brand as business bit:  Businessweek’s piece on Lego‘s attempts to crack the girl code describes how the company used anthropological research methods to understand its users:

“You could say a worn-out sneaker saved Lego. ‘We asked an 11-year-old German boy, ‘what is your favorite possession?’ And he pointed to his shoes. But it wasn’t the brand of shoe that made them special,’ says Holm, who heads up the Lego Concept Lab, its internal skunkworks. ‘When we asked him why these were so important to him, he showed us how they were worn on the side and bottom, and explained that his friends could tell from how they were worn down that he had mastered a certain style of riding, even a specific trick.’

“Lego saw it had drawn the wrong lessons from computer games. Instead of focusing on their immediacy, the company now noticed how kids responded to the scoring, ranking, and levels of play—opportunities to demonstrate mastery.”

“Encouraged by what it had learned about boys, Lego sent its team back out to scrutinize girls…Beauty, on the face of it, is an unsurprising virtue for a girl-friendly toy, but based on the ways girls played, [researcher] Groth says, it came, as ‘mastery’ had for boys, to stand for fairly specific needs: harmony (a pleasing, everything-in-its-right-place sense of order); friendlier colors; and a high level of detail.”

Designing research to include observation (in addition to asking) and examination of artifacts (like old sneakers) allows you to get beneath the surface, understand the why behind behaviors and attitudes, and uncover rich insights that enable you to really connect with people.

The holiday shopping season is upon us and retailers are trying to navigate the challenges and opportunities of the new retail reality.  As a recent Bloomberg Businessweek article observed, “Americans don’t shop the way they used to.”

Between developments in social commerce, mobile apps that facilitate shopping on the go, and increases in multi-channel purchasing, retailers are faced with a multitude of possibilities for engaging customers.  They need to create a cohesive brand experience across all touchpoints.

A Customer Experience Architecture is a tool that retailers can use to optimize, prioritize, and unify all of their customer experiences.  It’s a framework for describing and delivering the optimal experiences to different customer segments in different channels.

It’s an “architecture” similar to other strategic architectures like a brand architecture or an information architecture that are used as planning tools.  Plus, assembling a Customer Experience Architecture is like building a house.

A few years ago my husband and I got the crazy idea that we would build a house.  That delusion didn’t last long, but we learned a lot about the process of designing a house — and I learned a lot about the process of designing customer experiences.  After all, a house is more than the materials to make it – we were really building our desired home experience.

So here are the steps for building a Customer Experience Architecture:

1. Brand platform — Our first step was to hire an architect and the first thing he worked with us on was our vision for the house – did we want a mission style?  Modern?  Spanish?  etc.  That vision is equivalent to your brand platform, the first step in developing a Customer Experience Architecture.  You start by defining what you want your brand to stand for, the overarching idea that represents you.

2. Customer experience strategy — We then worked on translating that vision into the overall feeling of the house we desired – e.g., did we want a cocoon to rest in or a clubhouse for our family to gather in or an entertainment hub for our friends and neighbors?  That’s the second step – articulating your customer experience strategy, the overall experience you want to deliver across all channels.  Perhaps you want to create a “place” to discover and try; or perhaps you want to deliver legendary service.

3a.  Channel requirements and objectives — Next we broke our plan down into the specific considerations and priorities for each room – e.g., a wide-open kitchen; a walk-in closet in the bedroom, etc.  We had to factor in the limitations of the property we had purchased and the budget we wanted to stick to.  In the same way, in a Customer Experience Architecture, you break down your plan by channel.  Outline the business requirements and objectives of each and factor in your operational capabilities and assets.

Your website may use sophisticated filtering technology, for example, that makes it easy for the customer to find whatever they’re looking for, so you may specify that channel for carrying a very broad assortment.  Or, the location and layouts of your brick-and-mortar stores may be perfect for grab-and-go purchases, so that channel may be all about speed of service.

3b.  Segment needs and drivers — At the same time in our home-building process, my husband and I defined our different needs so the architect could tailor his designs to address those differences – e.g., in the living area my husband “needed” a large area for watching TV on a big screen while I needed a sightline to the kitchen.

Similarly, your target segments have different needs in general and in different channels.  Some may value convenience over price; others may be looking for an entertaining experience.  Whatever they may be, outline those different needs and drivers of their purchase decisions and brand perceptions.

