Hi folks!  Trying a new feature this year — a monthly round-up of my published content.

It’s a mental buffet of ideas that may seem schizophrenic at times (I do work on fast food restaurants as well as fitness brands, after all!), but it’s all in the service of helping companies understand and apply the “brand as business” management approach.  Enjoy!

retail and restaurants:

• 12 truths to guide retailing in 2012 – a slideshow success in retail from speakers at NRF’s Retail BIG Show in 2012
• Vickie Achee on the Grand Retail Experiment at Patagonia – an interview with the head of Patagonia’s retail marketing
• Brand Experience Brief: Patagonia’s Tin Shed – photos and notes from my audit of the new concept
• Killing Retail Giants – guest post by Stephen Denny, author of Killing Giants: 10 Strategies to Topple the Goliath in Your Industry.
• New Retail Opportunities – my post on Stephen Denny’s blog
• Picking a Marketing Firm for Your Company – advice from my QSR Magazine column
• J C Penney to Revise Pricing Methods and Limit Promotions – quote in New York Times article
• Is J C Penney Stuck with Stores? — the thoughts behind my NY Times quote
• How Wendy’s Found Itself, Slipped Past BK Into No. 2 Spot – quote in Advertising Age

digital health and fitness:

• Digital Health and Fitness at CES 2012 – video recap of highlights from CES
• Will 2012 Be Like 1984? – a bit inspired by the 3D TV hullabaloo at CES
• Digital Device Manifesto – a call to arms to get and keep the industry’s focus on the user
• Crossing the Health & Fitness Tech Chasm – article published by CE Vision magazine
• Fitness Technology: It’s Not Just Entertainment – a write-up on the panel I moderated at CES’s Fitness Tech Summit

other brand-building topics:

• Brands to Watch in 2012 – my prediction of brands that will make headlines this year
• Brands to Watch – a brand as business brief (e-newsletter) highlighting another brand to watch in 2012
• Lesson from Kodak – a bit about companies shedding their legacies and reinventing themselves
• Differentiation through Specialization – a bit about how to differentiate
• Brand-building for Small Businesses – an excerpt from the course I taught for Marketing Profs University, “Why Small Businesses Need Brands and How to Build Them”
• Learning at Lego – a bit about using anthropological research methods to understand users
• Sam Palmisano’s Legacy: Teaching a Giant to Run – a bit about Palmisano’s four question framework

In a post earlier this week, I started to address why some companies don’t operationalize their brands.  I suggested that there are 3 kinds of business leaders who fail to leverage the full potential of their brands.

The first are Naives:  “Naives simply do not understand the full potential of their brand.  That the brand is the core of the company is a foreign concept to these business leaders.  They don’t know what they don’t know.”

Then there are Aspirers:  “These people are knowledgeable about brands and definitely interested in leveraging them more broadly and substantially, but they don’t know how or they’ve run into roadblocks in their efforts to do so.”

Today we come to Emperors.

The last group of business leaders is comprised of people who think they are leveraging the full role and value of brands, but they really aren’t. Just as the emperor in the popular children’s tale foolishly wore clothes made of “invisible” cloth, these “Emperors” fool themselves and others into thinking that creative ads and clever marketing programs are enough to build a brand.  They spend a lot of money and energy on promoting their brand externally, but they don’t consider or they even ignore the internal, operational changes needed to actually deliver their brands’ value.

Unlike Naives whose omission of a brand-driven management approach may be attributed to their lack of knowledge, Emperors’ resistance is the product of skepticism.  They choose imperial nakedness out of distrust and cynicism about brands.

They think of operations and brand as two separate things.  In Emperors’ minds, the operations of the company fulfill the purpose and objectives of the business – i.e., making a product, offering a service, etc. – while the brand is the icing on the cake.  But when you operationalize the brand, there is no such distinction.

Emperors are often entrepreneurs who thrive on launching new ideas but who are less skilled at driving an operational system in a focused, integrated, consistent manner.  In an effort to propel their new business, these entrepreneurial Emperors often develop creative ideas on a one-off basis and disregard the disconnect between their aspirational vision of the brand and the stark reality of a fledgling operation.

