Branding the Current Economy

I have noticed that the news has had a tough time branding our economy these days. Maybe that is because names like "The Great Depression" and "The .com Crash" are created after these events, rather than during. Well unfortunately, this economic climate may be lasting longer than the others, and will need a name and personality.

Here are a few names I have heard recently:

1. new economy
2. economic downturn
3. Obamanomics (cousin to Reaganomics?)
4. recession
5. good depression
   
6. Obama recession
7. or as seen in The New York Times: The Slumdog Recession/Depression!

My favorite so far is The Good Depression. This name was invented by a friend of mine in the nonprofit sector. She says that this depression is not depressing, though many would disagree with her! She says that in this age of self awareness, we are open to all possibilities, including financial adventures! For nonprofits it is an opportunity to clean house and become more efficient and effective. Needless to say, a few corporations have seized this opportunity already. This HR "cleaning house" is a "survival of the fittest" per se. What works for nature is being put into place in the workforce.

Meanwhile, the term "Good Depression" can be applied at home: we are rediscovering the cost-effective, simple pleasures of eating home-cooked meals together, and vacationing locally; we are rediscovering our sense of creativity in gift-giving; we are entertaining ourselves in less expensive, technology driven, and expensive ways. For most families in dire need of connecting with each other, this is a good thing.

Applying the term 'Good Depression' to our personal or corporate finances can be a bit tricky--especially for those of us who have recently lost money in our investments. As you may have suspected, my friend has an explanation for this too. She says that this Depression, though presently among our finances with often disastrous results, has flushed out a bevy of dishonest and financially irresponsible individuals--again a good thing.

You may know already that a name is not a brand. Perhaps this depression will need to live into its name, as do many children with names like "Grace" "Theodore" or "Spartacus." Let's see what the future brings.

Overgreening

“We’re going green!” is less fresh and new these days. When it comes to branding, the green bandwagon is a full one. What does it mean to have a green brand?... To be in the green industry?...Or just form a few good green habits?

Most companies who say they are now a green brand are really forming new greener habits. They are choosing different paper sources, recycling, telecommuting, and so forth. It is not the crux of how they do business. It is not a filter with which they interview staff or determine buying decisions. It is not the essence of what is communicated in how they do business. Therefore, it is a collection of habits, rather than a brand. Companies that tend to fall in this category are said to be doing “greenwashing” according to Patricia Faulhaber who recently contributed to PRSA’s Public Relations Tactics. “More than one CEO was challenged during last year’s proxy season by investors who questioned green expenditures…” writes Bruce Harrison, elsewhere in the same publication.

Companies that are large have no trouble showing profits in this economy are at the forefront of green initiatives…again, NOT a green brand, but a green initiative. GE is so comfortable with its new innovation branch, Ecomagination, that it was proud of TV’s 30 Rock with dialog: “I’m so excited to see this trash-powered car of yours!” says Gore, to which Alec Baldwin responds “The thing is that the GE garbage car isn’t quite ready yet. Whaddaya say you throw on a pair of green tights and a cape and tell the kids how big business is good for the environment?” (Fast Company, March, 2009). Another front player with green initiatives, surprisingly enough, is Walmart. Their claims to fame include a store that was able to recycle 70% of its trash, setting itself as a potential leader in this arena for Walmart; as well as architectural elements reducing typical energy consumption. Yet, leadership for Walmart (accurately in my opinion) reports “We’re not green” (Fast Company, March, 2009).

Meanwhile, the green industry is growing, and has been selected as a trend to watch in the December, 2008 issue of Entrepreneur. Examples of companies in the green arena include Terracycle, a green business that recycles trash into fertilizer, and Pelamis Wave Power, an energy company harnessing the power of the sea. Their product lines include products that are green, but is their brand green? Not necessarily, and also, not easily! A segment of 60 Minutes on TV last autumn reported the unfortunate procedures of Denver-area recyclers of computer products—shipped right into a water supply in a foreign country. With this recent news in our memories, the companies that sell green products and services have their work cut out for them if they want their brand to be truly green.