4. Customer experience — Then like our architect, outline the ways you are going to meet those segment-specific needs in each channel.  Use all the levers of customer experience – product, service, content, community, value, facilities, etc.  What product categories will you feature?  Will you do sampling and demonstrations?  What added value services will you offer?  What information is provided and how?

5. Assessment and integration — Once your Customer Experience Architecture is assembled, assess it as a whole “house” – is the brand strategy delivered throughout?  Do the discrete experiences ladder up to the overall customer experience strategy?  Do the experiences complement and enhance each other, or do they conflict or detract from each other?  You may need to go back to the drawing board a few times.

You also need to show how you will integrate the experiences.  A map that shows how different experiences feed into and from each other will ensure customers get a seamless shopping experience.

6. Prioritization — The next step is to value the different segment/channel intersections and prioritize them.  Use criteria like profit potential, fit with your long-term strategy, differentiation, and value to the customer to determine which experiences are the most important.  You should also look for synergies between the intersections, meaning if you focus on one, you might also be improving another.

7. Description – Finally once you’ve set your priorities, use narratives, images, idea boards, videos, etc. to convey your vision for each priority experience and the granular details that comprise them.

Creating a Customer Experience Architecture isn’t rocket science.  And believe me, it’s a lot less painful than trying to build a house.   It simply requires discipline and a deliberate process.  Great customer experiences don’t just happen.

But the return on your investment is significant.  One retailer used a Customer Experience Architecture to get all of its employees, executives, and vendors on the same page about how it would increase its competitive advantage.  It showed how the company was going to get more business out of their existing channels and how to appeal to growing segments.  The framework increased marketing efficiency by helping the company target the right people in the right way.  And it improved customer satisfaction.

As the number of brand touchpoints grows in today’s retail environment, retailers need to focus and unify their customer experiences. A Customer Experience Architecture enables you to deliver a cohesive experience that builds your brand and your business.

(To learn how to use a Customer Experience Architecture for your business, to request a custom proposal, or to book a workshop, contact me at mail AT deniseleeyohn DOT com.)

At last week’s MINDBODY University, I had the opportunity to teach business leaders how to increase their competitive advantage. Although the seminar was attended by business owners in the health, fitness, and wellness industries, the principles we covered are instructive to most all businesspeople and so I thought I’d share them here.

The core of the session focused on competitive brand positioning – what is it, why is it important, how do you develop one.

What is a competitive brand positioning?

It’s a strategy that defines how your business will establish and maintain competitive advantage.  It’s one half of your brand platform – the other is your brand identity, or what your brand stands for. Your competitive brand positioning references who you are selling to, what your business scope is, and what you do to create value for your customers. It drives your business strategy and operating plan.

Why is competitive brand positioning important?

I can’t think of any business that doesn’t compete with something (another company, a changing market, emerging technology, etc.) And in order to effectively compete, you must understand what you’re competing against for whom, and how best to position your brand to leverage your strengths and take advantage of market opportunities.

Without a competitive brand positioning, your brand might only remain a conceptual vision or a set of cultural values which sound great but don’t really make a difference in the marketplace. A meaningful, powerful, valuable brand is based a clear, crisp articulation of your competitive strategy.

How do you develop a competitive brand positioning?

In-depth knowledge of your target, your competitors, and your own business enables you to define a strong positioning. Use rigorous market research and competitive intelligence to uncover new insights and develop a proprietary point of view about the market opportunities and competitive landscape (see my research and competitive landscape map tools). You also need a fresh and objective assessment and analysis of your own company’s capabilities, resources, and assets (a brand diagnostic can help.)

Armed with these insights, you can use the following competitive brand positioning statement template to articulate your positioning:

For X,
we are the A who does B
because C

• X = target audience

Who are you trying to persuade? What distinguishes them? What’s important to them?

• A = competitive frame of reference

What is your aspirational competitive set? What is the mental file folder your target should put you in?

• B = differentiating value you deliver

What do you do that no else does as well and that your target cares about? Why should your target value you?

• C = reasons to believe

What evidence proves that you deliver that value?

Some examples:

A few years ago, a national smoothie QSR chain articulated their competitive brand positioning as follows:

For (X) everyone who chooses to do something good for themselves, we are (A) the convenient place for great tasting, healthy products that (B) energizes the way you live and feel — because we (C)
• are considerate of what you put in your body
• make it enjoyable to be healthy
• help create healthier communities

A running shoe and athletic gear company used the following statement to describe their competitive position:

Only we design (B) performance solutions that (A) fit (X) athletes and fitness enthusiasts who are confident in themselves and are driven to achieve.  (C) Reasons to believe:
- we offer the largest breadth of shoe widths
- our company started as an arch support business
- we continue to innovate insole designs to optimize fit

(As the above example indicates, your competitive brand positioning can take on a different sentence structure — you don’t have to use the exact template, as long at the components are included.)

