Two of my favorite brands recently introduced innovations that brought me such delight, I was prompted to think about what was so remarkable about them. What was it about them that not only delivered a great experience, but also grew my esteem of their respective brands??

I realized these innovations, despite them being on polar opposites of the technology scale, have 3 things in common.  In fact, these shared characteristics seem to distinguish all brand-building innovations from the many forgettable new products and services we’re inundated with everyday.

What:  Two delightful innovations.

Ben & Jerry’s Flipped Out – a fun twist on a brownie sundae.  Flipped Outs pack Ben & Jerry’s delectable ice cream, fudge brownie pieces, and chocolate fudge topping into a single serve pack.  You flip it over onto a plate, lift the cup off, and eat and enjoy.  Not only is this a yummy treat but it’s a fun one.  The act of flipping the dessert and removing the packaging is a simple, but powerful one – it’s a moment of anticipation and fun which makes the whole experience a delight.

The new Nike+ — a new and improved version of the sensor/tracking system for running.  Nike has brought a whole new level of functionality and enjoyment to the Nike+.   The new Nike+ includes a customizable homepage which allows you to personalize your runs to illustrate your mood, the weather, the route, etc.; a search function to be used to find other runners, initiate challenges, and broadcast your results; a new shoe finder; and other features.  Even for a casual runner like me, using it makes me feel better equipped and more inspired to run.

How: Even though Nike’s high tech system seems completely opposite from the low tech Ben & Jerry’s Flipped Out, the two innovations are both great brand-builders because they both:

• enhance the core value of their respective brands – In the race to introduce the latest and greatest products and services, many companies pursue innovations that may be cool but have little to do with the core value they currently deliver to customers.  But the strength of these two innovations is that they are derived from the very core of their respective brands.  Ben & Jerry’s is all about ice cream that’s fun and creative (not to mention all natural and socially responsible); Flipped Out takes those attributes to a new level.  Nike’s brand brings innovation and inspiration to every athlete and Nike+ does this personal, tangible way.  Neither innovation is simply cool for cool’s sake; said more positively, they stayed true to their brands while enhancing the value they deliver.
• are different from how competitors are innovating – The trends in ice cream these days are natural, lower fat/calorie, and new flavors.  With Flipped Out, Ben & Jerry’s decided to “zag” while everyone else was “zigging.”  So the new form/new packaging stands out as truly remarkable in the crowded category.  Likewise, most other sporting goods brands are focused on product innovations like greener materials, lighter/faster shoes, and performance fabrics.  Nike+ creates a completely different playing field, introducing a whole new way to experience the sport.   Rejecting the usual innovation levers and looking beyond category trends, Ben & Jerry’s and Nike created breakthroughs.
• work – Both innovations work, really well – no glitches, no “still working out the kinks”, no disappointments.  To be honest, I feared Flipped Out wouldn’t be as good as it sounded.  I was concerned the flipping/lifting would be difficult or messy and I doubted its taste would be up to my ice cream aficionado standards.  But neither worry was necessary.  Not only did the flipping/lifting work, it was kinda cool, and the product itself was much better than other pre-packaged sundaes.  With Nike+, I knew it would work seamlessly because every other online interface I’ve had with Nike has been great.  The system is easy and intuitive to use, and as I explored all the new functionality, everything worked like a charm.  Can’t say that about many other innovations today, right?!

Perhaps the most salient thing which both innovations have in common is that they take brand “engagement” to a whole new level.  The term “engagement” has taken on a lot of different meanings in today’s social media world, but I found these innovations to be truly engaging in the ways engagement is usually measured – that is, the amount of time I spent with them, the enjoyment I felt while interacting with them, and the way I am telling others about my great experiences.

related post:

• brand inspiration
• the man behind walkman

My Patagonia catalog arrived in the mail today and I was reminded once again of all the things the Patagonia brand does that don’t seem to make sense — but they do.  The catalog’s inside cover spread,

featuring a picture of fallen rock climber Zoe Hart and the story about her breathtaking fall and valiant recovery, captivated me…and yet it seemed to have nothing to do with Patagonia.