To brand an organization successfully as green, this idea needs to be pervasive in all aspects of the organization. For example, it is a key element that is communicated visually, written about in it’s annual report and marketing materials, is included in training of staff, is conveyed to vendors, is part of how they select business methods and systems, facilities, transportation, and overall management of the company. It is everywhere. It is communicated by staff when they talk to their friends at parties on the weekend. It is something that isn’t dreamed up yesterday. It is clearly seen by customers, and is part of why their customers select them. As with all branding, it is deep, ingrained, and lasts. A great example of how this works comes from David Byrne, well known for his worldly ways. He has traveled by bicycle for decades and explains “I take a bicycle with me on tour. I don’t ride to make a point or to lower my carbon footprint—I ride because it feels good and it gets me where I want to go”(Destination, April, 2009).

Adding to Your Brand

We've talked at length about establishing a brand, defining a brand, and all sorts of different ways to work with and leverage a brand. But what if you need to add to it? Incorporating a new element into your brand can be a real challenge, especially if this element is something that is also entirely new to your organization.

McDonald's is working with this adjustment right now. The chain known for convenience, value, and consistency is now looking to build its "green" credentials and hopefully build this into its brand--not just for use as a PR tactic. The challenge here is twofold:

1. Can McDonald's actually make a big enough splash with green activities that their efforts will actually mean something?
2. If #1 is accomplished, can this be integrated successfully into the McDonald's brand?

Since this is something fairly new for the company, McDonald's needs to find a way to properly integrate its green initiatives into its communications. Much like any other group adding a new brand element, careful planning will occur, the new element will be installed across the organization's internal business processes, and finally, integrated little by little into external communications (ads, packaging, promotions, etc.).

One of the largest hurdles to overcome during this process is the check to make sure this new elements gels with the existing brand. If it does not, there is a bigger problem: why are you adding this in the first place if it doesn't make sense for the organization? Without passing this check, you'll end up shoehorning an incompatible element into your brand and sew the seeds of instability and inconsistency.

Source: Warner, Melanie. Large Fry. Fast Company, April, 2009.

Recessions Breed Cannibals

Cannibalism is always a temptation for brand managers. Brand cannibalism (at least for most people....). Who among us hasn't been tempted by an opportunity to make some quick gains by going against the brand we're charged with upholding? The problem with this is that each time we seize one of those opportunities, we eat just a little bit of our own brand.

When times are tough, making money and maintaining cash flow becomes more important then ever. Believe me, I understand that. There is, however, the consideration of short term gains versus long term sustainability of your brand. If you offer an incredible discount on your service or product in order to generate some much-needed cashflow, how can you expect customers to pay full price again once the economy recovers?

The danger of cannibilizing your brand for these short gains is that if you do it too much or too often, the brand cannot recover. A good example of this is what Starbucks is doing right now with their introduction of instant coffee to their product line (if you've listened to our interview on Marketplace Morning Edition, this might sound familiar). Starbucks is headed down a dangerous path that will forever cheapen their brand: lower quality products in an attempt to appease a wider audience and combat competition from McDonald's. The result of this will either be lower prices and thus lower quality, or an abandonment of the brand by once-loyal customers.

In the real world, however, I know that this may seem impractical. When you need cash, you need cash, and sometimes it's impossible to say no to a deal, no matter its inconsistency with your brand. If an opportunity like this comes up, try to look at all angles and see if you can't find a way to at least partially align the deal with your brand. For example, if you have to slash a price, try to make the product comparable to that cut--a scaled down or reduced version, so at least the buyer understands that they aren't getting steak at hamburger prices.

Guest Blog: Let Your Fingers Do the Branding

Guest blogger: Chandlee Lewis

Is your brand delivering the way you want it to in this tough market? Does it reflect the core values of your company? Does it clearly convey what you are promising your customers? Does your company behave in a way that is consistent with the brand and that also strengthens it? Are you getting the best value for the staff time spent in branding meetings?

These are some of the questions successful companies are asking themselves today. Until recently, it was possible to create a brand strategy and be confident that the same platform would be viable long-term. However, that is no longer the case. Current market conditions offer a perfect opportunity - as well as a catalyst - to ensure that your brand is saying what you want it to say, that you are optimally positioned, and that you are targeting the audiences that have the greatest need for your “promise”. Just as a season change is the best time for your car’s periodic tune-up, this new season and new economy are a perfect - in fact, critical - time for a branding “tune-up”.

