In the spirit of New York Times Magazine’s annual Year in Ideas, I’ve compiled an alphabetical digest of ideas, from A to Z, that I wrote, spoke, and passed along over the past 12 months.  The following are excerpts — the original pieces linked. 

By assembling this collection of preoccupations, provocations, and predilections, I realize how random my ramblings may seem at times – but I hope they’ve been helpful to you in some way.  So here we go:

All You Need Is Love – Love is a driver of business — when businesses are grounded in love and when leaders love the people around them, the result is growth and goodness and success and strength. (my op-ed published by the Greenville News)

Belief Repositories – “Belief repositories are fueled by hard evidence but can lead marketing teams to make investments where no experiment or marketing mix model has yet been run.” (Joel Rubinson in a guest post on my blog)

Culture Isn’t Enough — A vital, vibrant culture unifies, aligns, focuses, motivates, and propels.  But it is not enough to produce a profitable business.  Culture must be linked to, and pursued with the same rigor and vigor as, the customer experience. (blogpost)

Decrease Your Deal-Dependence with Differentiation — Differentiation is really the best way for all businesses to address consumers’ new value mindset. (my bylined article published by Franchise Update Media)

Embrace (and Enforce) an Inspiration Policy –  Clarify why inspiration is important to the company, and how people will be supported and encouraged to develop it.  (one of the top10 things i’m going to use from Andy Stefanovich’s book, “Look at More Stuff”)

Failure Is a Gift – “I think of my failures as a gift. Unless you view them that way, you won’t learn from failure, you won’t get better.” (from my three-part recap of Harvard Business Review’s Failure Issue which quoted former P&G CEO A.G. Lafley)

Grow As Slowly As You Can — Growing slowly allows you to make sure you have the right people and allows you to personally foster your culture. (learned from talk by Jason Fried, CEO of 37signals)

Health Is In the Eye of the Beholder –  Health means different things to different people — and that variation is actually good news for restaurateurs. (my bylined article published by SmartBrief for Restaurants)

Innovate Around the Person, Not the Technology — The temptation with any development in technology is to use the new capability as the starting point for innovation.  But this often leads to developments which fall short of or are off base from what end users want and need. (my guest post on CEA’s Digital Dialogue)

Just Because… “Food is served fast, doesn’t mean it has to be the typical fast food experience” – (from my recap of the reality TV show, America’s Next Great Restaurant, quoting Steve Ells, founder of Chipotle)

Kodak Tries to Bring Its Digital Revival into Focus — Kodak is not giving the consumer a reason to purchase. I don’t know that a good brand halo helps if you don’t have the ability to convert it into sales. (my POV quoted in Bloomberg Business Week)

Less Is More — “Trader Joe’s may offer customers less choice. However, in terms of ease of choosing and relevance of choice, it is definitely where less choice is more.” (C.B. Whittemore in guest post on my blog)

Modern Brand Names — Brand names reflect the business climates they’re developed in — modern brand names need to tap into the differentiating power of values and personality. (blogpost)

Not 360 Degree Marketing – “The goal shouldn’t be 360 degree marketing.  Find 10-20 degrees that give the most leverage.” (advice from Tim Maleeny, Ogilvy’s Director of Planning)

On-Stage Leadership – “Leaders are always on stage… it’s a metaphor [to explain] role modeling is the key element. They’re always in the spotlight.” (the philosophy behind Sharp Healthcare’s leadership training, as explained by Director Mark Tomaszewicz)

Progressive Brands Should Turn Their Backs on Sustainability – “Brands have a far more important – a far more exciting – role to play in helping us all move towards becoming more sustainable in our lifestyles.” (POV of Guy Champniss, Managing Director of Meltwater Consulting, as relayed in my blogpost)

Quality… of engagement is a better measure of brand strength than quantity of followers (from my piece “Leveraging ‘Like” Into Loyalty” published by Franchise Media Update)

Remarkable Retail — What makes a retail store an experience so compelling that customers will tell others about it?  Interactivity, a personal and local feel, and an editorial voice. (my e-newsletter recapping a series of Brand Experience Briefs)

Storytelling – “If you’re curating really excellent thought-provoking content, and then sparking conversations around that content, you can build that kind of equity…so that people naturally develop a relationship with you.”(recommendation from Sam Rosen, Creative Director and Co-founder of ThoughtLead)

Take a Crap – I told a CEO to “take a crap” – that is, go sit on the toilet in her restaurants — so she could see how much the details of the customer experience get overlooked.  (blogpost)

Use Your Fear – Survivors aren’t fearless.  They use fear:  they turn it into anger and focus. (one of many business leadership lessons from the book, “Deep Survival” as relayed in my presentation)

Visibility – A logo must achieve impact and contact. The former is about visibility, stating what the brand is and stands for; the latter connects the brand to the customer, making a personal, emotional connection. (my Brand New Perspectives column in QSR Magazine.)

