How Branding Works

Vague or Specific Brands?

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Tue, 12 May 2009 15:35:00 +0000

Within the spectrum of brand definitions, there are two extremes: vague brands and specific brands. Before we look at the implications of each, let's define them.

Specific brand: A brand that defines itself narrowly and with detail. Examples include Starbucks, Ray-Ban, and Kleenex.

Vague brand: A brand that defines itself via characteristics, emotions, and broad strokes. Examples include IBM (the new IBM), National Geographic, and Disney.

The differences between these types of brands go beyond names and logos. A specific brand is limited in its ability to spread beyond a limited category. Ray-Ban, for example, is exclusively sunglasses. Customers would not eat at the Ray-Ban Restaurant or buy Ray-Ban shoes. A vague brand is the opposite--a brand that can transcend categories and work across many channels. National Geographic has a television channel, a magazine, guided tours, retails shops, and many other conduits for its brand.

Each also has benefits and drawbacks. A specific brand is much simpler to establish and manage. Since it is highly focused, the messages and all other elements are easier to control within a narrow category. The drawback is that the brand is limited in terms of expansion. It becomes very difficult to spread a narrow brand.

When dealing with a vague brand, there is a huge amount of potential and variety. Like with Disney, a strong vague brand can extend from hotels to consumer products to consulting. The drawbacks here involve intense monitoring and management of the brand. A wide variety of goods and services means managing multiple messages, approaches, and styles that all have to fall under one overall brand umbrella. The cost of this management is much higher than a specific brand, but so is the potential.

As you develop your brand, try to think into the future to where you want to take it. I am not suggesting that you start off with a hard-to-control vague brand, but with proper planning, your move to a broader brand will be much simpler than if you try to do so with a specific brand.

Branding Help for the Retail Sector

noreply@blogger.com (matthew langley) — Tue, 05 May 2009 21:04:00 +0000

I don't believe that this will come over as overly snarky, however I do believe that these kind of common sense ideas will make everyone's retail experience better. If you own a retail store or chain, it will make your retail brand experience stronger, richer and more rewarding.

On another note, I don't think these ideas are too "boutiquey" for big box retail, in fact big box retail might want to read this post twice.

Attitude: Make sure you don't have one that offends. I'd rather see a big smile than to made to feel like I'm thankful for being able to shop in the staff's presence...

Good Music: Not Muzak. Not what my dad calls hippedy-hop. Renovation Hardware does a great job of this with their music, as does Victoria's Secret. What I recommend is something that reflects the brand and invites a variety of customers, not just your selected profile, to stay longer, enjoy your store, and not get bored. One never knows when your mom may want to buy the latest sneakers and may even buy several pairs if she enjoys the store environment, music included. There are always songs from each genre that have a wider appeal--it just takes a little bit of research.

Nice Packaging: A well done shopping bag is one of the best tools you can employ in the retail environment. You have the opportunity for each customer to walk around displaying your logo, so you may as well put it on a great-looking bag. Even better, on the higher end, when tissue paper and a box is included in the packaging, it looks great! Yes, it costs 4 cents per purchase and yes, it is remembered by everyone who ever sees your packaging. You want to make more from customers? this is a great way to start.

Attention to detail. I don't really need to explain, do I?

Last, Service minded, smartly dressed, and appropriately enthusiastic staff: Work on this aspect of your brand until you can't get any better, then make sure it stays that way. Your customer service representatives are your brand embassadors. They convey the experience of your brand, and what is discussed by your customers after they leave. How often do they talk about your logo or your lighting? Not very often. Thus, this aspect of your brand experience deserves considerable attention.

If you can get these five things right, it will lead the way for even more branding details to fall right into place.

Branding the Current Economy

noreply@blogger.com (Catherine M. Shaw) — Fri, 01 May 2009 17:39:00 +0000

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:

new economy
economic downturn
Obamanomics (cousin to Reaganomics?)
recession
good depression
Obama recession
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.