When you undertake a project as important as a brand “tune-up”, you will obviously need to make sure that you are getting the best guidance from your staff. You will need everyone’s input. Yet, meetings of all types typically revolve around those staff members who are outgoing and willing to engage actively in discussion. The less confident or bored staffers often fade into the background: doodling - or, worse, ensconced in their own private worlds of daydreams. Their lack of participation does not mean that they do not have valuable information or insights. It means simply that they are unable or unwilling to share them. Since they have not been involved, these passive participants do not feel committed to the outcome of the meeting and may even surface later to criticize it, whether or not they actually remember what took place.

Interesting new research suggests that doodlers remember more information than daydreamers. But the fact remains that a branding meeting conducted in the traditional manner results in the company sustaining at least 4 types of losses:

1. The value of the salaries of non-engaged staff during the time of the meeting
2. The lost contributions of non-engaged staff to the group effort
3. The opportunity cost of staff accomplishments had they not even attended the meeting
4. The value of the inevitable extra time required to complete the task with only partial participation.

The traditional manner of conducting branding meetings includes staff dissecting customer data, slogging through SWOT and competitor analyses, and matching results with company capabilities and product benefits to arrive at a strategy. It is during – and sometimes even because of - this process that some participants lose interest and drop out of active participation. These staffers need to be re-engaged and it can be argued that a company using resources to develop a fresh approach to its brand should also consider using a fresh approach in its processes.

Now contrast that scenario with a branding meeting in which 100% of the participants are working with 100% attention for 100% of the time of the meeting, and the end result is a concrete product that embodied the clear identity of your brand. Such a scenario would yield a cost-effective meeting, completed in less time than traditional meetings, and carry the additional benefits of complete group support and a model that can be manipulated, explained, and shared by the whole group.



An innovative way to achieve that degree of success is literally through play. A facilitation methodology, LEGO SERIOUSPlay, developed by the business arm of the well-known LEGO toy company, has shown great success in helping groups function more effectively, efficiently, and cohesively, and with lasting results. In so doing it also saves you money in both the development and execution of your brand. And it’s fun.

The process is based on the “Constructivism” theory of Jean Piaget and his colleagues in Switzerland, and the “Constructionism” theory of Seymour Papert of MIT. Both Piaget and Papert developed their theories by observing the learning activities of children. The two scholars worked from the premise that both children and adults acquire knowledge in the same way, and that learning is enhanced when people are engaged in constructing a product.

Piaget referred to the way children learn as “concrete thinking” – thinking with and through concrete objects. He viewed this as a stage of learning that children would grow out of as they developed more formal, abstract ways of thinking. In contrast, Papert viewed concrete thinking as a legitimate style of thinking in itself, and not simply a stage that would be left behind. As he saw it, if adults forego concrete thinking as they develop intellectually, they merely limit themselves by cutting off a valid path to knowledge.

Concrete thinking is at the root of the LEGO SERIOUSPlay (LSP) methodology. Play is seen not as a leisure or frivolous activity, but as something serious that can open the door to imagination and learning, just as it does for children. Group members literally think through their fingers, and in the process use creative energy they may have forgotten they possessed. What’s more, because the method is dynamic and requires a concrete product from each participant, those doodlers who hear but don’t contribute are drawn into the action, as are the daydreamers, who are so actively involved that there is no opportunity to drift off.

Typically, LSP facilitators design a workshop specific to your company’s needs and focus. For example, in early rounds of a branding tune-up, they would guide your staff in building a representation of the core identity of the brand, and then ask each person to make a story about what they have built and share it with the rest of the group as a way of explaining their insights and perspectives, and creating meaning and context. Other participants would be invited to ask questions for clarification.

In a succeeding round, participants would be challenged to create a shared identity for the brand, incorporating elements from the individual models and adding new elements as necessary, to arrive at a complete picture. During the building process, participants would be encouraged to change their physical positions from time to time to look at the model from different perspectives, perhaps gaining new insights or visualizing new benefits. In this way, participants achieve an appreciation of every aspect of the brand, of the total experience that it offers, and begin to understand how to build it into a company asset.

The workshop would culminate in the group’s extraction of simple guiding principles to act as the basis for all future brand decisions and company actions. As defined by David Ogilvy, a brand is “the intangible sum of a product's attributes: its name, packaging, and price, its history, its reputation, and the way it's advertised.” Once the fingers of the group have defined the core identity of the brand, the guiding principles greatly simplify creating or adjusting its attributes to be in tune with the ever-evolving business landscape.