Wallets…are becoming as unnecessary as watches.  Smart phones are easier to use, provide more functionality, and offer greater security.  (blogpost)

X…as in TEDx San Diego – spoken word artist Sekou Andrews opened this year’s event with an inspiring declaration:  ”When our ‘ready’ is ‘able,’ our will be done.” (from my slideshow recap)

You Need More Competition — More competition is a good thing because it generates increased demand, gives customers confidence, builds up infrastructure, and helps you get better. (my bylined article published by SmartBrief on Leadership)

Zappos — CEO Tony Hsieh says, “Every employee can affect your company’s brand.  Not just the front-line employees that are paid to talk to your customers.” (quoted in my speaker video)

Thank you for following, reading, re-tweeting, liking, commenting, and sharing me and my work this year!  See you in 2012 for another year of ideas!

My curiosity was piqued by the headline of a recent article comparing Siri, the personal assistant application on new iPhones, to Speaktoit, currently available on Android phones – but not because I wanted to understand the differences between the apps.  I was struck by how different the two names are – Siri:  short, cute, a person’s name, vs. Speaktoit:  longer, cumbersome, a function.

I got to thinking about what makes a brand name effective and how that’s changed over time.  As I’ve dug into the trends, I’ve discovered how brand names reflect the business climates they’re developed in – and how understanding the relationship between the two can help people develop effective brand names in these modern times.

In the past, brand names have served as labels for companies, products, or services.  The role of name-as-label is description and the purpose is primarily to instill confidence.  That’s why founders’ names (e.g., Disney, McDonald’s, Hewlett-Packard) and functional names (e.g., Burger King, IBM, Weight Watchers) have been popular.  The names tell people either what the company/product/service is, or what it does, or who’s behind it.  Names as labels are about consumer risk-reduction.

But in today’s marketplace, it seems brand names need to do more than that.  Modern names need to stand out, draw people in, and inspire their imaginations.  These days the most effective brand names don’t serve as labels – they’re more like identities.  They declare instead of describe, convey personality instead of confidence.  That’s why we see names like Jack for radio stations, Freebirds for restaurants, and Zappos for e-tailers.  These names as identities are about consumer attraction.

Which brings me back to Siri vs. Speaktoit.  The name Siri is derived from the SRI International Artificial Intelligence Center which developed the technology that powers the application.  Fortunately the founders were prescient enough to understand the technology’s potential and adapted the center’s name into woman’s name instead of forming it as an acronym.  An actual person’s name makes the application seem personal and approachable — the precise attributes the technology needs to attract people and generate trial.

The name Speaktoit Assistant, however, seems pedantic.  While the name clearly describes the technology, its descriptive nature genericizes the product.  It emphasizes what the user can do vs. suggests how the user will feel.  The potential of the technology seems more limited with a functional name and the name almost begs for copycats (I’m sure plans for Talktome, SayIt, and JustSpeak are already in the works.)

And that’s really the point.  An effective brand name conveys – or at least evokes – differentiation.  And while differentiation has long been an important part of brand-building, in most categories today, differentiation is achieved less with features and functions and more through values and personality.  The former are easily and quickly copied and commoditized; the latter, less so.  Modern brand names need to tap into the differentiating power of values and personality.

An effective brand name also supports the primary marketing task, so modern brand names should facilitate the marketing task of today’s market.  Companies have and always will need to assure customers of the brand quality in order to reduce the perceived risks of purchase – but now that is achieved less by promotion and more by identification.  Modern consumers trust brands that demonstrate interest in them and the things they care about – they’re attracted by the sense of affinity.  So marketers should select names that facilitate this connection through identity.

There are two other factors to consider. First, salience. With the growing number of competitors and the shrinking size of screens – not to mention attention spans – the need for salient brand names is greater now than ever before.  Short, pithy names stand out quickly.

Second, if ICANN’s push to add as many as 1,000 new top-level domains is accepted (and it’s looking increasingly like it will), descriptive names will become even less important.  No longer will a company need to spell out that it’s an eating establishment if it can use the “.restaurant”  or “.eat” domain.  So marketers will enjoy more freedom when selecting modern brand names.

Brand names are an interesting sign of the times.  And it’s clear, it’s a brand new world out there (pun intended.)

related posts:

• a tale of two re-brands: syfy and starbucks
• losing more than a brand name
• fundamentals of brand naming

In a recent post, I described a meeting I led for one of my clients that needed to engage its senior leadership with its brand. And I mentioned that I had started the meeting with a cheeky “What Can Brands Learn from Lady Gaga?” video.

