“Clarity of mind means clarity of passion, too.”
— Blaise Pascal
A Clear Eye.
Unlocking hearts and minds in today's idea economy
“Clarity of mind means clarity of passion, too.”
— Blaise Pascal
I'm going to come clean with you. I’ve become brand saturated and blogged out. In my quest to keep up with, and influence, the evolving “body of knowledge,” I’ve been increasingly subjected to a bunch of babble about brands and branding. Everything from what a brand actually is to the critical importance of brand names and brand positioning.
And it has been coming from everywhere; from authors and the media to academics and agencies. Here’s a recent NY Times Media & Advertising article headline (no, it's not a headline from The Onion):
“AOL Revamping Its Logo, Hoping to Revive the Brand”
All I can do is shake my head and wonder. So here are my seven wonders of branding (as in, I wonder why these dated concepts still flourish in these postmodern times):
1. Positioning
Here’s how Ries and Trout defined positioning in their seminal book of the same name:
“The basic approach of positioning is not to create something new and different, but to manipulate what's already up there in the mind, to retie the connections that already exist.”
And that may have worked well twenty-seven years ago when product and service options were a fraction of what they are today and people were still influenced by propositions like, “We try harder.” People today are better informed, hyperconnected and marketing savvy. We’ve been trained to be highly skeptical of any type of company communication or claim.
Which makes ours an era of action, not talk. We expect you to prove your pitch with new, exciting and relevant products, services and business models. We’re living in a marketplace driven by creativity and innovation. The concept of branding is a much more dynamic idea. Sticking to your knitting, and trying to persuade people with clever advertising and image-building campaigns, is a sure route to the retirement home.
2. A brand is a promise
This particular babble makes plain that a brand is an identifiable entity that makes specific promises of value. If this is true, then customers of the brand should be able to articulate those promises. Right? Because that’s how they differentiate between -- and ultimately choose -- brands. Isn’t that so?
So what’s the unique brand promise of Nike? Nike what? Pick one: glasses, golf ball, soccer shoes, sweatshirt. How about BMW? The Z4, M6i Convertible, Mini Cooper? The brand promise of the NFL is different than the NBA, MLB, and NHL in what way precisely?
A brand is NOT a promise (Please don’t tell me that people are buying the Mini because of the promise of German engineering. Most people think it’s a British car). A brand is a performance. It’s about arousing people’s emotional drives through a unique expression of those emotional drives -- with the cool design of a Mini, the stellar service experience of a Zappos, the cultural immersion of a Nike, etc.
3. Be consistent and repeat . . . repeat . . . repeat
The rationale behind this bit of jabber? The customer’s mind needs to be repeatedly exposed to a message (I’ve read everything from at least five times to nine plus) for it to cut through the marketing clutter. Plus the fact that repetition helps build familiarity, which in turn helps build credibility.
It is true that mere exposure to something results in a more positive attitude toward that thing. But running the same ad -- or mailing the same piece -- month after month is simply shallow and unimaginative. Like many of the impersonal, scripted remarks of service personnel. “How was your stay?” “We appreciate your business. We know you have a choice.” “Would you like fries with that?”
Sure, an emotionally provocative message may touch a chord with a customer . . . the first time. The tenth time, it touches a nerve. And that’s no way to build a relationship.
4. Top of mind awareness
This piece of brand wisdom is tied directly to the previous one and is closest to the dated, classical idea of branding. It goes like this: If we can burn our name and proposition into our audiences’ minds, then when the desire arises they’ll automatically think of – and choose -- us! Brain autopilot. Click. Whirrrr.
I have news for you (perhaps). The age of branding as brainwashing is over. I can hear it now: “Come on, Tom. For habitual buying, which occurs when involvement is low and difference between brands is small, top of mind awareness is key.”
You know, you may be right. Or maybe, low price is key. Either way, I wouldn’t want to take my customer relationships for granted and hope that my product or service category remains low involvement and undifferentiated.