Leaders of image-oriented businesses such as fashion and automotive also tend to be Emperors.  Because their customers’ purchase decisions seem to be based primarily on style and status, their focus tends to be on what the company says (the image it projects in advertising and marketing) vs. what it really does (the value it delivers in daily operations.)

And some retailers and restaurant leaders are Emperors because they are so preoccupied with pricing and promotions that they overlook many of the opportunities to build their brand through the in-store customer experience.

Really Emperors can be found in all sectors of business.  Most company leaders don’t operationalize their brands because they are skeptical of the brand’s role as a business driver.  They wrongly resist putting stock in something they consider to be too conceptual or qualitative to pass muster in an analytical or performance culture.

An intervention may be the only way to challenge an Emperor.  Only when forced to be thoughtful and honest about the way they currently view and use their brand will they discover the gap between delusion and reality.

—-

If you’re on the client side of the business, I’m curious to hear whether you see yourself in any of these 3 descriptions – Naives, Aspirers, or Emperors — or perhaps you’re someone who “gets it?!”  If you’re on the service provider side of the business, what kind of leaders do you most commonly encounter?  Please let me know!

My intent in outlining these categorizations is not to judge or criticize people – in fact, it’s the opposite.  I hope this might be a helpful step on everyone’s brand-building journey.  If we clearly understand the challenges before us, there’s a greater likelihood of surmounting them.

related posts:

• why not operationalize brands? part 1
• what’s a brand for?
• express vs. operationalize

Over coffee the other day a colleague asked me a question I actually get asked a lot:  Do you find that people “get it?”  By “it” he was referring to operationalizing the brand, the approach I teach and help my clients implement.  He asked because he’s found, as have I, that although many company leaders claim to understand the difference between expressing and operationalizing a brand, the fact is, most don’t put their brand in the driver’s seat of their organization.

Our talk prompted me to think about why this is the case.  Most business leaders are eager to leverage the full potential of their brands, but they’re not following through. 

I concluded that most are held back by holes in their experience, roadblocks in their organizations, or their own blinders.  I would say business leaders fall into one of three categories when it comes to the subject of operationalizing their brands.  (In today’s post, I’ll outline the first two, and later this week, I’ll conclude with the third.)

Naives.  Some business leaders can be described as “Naive” — those who think of brands only in literal terms.  To Naives, a brand is simply a logo or perhaps at most an advertising campaign.

The buzz that brands have received in recent years has piqued the interest of Naives but they’ve been misled by misinformation from so-called experts.  Many agencies, consultants, and even authors talk about “branding” in terms of slapping the company logo on everything, or using a particular color or tagline consistently, or working the social media circuit.  As a result, after researching how to build their brand, Naives usually end up with a long list of things they think they should be doing, but they remain unconvinced that any of them are going to have an impact on their bottom line.

Not surprisingly, executives with technical or financial backgrounds usually fall into this group.  In these leaders’ experience, brand development has usually been something relegated to the marketing department — so their exposure to what a brand really is and how to use it properly has been limited.

Salespeople are also often Naives, because of their relentless focus on the sale.  Brands may serve as fodder for a great sales presentation, many salespeople believe, but they’re unsure of their value beyond that.  And leaders of B2B and technology companies may not recognize how a strong brand can impact their relationship- or innovation-based business models.

Naives simply do not understand the full potential of their brand. That the brand is the core of the company is a foreign concept to these business leaders.  They don’t know what they don’t know.

In order for Naives to operationalize their brands, they need to learn to think about brands differently.  An open mind and a willingness to test a new approach are the required first steps for these folks.

Aspirers. Another category of business leaders are “Aspirers.”  These people are knowledgeable about brands and definitely interested in leveraging them more broadly and substantially, but they don’t know how or they’ve run into roadblocks in their efforts to do so.

A typical Aspirer is a former Chief Marketing Officer who has taken on line operating responsibilities – a common occurrence at packaged goods companies.  Having worked with brands throughout their careers, these Aspirers see the potential brands have for creating value throughout the organization but they lack the internal traction to implement the brand-driven approach.