You might have an intuitive understanding of your competitive strategy, but it’s important to take the time to document your competitive brand positioning. Doing so will ensure you’ve applied a rigorous analysis and covered the most salient points of your strategy – and the statement is a powerful tool to unify and align all of your stakeholders.

A few final notes:

-  target – Some businesses try to reach everyone because don’t want to limit their appeal – but history shows, if you try to be everything to everyone, you end up being nothing to no one. If you target a particular type of person or group, your relevance to them is stronger as is their identification with your brand.

Also your strategy will be stronger is you define your target audience with more than demographics. People groups are growing in diversity, so an 18 year old young lady in California is probably looking for very different things from a similarly-aged person in the South — and actually might have more in common with a 30-something guy who embraces an active lifestyle.  So use mindset, needs, attitudes, or values to profile a more precise target.

-  competitive set – The opposite tact is necessary here – you want to think broadly about who you’re competing with. The more narrowly you define your competition, the more easily it is to identify your competitive advantage – but also the more likely you’re overlooking viable options your target is considering.

A fitness boot camp isn’t simply competing with other boot camps – it’s also competing with other types of specialized workouts, full-service fitness clubs, non-group workouts like running, and even inertia. The couch may be its biggest competition! So define your competitive set from your target’s point of view, not your category’s.

-  differentiating value — Unless you’re the 99 cent store, price is not a sustainable differentiator. If the only thing that differentiates your offering is price, it’s fairly easy for a competitor to undercut you or bait you into a price war.

That’s not to say price promotions shouldn’t be used as introductory offers or other limited time only deals, but they should not be the thing you count on to maintain competitive advantage. Instead, your differentiating value should be based on a claim that you are “the best,” “the first,” or “the only” brand to do what you do.

related posts:

• strategic brand platforms
• frozen yogurt and the future
• size as a competitive advantage

A couple of months ago I gave a workshop on my topic “Brand as Business:  How Companies Drive Business Growth by Operationalizing Their Brands.”  Feedback was so positive I thought I’d get a brief video of excerpts made to share with my readers here.    Please check it out and let me know what you think (run time:  approx. 8 minutes).

denise lee yohn brand as business workshop from Denise Yohn on Vimeo.

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

Attention:  fast food marketers – you’re wasting half of your advertising!

But I’m not talking about the waste that John Wanamaker was referring to in his famous quip about not knowing which half of his advertising was being wasted.  I’m talking about the average of 48% of people who say there’s a big difference between what you promise in your advertising and what they experience at your restaurants.

This gap between your brand promise and your brand reality is one of the findings from research I recently conducted on QSRs*.

It’s no surprise that the everyday fast food experience doesn’t measure up to the fresh food, friendly service, and fun environment depicted in category advertising — but a disconnect of this degree is disturbing.  Even more troubling is that up to 66% of customers report a gap between the brand promise and brand reality for some chains!

I’ll keep the names of the worst offenders confidential, but I will reveal that the list includes a company which recently undertook a “rebranding” effort (i.e., new logo and visual identity) and another which recently announced plans to roll-out a value promotion.  While these changes might have been important, I can’t help but wonder if the effectiveness of these efforts will be limited because their in-restaurant experience isn’t delivering on the brand promise.

The findings from my research have serious implications for marketers in the fast food category and beyond.  Given that 64% of CMOs and brand managers at a wide range of organizations say their brands do not influence decisions made at their companies (see a previous post of mine on this shocking finding), it’s likely there’s a disconnect between the brand aspirations and operational reality at most companies.

The brand promise:reality gap suggests that instead of fretting over brand campaigns, companies’ brand-building efforts might be more successful if they were directed toward the actual customer experience.

Sure, the company’s ops department is responsible for ensuring operational excellence in the customer experience – but for most chains, competitive advantage is largely dependent upon the values and attributes which differentiate the brand.  So, operations must be about more than delivering efficiency and quality.  Aligning the customer experience with the brand vision is critical to establishing and sustaining a strong brand.

Furthermore actions speak louder than words and the research findings make it clear companies need help putting brand values and attributes into action.