Branding Readability

noreply@blogger.com (Catherine M. Shaw) — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:25:00 +0000

To many, the visual aspects of a brand--a brand identity, or style--is what is thought of when the word brand is mentioned. With this in mind, it is interesting how often designers create identities that are unreadable. Now, I don't mean that the brand is unreadable due to poor grammar! Rather, this is due to strictly visual reasons, the sort that designers should be aware of as professionals. It is amazing how often this happens. Let's visit a few reasons identities are unreadable:

1. Font. There is a reason why Helvetica is probably the most used typeface--it is easily read. It can be reduced to a teeny tiny size and is still readable. Some of us are sick of Helvetica, and seek alternatives, and get into trouble. It is important to select a font that is truly readable at a distance. Ask someone that wears glasses to try to read it--is it overly difficult for them at a large size? Sometimes, designers argue: "This design isn't for older people anyway!" I wonder what those older people do when they can't read the packaging on a gift they want to buy for their neice or grand-daughter?...they have the onerous task of delaying their purchase due to their inability to read the text. How is that a good introduction to that product and brand? It is not good, yet remains in the hands of designers making type decisions.

2. Color. Some colors are difficult to read at any size. Try yellow or some shades of orange. for example. Light blue falls in this category too. The background color complicates matters. There is nothing like red text on a blue background--a visually vibrating mess of a combination.

The essential thing to remember with color is to make selections that are appropriate for the size and background where it appears. The best way to check is to print out a copy--on your computer monitor, it will probably be more defined and easier to read.

3. Location. Sometimes the items identifying a brand are located in a strange place or on a complicated pattern making it unreadable because the reader can't find it! Use conventional places to use text in packaging, among other design peices. There are other opportunities for creativity. If you are using photographs, illustrations, or patterned backgrounds, thoroughly test your design to make sure the text is easily read.

Cafe Bustello's Hipster Gamble

noreply@blogger.com (matthew langley) — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:46:00 +0000

In the New York Times this Sunday is an article on Cafe Bustello coffee. This brand’s approach to growth is interesting in that they are approaching a non-traditional market base. Cafe Bustello is experiencing a growth spurt, with many good reasons for this growth. Cafe Bustello is quickly becoming a "Hipster Brand”--meaning that it is being marketed to the affluent and style leaders of the Millennial Generation. We have seen this before from a number of brands: Carthart Clothing, Pabst Blue Ribbon Beer and Hush Puppies to name a few.

Hush Puppies went through a short period of similar growth. This is just enough to bamboozle your marketing and sales projections before the next idea (or fad) is claimed by another company!

The biggest problem for brand growth due to a “hip factor” is that it usually does not match nor extend the core customer base. It begs questions: Do I chase the new audience and hope it stays with the brand long enough to add to the current core customers?...Do I spend money for ads intended to enhance the brand for these new customers, knowing that the current customer base will probably not see these ads or be influenced by them? These are tough decisions, but in Cafe Bustello's case they can't really do either…because a large part of the new target is really the children of the current core customer base!

Advantages for Cafe Bustello's brand are:

A loved Cuban/American Brand
Available in stores in the urban centers of the Cuban community
Reasonably priced
Unique taste
At the moment, Cuban coffee is a fresher story than Columbian coffee)
Notoriously under-marketed to the mainstream.

Disadvantages of the brand include:

Approaching a new audience that is notoriously fickle
If marketed as a premium product at a new price point, this will quickly alienate the current core
A lack of funds and market share to compete against the global players in the international and U.S. market
As a result, Cafe Bustello may be left with an alienated core customer base.

Cafe Bustello is taking a smart approach to this particular dilemma by segmenting their audience into two groups. They are introducing new products that come prepackaged (not unlike the Starbucks "Mocha" and "Doubleshot" products") and are only marketing these towards the youth market. The original coffee is being marketed in the traditional way but with a bit of a youthful twist. This keeps the current customer base and also reaches deeper in the Cuban community with a focus on community music and artists. Hopefully this grow their brand awareness and lead to enhanced sales.

The hipsters don’t always drink what grandma drank! Thus, this approach strikes a strong mix with the senior customer base, yet potentially may gain a massive, new, affluent young base. This will be a brand worth watching.

Showering Skies

noreply@blogger.com (Catherine M. Shaw) — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:40:00 +0000

One of the best ways to make your brand work is to harness what are called key differentiators from your competitors. If you are successful at this, customers will choose your products or services because your company provides something the others do not. In addition, these differences may be geared towards specific groups of people, called target markets.