Other Aspirers may have previously worked at or heard about other companies which have opertionalized their brands and are interested in engaging a similar one in their organization.

For Aspirers the key needs are instruction and equipping.  They need to learn the specific tools and methodologies and examples which make a solid business case for operationalizing the brand.  They need help in conveying the importance of the brand to every stakeholder of their organization and persuading them to adopt the brand as the driver of the business.

I hope this has provided some good food for thought so far.  Please check back on Thursday for my description of the final group of business leaders who aren’t operationalizing their brands.

related posts:

• brands vs. branding
• gaining the competitive edge
• missing the brand boat

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.

I’ve been mulling over a debate for the past few weeks and haven’t been able to resolve it, so I thought I’d share it here and get your input.

The issue is whether marketers should try to increase the marketing function in the organization or whether they should try to increase the marketing capability of the entire organization.  The debate was prompted by an op-ed written by Larry Light, marketing guru and former McDonald’s CMO, in Forbes a few weeks ago.

Larry’s piece, entitled “Marketing Is Being Devalued,” argues that marketing “needs to assert its rightful role making it the central force of brand-business management.”  Larry outlines the 5 reasons he believes marketing is not fulfilling its business management role, including lack of organizational alignment, a trust deficit, and a measurement mindset which stifles marketing.

He warns, “Marketing as we know it will continue to decline unless we move to reform marketing and transform the CMO from a marketing communications leader to a brand-business leader.”

At first blush, I couldn’t agree with Larry more.  I share his concern about marketing being a short-term, tactics-based function.  Marketing is so much more than ad campaigns and taglines. I even recently penned a piece for my new Brand New Perspectives column in QSR Magazine about the expansive, impactful role that the most effective CMOs play. Particularly in these times when companies are focusing on growing the topline, marketing should be the engine which drives new growth.

But upon further reflection, I realize that making the marketing role more important may not be the answer.  Perhaps the goal shouldn’t be to elevate the marketing function within companies, but rather to make marketing the function of companies.

That is, perhaps companies should organize their people, build systems and processes, align resources and prioritize, and build capability throughout the organization so that the entire enterprise executes the marketing role.  I believe this is what Peter Drucker was referring to in his famous quote, “Because the purpose of business is to create a customer, the business enterprise has two–and only two–basic functions: marketing and innovation…Marketing is the distinguishing, unique function of the business.”

Many of you know that I advocate for the “brand as business (TM)” management approach. “Brand as business” involves the deliberate and systematic management of the business around the brand.  It impacts all business functions – from generating insights, to making planning decisions, and to facilitating operational excellence.  As such, “brand as business” is not a marketing undertaking; it’s a business model led by the top executives and executed by everyone in the organization.

When I speak to marketing folks about “brand as business,” I tell them that it’s not enough for the marketing department to “get it.” It requires everyone in the organization to shift their identity from their traditional job description, instead thinking of themselves as operators of the brand, who develop, maintain, and activate the brand across all of their activities.

So marketing shouldn’t be vying for bigger budgets for marketing and bigger jobs or titles.  Their goal should be a brand as business organization and their job is to find ways to convey the importance of brand to every person in the company – to persuade them to adopt brand as business.

I think this way of thinking applies to the marketing function in general.  Take customer insights.  It’s counter-productive for an elite few to claim ownership of customer understanding.  Likewise identifying creative ways to engage customers may indeed be marketing’s bailiwick but unless the ideas are are co-developed with other functional areas, operational considerations will be overlooked and their viability, unlikely.  The understanding of customers, the development of value propositions, and the broad application of brand values must be aligned and integrated throughout the organization.

Larry Light argues that

• the CMO is responsible for building and managing the brand-business plan,
• the CMO is the voice of the customer, whether a BTB customer or a consumer.
• the CMO is the customer advocate.
• the CMO must lead the effort to drive true customer-insight focused innovation.
• the CMO should lead the effort to break down organizational silos.