Your branding agency or consultant is sure to thank you for having taken such a step to create a strong brand identity that they can then use with confidence to create and direct your messages, collateral, and the many other ways in which you project your brand to the market. The market is sure to respond with a positive message as well.

About the author: Chandlee Lewis is the founder and CEO of Envision the Results, LLC. She can be contacted at clewis@envisiontheresults.com.

Seven Considerations for Your Brand During "The New Economy"

1. Enter the vacuum of opportunity. While others are running away from communication opportunities and expense, there is a void created—ready for you to fill and trumpet your brand’s existence and success.

2. Something is better than nothing. Deleting or minimizing communication sends a message that your organization is a casualty of the economy. Sad but true; many customers do not check to see if you are still in business because they are used to hearing from you, not reaching out to you.

3. Get more for your money. Advertising, printing, and other commodities are at lower prices these days. In other words, it is cheaper now to obtain customers than before using these communication channels.

4. Focus on your end result. Old-fashioned, ‘this is why we’re interesting and this is why we are good’ brand awareness, rather than tricky or avante-guard approaches will connect you to customers faster these days. Prepare for lower-cost, newly-formed competitors. Trump those nipping at your heels by communicating a brand with a solid track record of success.

5. Realize that hiring in-house communication assistance doesn’t save money. Studies in business journals attest to this. When you add together salary, taxes, benefits, and the portion of overhead assigned to each employee, this is far more expense than what you would pay an agency for your brand initiative.

6. Recognize the benefits of a small team. For a slightly higher price than a freelancer, you can hire portions of several skill sets from a small team. It is rare that a freelancer has project management, strategic insight, experience, technological acumen, design ability, and efficiency all in one person.

7. Create a current brand strategy. Recently, the world changed significantly. If your strategy was finalized before 2009 began, it is worth reviewing to see if it is still applicable.

This information will be released for the first time in person at a WIT event Basis is sponsoring tomorrow: Anna Post discusses etiquette in the modern work environment.

How Branding Works Podcast #1: Reasons to Be Cheerful, Part I

Today is an exciting day for HBW! I am very pleased to announce that our very first Podcast is now available for download!

Matthew Langley, Director of Branding for Basis and host of this blog, takes you through his commentary on current branding topics. We hope for this to become a regular feature and welcome your feedback on our initial broadcast. We also intend to make this available via iTunes, so please stay tuned for information on that in the future.

Episode 1: Reasons to Be Cheerful, Part I

• Marketing during a down economy,


• Comments on Tropica's rebranding and its retraction.

Download

Thanks to everyone for their continued support of HBW!

Update: Will Apple's Brand Become Its Downfall?

Update: Will Apple's Brand Become Its Downfall?

We now have some proof that Apple's brand is directly tied to Steve Jobs. Late on December 16th, it was announced that Mr. Jobs will not deliver the keynote address at Macworld, Apple's annual premiere event to announce its new products. Guess what happened? Apple stock prices sharply fell at the opening of December 17th:

If a benign announcement like this affects a 5.5% stock price drop overnight, what will happen if and when the news is more dour?

You're on thin ice, Apple.

Minimum Pricing: Oligopoly or Brand Maintenance?

On June 28, 2007, the Supreme Court reversed a 96 year-old ruling to allow manufacturers to set minimum pricing with its retail partners. Now, a group of retail discounters, led by Ebay and Costco, are returning to the Hill to plead their case and have the ruling overturned. Their argument is that rigid price controls impede their ability to remain competitive. The manufacturers argue that ensuring a minimum price for their product is part of their brand management.

Each argument on its own is not without merit, but who is right here? Ostensibly, both are a question of brand enforcement: the retailers need to maintain low prices and the manufacturers don't want to associate a "discount" message with their product.

What of the opposite phenomenon? Wal-Mart is a discount retailer so large that it is able to dictate to manufacturers not only the price for which they want to sell it but also what they want to pay for it. Although a much rarer occurrence, minimum pricing does go both ways.

In my opinion, the manufacturers do have a right to set a minimum price. Just as a manufacturer has merchandising, release date, and other demands, price is just another factor within their ability to effectively manage their brand once it is in the hands of the retailer. In addition, retailers are not completely without power. If a retailer doesn't want to sell at the manufacturer's minimum price, they have the option to buy from another supplier. If the retailer's argument is that they need that brand on their shelves in order to remain competitive...... well that kind of answers that question, now doesn't it?