A new company that is doing the differentiation dance well these days is Emirates, one of the fastest growing airlines in the world. Unlike other airlines, it has been profitable for over 20 years! If you are an investor, that is indeed a difference from airlines here in the States. Another difference is the level of luxury provided to first class guests: cabins like mini hotel rooms, complete with showers.

Overgreening

noreply@blogger.com (Catherine M. Shaw) — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:19:00 +0000

“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

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:20:00 +0000

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:

Can McDonald's actually make a big enough splash with green activities that their efforts will actually mean something?
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

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 13:46:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:59:00 +0000

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:

The value of the salaries of non-engaged staff during the time of the meeting
The lost contributions of non-engaged staff to the group effort
The opportunity cost of staff accomplishments had they not even attended the meeting
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"

noreply@blogger.com (Catherine M. Shaw) — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:37:00 +0000

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.

Our Comments on NPR's Marketplace

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:33:00 +0000

Yesterday was another exciting day for HBW!

We were contacted by American Public Media/NPR's Marketplace Morning Edition to comment on branding during a recession and specifically about Starbucks. They found our humble blog while searching for "recession brands" and decided to get in touch.

You can hear our comments on their site. Our portion begins at 2:35.

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

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:13:00 +0000

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!

Branding During a Recession

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:48:00 +0000

When times are tough, marketing and communications usually experience the first cuts. Why? I really don't know. If anything, an organization should market more, but this is something you'd hear from practically any marketing professional and this is not my point. Sometimes branding exercises must still move forward, despite cutbacks and market conditions. How can an organization spend a little but get a lot?

There are some basic elements to a brand that, if leveraged properly, will get you far without undertaking a full-blown development project:

Logo: At the very least, a logo that is a simple word treatment--graphics are not necessary, but something to use as your "stamp" is.
Color palette/strategy: A basic color strategy is sometimes all a brand needs to help it stay consistent throughout its use.
Message: Without a message crafted towards the target audience, a brand lacks direction and power.
Image strategy: At some point, imagery (photos, illustrations, etc.) will come into play, so having a strategy, however basic, will help to maintain consistency.

A good way to save money is to hire someone to help you develop these and work with them and contribute as much as you are able. I know it sounds counter-intuitive to save money by paying someone, but often a professional branding expert can help you move through this exercise much quicker than on your own. Having the same person/agency work on everything is another good way to cut costs--packaging development almost always saves time and money.

Everything on top of these basic items can either be developed in-house or on an as-needed basis when funds become available. You will be surprised at what you can accomplish with this small toolbox of brand elements. Much like the 8-pack of Crayola crayons, it's all about how you use them that determines your result.

Salon's Brand Graveyard

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:07:00 +0000

Salon.com, an article amalgamating site, recently launched a really interesting new blog called the Brand Graveyard. Each entry is the tale of a recently deceased, major brand. Recent entries include Circuit City, Fortunoff, and the still-warm-corpse of the Rocky Mountain News. These articles are terribly interesting and showcase just how easily the mighty can fall.

As a corollary to this, there is a firm called River West Brands in Chicago that buys dead brands and gives them new life. A profile on them can be found here.

Even dead brands still retain value. Their equity continues to live from beyond the grave!

Worldwide Feed is Now Live

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 18:07:00 +0000

If you haven't clicked on the Worldwide Feed on the right-hand side of the blog, then you haven't seen our "mashup" of Google Maps, blogs, and Flickr. We've finally launched this feature in its final version and I highly encourage you to explore it.

Basically, the Worldwide Feed is a global map of branding-related articles from all over the Internet. Check it out!

For Most, "Rebranding" is a Misnomer

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:41:00 +0000

A lot of people hire my agency for rebranding. They walk in and state that their current brand is too old; it must be updated! Truthfully, the process behind branding and rebranding is nearly identical. The reason for this is that for 95% of organizations, the work that we do is a realignment of the brand.

A true rebranding is much more than updated visuals and messages (any faithful reader of this blog knows that!). To really rebrand your organization, there must be a change in the organizational culture that fundamentally affects the way you conduct your business. There is a reason for this--something I've learned in my years as a brand consultant.