And a side of me wants to stand up and shout “amen!”  But I wonder, shouldn’t everyone in the organization be doing these things?  Shouldn’t everyone seek to better understand customers and advocate for doing what’s best for them?  Shouldn’t everyone work together to develop innovations based on customer insights?  Shouldn’t everyone tear down silos and contribute to building the brand?

This is not to say that there’s no need for a marketing department or that marketing doesn’t play an important role in an organization.  Marketing establishes and cultivates the critical conduit with the “outside world” – communicating and delivering brand value from the inside out and gathering insights and sourcing tools and resources to bring inside for the entire organization to use.   Depending on which way you look at it, either this sounds like the functional expertise and value of marketing is diminished; or it paints a bigger vision for marketing.

So, what do you think?  Should we be concerned that marketing is being devalued?  Or should we be excited about making marketing something everyone in the organization does?  Please share your thoughts!

related posts:

• the business reset button
• gaining the competitive edge

As 2009 draws to a close, I thought I’d take a quick look back at significant developments of the past year.  And what a year it’s been, hasn’t it?!

Last January, I don’t think any of us could have predicted how bad things would get (the economic downtown, collapse of the automotive industry, Adam Lambert’s American Music Awards performance – to name a few of the year’s downers) – nor what the bright spots would end up being (Twitter adoption, explosion of iPhone Apps, and Glee – some of my picks for highlights!)

A stroll through the past year’s brand as business bites ™ posts reveals some of 2009’s more memorable moments and movements:

January 5th – “no money, no problem”  I started the year with an optimistic outlook, calling the “brand as business” approach “the biggest opportunity for brands” because it transforms brand-building from a discrete, costly, and subjective activity into the most critical way of managing and growing a business.  Little did I know how many leaders would end up completely neglecting their brands for the year.

February 6th – “brand you?”  Thanks to the tanking economy, many people found themselves looking for work.  Pundits pounced on their misfortunes, promoting personal branding as a way for folks to package and sell themselves.  I became concerned that this development might trivialize brands in general, so I wrote this post to remind everyone that brand-building, whether for individuals or brands, depends on increasing the value you deliver and how you do it.

May 3rd – “5 brands we would miss: a series”  Kicking off Q2, 24/7 Wall ran an article outlining twelve brands that were likely to see their demise in the year’s downturn.  I started a blog series which highlighted a few brands from the list and explained on why I would miss them.  It’s interesting to note that only one of the five I wrote about (Saturn) ended up disappearing.

July 9th – “free to be free”  As introduced by Chris Anderson in his  book “Free,” the “free economy” took off this year and commerce will never be the same.  We’re witnesses to tectonic shifts in the way businesses make money and the innovation of brand new business models.  This post outlines my thoughts on how Free should and shouldn’t be used.

September 1st – “starbucks went changin’ — best blogpost revisited”  Starbucks made the headlines several times this year.  From starting the year off on shaky ground, to testing an unbranded re-brand (15th Avenue Coffee and Tea), to introducing VIA an instant coffee product, the venerable coffee chain sparked many a conversation.  Perhaps the most exciting for me came from this post in my best blogpost contest in which the winner stated, “Rather than trying to be all coffee shops to all people, it makes more sense for Starbucks to focus on the core of their brand, and then to make sure that they always do that well.”

October 22nd – “brand documentaries”   This post outlined an idea for a new brand tool (brand documentaries which would be used by all brand stakeholders to enhance their brand understanding) and sparked great feedback and new ideas on my blog and on Twitter – and the discussion even continues on today on LinkedIn.  And that’s what’s so remarkable.  It’s encouraging to see the widespread interest in new tools for use in today’s brand context as well as the willingness to collaborate and share ideas in order to create them.  And it’s amazing that we now have the social Web to facilitate this kind of collaboration and dialogue.

October 26th – “the business reset button”  Early signs of a recovery emerged in Q3 and as business leaders started returning their attention to growth, I returned to advocating for a new management strategy – one that’s more in tune with the changing market and optimizes the company’s core operating system in meeting demand.  I wrote a paper and introduced a new keynote presentation on “brand as business” ™ the ultimate business reset button.