What do you think?

A New Way to Chip Away at Your Brand!

Today in the New York Times, I read about a new technology. It seems that there are a couple of firms out in California that are working on ways to deploy online ads that are assembled on-the-fly, with the user's customer profile in mind. It seemed like the perfect tool for someone that wanted to try them all before settling on an answer.

Basically, the technology can be seen "...creating hundreds of versions of clients' online ads, changing elements like color, type, font, message, and image to see what combination draws clicks on a particular site or from a specific audience." Like a kid in a candy store, this will lead those of us without brand awareness to investigate all sorts of possibilities!








This is interesting to think about when it comes time to create new advertisements for your business. If this technology is used and your ads change fonts, colors and so forth, does each new flavor fully represent the essence of your organization each time? If your customers remember you as the calm, composed company that produces publications in that special tone of beige, what does that mean if you suddenly are represented otherwise? One of the things that makes brands work is the prevalence of one message, both written and unwritten. Much of this consistency comes from subtleties implied by color, fonts, arrangement of text, open space in a design and other related features. Customers select a vendor because what is said (and shown) resonates with them. They feel comfortable with their choice. They like predictability and take comfort in that.

For new customers, the intent of a brand is to, again, attract interest from those who would be most likely select their products and services. So when new technology comes along offering many options, consider resisting temptation, and keep the integrity of the brand that is yours--your customers, new and existing, will thank you for that.

Me-Too Brands: Vacuums

Vacuum cleaners: did anyone think this was an industry that could be radically reinvented into product lines where people would willingly pay over $500 for a unit?

We can probably thank Dyson for these recent innovations. They finally created a vastly superior product and charge a handsome premium for it. The best part is that people are happy to pay for it and continue to sing the product's praises. Enter the copycat branding.

Walking through the vacuum section of any store, you will notice an interesting phenomenon. Many of the units on display have copied the body style and characteristic yellow highlights of the Dyson models (and also some of their premium pricing). This isn't all that uncommon: mimic the style, but not the functionality, of your premium competitors. Buyers aren't necessarily tricked into thinking this is the same product, but they are comforted by the fact that this less expensive alternative bears a superficial resemblance to the high-status version. Perhaps there is a little status-seeking in this as well.

Riding on the coattails of a successful competitor is, obviously, not uncommon. We see it with cars, clothing, accessories (think women's purses), electronics, and many other consumer products. The problem with this is that the copycats, almost always of inferior quality, end up eroding the first-mover's brand. Next time you shop, keep your eye out for who is the leader and who is the follower and note some of the product trends. You might want to turn that eye onto your organization's brand as well--are you the leader or are you the follower?

Packaged Goods Reign Supreme

Earlier this year, Harris Interactive held their latest brand equity study. This study, which has been held every year for 28 years, measures brand equity ratings across 39 categories on 6 different factors utilizing around 1,000 products for the survey. The report on this year's study revealed that by and large, consumer packaged good brands reign supreme over all others; 9 out of the top 10 brands can be found on supermarket shelves and of those, the newest brand is Duracell, introduced in 1964.

Should we be surprised by this? Probably not. Although there may be stronger or more well-established brands out there, these are the ones that pour billions of dollars every year into mass-media advertising, sponsorships, and promotions. Couple that with the fact that these 9 brands have all been around for 45 years or longer to build up their equity, it stands to reason that when it comes to consumer rating, these packaged good monoliths stand above all others.

Brand equity is an interesting measurement. I think this study proves that, if nothing else, it is a good indicator of how longevity and steady consumer exposure trumps marketing stunts and flash-in-the-pan bursts of advertising. Recall, however, that brand equity is a measure of the value of a brand, and not necessarily its effectiveness. For most product and organizational brands, the ability to offer a consistent and strong customer experience and attract new business is always going to be more important than that brand's intrinsic value.

CUSTOM ONLINE LOGO DESIGN - $99!! CLICK HERE!!11!

Discount, online logo development. The words alone make people like me and my colleagues shudder with disgust. But, is it really that bad? Aren't there some circumstances when quick and dirty logo design might get the job done for someone with literally no budget?

A great experiment recently concluded where the folks at Speak Up provided the same creative brief to a series of online logo developers, using an overall budget of $1,000 (total, spent on 4 different sites), and compared the results. The outcome was interesting, if not expected.