Although I can’t show the video here, I did want to share with you the points from it, since I really do believe the Lady has a lot to teach us about brand-building. And the success she’s achieved in such a short time is admirable for anybody – and any organization – that’s looking for tangible results:

• won five Grammy awards
• 1st album “Fame” hit #1 on record charts in 6 countries
• named Billboard Artist of the Year in 2010
• on Time Magazine’s list of the 100 Most Influential People
• is #7 on Forbes’ list of Most Powerful Women
• sold over 22 million albums and 69 million singles worldwide
• grossed $170 million on 137 songs in 22 countries in 1 year

Those are impressive numbers on the key metrics that matter for someone like Lady Gaga. How did she build such a powerful brand? Here are the top 5 lessons we can learn from the Queen of the Little Monsters:

#1. define a clear identity

“Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta” just wasn’t who Lady Gaga aspired to be, so she changed her name and assumed a new identity:
• a change agent
• a diva
• pop culture
• creative
• outré (definition: unusual and startling)

Companies need to clearly define their brand identity. While visual image is certainly an important piece of this (Lady Gaga wouldn’t be Lady Gaga without her unique looks), identity is much more than just a logo or look and feel. Brands must be clear about what they stand for – the values and attributes they want to be known for.

Companies need to ensure the brand identity is understood, embraced, and interpreted and reinforced properly by all internal stakeholders so that it is clear to the outside world. This is particularly important in today’s social media-dominant world where if you don’t define your identity, someone else will.

#2. be different

If there’s one thing Lady Gaga is, it’s different. She stands out from the sea of female pop artist sameness by looking, acting, performing, writing, and being different. “You have to be unique, and different, and shine in your own way,” she explains.

Differentiation is critical to brand-building as well. It’s important because our brains are hard-wired to notice differences. So differentiation enables you to stand out and get noticed – not a small feat in the today’s over-crowded marketplace.

More than that, though, differentiation also helps create brand preference by helping customers understand their options and giving them reasons to choose one over the other. And it helps companies charge higher prices. If people perceive an offering as special, they are willing to pay more to get it. Think of how at auctions it’s the one-of-a-kind items that people drive up the price for. Plus, if you offer something completely different from everyone else, customers can’t easily compare it to others and so you can set your own price expectations.

#3. tell your story by creating an experience

Lady Gaga is an entertainer, so she knows how to create a breakthrough experience that really brings to life who she is and what she wants to say.

Think about the 2011 Grammys. She was paraded through the streets and down the red carpet in an egg carried by staffers in revealing eggshell-like costumes. On stage, the egg hatched and Lady Gaga emerged, launching into a spectacular version of Born This Way. At one point, she played on a dramatic organ with disembodied heads balanced on top and, at the end her dancers stripped off their latex outfits. Talk about an experience!

Most companies, of course, wouldn’t want – or need – to create such a spectacle, but they do need to create customer experiences that stand out and send a message. Brand experiences should tell a story, appeal to the senses, and inspire — from start to finish. And, details matter (you can bet every moment of Lady Gaga’s time at the Grammy’s was choreographed.)

#4. stand for something bigger than yourself

The gospel according to Lady Gaga goes something like this, “I want women — and men — to feel empowered by a deeper and more psychotic part of themselves. The part they’re always trying desperately to hide. I want that to become something that they cherish.”

Or in other words, “To everyone who says this is wrong to feel like this say, ‘I was born this way baby.’”

To her fans, Lady Gaga is more than a singer or performer. She is hope, love, inspiration, and empowerment. That’s why she’s able to create such a powerful connection with them.

Companies can develop powerful connections with their customers as well. For some, this is done by connecting the core values of the brand with customers’ core values. For others, it’s about calling people to a higher purpose to which the company and its customers aspire. The point is to recognize that, as humans, we all seek meaning in our lives.

#5. foster a community

Community is what creates impact for brands and for Lady Gaga.

Lady Gaga calls her community her “Little Monsters.” They love it; they love her. She’s written a manifesto and created an app for them.

She also uses different tools to engage, listen to, share with, and relate to them: Twitter (12.2 million followers), Facebook (42 million likes), YouTube (150 million views), etc. Her website features a wiki-style blog, Gagapedia, which features nearly 2,000 pages of content she and her Little Monsters have created.

These tools and tactics are powerful brand-builders. They help develop relationships that seem exclusive and personal, while fueling buzz and broad awareness. What company wouldn’t want to have a passionate community of supporters and evangelizers?!