November 30th – “ode to black friday”  Given the dismal results retailers posted for most of the year, many started this holiday season desperate for sales. I wrote this ditty to express my personal fatigue with their emphasis on deep discounts and deals.  We now know that business has come back at a moderate clip, but I remain concerned about the long-term damage caused by retailers’ over-reliance of sales and discounts.

And this is where we find ourselves now — on a slow and bumpy road to recovery, but a recovery nonetheless.  I hope this recap has shown that, although there was a lot in 2009 that we’d like to forget about or do over, there have been some glimmers of hope and new ways of working have emerged which will propel us forward.  As we close the books on the past year, let’s preserve the best and reinvent the rest.

Hope you are enjoying a wonderful holiday season!  (brand as business bites will resume on January 4th.)

Last month I asked you to vote to get my manifesto, “Reset:  Re-Ignite Your Business with the Power of Your Brand,” published on ChangeThis.  I really appreciate all of your votes which ended getting my paper to one of the top spots on the list — but apparently others garnered more and so they took a pass.  So…I’m publishing it here instead.  And, I’m also posting some bonus content.

Here is the paper:

click on icon to download paper

It calls for fresh thinking and a new management approach to jumpstart the recovery.  We need:

• new ways to create new value.  Companies need to identify new revenue streams and seize the right ones.
• to re-ignite topline growth while continuing to manage costs.  Advertising and marketing may be back in play but we need to do more with less.
• to re-engage employees.  Layoffs and budget cuts have caused employees to become distracted and their work, unfocused.  Workforces need to be motivated, aligned, and productive.

In short, business leaders need fresh ideas and a new business model to help their organizations become more nimble, efficient, and focused.  “Brand as business^TM” is the ultimate business reset button.

And, here is a video:  Reset video

click on image to launch video

It’s an introductory video to my new keynote address based on this paper.  It explains why the “brand as business” management approach is needed now more than ever.

I hope you agree business leaders need to hear this message and so I’m hoping to get as much exposure for the paper and the video as I would have gotten on ChangeThis.  So if you like what you read/see, would you please pass it along.  Thanks much!

Five years ago this month, I became an independent!

Yep – back in September of 2004, I followed the advice of a book title I heard of (“Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway”) and resigned my VP/GM Brand and Strategy post at Sony Electronics, Inc. to hang out a shingle as an independent brand consulting partner.  I thought I’d take this occasion to recount some of the milestones on the journey I’ve been on since that crazy moment.

For those of you who don’t know me well, I hope this post will explain why I believe so strongly in “brand as business” – and for those of you who have been my support and guidance, partners and clients over the last 5 years, I hope you will be able to see how you’ve helped get me to where I am today.   

September, 2004 – I started out with a business card, a hope and a prayer.  I wanted to share with the world all that I had learned about brand development and be able to have more impact and help more companies than I would if I had stayed at Sony or any other corporate job.

October, 2004 – I got my first gig.  I served as an advisor to an advertising agency that was pitching a piece of new business and that wanted to tap my experience in the category and my insider’s knowledge of the client.  I was grateful to start off with such an interesting, challenging, and (most importantly) paying (!) project – but even then, I realized that I didn’t want to limit the scope of my work to marketing communications.  I was far more interested in the integration of the client’s brand with its business strategy and operations.

September, 2005 – I celebrated my 1 year anniversary, having been blessed to have worked on great brands like Frito-Lay, Jack in the Box, and Hitachi in my first year.  I learned so much from those first experiences – including that companies of all kinds and sizes struggle with how to close the gap between their brand vision and the reality of their day-to-day business. I drew upon my client-side experience base to try to help my clients navigate through budgets, politics, and processes to build their brands.

January, 2006 – I incorporated my business and officially became Denise Lee Yohn, Inc. More than an accounting change, this move signaled my intent to not just be a “freelancer” or a consultant as in I-say-I’m-a-consultant-but-I’m-really-just-in-between-jobs – but rather, I wanted to have direct, vital, and fully accountable relationships with clients.