I was speaking with a colleague about this article and the whole online design phenomenon. He said the whole concept just didn't make sense. We thought it through, and here's what we came up with: If someone had one of these studios with 1 or 2 designers on hand, they could do well. If a designer sat down and did nothing but crank out logos for 8 hours a day, never throwing anything away, they could easily satisfy at least 10 or more clients each day--multiply that by 2 or more if they have a larger staff. That translates to a lot of money. This model, however, hinges on delivering quantity, without regard for quality, and hoping that most customers will be happy with the first set of designs that come to them.

And that's what you usually get: fairly low quality work for a very low price. For some people, this is just fine. For others, they are looking for something a bit better.

Previously, we discussed not overthinking a logo, but I think there is a happy medium between these 2 extremes. Unless you really have no budget or just need something out there - anything - then hire a real agency or designer. Otherwise, you'll just have to be happy with what you get.

Brands Outlive Products

People tend to believe brands come and go along with the times. One day you saw Brim coffee on store shelves along-side Eagle Snacks, and the next year they’re gone. Allow me to make the statement: brands don’t die. Products themselves are discontinued but product brands continue in the memories of people.

Take River West Brands, a small company out of Chicago who base their company solely on acquiring “ghost brands” (brands whose products have been discontinued). They believe in the nostalgia and affection people have for brands and have made a business out of reviving these brands (with some tweaks).

So next time you walk down an aisle wishing for a bag of Eagle Snacks because you used to eat them as a kid or get some Brim coffee because you used to drink it on your way to work, remember that the power of a brand will sometimes outlive the power of the product itself.

A New Type of Clutter Inside our Homes

My niece just broke up with her boyfriend.

This would not be significant if not for the fact that she is temporarily living with me, and that I am in the branding business. Watching this newfangled breaking up process fascinates me. Not only do they break up in person, but there is a whole set of additional breaking rituals: facebook, myspace, 4 email addresses—some shared by both of them, instant message habits, cell phone access, and more.

As a branding professional, this hit home (no pun intended) about how busy the minds are of people in their early 20s. It rivals the time commitments of single moms or dads, overextended entrepreneurs, and those that have absorbed others’ jobs due to budget cuts. There is simply not enough time in a day to make careful buying decisions.

So for many of us, this adds another layer of complication when it comes to stating clearly what we are delivering to our customers. Are you sure your customers are fond of what you are delivering? They are the ones that create the perception of your brand and control it. Also, we must consider whether our customers use any of these communication tools to talk about your organization—if so, opinions are being shared about your brand quickly. For example, my niece is on one or the other about every 10 minutes. It is time for all of us to consider how to revitalize our brands so they get through the clutter, particularly for those in the early 20s that can’t walk away from their instant, web-based, and emailed messages very easily.

Post contributed by Catherine Shaw.

A Real Life Illustration in Brand Value

There are a lot of naysayers out there who think that branding is a "soft" marketing tactic, with no real tangible or measurable benefits. To them I say: take a look at the superstar cities.

What is a superstar city? Wharton real estate professor Joseph Gyourko defines them as the highly-sought-after, ultra-expensive, chic places to live. They are your New York Cities, Londons, Shanghais, and Bangalores. They are centers of culture and decadence, driving trends and defining what the rest of the world will be thinking tomorrow. How does this illustrate the value of branding?

All around the world (the U.S. in particular), the economy is slumping. World stock markets are drooping, taking real estate values with them. And the superstar cities? They seem to be immune. Despite all this, they are able to maintain and even increase their property values. They are luxury brands.

We see the same in hard goods—the luxury brand is always able to charge more. Of course, professional centers like Wall St. help keep these cities afloat financially, but it is all part of an intertwined mashup of economy, style, and personality that make up these brands. If these cities can ride out rough times by way of their brand, maybe some savvy businesses can too.

Take Control of Your Brand's Images

I hope you understand I'm not talking about identity guidelines, but of the photography you use to market your company or organization. A lot of things have changed over the past 5 years with commercial photography, but two things have not:

1. Great photos are harder than ever to find.
2. Inexpensive (or free) images are now everywhere.

Over the past few years, Web sites like istockphoto.com and Shutterstock (among others) have led a revolution in royalty free stock photography. Their sales model is based on community, rather than the traditional client and photographer relationship. This position allows their prices to be very low, making this an economical solution. But the images that buyers are able to obtain are open to everyone, meaning there is no way to ensure exclusivity of any kind. Many organizations are comfortable with that--however some are now finding out otherwise.