To riff on her song title, Lady Gaga teaches us about brand romance!

related post:

• kicking off a brand journey

NBC’s new reality show, America’s Next Great Restaurant, aired again last night — contestants had to pick a chef, design a logo, and feed 1,000 people as a “proof of concept.”   Here’s my recap and takeaways for all entrepreneurs:

DLYohn America’s Next Great Restaurant 03.13.11 Episode 2 Recap from Denise Lee Yohn on Vimeo.

Thanks to my column-writing gig with QSR Magazine, I recently got an insiders’ look at a remarkable company, Garden Fresh Restaurant Corp.  You probably know them as Souplantation, the 110+ unit salad and soup buffet concept, or Sweet Tomatoes, the name they operate under outside of Southern California.

I’ve always loved their restaurant concept and so I appreciated the opportunity to take a look behind the curtain.   What I found was a fun team, a smart business approach, and some fresh takeaways for all companies:

1. When it comes to corporate personnel, don’t underestimate the value of front line experience.

Many of the people on the corporate staff at Garden Fresh started their careers on the company’s restaurant floors.  Co-president Ken Keane got his start as a Souplantation restaurant manager, for example, while a couple of restaurant dishwashers worked their way up to roles as the company’s Culinary Director and Vice President of Business Development.

Not only does such a track record produce a deep passion for the brand and the distinct wisdom which results from longevity with the company, but also an intuitive understanding of what customers want and a careful eye toward in-restaurant execution to shape every decision.  The organization seems nimbler and more focused because it’s run by former front-line employees.

2. Understand the difference between a product and a brand.

The company just introduced a new restaurant concept (read a great write-up about Souplantation Express by my QSR Magazine editor Sam Oches.)  The way the company developed the concept reflects their understanding of the difference between a brand idea and a product offering.

The new concept, in which a customer points to the ingredients he or she wants while an employee builds the selections into a salad, is a departure from the signature all-you-can-eat buffet set-up of the chain.   Souplantation Express was inspired by the many you-pick-we-make salad QSRs which have grown in popularity in New York City over the last several years and are now popping up everywhere.  But as CEO Michael Mack explains, “Salads are products; other restaurants don’t have a concept.”

The company is using Souplantation Express to reinforce – and to grow – the company’s brand identity in “choice.”  To that end, they offer over 30 salad ingredients to choose from as well as five soup selections.  Plus customers are not limited to a certain number of ingredients and they’re not charged by the weight of the completed salad, common practices among most salad restaurants.  All of these factors increase operational complexity and are likely to wreak havoc on food costs, but the company believes delivering their brand identity, not simply a product, will make the business a success.

3. Use social media as a business tool.

The way CEO Mack explains it, social media is a like a “mirror image.”  It reveals what you really are, how you’re really perceived – and the company embraces that sometimes harsh reality.

Garden Fresh doesn’t simply use social media as a way to interact with guests – although it does have over 15,000 followers on Twitter (three times as many as Burger King, which has 10 times the number of units), and more impressively the company follows over 15,000 people (for most QSRs, the number of followers dwarfs the number of people they follow.)

The folks at Garden Fresh see value in using social media to round out their other market research efforts and to increase transparency within the company and with the outside world. Social media enables the company to “get more well-rounded information, it puts everyone on their best behavior, and it ensures everyone has the same information.”

—

It’s difficult to determine the impact of these principles on business growth and the bottom line since Garden Fresh is a private company.  But, chain-wide sales have been reported at $300MM, which translates into a $2.6MM+ PSA (Panera Bread’s is around $2.1MM).  They haven’t closed any stores recently and in early 2009 they reported annual same stores sales had increased 3.2%, which is pretty impressive given the chain’s concentration in California, a state hit hard by the recession.

So from what I can tell, Garden Fresh’s approach is, well, fresh, and worth learning from.

other impressive companies:

• herman miller, a business lab disguised as a furniture company
• six best practices in retail
• love the moosejaw madness

A year and a half ago, I wrote “Don’t Stop Retailin’, Blockbuster,” an encouraging post to the then-struggling video rental chain.  Blockbuster had just hired a new advertising agency and CEO Jim Keyes was mapping out his digital media-heavy plan for re-invigorating the business. I offered a different perspective saying, “While Blockbuster’s Keyes may want to evolve the business from a video-rental chain to a full-service media delivery company, I would recommend he put more focus on reinvigorating Blockbuster as a retail brand” — and I offered three suggestions for doing so.

Last week’s news of the chain’s bankruptcy filing prompted me to re-visit my post and re-consider the direction I had recommended.  Since Keyes didn’t follow my advice (gosh darn it!), I can’t be blamed for the chain’s current predicament.