One way to do this is to use a brand toolbox to inspire, inform, and instruct everyone in your organization how to interpret and reinforce your brand.

A brand toolbox is a collection of tools such as:

• a brand strategy users’ manual which explains the brand essence and positioning and the rationale behind them
• principles and guidelines for delivering brand values and attributes in day-to-day situations
• decision guides and process outlines to facilitate on-brand decision-making and behaviors
• virtual reality platforms which enable employees to practice using brand principles to deliver customer experiences consistent with the brand promise
• a forum through which employees can share their insights about how to bring the brand to life

Importantly a brand toolbox isn’t some yay-rah-rah feel good “invertising” effort which simply promotes the brand to employees. Nor is it a dense training manual which collects dust on a shelf.  It’s a dynamic resource integrated into the company’s standard operating procedures.

It requires active engagement and consistent updating – and an investment of time and money.  Come to think of it, developing and managing a brand toolbox is similar to developing and managing a brand campaign. But instead of simply promoting an image, it helps translate that image into remarkable customer experiences.

In today’s resource-constrained environment, a company cannot afford to spend its precious marketing dollars on a brand campaign only to see them wasted when the customer walks through the door.  Closing the brand vision:promise gap needs to be a top priority.

p.s.  A brand toolbox is only one of several ways to close the brand vision:promise gap.  Please contact me to learn about others:  mail AT deniseleeyohn DOT com.

* survey was fielded among over 200 moms with kids

related posts:

• invertising
• what’s a brand for

I’m working with a client to develop a new brand platform and thought I’d share one of the tools I used in my engagement – Brand Obituaries.

the background
The client lacks a clear brand identity and their brand seems “forgettable.”  The problem is not that they don’t have good products – it’s that they no longer know what they stand for, and so neither do consumers.

The first step in my engagement was a Discovery — a diagnostic evaluation to assess the current performance of and future opportunities for the brand.   As a matter of course, I conducted stakeholder interviews to learn (among other things) individual perceptions and beliefs about what the brand currently stands for and aspirations of what they want it to stand for.

Although this process was helpful, I found people were more likely to define the brand by what it isn’t, as opposed to what it is, or could be.  As such, I wanted to generate more perspectives about the potential identity for the brand.

the objective
I decided I needed to do something in the first project team worksession to spark a dialogue about the brand’s “reason for being” – generating rich discussion and revealing points of consensus and disagreement – which I could use as inputs to our work on crafting a new brand platform.

I often use projective techniques in consumer qualitative research in order to uncover underlying attitudes and beliefs.  They also help less-verbal people articulate their ideas.  I decided to use such a tool with the project team.

the process
Prior to the worksession, I asked the participants to complete the assignment described in “the tool” section below.

During the worksession, I divided the group into small groups and asked them to share their completed assignments with each other — and then to incorporate the best of each into a composite to share with the large group.

the tool
People were asked to write a Brand Obituary:

Think about the brand as a person – not necessarily the type of customer that shops at the brand, but rather the type of person the brand would be if it came to life.

Also think about the brand today when it’s at its best – not some idealized future – and think about it as a whole – all that the brand entails.

Pretend that upon waking today, you learn that the person “the brand” has passed away.  As a reporter for the local newspaper, your job is to write an obituary for the brand as if it were an actual person who has died.  Please jot/type your thoughts in the space provided below.

In doing so, think about describing the salient points of the brand’s life, as well what is different now that the brand is gone.

Some of the type of things you should include are:

• the cause of death – given how the brand is “living” today, what might be the reason he/she would die?  Was his/her death unexpected?  Did anyone (competitors or trends) contribute to his/her demise?

• who/what the brand left behind – who will mourn or miss the brand – and why?

• what was the brand’s biggest accomplishment in life? What will he/she be remembered for?

• what lessons can be learned from the brand’s life? – and from his/her death?

• who will take the brand’s place now that the brand is gone?

the outcome

This exercise was a real success on several different fronts:

1.  Participation in the assignment – Given that the project team is comprised mostly of the company’s executive team, including the CEO, CFO, and head merchant, I wasn’t sure how much cooperation I would get with a “homework” assignment.   But I was pleasantly surprised that 12 out of the 14 participants completed the assignment and it was clear many of them had spent a lot of time on it.