Did you hear about the company that found the face of their advertising being used in Playboy ads selling Enzyte?

Do you know about the model simply referred to as Everywhere Girl?








Or the model whose same photo shoot has been used to sell everything from handbags to "dating services" (full story here)?

In an era where stock photo sales have exploded and using them in marketing efforts is the norm, realize that using (and more importantly relying on) inexpensive stock photography as a representation of your brand is similar to dating every person who has used that photo--and that is a scary thing.

Like A Boomerang, They Come Right Back

Logos may stand in the background for a few decades, but they always make a comeback. This can be good and bad. Take a look at this Flickr page, which shows a collection of vintage logos from a mid-70's edition of the book World of Logotypes.

Many are similar to modern logos. The logo in the top right of this page is similar to the current Motorola logo. Companies still use clear and identifiable shapes today, as well as the use of one letter to represent the brand. Since the core concepts of logo development are the same today as they were 30 years ago, so are the bad choices.

Today’s logos have a strong connection between the brand and the customer; poor logo choices do not. In these examples, many logos seem to lack that strong correlation to the brand. For example, in the United States Postal Service logo, there are nine stars. Why does the logo use nine stars? Thirteen for the original colonies or fifty for the number of states (post-1959) are the typical numbers for stars relating to the U.S. Only nine colonies were needed to ratify the Constitution, but somehow I don’t think that was USPS’ reasoning for the number. My colleague commented that many logos look like “someone just slapped it on top of a letterhead to make it official.” There may be a lot of truth to that.

When branding or rebranding your company, be sure the logo has substance. Connect it with the brand and with your target audience, but don’t over-think it. It’s okay to take hints from the past, just don’t go overboard.

Use of Graphics Today from a Branding Perspective

Today’s average consumer frequently is on the go and has little time to sit and contemplate. The world of graphics was created as a way for us to quickly and easily absorb information.

A company logo is a graphic. It’s a primary identifier for a company, but often receives too much attention for smaller business without a history to represent in a small, scrutinized image. For some, it may make sense to begin with a word mark – think Pottery Barn, FedEx and Tiffany’s as examples.

On the front page of every section, everyday, the USA Today newspaper has an info-graphic in the lower left corner. An info-graphic is a graphic that directly imparts information through words and pictures. They use them to show the revenue streams of companies, the history of a product or employee, or a visual breakdown of what all the buttons do on that new product.

When we, as consumers, see graphics in the same style we think “USA Today.” In the graphics profession, you can even hear, “Let’s use a USA Today-style chart here.” Wouldn’t it be nice if your group’s graphics were as easily recognizable, conjuring up instant references to your team? All the more reason to consider their importance carefully, and as we do with law, construction, and even coffee… leave it up to the professionals to guide you.

Last but not least, remember, “a picture is worth a thousand words,” and think about how your selection reflects upon your organizational efforts. For those non-readers out there, they will rely upon them to receive clues about your group – the essence of your brand.

Check out this library of graphics working for their companies in various ways.

Going Green

Going green is one of the newest market fads, though I hesitate to actually call it a fad because it implies that it is temporarily the cool thing to do. Wrong. If you are paying attention, it should be a permanent habit, like our transformation into buckeling up in the late 70s.

The way in which your company goes green really depends on your type of company. Even in small ways any company can creatively incorporate their new green status into their brand image.

As you take your first steps, don’t get discouraged by entire green companies. Most visibly are food chains like Trader Joe’s and Whole Foods. Big companies can afford to create entire green brands. Clorox recently created a new line of environmentally-friendly products called Green Works. Clorox tells us all about it.

Your company might need to begin with something smaller, like using greener materials such as recycled paper and ink, and letting customers know in a subtle, smart way. Other green materials will be industry specific. Other examples can be as simple as recycling. Choosing to associate with environmentally-conscious companies.

Going green can only hurt your budget, but may help increase your profits. Hopefully, through your efforts, the change in company perceptions, internally and externally (i.e. the brand), will attract and retain more and dedicated customers.

If you are still interested, this guy puts it well.