekend. I charged through the front door with one thing on my mind: buy a couple of Yankee Candles with a sale coupon I had in my purse.

When I arrived my destination—or, rather, what used to be the location of the candle supplies—I stopped short. The candles were gone. For the first time, I opened my eyes and looked around. The store was different—very different.

Before I realized what was happening, I was browsing. Please understand that I never browse at Kohl’s. It’s just not my browsing spot. Nevertheless, that’s exactly what I did. I ambled through housewares, making mental notes of some potentially great Christmas gifts for family members. I found a few placemats on a clearance table—and I snagged two of them. I finally made it to the relocated candle display area, but not before browsing the Christmas decor.

I checked out with just a few purchases—two candles and my prized clearance placemats—but with a mental list to return when I had lots more time to look around.

I read an article recently that Kohl’s had just celebrated its 1,000th store milestone, opening on Oct. 1 its 1,000th store and reiterating its plans to introduce innovation through store design, store remodels and evolution of the in-store experience.

I would say that, at least in one market and with this one customer, Kohl’s plans are working.

—Katherine Field

Obama, Cosby and Kmart

On the Saturday after Barack Obama’s election as the 44th president of the United States, The New York Times ran an article in its Arts & Leisure section entitled, “Before Obama, There Was Bill Cosby.”

The premise of the article was that the depiction of the Huxtable family on Cosby's show, which began in 1984 and runs even today in syndication—paved the way for public acceptance of an Afro-American as a leadership figure. The article pointed out that even Karl Rove, the magna-GOP strategist, said on election night on Fox News, “We’ve had an African-American first family for many years in different forms. When “The Cosby Show” was on, that was America’s family. It wasn’t a black family. It was America’s family.”

Cosby, no doubt, influenced public perception. So did other TV shows and movies that put minorities and women in the Oval Office. Pop culture, in other words, makes it easier for breakthroughs to occur.

Sometimes, however, pop culture stands in the way of transformation.

Take Kmart. No matter what Kmart has done over the last quarter-century, it has been unable to shed its image as the “polyester palace,” the home of the “Blue Light Special.” Kmart recently has even tried to capitalize on the blue light heritage, but to little success.

I believe Kmart’s image problem can be traced to its rapid ascendancy by the early 1970s as the first, and at the time only, national discount store chain. Back then, when TV and movie writers and comedians needed a national frame of reference for their scripts and jokes, Kmart was there for the punch line and context in the ’70s and well into the ’80s. Since many of today’s writers and comedians were growing up in those decades, there has been a carryover effect, even as Wal-Mart vastly outpaced Kmart as the largest retailer in the country. Remember, back then Wal-Mart was not yet a national chain and was an unknown entity to most people growing up along the Eastern and Western seaboards. Only Kmart had imprinted itself on the national landscape and psyche.

Think about the 1988 movie “Rain Man.” Where did the character played by Dustin Hoffman want to go to buy his underwear? Kmart was the running joke throughout the movie.

Wal-Mart’s reputation is by no means pure, given the many lawsuits filed against it for alleged labor violations, its impact on communities where it opens and closes stores, its import policy—its sheer SIZE.

But for now, Kmart has retained its identity as the national butt of humor and low-end retailing.

For Barack Obama, the media helped create a climate of change. For Kmart, the stigma of the past remains just one of the obstacles in its path to transformation.

By Murray Forseter

An Unpatriotic Coffee Break?

Is it me, or does it seem like Starbucks can’t catch a break these days?

As the economy tightens, consumers are keeping disposable income closer to the vest—a practice that is taking a toll on the higher-priced Starbucks coffee chain. Hoping to nab some of these cost-conscious coffee drinkers, Starbucks rival Dunkin' Donuts began offering 99-cent lattes weekdays between 2 and 5 p.m. (The promotion started Oct. 1, and runs through Nov. 11.)

And two weeks ago, Dunkin' Donuts launched its “Dunkin’ Beats Starbucks” media blast. The campaign, which is based on results of a blind taste test among approximately 475 consumers, promotes that more consumers prefer Dunkin’s brewed coffee over Starbucks’ House Blend. (Besides television ads, consumers can visit www.dunkinbeatstarbucks.com to read about the experiment, learn about Dunkin' Donuts’ coffee, corporate promotions and services.)

But on Monday, Starbucks upped the promotional stakes. An e-mail blast and YouTube spot reminded coffee drinkers, “If you vote, Starbucks buys your coffee.” All voters have to do is tell a barista they voted today, and a “tall” cup of coffee is on the house.

The promotion certainly caused attention in my neck of the woods. It was a story on last night’s local news, and I—along with many of my friends—plan to take advantage of the offer.

However, not everyone was impressed by the ad. Election officials for the state of Washington got wind of the promotion, and told a local news station that rewarding voters with free coffee is illegal. More specifically, a federal statute prohibits any organization from “providing rewards for voting,” Nick Handy, director of elections, said in an article on kirotv.com, a news Web site that supports Seattle’s KIRO 7 television station.

To avoid any flack, Starbucks quickly changed the rules of its promotion. Rather than reserve free Joe for voters, Starbucks plans to hand out coffee to anyone who asks for a free cup.

I see the point that election officials made, but I also think they took the situation a bit too far. Not once did Starbucks plan to reward anyone for voting for a specific party. In my opinion, the only “swing vote” Starbucks might have hoped to reward today was a former Dunkin' Donuts supporter.

By Deena M. Amato-McCoy