2.  Tone – I was also a little concerned that I was asking people to think about something quite unpleasant – the brand’s death.  I even included a note on the assignment to offset any potential negativity:

“Please note this is intended to be a fun exercise, to get you thinking out of the box.  Although the approach seems to come from a negative place, the results will be quite positive!”

This turned out to be a non-issue.  People did indeed have fun with the exercise — some of the obituaries were quite creatively written and the small groups had animated discussions, sometimes punctuated with laughter.

3.  Participation in the discussion — The exercise seemed to break the ice and get people really talking.  After engaging with each other over the obituaries, the participants seemed more willing to speak up and speak openly.  As one person explained to me in a follow-up note, “Exercises outside of our normal routine can and should serve as important learning experiences that are fun.”

4.    Group buy-in — Some of the issues revealed by the obituaries were the same as those that I had presented as having learned from my stakeholder interviews – but they seemed much more powerful and persuasive coming from the participants.   Actually I think the exercise gave my assessment and recommendations more credibility because many of my points were reinforced by the obituary outcomes.

5.    Rich insights – Above all else, the tool accomplished its objectives.  From the reactions in the small and large group discussions, it was obvious that the obituaries revealed thoughts that people had not shared with others before.  People were surprised to learn what others really thought about the brand – and in some cases, I suspect, they aren’t aware of all they had thought or communicated themselves.

I definitely have rich fodder from which to craft a “strawman” brand identity for our next worksession!

Let me know if you’re interested in learning more about this tool or other approaches I use in my Discovery process.

related posts:

• strategic brand platforms
• brand documentaries

Later today I will be presenting the new strategic brand platform to the Board of Directors for an organization I’ve been working with.  I thought I’d take this opportunity to share my approach to brand strategy.

Why do you need a brand strategy?

I believe a brand is a driver and compass for the organization – it focus and aligns all decision-making and it guides what we do/don’t do and what we say/don’t say.  Having a clearly articulated brand strategy ensures everyone who works on our brand shares one clear, consistent, common understanding of what our brand stands for and how it competes.  And this, in turn, helps them align their behaviors and decision-making with the brand so that it is delivered through every touchpoint with the outside world.

Simply put, if we are clear about our brand, so will our customers be.

The brand strategy should be clearly articulated and written down.  Whether your organization has 5 employees or 500,000 – whether you’re just starting the business or it’s been around for decades — it’s dangerous to assume everyone knows what your brand platform is or to rely only on informal means for sharing it.  Particularly in these times of so much change, it’s easy for efforts to become unfocused or focused on the wrong things.  Your brand strategy should be codified.

Also, with so much buzz about customer co-creation and the power of word of mouth vs. traditional one-way brand communication, some pundits have proffered, “Your brand is whatever your customers say it is.”  This would suggest that there is little value in defining and articulating your brand strategy – I completely disagree.

An organization must know and make clear what it wants its brand to stand for and how it wants it to be positioned.  There is definitely a place for collaboration and integration with customers on how the brand manifests itself and how it is expressed (see 2 great presentations 1, 2 on this topic from German agency nouve, but I believe a brand strategy is as valuable a tool for business leaders today as it ever has been – if not more.

What is a brand strategy?

A strong brand strategy is really comprised of a complete strategic platform:

• brand identity – what your brand stands for – the values and attributes that define your brand
• competitive brand positioning – how your brand compares to existing options – this includes your target customers, the frame of reference in which they consider your brand, and the unique benefit or value you provide to them

An example I came across years ago is Campbell’s.

The two parts of the platform are integrated and interdependent. The brand identity explains who/what the brand is; the competitive brand positioning explains how the brand does what it does.  The brand identity tends to be more timeless, serving as the constant foundation of the brand; while the competitive brand positioning can change as the competitive context and target audiences change.

Your brand understanding is incomplete if you only have one part.  Without a brand identity, your company lack beliefs and principles to guide its market activity. You define yourself more by your context and less by your organization’s strategic intent.  Particularly in categories in which the products have become commoditized (fast food, for example) or in which the distinctions between competitors is difficult to ascertain (healthcare), the who and the what of the brand is the basis for most of a brand’s differentiation.

Without a brand positioning, the business orientation of the brand platform is missing. In isolation, a brand identity can seem only conceptual.  You need a brand positioning to reference who you are selling to, what your business scope is, and what you do to create value for your customers.  If the brand is defined separately from the business strategy, often the two aren’t aligned — and so when conflicts arise, the brand takes a back seat to the business.

Together the brand identity and competitive brand positioning function symbiotically – complementing and supporting each other.