When one develops or introduces a brand to an organization, it is completely ineffective to force a core brand attribute that isn't already present in the organization. What I mean is that while developing a brand, more often then not, we are bringing to the surface key differentiators that already exist within the organization. For example, if your organization is, at heart, a stern, calculating, profit-driven machine, then a whimsical and playful brand is going to a major problem. When we brand, we are not necessarily creating anything new, just shining a spotlight on what was already there, perhaps hidden. [Please keep in mind that true rebranding efforts do exist. These are often challenging, well-planned, and organization-wide executions.]

It is natural for an organization to see the need for a realignment once in a while. Culture and operations drift and so an update has to happen to keep communications fresh. I suppose the truth about branding is that whatever your brand is, it already exists, but it might be buried. You just need someone to help you dig it out and let it shine.

The Branding Werewolf Approaches!

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:16:00 +0000

Look out! Oh--that's right. There is no 'branding werewolf.' What a silly idea, right? Well if there's no such thing, then why are businesses and nonprofits always looking for a silver bullet to slay it?

The silver bullet, in this case, is that perfect logo, name, or other element that makes you say "Wow! That's it!" when you see it. Many people expect this to happen during a brand's development and often use it as a litmus test for their final decisions. While a 'wow' factor is a great phenomenon to come across, it is unfortunately an unrealistic expectation and often inhibiting to the process.

What constitutes the 'wow' factor is different for every person because it is based on personal opinion. Your goal in brand development is not to create something that knocks your or your boss' socks off, but rather to create something that is competent and sends the correct message to your target audience. Also, keep in mind that it is rare for a single brand element to stand on its own. Logos, names, colors, messages - everything - are almost always within some sort of context, existing within a cohesive brand system where each component supports another. There is no need for each portion to be immaculate on its own.

The reality is that we all have to learn to accept something that competantly gets the job done. For many, it is difficult to sign off on something that doesn't feel like the surefire, 100% solution, but those people must remind themselves that any weakness in one area will be compensated by the strength of another. It is the beauty of a cohesive system.

Link: 3 Keys to Successful Branding for Small Business

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:36:00 +0000

Normally I'd provide commentary, but this article pretty much covers everything I have to say: http://brandingmatters.net/3-keys-to-succesful-branding-for-small-business/

This is a short, sweet, and excellent synopsis of how to develop a brand at a practical, small-business level. Not everyone has the resources of a multinational corporation and for most of us market research is just a pipe dream. The keys presented in this article really are the main goals to developing a successful brand. Couldn't have said it better myself!

Sales and Support Come Together

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:47:00 +0000

Sales reps are common in many industries. It's a great tactic - brand ambassadors travel to client or customer sites, take orders, provide service, and handle most of the marketing. I think the most important aspect of the rep/customer relationship is that the same person that sells the product is the same one that provides the service and support. It's a consistency within the relationship that reinforces trust. So why don't we see this with other business models?

I recently met with an emerging telecom. Their tech support people are also the same ones that handle the majority of the inside sales. This got me thinking--what if the tech support people also handled external sales? I know that there are some time management issues at hand, but for the sake of argument, let's explore the benefits of this arrangement.

Imagine if the same person that came to sell you an expensive telecom system was also the person who oversaw the installation, gave you his/her cell and home number so you could contact them during off hours, and also was the same person who gave you the tech support answers you may seek. This is a strong, consistent relationship. No longer is the customer passed off between departments with a new contact each time. I'd be willing to bet that this customer would keep their business with this company longer than average.

Maybe there is a place for this type of setup in more organizations. You can never underestimate the power of consistency and relationships.

Battle of the Brands

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:22:00 +0000

Whether you, your child, or your friends play video games (or not), it's probably safe to assume you've heard about the music-simulation phenomenon that has swept the electronic entertainment sector and become the big blockbuster sellers at the holidays. It began with Guitar Hero (with a single guitar), which led to a sequel, which led to Rock Band (the 4-instrument simluation), which all culminated in 2008's Guitar Hero World Tour (4th installment) and Rock Band 2--both full 4-instrument simulations.