But even so, I now realize that my emphasis on the brand’s brick-and-mortar foundation should have been balanced with recommendations for how to shore up new brand creds in the digital space.  Perhaps instead of adapting the name of the classic pop hit “Don’t Stop Believin‘” by 80′s band Journey for the blogpost title, I should have chosen another of the group’s hits, “Anyway You Want It.”

Certainly re-building Blockbuster’s retail business was — and still is — a critical contributor to the company’s survival.  But the fact is — and was — consumers want options.  Blockbuster needs to develop robust digital media capabilities and offer an integrated multi-channel customer experience which gives consumers the choice and flexibility they expect and demand.

No doubt Keyes and his team have been working on this, though.  And they still find themselves squeezed by Netflix in the online and mail space and Coinstar’s Redbox in the retail arena.

So, perhaps there’s a bigger issue at play here.  Perhaps Blockbuster’s challenges aren’t limited to channel and content distribution. Perhaps it isn’t about whether they provide movies in bits or boxes or both.  Perhaps it’s about belief — the core Blockbuster brand belief, that is.

What does Blockbuster believe in? I can’t really say — and that’s a problem.

It’s a problem because without the clarity of purpose that comes from a strong core belief, the company is rudderless.  But don’t take my word for it.  Listen to what Howard Schultz said about his company’s recent turnaround.

He’s quoted in a recent HBR interview saying, “What I stand for is not just to make money; it’s to preserve the integrity of what we have built for 39 years — to look in the mirror and feel like I’ve done something that has meaning and relevancy and is something people are going to respect.  You have to be willing to fight for what you believe in.” (emphasis mine)

Only a short 2 years ago Starbucks was really struggling, and if it hadn’t been for the company’s storehouse of cash, the chain might have been filing for its own bankruptcy.  But Schultz led the company out of its funk largely based on what he believed — and what he knew the Starbucks brand believed.

I don’t mean to suggest that all Keyes has to do is articulate what Blockbuster believes in and and all will be made right.  But I do think that a strong brand core belief could serve as the foundation the business desperately needs.

And I know that if Blockbuster believed that movies ignite the imagination and satisfy the soul, for example, it would have a strong point of differentiation from its competitors who are competing on access and price.

Furthermore, having a clear, compelling passion for being could:

• direct executive decision-making about which elements of the business to start/stop/continue to feed the company’s innovation pipeline as well as people’s passion for movies
• unite all stakeholders, including franchisees, store managers, and employees in delivering an outstanding customer experience that’s all about a passion for movies
• bond the company to customers who share the brand’s passion for movies

Perhaps I wasn’t wrong when I looked to a Journey song to describe the remedy for Blockbuster’s woes — but perhaps I should have left it at “Don’t Stop Believin.’”

related posts:

• don’t stop retailin’, blockbuster
• bankruptcy is a brand event

Eliminating co-pilots; offering standing-only cabins; asking customers to work the baggage conveyor belt – these are the things Michael O’Leary dreams of.  As CEO of Ryanair, O’Leary loves to propose provocative potential developments for his airline.

Does he do it because he’s a rabble-rousing PR machine or because he’s a shrewd businessman – or both?  I don’t know.  But I do know that I both hate his brand and love it at the same time.

The hate part is probably easy to understand.  Between fees for carry-ons, inconvenient airports, and frigid employees (oh and let’s not forget O’Leary’s threat to start charging for using the bathroom), what’s not to hate about Ryanair?  Now, I’m not a travel snob – I fly my share of Southwest flights and stay at budget hotels – but the thought of such a horrendous flying experience is repulsive to me.  So hate the brand, I do.

But, why the love?  Because as a brand person, I appreciate the way O’Leary has built his brand and I think a lot of other companies could learn from the brand’s willingness to buck conventions, its commitment to its target, and its authenticity.

-    It’s clear, O’Leary sees the world differently from most.  In a recent Businessweek profile, he explains, “If you don’t approach air travel with a radical point of view, then you get in the same bloody mindset as all the other morons in this industry:  This is the way it has always been, and this is the way it has to be, so nothing changes.”

He’s challenged every industry convention and in doing so, has developed a unique brand identity and competitive position.  And in the sea of sameness which is the consumer airline industry, Ryanair certainly stands out.

-    Ryanair isn’t for everybody and they’re just fine with it.  The brand targets the cheap travelers whose priority is a low fare — and the company delivers a customer experience appropriate for that target.

The Businessweek piece states, “O’Leary says that for decades, airlines have been mixing up their breeds of passengers – treating cheap budget travelers as though they were corporate tycoons, handling them with a level of courtesy they neither receive anywhere else in their lives nor truly expect.”  So instead Ryanair focuses solely on offering low fares and does so by keeping operating costs to a minimum.

