Can a brand built by a visionary be sustained in the corporate world and its short term matrix model?
Several times in this blog, I have posed this question. I never found the answer but, somehow, now I have. As Mr Bob Luts puts it so well in his article it depends on the guts, leadership style and vision…of the commander-in-chief.
OF BRANDS AND MEN
A few days ago, tired of waiting for my facial treatments to fulfill their promise of making my skin defy Mother Nature, I decided to visit the cosmetics department of my favorite store. I had given a brand 30 years of, as I saw it that day in front of the mirror, undeserved loyalty, so I was pretty much ready to take a step forward and be enveloped in the magic seduction of a new brand, enthusiastically embark in an affaire that would convince me to spend, in those miraculous little bottles, thumping amounts of money fuelled by illusion, not reason.
As I strolled from counter to counter, my hope to discover new idyllic potions that would make me feel beautiful, feminine and attractive was rapidly waning…
In our girly chats we take comfort convincing ourselves that “all men are alike”, but in this hopeful escapade in pursuit of glamour and, as a professional in the branding business, I couldn’t but associate brands to this famous conclusion. Apparently, it’s not just men that are all alike, brands are too, and none of them deserve my trust.
Promises, nothing but promises. Apathy followed me from counter to counter, where one brand after another was trying to seduce me with lavish presentations and endlessly repeated platitudes. The more proactive would offer me little presents or charm me with the scientific arguments that supported their magic. But, as a fifty plus veteran in matters of both, men and brands, I’m not an easy prey for either one or the other.
I finally gave up searching for the fountain of youth and decided that changing brands was not even worth it. After all, I thought to myself, better the devil you know than the devil you don’t, and moved on… Read the rest of this entry »
Data Overload
As I was preparing for a recent pitch, I once again felt creeping inside me that insidious need to support, with well-researched data, of course, every single strategic decision our agency was recommending. Therefore, as conscientious professionals, we proceeded to attach to the proposal plenty of charts and tables that not only covered the local market, but also expanded into the realm of global trends and all sorts of statistics and additional information. The more, the merrier! To make a long story short, we won the pitch.
To tell you the honest truth, I seriously believe that, irrespective of that data overload, our proposal made a lot of sense, as it clearly showed a profound understanding of the industry and of the desires and expectations of our audience.
When we think marketing, we know data is very important, it’s just that I feel that true success stories actually reinvented data, not followed it. Read the rest of this entry »
Familiar Faces
“What is your brand?” asked Piers Morgan in a recent interview with Oprah Winfrey. Oprah, with a broad smile spreading across her face, candidly answered, “I’m the love brand.” As Morgan poked fun at her positioning, Oprah continued “ultimately, everything I say, whether it’s in my magazine, whether it’s Gayle on the radio, whether it’s the ‘Oprah Winfrey Show’ and now, everything about the OWN channel is about opening your space, your heart space, so that you can love more. That’s really all money is for. Money is worth nothing if it can’t buy you the opportunity to love more.”
Oprah is not the first person to become a brand. Read the rest of this entry »
Talk the Talk, Walk the Walk
Before becoming president and following his career as an actor, Ronald Reagan became a spokesperson for GE. The brilliance of this strategy and the astounding results it had, not only in Reagan’s career as a politician but also in the construction of GE’s reputation, came from the CREDIBILITY of the spokesman.
Reagan was hired by GE as a host of one of the programs sponsored by the brand, GE Theater (a gig he likely accepted as his acting career was deteriorating). The company also decided to make him deliver speeches in front of over 240 thousand employees in a circuit that allowed him to visit close to 40 states.
Reagan, who began his career as a member of the Democratic Party, wrote his own GE speeches, which carried with them a conservative, pro business message, the same famous principles Reagan shared as a president, which advocated lowering taxes to spur economic growth and the economy deregulation. He was being shaped by his experiences at GE, and began gaining consciousness of the power of the American corporate system and its astounding possibilities.
During this time, Reagan went from being a “paid salesperson” to an honest herald of a message that both the spokesman and the company shared. One could argue that this “evangelist” applied what he preached. He was moved by what he was preaching and, as a result, Reagan became more than just a paid servant.
We all know that Reagan was a natural salesperson. But, as a spokesman, his role took a more profound direction: his voice was credible because his principles and the core message of the brand were the same. Reagan stopped talking about toasters and TV’s and the “benefits of living better electrically” and started to talk about the values that these appliances represented (the power of innovation which is possible under the American capitalist system).
To the public’s ears, these values were reflected in the products endorsed by the GE brand. This gave Reagan a political platform he could believe in and, in turn, his skills as a communicator gave GE a source of inspiration and the opportunity to establish an emotional connection with their audience.
The paid spokesman became a credible evangelist, and initiated a process of open forum in those scenarios where the brand wanted human-to-human contact, without a script and without a camera in between.
Today, this virtue has never been more important. Unidirectional media, such as TV, radio, and print, lose their strength, as bi-directional media represented by digital and social networks become the most valuable tools for building a reputation. GE’s force as a company had the power to turn a paid spokesman into a preacher because he honestly believed in the company’s agenda. As spokesman for GE, Reagan became an authority. This added up exponentially to his natural capacity and charisma as a communicator.