5. Personal branding
It was management guru Tom Peters who started the personal branding noise with an essay that appeared in Fast Company in 1997 under the title "The Brand Called You." Peters wrote:
“. . . think of yourself differently! You're not an ‘employee’ of General Motors (ooops, bankrupt), you're not a ‘staffer’ at General Mills, you're not a ‘worker’ at General Electric or a ‘human resource’ at General Dynamics (ooops, it's gone!). Forget the Generals! You don't ‘belong to’ any company for life, and your chief affiliation isn't to any particular ‘function.’ You're not defined by your job title and you're not confined by your job description. Starting today you are a brand.” [Smart aleck emphasis mine].
With all due respect to Tom’s rant, he was right about one thing: In today’s rapidly changing world, jobs are NOT for life. But neither are companies, relationships or brands. In the article, Tom points to Arthur Anderson as a “model of the new rules of branding at the company and personal level.” Hey Tom! Ooops, they’re gone too!
Consultants, authors and personal coaches have jumped all over this buzzword and have in essence rebranded Dale Carnegie-like success secrets as “Personal Branding.” With a little dedication (time, money, and a Flip video camcorder), you too can become an Oprah, Madonna, or Donald Trump (although I’m not really sure why you’d want to be). Or perhaps a social media rock star.
Do yourself a favor. Dump this self-involved concept and get back to being a caring, passionate, curious, human being. Go out into the world and do something to help improve the lives of others. You’ll enjoy life a hell of a lot more, and -- as a bonus -- you’ll probably make more money in the process. Success isn't about self-promotion. It's about passion for the possible; sensitivity and caring for people; the willingness to try new things, to take risks, to learn and to grow; and a self-deprecating sense of humor.
6. Brand inside
I understand this one. I simply don’t believe in it. The grounds for creating this brand adjective gibberish are that executives by and large ignore their internal audience (employees) when developing and executing branding campaigns (Hey CEO! It’s strategy, not a campaign). As a result, employees end up undermining the expectations set by the company.
So now we need a distinction to get executives to understand the importance of organizational alignment? Of getting everyone to live the brand? Or . . . do consultants need the distinction to position and sell their services? You know, I suppose one could also draw a distinction between the retail outlet outside and the retail outlet inside. That way, employees who work inside the store can be conditioned to rush right past gum wrappers in the parking lot on their way to their real jobs.
7. Brand logic (with a focus on USP, UVP or what ever you want to call it)
And last but not least on my notorious list, a return to rational, features and benefits marketing (Déjà vu all over again). A scientific sales mentality brimming with arguments, metrics, dollarization, etc. Irresistible logic. “How can you NOT be persuaded to choose my brand? I’ve proven it to you the way that one proves a theorem. Are you stupid, or what?”
This is direct marketing gone mad. You can find it on web sites, in brochures, sales letters and presentations, infomercials . . . you name it! You know when you come across it, because it always begins with a rhetorical question (we really shouldn’t call such questions rhetorical, because they don’t enhance the persuasive effect. Stupid or manipulative comes to mind); e.g. “Do YOU want to lose your shirt in real estate? If not . . . blah, blah, blah.”
Look. Branding today can only work through ideas that customers WANT to connect with. People can neither be hypnotized with media images nor cajoled with flowery prose. You must truly understand their pain, speak their language, and be felt like a part of their inner world of hopes and dreams.
The old world of branding was similar to an adolescent’s view of love. It was about gazing into each other's eyes and being dazzled by the reflection. Today, great branding is about a mature love. It’s about standing side by side in a trusting relationship with both sets of eyes focused on the horizon of life’s amazing possibilities.
I'm not entirely sure what direction 2010 will take me, but I'm pretty sure that I'm giving up on the tired concept called "brand."
When great companies like P&G, UPS, Time Warner, Meredith, and others need an entertaining and inspiring speaker to shake up their people, fill them with ideas and charge them with inspiration, who do they call? See for yourself
Salon.com's CEO Richard Gingras is tasked, like many of his counterparts in the content business, with saving the business. His solution? The "brand," as described in a recent ClickZ article:
"[I]ncrease readership by focusing on relevancy and SEO; bring in advertisers by modernizing the ad inventory; and create new revenue streams, such as an online store. What makes Gingras thinks he can accomplish this amidst the most dire ad market in decades? The magic bullet, he says, is the brand."
"'I do think that in the content space, as we see the print publications decline, I think brands matter more than ever,' he said. 'I think brands with sharp personalities matter more than ever, and I think that presents an opportunity for salon.'"