A strategic brand platform is intended to provide richness and depth, not complexity.  Some of the best brands can be summarized in a single word or idea (Southwest Airlines = fun; Disney = family magic).  But in order to fulfill its potential as a business driver, leaders must expound on the brand and dimensionalize it into a full platform.

There are many frameworks that can be used to communicate the brand identity and competitive brand positioning.  Building blocks, circles/wheels, four-boxes, etc. — each is relevant to a different type of brand.  Storytelling, images, and videos are often helpful approaches to expressing a brand strategy.

What makes a brand strategy good?

The strength and integrity of a brand platform can be judged by several criteria.

1. Is it meaningful? – is it relevant and compelling to our target customers?  Some brands create new desires; others simply meet existing demand – either way, people must value what the brand stands for and delivers.
2. Is it believable? – does it over-promise or set up false expectations, or does it pass muster among even the most skeptical of customers?
3. Is it differentiating? – does it give us a distinct advantage over competitors?  The advantage must be noticeable, understood, and appreciated by your target customers.
4. Is it feasible? – does it accurately reflect our organization’s capabilities?  A brand platform can be aspirational but it must be possible.
5. Is it sustainable? – does it enable us to provide value and compete now and in the future?  The brand should be an enduring proposition which drives continuous improvement and innovation, not a fad-dependent or short-lived idea.

How is a brand strategy used?

As I explained earlier, the brand drives everything the organization does.  So it guides and influences R&D, product/service development, manufacturing, operations, sales, distribution, employee recruitment/training/development, stakeholder engagement, strategic planning – oh, and also marketing.

In the case of the organization I’m meeting with today, the new brand platform is of particular interest to the staff, who see it being particularly helpful in their prospective employee interviewing/screening process (“The brand personality explains the exact kind of employee we’re looking for,” said one manager).

Also it’s serving as a guide for the website re-design they’re undertaking, ensuring that the experience of using the website is aligned with the brand attributes we’ve developed.
—-
I hope this information has been helpful.  I haven’t done a post like this in awhile — I’ve been doing more observation and analysis lately.  So if you’d like to see more posts like these, please let me know.  Also if you or someone you know wants to know more about engaging me to develop a strategic brand platform, here’s an overview of my Brand Platform service offering.

related posts:

• brand documentaries
• simple brand tools

Right before the holidays, MarketingSherpa released its “2010 Social Media Marketing Benchmark Report.”  The report indicated that “improving brand or product reputation” and “increasing brand or product awareness” did not rank highly in the list of social media objectives targeted and measured by U.S. marketers.  This confirms my own findings that companies are overlooking the importance of using social media tools for strategic, proactive brand-building.

MarketingSherpa found that only 20% of companies who they classified as being in the “trial phase” of their use of social media are using it for improving brand reputation and only 21% for improving brand awareness.  Although both of these numbers double to 54% for companies in the “strategic” social media usage phase, that incidence still seems quite low to me – particularly when compared to the 88% using social media for increasing website traffic and 75% for lead generation.

Perhaps that these latter objectives are more easily measured has led to their higher rate of implementation, but it seems companies are viewing social media as very tactical.

In a related effort, I audited over 30 organizations’ social media guidelines (including Sun Microsystems’, General Motors’, IBM’s, and even Yahoo!’s) and found another skew.  The most thorough social media guidelines encourage users to be responsible and respectful, indicate how confidential information should be handled, and reiterate the corporate rules of business conduct — but none indicate how the brand can and should be promoted with these new tools.

MediaPost recently asked me to write an article about this.  In it, I talk about the difference in between using social media for what I call “Defense” (protecting the company and its brand name) and “Offense” (promoting the brand.)  I ask,

“In recent years, many companies have cultivated the role of employee as brand ambassador.  Front-line employees in particular are recognized by many as critical brand touchpoints; “friends and family” discounts or coupons are often distributed through employees in order to generate broader awareness and positive impressions in the community.   Why not extend these efforts to the new social platforms and encourage and enable employees to use these tools to promote the brand?!”

Perhaps, as with setting objectives, taking a Defensive stance in social media is easier than adopting an Offensive one?  What not to do is certainly more obvious than what to do.  Understanding social media’s full brand-building potential and then figuring out the best ways to leverage that potential takes time and resources (budget, staff, and infrastructure).