September, 2006 – My second year included projects for Jamba Juice, Kipling, and Road Runner Sports, among others.  I drew from and added to my toolkit of methods, processes, and tools that helped companies translate brand strategy into brand execution.

August, 2007 – I took a class based on the Strengthsfinder assessment and realized what my strengths are and what gives me energy and gets me excited.  Based on this, I decided to pursue more speaking opportunities as a way to share my passion for operationalizing brands.

November, 2007 – I attended HOW’s Mind Your Own Business conference and was forever changed!  (I’m not exaggerating.)  The conference is targeted to creative service professionals, but it is a great learning experience for anyone running a professional services business.  Thanks to the provocative conference sessions and the follow-up research I did, I became convinced of the importance of specialization – that is, of focusing on one area of services and/or one market/category.

I realized I needed to narrow my scope to “brand as business” – the management approach that involves the deliberate and systematic management of the business around the brand.  Not only would this differentiate me from all the other brand consultants out there by leveraging my unique experience of having spent so many years on the client-side of business, but also it would enable me to influence and guide companies in the way they needed to grow the most.

Furthermore, I decided to more aggressively target companies in the health, fitness, and wellness categories, since I know these categories well (I’m a fitness enthusiast and a former aerobics instructor) and since I had already worked with quite a few of these companies.   The learnings I took away from conference truly helped change the game for me.

January, 2008 – I launched “brand as business briefs^TM,” periodic emailed briefings about how companies can operationalize their brands.  I wanted a way to share with and get feedback from others on my thinking about “brand as business.”  I wanted to know if other people agreed that while breakthrough brand strategies and messaging are important, companies needed to make their brands the central organizing and operating idea of their businesses.  People did indeed agree and encouraged me to continue working on and sharing about this.

March, 2008 – I started down the path of writing and publishing a book.  Based on my desire to evangelize “brand as business” and to establish a more regular speaking business, I was advised to write a book.  So I engaged a marketing mentor to help me write a book proposal and I asked a presentation consultant to help me package “brand as business” into an argument that could be made in presentation or book format.  (Little did I know then how long and hard of a road it would be to even get the book off the ground.  But now, a year and a half later, I’m closer than ever to securing a publisher and I’m planning to publish “Reset: Re-Ignite Your Business with the Power of Your Brand” in 2010!)

August, 2008 – “brand as business bites,” my blog, launched.  I had gotten such positive feedback on my newsletter that I felt there might be a desire for more ongoing communication with my network.  Plus, it seemed a blog would provide the venue through which I could share insights with the broader brand and business community.  For awhile I have to admit I felt like I was writing into the wind – maybe connecting with a handful of readers.  But the process of writing the blog as well as following other bloggers helped to sharpen my thinking and writing, so I kept at it.  And, now, I suppose if you’re reading this, then that means I’ve reached a few more folks and hopefully I’m advancing the conversation about brands and how we build them.

April, 2009 – I took the Twitter plunge.  And lo and behold, it’s been a godsend!  I have been exposed to far more people, resources, and ideas through Twitter than anything else I’ve done.  I feel much more engaged with current business issues and the latest thinking on brands, and I’ve enjoyed meeting and learning from folks from places as far away as New Zealand and Brazil.  I also am learning from how businesses of all kinds are using Twitter to connect with customers and achieve their objectives.  All of this, I believe, has helped me be a better resource to my clients as I help them operationalize their brands to grow their businesses.

September, 2009 – Today! It’s been 5 years – woo hoo!  Thank you so much to everyone who has helped me along on this journey.  I’ve purposefully not mentioned specific names of resources, partners, and other folks who have supported me through this journey only because I fear I would offend people by forgetting or excluding them.  But please know that I am fully aware of the many people to whom I owe the success of my business.  I am extremely grateful for you – I hope you know that.

Now as I turn to the years ahead of me, I’m excited and (cautiously) optimistic about what the future holds for Denise Lee Yohn, Inc. and “brand as business.”  I’ve made some plans and set some goals – one of which I’m delighted to announce today:  I’ve started a podcast, the “brand as business bites podcast.”  The podcast features a mix of current blogposts and revisits of past blogposts, along with occasional bonus content and (hopefully in the future) interviews with brand and business thought-leaders. It’s available on iTunes and I would love for you to subscribe and give me feedback.