He doesn't get it. He's living in some 1950s fantasy world of brands. A brand is not primarily a "personality;" not any longer. Snap, Crackle and Pop are impotent in today's age of skepticism and abundance.
In addition, content providers are living in an age of free, where writers trade work for attention and marketers increasingly launch their own media properties funded with the same ad dollars that Gingras and others so desperately seek.
Here's the reality: Today's readers are searching for unique value; a compelling why to trade for their scarce time, attention and money. The why comes before the who. Where are the whys in Gringas' solution? Relevancy? C'mon. Relevance is simply another word for niche. And every strong brand is a niche brand today.
Here's what I think (call me crazy, many have): I think emerging platforms, like Apple's forthcoming tablet, are the whys that will save niche content businesses like salon. When people have the cool, portable media device in their hands, they'll want their who -- their cool content -- to be on it and travel with them.
Salon.com presently has about 5 million readers a month, with only 25,000 selecting the ad-free version at $45/year. Fast forward 18 months, and if Gingras gets the SEO and experience right, salon may have millions of people downloading a $9.95 tablet version of the digital magazine.
And then, instead of starting an anemic on-line store to "'curate' lifestyle goods from around the Web," salon can create and sell branded APPs for their community; social tools for their community; and other useful and meaningful innovations for the benefit of their community. And that's when the salon brand will matter more than ever.
“I put my team first.”
That was Patriots head coach Bill Belichick's response to reporters on last night's failed decision to go for it on fourth-and-2 from his 28 with 2:08 left at Indy. And I happen to both believe in and respect Bill's decision and intent. Here's the entire quote:
"I told the team, and I think they believe I do what I feel like is best for our football team to win every game. I put the team first, I put those decisions first. I just hope everybody understands that."
As a leader, did Belichick make a bad call? Absolutely not. A leader's job is to acutely examine the changing situation, assess his or her organization's resources and abilities in the evolving environment, and make a decision that best favors the entire organization's chances for success.
Most pigskin pundits have panned Belichick's decision. They're almost unanimous in their criticism of the controversial call, declaring that he should have played the percentages and punted the ball. Some have even called his decision a slap on the face to his defensive unit.
Bullshit. Great leaders make decisions for the benefit of the entire team, not to make certain folks feel good about themselves. I know I have many Boston friends seething right about now, so . . . sorry. Now answer me this (and be honest with yourself):
If last night's exact scenario presents itself in a do or die playoff game in January 2010, wouldn't you want Bill to go for it . . . again?
Especially considering the fact that since 2000 when Belichick has faced the Colts, on fourth down he has gone for it 12 times during the regular season and gotten it eight times. And during the postseason he's gone for it four times against the Colts and gotten it all four times.
You bet you would. We all want a leader who goes for it. One with an inspiring vision, who makes both informed and bold decisions for the benefit of the entire team.
I say thumbs up to Belichick on a courageous and correct call last night. We desperately need more leaders like Bill with the passion, intelligence and guts to go for it with the game on the line. Because for most of us in business today, every game is on the line.
People are finally realizing that their most powerful assets are not their buildings, bank accounts, or even technologies. It’s their relationships with their audiences. The problems arise when they try to be all things to all people.
Instead, they should develop a core attitude with their core audiences and be as many things as possible to them.
Conventional wisdom resists most attempts to develop a business concept around an attitude.
“We need a defensible position. We need to own a space in the customer’s mind.”
Unfortunately, that’s why more than half of the businesses on the Fortune 500 list when I was in college are no longer in business. They stuck to their knitting while their audiences moved on.
New and improved products and services will continue to appear at a mind-numbing rate. You'll never keep up as an outsider; by watching and reacting.
The future is about being an insider. It's about co-creating with - and for - a passionate subculture of like-minded people.
It's time to go deep and discover their hopes, dreams and concerns. And lead them and educate them to new value propositions, new possibilities, for their benefit and for yours.
I took a ride with a couple of friends yesterday to visit a mutual friend who is home recovering from life-saving surgery. We all hugged, laughed, told jokes and fully absorbed an, unfortunately, rare and quintessential human moment.
I suppose we could have visited him on Facebook, but the thought never crossed our minds. Thank God.