-    Ryanair says what it does and does what it says.  “…The physical process of getting from point A to point B shouldn’t be pleasant, nor enriching,” O’Leary declares.  So the brand doesn’t tell you it will be.

O’Leary’s statements seem like provocations, but at least they’re not platitudes.  Unlike practically every other airline these days, the brand doesn’t overpromise and under-deliver.

So as much as I personally would never willingly fly Ryanair, professionally I admire the brand.  It’s probably one of the best examples of a “lighthouse brand.”

Account planner Adam Morgan introduced the marketing world to the concept of lighthouse brands in his excellent book, Eating the Big Fish:  How Challenger Brands Can Compete Against Brand Leaders.  Although the text was published over 10 years ago, it remains one of the best references for developing and executing brand strategies today.

The book outlines eight “credos” which successful Challenger brands embody – one is “Build a Lighthouse Identity.”  Morgan writes, “Success as a Challenger comes through developing a very clear sense of who or what you are as a brand/business and why – and then projecting that identity intensely, consistently, and saliently to the point where, like a lighthouse, consumers notice you (and know where you stand) even if they’re not looking for you.”

The lighthouse brand concept resonates with me strongly because I’ve seen far too many brands squander their equity as they go chasing after other brands or an elusive audience instead of embracing and celebrating what they are and in doing so attracting customers to them.  Morgan explains that it should be no surprise that consumers find brands which have clearly forged and insistently communicated their identities appealing:  “People are drawn to strong brands.”

Clearly not all people are drawn to all strong brands – but enough people are drawn to make it a business success.

According to Businessweek, Ryanair has turned healthy net profits in 9 of the last 10 years – at a time when the global airline industry collectively lost nearly $50BB.  And when you read how a lighthouse brand works, you begin to see how it’s been able to do so.

“Challengers do not seem to plot their path by the rest of the world,” Morgan explains.  “They are confident enough to invite the world to navigate by them…They have a very clear sense, first and foremost, of who they are, not as a sense of their own external image, but as a sense of their own internal identity…Everything else in the company flows from this – behavior, image, communication, culture.”

Earlier this week I posted some key takeaways from the keynote speakers and panelists at the Southern California Business Growth Conference.  As a panelist on the marketing track, one of the things I said during the “Brand Implementation & Impact: Bring your Brand to Market” session seemed to spark some interest of its own – and so I thought I’d say more about it here.

I referred to political platforms when I explained why I call a brand strategy a “strategic brand platform.”  Just as a political candidate or group has a platform which outlines what they’re advocating, I explained, a brand should have a platform to delineate what it represents.

Specifically I see three similarities between brand platforms and political ones:

1.    a platform outlines what the brand – or candidate – stands for

For example Meg Whitman, who is running for Governor of my fair state, has outlined 3 goals she has for California.  On the platform page of her website she says:

“I am running to reinvigorate California’s economic potential and help employers create two millions jobs by the beginning of 2015. I am running to rid our state government of waste, duplication and inefficiency so we can get control of runaway spending and create long-term fiscal stability.  I am running to fix our failing schools so we can give our children the opportunity to advance up the economic ladder and achieve their fullest potential.”

From these brief statements, we get a clear understanding of what Meg stands for.

In the same way, a brand platform should clearly outline the values and attributes of the brand. A tagline, mantra, or even brand essence serves as a useful tool to summarize and/or communicate the brand strategy, but it’s not the same thing as a rich and thorough brand identity which fleshes out all that the brand stands for.

2.    a platform gives buyers – or voters – reasons why they should choose the brand/candidate

The storied Contract with America which the Republican party created during the 1994 congressional election campaign is another example of a political platform.  In it, the Republicans promised a list of actions to bring on the first day of their majority to floor debate and votes, including
* cutting the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third
* limiting the terms of all U.S. Congressmen and U.S. Senators
* banning the casting of proxy votes in committee
* requiring committee meetings to be open to the public

By outlining these specific plans, the group made a clear case to those who were seeking governmental reform – if you elect our people, you will get these results.

Similarly brands need to outline what customers will get when they buy them. A strategic brand platform should include a brand positioning which states the unique benefit or value the brand delivers to customers.  It shouldn’t necessarily be about specific offerings or value propositions – rather, the platform should articulate the broader, higher level brand value.

3.    a platform explains how the brand – or candidate – differs from others

In the 2008 Presidential campaign, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton sought to differentiate themselves from one another by adopting distinct platforms.

Each used postures (the establishment vs. the challenger and the tested vs. the inexperienced) to denigrate the other. But more importantly, the candidates’ positions on policy and major issues also were points of differentiation.