Once again, thanks for everything!

p.s.  the picture above is of the pink slippers my Sony colleagues gave to me when I left — as you can see, they’ve been worn a lot and so 5 years later, I’m finally going to retire them!

The folks at ChangeThis* are considering publishing my manifesto, “Reset: Re-ignite Your Business with the Power of Your Brand“ — and I need your votes to make it happen.

The manifesto asserts that it’s time to hit the reset button on business.

Business leaders need a new management strategy – one that’s more in tune with the changing market and optimizes the company’s core operating system in meeting demand.

“Brand as Business^TM” is the ultimate business reset button. “Brand as Business” is the management approach that involves the deliberate and systematic management of the business around the brand. Using the brand as a management tool makes organizations more nimble, efficient, and focused.

The manifesto jump-starts the recovery with a new approach that transforms brand-building from a costly, discrete, subjective activity into the most integral way of managing and growing a business.

Please vote for the manifesto before October 14th — if it gets enough votes (how many is enough is not clear, but the more, the better), it will be published.  Thanks in advance for your support!

*ChangeThis is the brainchild of Seth Godin — owned by 800-CEO-READ, ChangeThis publishes “thoughtful, rational, constructive arguments about important issues.“

Congratulations to Jon Galloway, the winner of the “vote for the best blogpost” celebration I held to mark the 1-year anniversary of my blog!

Jon voted for “don’t go changin’ to try to please them,” a post I had written about why brands shouldn’t go chasing after customers.  Jon explains his choice:

This really resonated with me since I’ve seen this mistake made so many times from a product development point of view:  “let’s add a splash of social media, a dash of what’s trendy this week, and a little bit of what the boss read about in an airplane magazine last week…”  Eventually you end up with an incoherent mix that doesn’t make anyone happy. Your post really summed this up well – rather than trying to be all coffee shops to all people, it makes more sense for Starbucks to focus on the core of their brand, and then to make sure that they always do that well.

To explain, I wrote in the post that if Starbucks were to heed the advice of a recent Harvard Business Review article, they would try to steal some of my visits to a local independent coffee shop, Mystic Mocha— but it would be a fruitless and senseless effort.  Fruitless because I like visiting Mystic Mocha regularly and don’t want to stop going there; senseless because Mystic Mocha meets a very different need from Starbucks and I value each brand for fulfilling each unique need.  Instead, I advised, Starbucks — and all companies really — should focus on the elements that are at the core of their brand and invest in excelling at those.

Interestingly, in the time that has transpired since when the post was published back in early April, Starbucks has indeed gone “changin’ to try to please them.”  The company’s debut of 15th Avenue Coffee and Tea features equipment, product, and design changes to give the stores a locally-themed and less uniform look.  By serving wine and beer and to hosting live music and poetry readings, the new stores are intended to attract an older, more upscale, and perhaps more elite customer.  The change has been critiqued and criticized by many, including me.

In my mind, the reasons why this latest move from Starbucks’ doesn’t make sense all boil down to the thinking I shared in the post our winner Jon selected.  So, thanks, Jon, for drawing our attention back to the post, and congratulations once again.

Jon is Senior Software Engineer with Vertigo Software.  He works with cutting edge technologies, like Silverlight and Microsoft‘s latest web frameworks.   Check out Jon’s blog and podcast for a full immersion into the world of programming.

Jon’s favorite brand is StackOverflow (a programming Q&A website) — because, he says, “they’ve got such a clear focus on making their customers successful.  I think they do a great job of saying who they are and what they’re trying to do, then really delivering.“  Sounds like my kind of brand (if I were a programmer!)

Thanks to everyone who participated in the contest.  (The winning vote was selected at random; the post that actually garnered the most votes was “brand inspiration” — more on this to come.)  I’ve enjoyed hearing from all of you — I so value your readership and our connection.

I’m looking forward to a great Year 2!