Now, I don't mean to diminish the significance of the social web. It is certainly a life changing and, for many, a life enhancing technology. But folks, please don't become hypnotized and deluded by your addiction to simple social stimulus. Real life is where it's at.
Get out from behind your screen, bake a loaf of hearty bread - like my friend Craig did for his recovering friend - and pay someone a visit. And do it soon. For real life streams much more quickly than your hyperactive mind would ever lead you to believe.
"Battle For The Brain: Hook wires to a snacker's head and you can figure out how to sell more potato chips. Maybe."
That's the headline of a recent Forbes magazine article under the heading "MARKETING." It's no wonder that the word marketing conjures up words like spin, manipulation, bullshit, etc. Marketers are doing it to themselves.
I did get a kick out of the last paragraph of the article:
There are skeptics. Craig Bennett, a neuroscientist at UC, Santa Barbara, wrote a report this year about running a dead Atlantic salmon through an MRI machine. The result showed signals of brain activity similar to the ones neuromarketers see when testing commercials on consumers. "You could say the salmon liked one brand of peanut butter over another brand," says Bennett. "But it was dead."
People don't really hate marketers. They hate the modern day idea of marketing. Marketers are the only ones who can change that idea by using their creativity and influence to make a meaningful difference in people's lives. And now is the best time to start, when people really need it.
Years back two researchers argued that rampant crime in the city is the inevitable result of disorder. If a window in a building is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one cares and that no one is in charge. One unrepaired window is an invitation to break more windows, and then lawlessness spreads outward from buildings to streets to entire communities.
Can you see the parallels between broken windows and broken brands?
A broken brand is a business that has no idea where it’s going; has no way of communicating its purpose (since none exists); and therefore cannot align its activities nor inspire its people. It’s in disorder. And this disorder leads to people walking around concluding that no one cares and that no one is in charge. Employees may see problems or opportunities, but they stop complaining and suggesting ideas, since they’re convinced management can’t do anything, or won’t. I’ve read the results of recent surveys, which showed that fewer than 10 percent of employees believe their daily activities are actually related to corporate goals. That’s pitiful.
Leaders are not connecting their organizations’ purposes to the individual’s sense of accomplishment, because the organization doesn’t have a purpose. There may be goals and objectives and “todos,” but there is no unifying perspective -- or strong brand -- that inspires people and guides their actions. This lack of a central organizing principle becomes an open invitation for people to run around following their own self-serving agendas. And like the broken window syndrome in neighborhoods, this lawlessness ends up spreading from employee to employee and from employee to customer. Before long, the organization is hardened with passionless team members, uninspired customers, shrinking margins, layoffs, accounting scandals, Dilbertesque cynicism. A vicious, and totally avoidable, downward spiral.
You’re probably wondering why the leader doesn’t simply step in and take control.
The simple answer is that today’s environment is too complex for leaders to “take control.” In the simpler days leaders acted as police and, like the police of that time, were far more integrated in the “community.” They could see -- or sense -- signals of disorder and intervene to protect their brand. The leaders of today -- like the police of today -- are dealing with a much more complex environment with widely different competitive pressures, customer demands, stockholder expectations, and workforce requirements. They are struggling with the global recession, the social web revolution, and the collapse of the old Industrial business paradigm. The only way for today’s leader to prevent disorderly behavior that will ultimately corrupt his or her organization is to viscerally understand and passionately communicate the organization’s brand!
The leader needs to communicate the brand’s compelling essence, which will inspire sharing, tolerance, teamwork and innovation, and act as a filtering mechanism for new ideas. The brand’s driving philosophy will create alignment and focus, and instill confidence, and give people permission to act, and bring ideas to life. Its special spirit will engage and unify people, and compel them to self-police the organization and prevent the small but unmistakable signals of impending chaos.
The good times are not returning any time soon. And until leaders put the brand at the heart of the organization and make people feel that they exist at that heart, chaos will prevail.
Brand is Not a Four-Letter Word
"Tom is timely, thought provoking and all about the new brand vision packaged as a Seinfeld stand up. I went to school on his ideas."
- Jeff Taylor, Founder, Monster.com and CEO, Eons.
(Rest assured, we will never provide your email address to anyone. Period.)
RSS feed