For example Clinton’s American Health Choices Plan provided a mandatory path to universal health care for all, ensured coverage is not denied because of preexisting conditions, and gave small businesses a tax credit for health care coverage.  Obama’s platform outlined universal health care (although not mandatorily), a reduction in family premiums, and the establishment of a National Health Insurance Exchange to oversee plan fairness and standards and increase competition amongst insurers.

On the campaign trail, these differing plans and the philosophies behind them were hotly debated between the two candidates.

As noted above, the unique value or benefit delivered to customers is an integral element of a strategic brand platform – here the emphasis is on the word unique.  Oftentimes a brand platform might also include a list of key differentiators. The point is to articulate what makes the brand different and better from the other choices the buyer has.

The similarities between brand platforms and political platforms are reinforced by some of the definitions of the word “platform” listed on Dictionary.com including:

- a public statement of the principles, objectives, and policy of a political party, esp. as put forth by the representatives of the party in a convention to nominate candidates for an election
- a body of principles on which a person or group takes a stand in appealing to the public; program
- a set of principles; plan.

I hope this examination has been helpful. I also hope it has led you to an important conclusion about campaigns — political ones and brand ones.  That is, a campaign is only the promotion of a platform – it’s not the platform itself. So when a company is looking to develop or optimize its brand, it should start with the platform first – it should ensure the strategic foundation is right before seeking a creative way to communicate and promote it.

Furthermore, the integrity of the campaign really becomes apparent only after the purchase (or election!)  Hopefully brands have a better track record than most politicians when it comes to doing what they say they will do.

For more of my thoughts on the elements of a strong brand platform, see this post.

Oh and of course I must point out that all of the above examples are used for the purposes of explaining my point, so please don’t try to surmise my political leanings from them.

other posts inspired by politics:

• the brand mavericks
• brands are more than symbols and words

A few weeks ago, in response to some inquiries by colleagues and friends, I wrote about personal branding.

As a reminder, I suggested that a personal brand is a bundle of values and attributes that define:
-  the value that a person delivers to his/her “customers” (business partners, bosses, hiring managers, family members, community, etc.) , and
-  the way that person operates that is the basis of his/her relationships with them

My main point was that, contrary to most of what is said about personal branding these days, brand-building — whether for individuals or brands — depends on increasing the value you deliver and how you do it.  So, your brand is not the perception you want to create; it’s the reality of who you are.  I got some great comments here as well as through email –- thanks for the feedback.

At the time, I promised I’d follow-up with a Part 2 to address what makes a strong personal brand, and so here it is.  Actually I’ve decided to try to do this by applying the 10 criteria from a tool I use to assess the strength of any brand (I originally distributed the tool in one of my newsletters, and then brandchannel.com asked me to expound on it and show that the ways to strengthen your brand depend less on how much, or little, marketing money you have these days.)

I found the tool works pretty well as an assessment of personal brand strength, with a few adaptations and in a different order.  So here we go — a strong personal brand distinguishes itself by:

1. being meaningful – a strong personal brand is relevant and compelling to our customers.  As noted above, when I say “customers,” I mean business partners, bosses, hiring managers, family members, our community, etc.  So having a meaningful personal brand means we offer something of value that these people want.  For example, if we’re applying for a job, we bring the requisite skills, experience, attitude, working style, etc. to do it.   If we don’t, then we shouldn’t be applying for it.
2. being differentiating — a strong personal brand gives us a distinct advantage over others who might be competing for the same job, promotion, attention, or resources.  This isn’t simply about looking different or standing out from the crowd per se.  Lately people have been giving all sorts of job-seeking advice based on how to create a stand-out resume or how to make a memorable impression – while these tactics are important, having a differentiating personal brand is more dependent upon delivering unique value to our customers by being the only person who does what we do the way we do it.
3. being transcendent — a strong personal brand conveys value beyond the specific job or role — e.g., the waitress who genuinely cares whether her guests are satisfied with their meal, the co-worker who always gets the job done regardless of what it takes, the manager who takes personal responsibility for developing and nurturing those around him.  People with strong brands do more than what’s expected of them and inspire others to do the same.
4. adding “business” value — a strong personal brand produces “business” results.  I use quotation marks here because, unlike the brands for which I usually use this criterion, our personal brands aren’t limited to business situations – yet, in all situations, we should be seeking to deliver tangible, measurable results.  Simply put, having a strong personal brand means making a difference.
5. being operationalized — a strong personal brand must be more than a vision of who we want to be — it must be what we do and what we deliver.  Operationalizing a brand involves the deliberate and systematic management of the business around brand – in the same way, operationalizing a personal brand means identifying, prioritizing, and implementing the things we do to deliver our brand values and attributes.
6. being used as a tool — a strong personal brand inspires, informs, and instructs our daily decision-making and actions.  Instead of something we use to promote ourselves, it should be used as a resource we draw upon to drive everything we do – if we were cars, our brand would be our fuel, engine, and GPS all combined into one.
7. being clearly articulated — a strong personal brand is clearly defined and can be easily described.  Before we develop a great “elevator speech” or memorize a sound bite to go along with a firm handshake, we must do the hard work to clearly define what our brand stands for and determine the best way to communicate it.
8. being consistently experienced — a strong personal brand is a consistent one.  That is, we do what we say, and we say what we do.  We all know people who present themselves one way when they first meet someone (on a date, in an interview, etc.) but turn out to a totally different person once you get to know them. Surprises are great for parties, not for relationships.
9. having integrity (this criteria is “believable” in the original tool) — a strong personal brand doesn’t stretch too far or over-promise.  “Know thyself” has proven a worthy discipline since its origins in ancient Greece and it serves people well today as we are all feeling the pressure to do more with less.  Rather than taking on more than we are capable of doing well, or stretching the truth in an effort to make ourselves more attractive, we should act with integrity.
10. being sustainable — a strong personal brand enables us to be successful now and in the future.  Instead of allowing ourselves to be defined by our current circumstances, we should be developing a big enough platform to sustain us beyond our next gig or job.  We should be constantly growing and learning so that we can continue to deliver our value as new positions, technologies, and opportunities open up.