I mean, perhaps the clothes and shoes which Zoe is wearing in the photograph are from Patagonia — but there was no indication of such — and even if they are, you can’t really see them very well or read any information about them.  Plus, they’re shown on Zoe as she lies in agony after her 30 foot fall –  I’m guessing most brands wouldn’t want their products shown in such a graphic context.

But that’s the point — Patagonia isn’t like most brands.  In fact, one could argue there is no other brand quite like it.  The company does things which leave most other businesses baffled.  Recently it got some buzz from its move to remove all packaging from its underwear  — take a look at the video from Fast Company in which Patagonia Founder Yvon Chouinard explains how much pushback he initially got from his team when he suggested making this change.

Other examples of Patagonia’s unique operations:

• it doesn’t confirm to industry practices — 16 of the 60 pages in its most recent catalog (over 25%) did not feature any products (2 of the pages were devoted to whooping cranes — yes, birds)
• exceeding generosity to its employees — it has an on-site child care center which it started back in the early 1980′s long before the practice was even considered by most companies — and it subsidizes a portion of the center’s operating costs so that employees can pay lower rates than they would elsewhere
• a faithful corporate steward — boom or bust, it gives 10% of its profits each year to small groups working to save or restore habitat
• willingness to be transparent and vulnerable to criticism — a few years ago it introduced a groundbreaking program, Footprint Chronicles, which allows people to track the carbon footprint of its products from manufacturer to point of purchase
• some pretty unbelievable innovations — the fabric of its Synchilla fleece is made out of post consumer recycled plastic soda bottles

I could go on — but instead, I’ll simply recommend you read the book, “Let My People Go Surfing,” a memoir/manifesto from Chouinard.  It is one of the best studies on “brand as business” — that is, how a company operationalizes its brand values.  The stories and principles relayed in the book provide a strong challenge to the way most people build a brand and run a business.

Which brings me back to my original point:  the Zoe Hart catalog spread which stopped me in my tracks was such a departure from the product- and sales-oriented catalogs du jour — it seemed to have nothing to do with Patagonia, but in fact, it had everything to do with it.

The Patagonia brand is all about courage, commitment, and challenging conventions — in everything it does.

related links:

• brand as business
• using your brand as the North Star of your business
• operationalizing the brand

Trolling through recent news from Packaging Digest, I noticed the juxtaposition of two stories that make a great point.

The first story was about a packaging re-design undertaken by Wonder Bread.  The change, by Willoughby Design, was intended to evolve the brand to appeal to an older and more nutrition-conscious audience.  They adapted the brand’s iconic balloons, fiddled with the typeface, and changed the logo.

The second bit featured another bread manufacturer that re-designed its packaging — Silver Hill.  Silver Hill’s bread line up of sprouted organic breads is also targeted to health-conscious consumers.  In this case, though, the folks at Silver Hill and the design firm they hired (Karacter Design Group), took on a totally new look.

before and after

new line-up

The new designs incorporate fun colors, illustrations, and copy, bringing whimsy and personality to a dry (pardon the pun) message about the nutritional value of the products.   Importantly, the new packaging stands out on shelf amidst the sea of brown that typifies the bread aisle in grocery stores.

Given that I’m not a design expert, my POV on these two packaging changes is strictly from a brand perspective.  It seems to me Wonder has only tweaked a few design elements in such unimaginative ways that any change in brand perception the brand managers were trying to achieve is unlikely to occur.  On the other hand, Silver Hill has made a bolder, albeit riskier move that is likely to get people’s attention and prompt a reconsideration.

It seems to me that if a company is going to invest the time and energy to redesign a brand’s packaging, they should make it a change that matters.  No?

When I worked as a consumer research analyst for Spiegel catalogs (my first job out of college!), we used to talk about the three critical points in a customer’s experience with our brand:

1. the point when she shops our catalog,
2. the point when she receives our package, and
3. the point when she uses our products.