MarketingSherpa observes that “the effort (time and resources) required of a social marketing tactic often trumps the effectiveness of a tactic in determining its use. The more effort required, the less likely it will be implemented.”  This “fast and easy” approach may be the first step in companies’ usage of social media, but to take full advantage of the brand-building opportunities in social media and networking, companies need to evolve beyond it.

My MediaPost article suggests that companies need Brand Guidelines to inspire and instruct employees how to generate excitement and interest in the brand.  I outline suggestions for specific content Brand Guidelines should include in order to address the usage of social media.  Please give it a read and let me know what you think.

related posts:

• brand impact in 2010
• brand value creation — learning and growth

When it comes to mishaps, most companies seem to have adopted Discovery’s song “It’s Not My Fault” as their anthem – but it would be so much better for them to follow Akon’s lead and plainly state “Sorry, Blame It on Me.”

To be clear, I’m not talking about issuing apologies for the sweeping mistakes companies have made for, say, running our economy into the ground — nor about mea culpas for the indiscretions of executives with poor personal judgment.  I don’t even mean the situations in which a company clearly screwed things up for a customer, like failing to provide a promised service or selling a defective product.  By now, companies who haven’t figured out the importance of an appropriate apology in these situations are just helpless and hopeless.

I’m talking about saying “sorry” for little things – the millions of seemingly-forgettable occurrences that happen every day as companies go about their business and end up inconveniencing, or disappointing, or causing some trouble for their customers.

I recently had two experiences that exemplify the right and wrong way to handle these apologies.

First, earlier this week American Airlines sent out an email to their “elite” customers, notifying them that their double elite qualifying miles had been posted to their accounts.  Six hours later, another email followed.  It stated, “We need to advise you of a correction to the email you received earlier today regarding the posting of your double elite qualifying miles, which counted toward your 2009 qualification. The additional elite qualifying miles that have posted to your account will appear on your January Summary which will be available on AA.com on Monday, January 11. We apologize for the confusion. The below email has been revised to reflect this change…”

Given that this was an email communication about a relatively inconsequential error, most people might not have even given it a second thought – but it made an impression on me because I thought it fell short of a good apology.  Why the hem-and-hawing of the phrase “We need to advise you” blah blah blah?  Why not just start out with “We’re sorry.  We sent you incorrect information earlier today”?  And they shouldn’t be apologizing “for the confusion” – they should apologize for the error.  “Confusion” makes it sound like the reader is the one who was mistaken.

Instead of using a bunch of words that sound vaguely like corporate conflict-avoidance, American should have simply and directly stated they made a mistake and they’re sorry.

The other experience happened after I had made a reservation at the local location of Truluck’s, a fine-dining restaurant chain.  Some friends and I had decided to take advantage of the dinner special the restaurant was offering as part of San Diego’s Restaurant Week.  The next day they called me back to apologize and explain that their special was actually $40; the $30 price that had previously been posted on the Restaurant Week website had been a mistake that they were sorry for.

The caller was pleasant, direct, and apologetic. She was also gracious when I asked to cancel my reservation (I don’t do $40 “specials” in San Diego – New York, maybe, but not here.)

Neither of these interactions was really important, right?  The note from American Airlines was one of several emails I got from them this week; the Truluck’s phone call lasted less than 30 seconds.  One might think that I’m making a big deal out of nothing.

But I would argue that it’s the little things that companies do that show their true colors – and ultimately shape people’s brand perceptions.

One of the tools I use when working with my clients is a Brand Touchpoint Wheel. A Brand Touchpoint Wheel provides a visual representation of all the ways people interact with the brand and how they work together – or in some cases, don’t – to impact people’s perceptions of the brand.  When I headed up Brand and Strategy for Sony Electronics, we assembled a Wheel that featured over 270 different touchpoints!  I help companies develop and use the Wheels to identify and prioritize their touchpoints – and understand the changes that internal groups need to make in order to optimize those touchpoints.

Apologies, like the ones I describe above, are indeed brand touchpoints. In American’s case, their apology reinforced the cold, corporate personality I already associate with the brand (despite being a “loyal” customer thanks to those Platinum handcuffs.)  Truluck’s approach endeared me to the brand and the next time I’m looking for a special-occasion restaurant, I’ll be sure to consider them.  Companies need to realize the importance of every touchpoint.

Sir Elton may be right in that “Sorry Seems To Be the Hardest Word” – but companies that say it well, earn customers’ R-E-S-P-E-C-T as only Aretha can sing it!

related post:

• the art of saying thank you