Just as the tough economic climate has caused some business leaders to cut brand investments, we may be tempted to try to cut corners with our personal brand development.  And if we heed most of the advice about personal branding that’s out there these days, we might simply focus on things like developing a personal website or dressing to impress.

But hopefully the above criteria show that the ways to strengthen your brand have less to do with how you express yourself, and more with what you deliver.  Many companies focus their brand building too much on external marketing activities, instead of channeling their efforts internally and putting their brand at the core of what they do and how they do it.  Let’s not make the same mistake with our personal brands.

Personal branding seems to have re-emerged as a hot topic.  The concept introduced by Tom Peters over 10 years ago is now back on everyone’s radar screens — or at least mine.  Several friends and colleagues have recently asked for my POV on personal branding; last week I read a stimulating post by Jonathan Salem Baskin on the topic; and it’s being named as one of the top 5 digital trends to watch by the digital arm of PR-giant Edelman.

Perhaps personal branding is getting all this attention because of our nation’s unfortunate situation of experiencing the highest number of lay-offs since 1974 and so all of those job hunters are seeking a competitive edge.  Or perhaps it’s because our new President seems to enjoy one of the most, if not the most, influential personal brands of our time.

Whatever the reason, it makes me nervous.  There’s the danger that if personal branding is misunderstood or misused, branding itself will become misunderstood or misused.  There’s certainly a lot of misinformation about it on the social media circuit lately.

Self-described “leading personal branding expert” Dan Schwabel states, “Personal branding, by definition, is the process by which we market ourselves to others. As a brand, we can leverage the same strategies that make these celebrities or corporate brands appeal to others. We can build brand equity just like them.” He then goes on to list 10 ways to create your brand, ranging from having a business card to selecting a wardrobe.

“Question everything you do, every tool you use, every article of clothing you wear. Are they consistent with your brand? Do you have a WAP phone but use a printed calendar or a handwritten to-do list? Do you carry a briefcase?” advises William Aruda, “the Personal Branding Guru.”

I fear this kind of talk about branding — personal or not — trivializes the importance and role of brands as drivers of business growth.  It reinforces the incorrect but already commonly held view that brand-building is about what you communicate instead of what you do — and it emphasizes the expressive and marketing value of a brand, while overlooking its more fundamental business value.

Here’s my view:

A brand is a bundle of values and attributes that define:
-  a product or service’s value that is delivered to its customers, and
-  the way of doing business that is the basis of a company’s relationships with stakeholders

Translated to the realm of individuals, the definition would read something like:

A brand is a bundle of values and attributes that define:
-  the value that a person delivers to his/her customers (business partners, bosses, hiring managers, family members, community, etc.) , and
-  the way that person operates that is the basis of his/her relationships with them (it seems like customers and stakeholders are the same for individuals)

So brand-building, whether for individuals or brands, depends on increasing the value you deliver and how you do it.  Your brand is not the perception you want to create; its the reality of who you are.  It’s not the way to get noticed; it’s what you do on a daily basis.  It’s not about being different for the sake of being different; it’s about delivering unique value to your customers by being the only person who does what you do the way you do it.

I’ll soon follow up this post with another about what makes a strong personal brand but if you want to jump start your personal branding efforts now, the aforementioned post by JSB provides some great thoughtstarters for ways to build your brand.