This is an astounding example of how the academy of classic branding is a perfect platform for our current environment. What was valid in the 50’s is just as valid in this revolutionary decade we live in: never choose a spokesman because he is famous with a certain audience, but because he is credible and is able to communicate your brand’s agenda. What better example than the worldwide appeal of Michael Jordan as a spokesperson for Nike!
Where is the word starbucks going
Retrospectiva de la imagen de Starbucks
The branding world is in an uproar over whether Starbucks’ move to eliminate the typography from its logo is a wise decision. Frankly, most of us aren’t in the position to formulate an educated opinion on the subject, or better said, any opinion we pose would be superficial since no one can tell for sure the rationale behind its strategy. Although it’s founder words can give us a hint a-look-at-the-future-of-starbucks-new-logo-2011
Companies generally opt to refresh or change their brand when there are sound reasons to do so such as when the company wants to do the following:
- Communicate a change.
- Respond to an internal or external crisis.
- ncorporate new categories under an umbrella that did not formerly fit within its brand.
All 3 scenarios , in my opinion, surround Starbucks’ decision.
First, Starbucks’ aggressive expansion policy resulted in the brand losing credibility, and a brand makeover may help the consumer perceive the change.
Second, the brand and the concept behind it are in crisis; Starbucks still stands for your corner coffee shop, an extension of your life where the rest of the community congregates, but its become impersonal, contradicting that basic principle. In addition, there is also a need to communicate change during this identity crisis.
Lastly, Starbucks’ position as a brand of exclusive coffees has worn out and the company is involved in isolated pilot testing to expand its menu of teas and incorporate alcoholic drinks.
That’s why that opining on Starbucks’ decision would be premature, and would prefer to wait and see, and not speculate any further.
It’s time for stories
As many of us have noted, business is changing at an alarming speed. This is especially true from a marketing perspective. Consumers now hold the power to watch what they want, when they want it and how they want it (and even choose to skip those “pesky” commercials that I have worked so hard to create). Not only this, but after watching it they can participate in the discussion and blog about it.
At the same time and due to these new technologies, there has been an explosion of new content and of outlets created with the sole purpose of distributing it. This has developed a cycle where content creators hold more power than ever. And now, the Ipad has put all of this information in the palms of our hands, literally, inviting these new technologies into our everyday lives (i.e. no longer reading comic books in the toilet but watching Youtube videos and updating our Facebook status).
In practical terms what this means is that traditional sponsors of content, the advertisers as well as the content creators, have to figure out a brand new set of rules of engagement.
For all of us “brand builders” (true believers that all marketing dollars are well spend only if they respond to a seriously developed brand directive), this new environment means that we need to re-invent the science of branding as we know it. We no longer live in the world of structures. Rigid, formulaic brand books, like Unilever’s brand key, are limited in this new age of technology. The brands vision, values, and discriminators are not designed to perform in this brave new world. Read the rest of this entry »
I would never buy a Cadillac
I would never buy a Cadillac. Quite a strong statement, isn’t it? The thing is that, for the past 10+ years, every time I think of changing my car, the Cadillac CTS jumps into the portfolio of options, but it disappears as fast as it appears. It has absolutely nothing to do with the shape of the car, which I must admit, carries one of the most handsome designs in the market. It has nothing to do with the quality either, since, as an impulsive consumer, I’m simply not interested.
And price doesn’t enter the equation because I haven’t even compared it to others yet.
Read the rest of this entry »
The not so hidden symbols
“At the front of the auction room is a large television screen that projects each bid simultaneously in pounds, U.S. dollars, euros, Swiss francs, Hong Kong dollars, and Japanese yen. In May 2007, Sotheby’s added Russian roubles to the conversion for the first time. Every bidder is perfectly competent to calculate their bidding position in the auction currency; the conversion is there to remind everyone what an international event this is.”
Don Thompson, The $12 Million Stuffed Shark
When I recently read Thompson’s entertaining and illustrative book on the role of branding in the world of contemporary art, I realized I have never written about one particularly fascinating topic: The use of rituals and symbols to build a brand.
A Family Affair
Last night, I was playing with my BlackBerry® during the TV ads–as most people do–when suddenly a deep and honest voice drew me back to the TV.
“Can a company really have a heart, a conscience, a soul?” asked a man in a warm and personal tone. “It can when the company is a family,” he continued.
The voice turned out to be that of Fisk Johnson, the fifth generation owner of S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. His point was on the environmental responsibility of his company and its commitment to the quality of its products. In between the lines, there was a strong branding messaging, one of integrity and dependability.
Thoughts of Pledge®, Ziploc®, Glad®, and Windex® came to mind–products that I trust as a consumer and admire as a marketer. Here was a company that has never compromised its mission and always delivered its value proposition day in and day out, a company that I would love to have as a client. (Mr. Fisk: if you are reading this, feel free to call.)
So I ask you, reader:
- Must a company be a family, like the Johnson family, to be true to its company’s core values?
- Can a public company succeed as a brand when it relies on the instincts and guts of people not bound to it by family ties?
- Are the chief executives of public companies driven more by the bottom line, quarterly reports, and their resumes than the vision of the company founders?
I haven’t seen many public companies whose heart, soul, and dreams have survived its owners. Not that they don’t exist. They do! Chances are slim, but that’s no one’s fault; it’s just the way the system works.
As stated in Mr. Fisk’s brilliantly written script, being truthful to your soul is not a business obligation; it’s a family obligation.
Kudos to the dreamers who passed the torch to other generations!