We knew we needed to improve at the second point (perhaps what we may now call the “second moment of truth” in today’s P&G parlance?).   So even waaaay back then, before there was the Internet and e-commerce, it was clear that direct sellers have a unique opportunity to make the shipping package a positive, impactful brand touchpoint.

Today, with over 15 years of Internet-based selling now passed, how many companies have figured out how to do this?  By my personal count, not many.  I’ve seen more than my share of plain brown boxes and generic packaging.

That’s why I was so delighted to receive the below package from Moosejaw, the somewhat irreverent, always amusing outdoor outfitter.  (Their themeline “love the madness” says it all.)

Can you believe it?!  My package was sealed with a kiss from Matt.  How cool is that?!  And inside, the following note from Ash was waiting for me.

For me as a customer, all of this made me feel just wonderful about the brand — and you can be sure that’s going to drive me back for more purchases.  As a brand professional, I give kudos to Robert Wolfe and his team at Moosejaw for making an commonly-overlooked brand touchpoint fun, memorable, and differentiating.

It just goes to show every touchpoint between your brand and “the outside world” matters (as clients who engage me to develop a brand touchpoint wheel quickly discover.)  I hope to see other direct sellers following Moosejaw’s lead.

I’ve noticed something lately — name brand food packaged goods are changing their brand visual identities to what seems to me to be a more generic brand look.  Following the two-times-is-just-a-coincidence-but-three-makes-it-a-trend adage, I offer 3 examples:

• Tropicana orange juice
  

  old carton design

new carton design

• Post Shredded Wheat cereal

old box design

new box design

• Lay’s potato chips

old bag design

new bag design

In each instance, the brand name seems to be de-emphasized, while the product type is more the focus.  I find this an interesting approach, given the battle between private-label and branded goods. Private-label brands are growing in number and market share, in part because of their increased “branded-ness” — cases in point:  Whole Foods‘ 365 Everyday Value brand and Costco‘s Kirkland.  And branded goods have been struggling to fight back.  (I previously posted about this.)

Are branded goods trying to emulate a private-label look in order to compete more effectively on shelf?  Or are they simply going for a more streamlined design and have inadvertently adopted a more generic look?  Either way, it’s a curious approach — one that doesn’t make sense to me.

Amazon has launched a new initiative I’m just thrilled about.

The initiative, “Frustration-Free Packaging,” is “designed to make it easier for customers to liberate products from their packages.”

Amazon’s press release explains, “Frustration-Free Packaging is being launched in the U.S. with 19 bestselling products from leading manufacturers…In addition to making packages easier to open, a major goal of the Frustration-Free Packaging initiative is to be more environmentally friendly by using less packaging material.” Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon, is quoted as saying, “I think we’ve all experienced the frustration that sometimes occurs when you try to get a new toy or electronics product out of its package.”

Woo hoo!  I’m excited about this latest development on 2 levels.  First, as a consumer, I can totally relate to what Bezos is talking about.  Just the other day I had a heck of a time trying to open the clamshell on a new USB hub I purchased (through Amazon, ironically) — I had to hold my frustration in check, though, as my previous hasty encounters with hard plastic and sharp cutting materials have yielded a couple mishaps involving bloodshed.

As a brand person, I’m also delighted to see Amazon take this step because it’s so beyond what is expected from an e-commerce company and yet such a wonderful example of the customer service innovation that the Amazon brand has become known for.  From its launch, the site has consistently developed and delivered innovations that have improved the shopping experience — innovations like advanced filtering technology to make their huge selection manageable and “Search Inside The Book” to reduce the risks of online shopping.

On its own each one of these innovations might be easy to copy, but in aggregate they come together to produce a superior shopping experience.  And in turn, this extraordinary shopping experience has created a brand that has no rival.

Amazon says its mission is “to be Earth’s most customer-centric company, where customers can find and discover anything they might want to buy online, and endeavors to offer its customers the lowest possible prices.”  Frustration-Free Packaging is a great example of how this company has made customer-centricity more than just words on a page.  They’ve made it their “brand as business.”