Now that you know the history, let's talk about the product. At this point, the Rock Band and Guitar Hero franchises have become nearly identical products. They each feature singing, lead guitar, bass guitar, and drums. The mechanics of how one plays are nearly identical. Even the song lists, at this point, have a lot of crossover. Granted, there are some superficial differences including Guitar Hero's "GH Tunes" feature, but for the most part, we're talking about Coke vs. Pepsi (if you're wondering, the price points are about the same too).

Consider this, now: NPD's 2008 figures show that the recent Guitar Hero offering outsold Rock Band 2 by a factor of 2:1 (1.7 million vs. 3.4 million units). With all other factors equalized, it is Guitar Hero's strength of branding that has propelled it to the number 1 position. The franchise has existed longer, has bigger and stronger partnerships (for example, its use of celebrities), and a huge and dedicated community.

As a shining example of how branding can make the difference with comparable competition, this instance has some takeaways we can all use against our competition. In this case, volume of advertising, superiority of product, merchandizing, and pricing do not factor into the upper hand. Rather, we see a strong leverage of external forces, consistent messaging across media and partners, and everlasting reinforcement of the core brand promise. Relentlessly pursuing this strategy has paid off in the face of competition. A good lesson for us all.

Perk Up in the New Year

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:45:00 +0000

If you haven't begun to feel the pinch of the current economy in your business or organization yet, you're either extremely fortunate or about to get a nasty surprise. For the rest of us who have seen prices go up and new business ebb, cost-cutting is an inevitable tactic to employ so we can bear the economic strain. A particularly painful, yet effective, area to cut costs is employee perks and benefits. However, there is opportunity here (yes, BRAND opportunity).

If you must remove perks and benefits from your employee package, it softens the blow to replace them with other, lower-cost perks. These can also be brand-building tools, if carefully selected; the types of perks you offer your employees say a lot about a company, its values, and its brand. While none of these are going to be a good replacement for health insurance or 401k matching, they could soften the blow of some cutbacks:

Creative Brand

Impromptu field trips

Free beer in the office

Time off for creative projects/hobbies.

High-end Brand

Consulting and planning services

Concierge services

In-office massages.

Nurturing Brand

Daycare/on-site lactation room or emergency child allowances

Holiday turkeys/hams

Time off for volunteer work.

Don't let these examples limit you--getting creative with perks is what makes them stand out. For example, RedPeg Marketing of Alexandria, VA sometimes awards its employees their bonuses with suitcases full of cash instead of checks. It doesn't cost any more, but the impact is huge. Use these to promote your business as a place that cares about its employees but, more importantly, lives the brand that it promotes.

Sources:
Jacobson, David. Extreme Extras. April, 2006. Money.
Penttila, Chris. Employee Benefits in Today's Economy. January, 2009. Entrepeneur.
Create loyal employees with creative benefits and unique perks

Update: Will Apple's Brand Become Its Downfall?

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 17:08:00 +0000

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.

"Judo Brand Marketing"

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:25:00 +0000

Monday's Wall Street Journal had a very interesting article written by Professor Ross Petty of Babson University (a fine university located in the berg of my alma mater in Waltham, MA). He's coined a term called "Judo brand marketing," taken from the core philosophies of Judo which involve using an opponent's size and momentum to one's advantage. The marketing ramifications are very similar: using a larger, more established brand to propel your own. Dr. Petty goes on to discuss the ways that this can be accomplished and how to stay on the right side of the law when doing so.

Some of the techniques involve using logos and brand marks alongside your own, copycat branding (see my article on Me-Too Brands), and compatible and comparative marketing, among others. All of this is very interesting and are, frankly, fiendishly clever marketing tactics. At the same time, however, these are very dangerous--something Dr. Petty states outright.

If you are going to make use of someone else's brand in your own marketing, you're treading in some very dangerous waters. The obvious pitfalls include copyright infringement and misuse. Other dangers include tying your own brand to something that you cannot control. What if the other firm goes under? Or has some PR nightmare descend on them? All of these are risks one assumes when implementing these tactics. But, like any other strategy, the risks are commensurate with the potential rewards.

Minimum Pricing: Oligopoly or Brand Maintenance?

noreply@blogger.com (Harris Eisenberg) — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:20:00 +0000

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?