Brandweek’s cover story this week, Brown Bagging It Becomes Fashionable, reports on food consumer packaged goods (CPG) brands like Kraft, Campbell, ConAgra, etc.  These brands have recognized the brown bagging trend by focusing their recent marketing efforts around ingredients that go inside the bag.

The reporter behind the story contacted me for some insights about why we’re seeing the trend.  Although my comments ended up on the cutting room floor, I thought I might share them here.

It seems these CPG brands are making a smart move by supporting a shift in consumer behavior but they should be careful not to put all of their proverbial eggs in one basket (or one brown bag, as the case may be!)

I believe consumers’ increase in brown-bagging reflects a confluence of 3 trends:

1.  less discretionary spending funds due to economic pressures

2.  continued need for convenience foods that keep pace with more active/hectic lifestyles

3.  growing desire to eat “good” food vs. junk food, fast food, etc.

Brown-bagging gives consumers more control and brands that help them brown-bag are thought of as smart “partners.”

However the offerings need to address all of these trends — e.g., if brands price their convenience-products at too high of a premium vs. regularly-packaged products, consumers are going to figure out they’re not worth it and they’ll either reject brown-bagging or improvise their own solution; or if products for brown-bagging are loaded with sodium and chemicals (as many may need to be for preservative function), consumers will realize they’re not really smarter eating choices.

Plus there “green” concerns about wasteful packaging — and just yesterday a new study was released about the damaging health effects of BPA found in plastic bottles and other food packaging.  So brown-bagging products will come under these scrutinies soon.

My final word of caution is that too many brands doing/saying the same thing may become a problem.  Many of these CPG brands already suffer from lack of differentiation and they end up competing primarily on price.   I would encourage marketers to figure out how their brown-bagging products might be integrated into an overall differentiating brand platform.

Michael Phelps is going to appear on Kellogg’s Corn Flakes and Frosted Flakes cereal boxes. Apparently Phelps passed on posing on Wheaties boxes where he has appeared before, so says US Magazine (not the most reliable source of business news, I know, but it’s the only one I found that had an explanation for this interesting development.)

General Mills, on the other hand, just announced they’ve snagged Nastia Luikin and Brian Clay, Olympic winners in gymnastics and the decathlon respectively, to appear on the front of their Wheaties boxes.  As a reminder Wheaties, the “breakfast of champions,” practically invented the practice of athlete endorsements when it debuted a box featuring Lou Gehrig back in 1934.

I’ll let others argue whether Phelps is a better catch than Luikin and Clay — what I find fascinating is the contrast between the two brands’ strategies.

According to Marta Cyhan, Vice President, Global Promotions, Kellogg Company, Michael was chosen because he “embodies the values behind our Frosted Flakes Earn Your Stripes™ program. He knows that winning is not just about the glory that comes with gold medals, but about good sportsmanship, working hard and being your best.”  Apparently the Earn Your Stripes program is designed to encourage kids to eat right, be more active and work hard to achieve all of their goals.

So it seems Kellogg’s is employing a 2-pronged approach — using Phelps’ picture to get kids’ attention on the shelf (and in the pantry) and tying his good-ol-American-boy image to the company’s social responsibility platform in order to earn props with parents.

General Mills‘ celebrity tie in is part of a new brand platform for Wheaties called “Jumpstart Your Metabolism™”which invites people to “discover how eating Wheaties can give you the best chance at winning.”  Their site has a serious look and feel and includes a link to research on muscle recovery.

General Mills, I have to conclude therefore, has elected to target adults who are serious about athletic performance — and to utilize Luikin and Clay to bolster the brand’s credentials as a product for serious athletes.

Two different strategies — for two different brands.  I see Corn Flakes’ approach as tried-and-true, but somewhat tired, while Wheaties is breaking new ground in the cereal category.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out in grocery store sales data — and brand perceptions — over time.