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.)

I’m guessing most of you don’t frequently have the opportunity to tell your CEO to go take a crap, but that’s essentially what I did last year – and ever since, we’ve had a fruitful and rewarding relationship.

This, of course, requires some explanation.  The background is that my partner (Shawn Parr of Bulldog Drummond) and I had been engaged to kick off a brand revitalization effort for a restaurant chain.  As is the case with many of my clients, the challenge was less about setting the right brand strategy and more about engaging all stakeholders to execute it with excellence in the customer experience.  We decided to start with a worksession for the executive leadership team – our goal was to help them take an honest assessment of their brand execution in the customer experience.

For most of the worksessions I lead, I assign pre-work for the participants.  Sometimes it’s reading briefing materials, other times it’s doing research on competitive brands or consumer trends.  The value is the participants come to the session more focused and primed for discussion.

For this worksession, the pre-work assignment was to do some restaurant visits. But there was a catch: we gave them specific instructions to follow — including visiting the same location at various times of the day/night (to help them assess the consistency of the customer experience), to taking a friend along and asking him/her to complete an assessment (to help them see things they might miss), and to going to the bathroom and sitting on the toilet (to get the full experience of using the facilities, not just looking at them).  We believed this last step – essentially telling the CEO (and the rest of the executive team) to take a crap — would be a real eye opener — and indeed it was!

The participants came to the worksession armed with stories and pictures (part of the assignment) revealing how poor the customer experience was.  The CEO reported learning so much from the exercise because her m.o. was usually to go through the drive-thru, rarely going inside the dining room and never going to the restroom, much less sitting on the toilet.

It was uncomfortable for the executive team to give their sobering reports from the restaurant visits, but their collective frustration served as the foundation for the rest of the worksession.  The exercise aligned them with a common understanding of the customer experience problems and united them with a commitment to develop solutions.

Since then, we’ve been on a journey of developing a brand strategy that’s more focused and executable, and engaging the rest of the organization with the vision and their roles in delivering the brand throughout the entire customer experience.  The company is well on its way to regaining brand equity and its key business indicators have been improving.

It’s been a terrific engagement — and it all started with a simple exercise:  go sit on the toilet.  It’s amazing how much the details of the customer experience get overlooked.  Other eye-opening assignments I’ve given include:

• For an e-retailer, order a product online and get it delivered to your home.  Most executives buy – or are given — their company’s products in the office and then take them home with them to try out. Many are surprised to see what their product and packaging looks like after getting shipped from the warehouse, taking a cross-country ride through the USPS, and getting dumped on a doorstep.
• For a restaurant brand, order the items with the lowest sales mix.  Most executives try the newest products on the menu and have their favorites they always order.  But sampling some of the least popular menu items gives a sense of what a product is like when the ingredients have been sitting around for awhile and the chef or crew don’t have the proficiency that comes from making and serving the product frequently.
• For a services company, make a complaint.  Corporate executives set and review service procedures and some might occasionally listen in on service calls, but there’s nothing like dialing up that 800 number themselves.  A CEO learns a lot from enduring the hold time (a 60-second wait time doesn’t sound that bad until you have to sit there listening to bad hold music), to trying to converse with a live representative (who may or may not have the skills, tools, authority, or inclination to fix the problem), to seeing how the complaint is (or isn’t) resolved.

There are plenty of other ways to illuminate a company’s opportunities to improve the customer experience – and some CEOs might not respond as graciously to explicit instructions on bathroom usage.  But I always try to work in a way to personally and deliberately engage in the customer experience the people responsible for making changes to it.

(This post is part of the Bathroom  Blogfest, a fun series of posts from a community of bloggers organized Christine B. Whittemore, chief simplifier of Simple Marketing Now. This is my first year participating in the series and I’m so excited to hear the different perspectives on this important aspect of customer experience.  Below is the list of all the other posts – happy reading!)

The adage “god is in the details” is usually offered in reference to a small mistake with big consequences. And when it comes to brand touchpoints, it’s commonly known how a screw-up here or a snafu there can cause significant damage to a brand’s image and equity.

But often the most important details are ones that most companies overlook.

They’re not mistakes so much as they are simply missed opportunities.  It’s easy to miss or miscalculate the value of some brand touchpoints. They’re unused branding real estate that people wouldn’t give a second thought to, unless someone else did first.

Here are three details I noticed recently:

reloadable charge card from Caribou Coffee – The card conveys simple, uplifting messages like “Yes, It is possible” and “Hold hands, not grudges” in a well designed layout. How fun!

water decanter at Ciao Bella restaurant (in Richfield, MN) – A glass bottle is labeled, “Fresh water compliments of the house. This double filtered water is free of impurities, free of wasteful packaging, and free of charge.”  How refreshing!

stamp on letter from Plant with Purpose (a non-profit working against deforestation) – A Forever postage stamp features the exhortation “use efficient light bulbs” accompanied by a cute drawing of such a light bulb. How appropriate!

What’s significant about all three of these examples is that the companies didn’t just slap their logos in these spaces. They used the real-estate to convey messages – and meaningful messages at that. The messages reflect the core values of the brands and convey a sense of the brands’ personalities.

These details weren’t necessary – we’ve all used charge cards featuring logos or fanciful designs, been served water from unlabeled decanters, and received letters with regular stamps. I probably wouldn’t even have noticed their absence if they hadn’t been there. But I did notice them, and they did have an impact on me. Each was a positive brand impression. And that’s the point.

Conventional wisdom says that there are only a few ways that customers get exposed to your brand – advertising, packaging, websites, and social media. But the reality is, there are hundreds of touchpoints between your brand and the outside world.

Below is a template of a Brand Touchpoint Wheel which shows all the possible touchpoints through which people experience a brand.

When we created one of these at Sony, the brand wheel identified over 240 touchpoints — not including all of its products. Fewer than 40 of them were advertising or marketing touchpoints. A wheel like this shows that the big things you say are greatly outnumbered by the little things you do.

So if you’re looking to make a bigger impact with your brand, pay attention to the smaller opportunities. By conducting a simple customer experience audit, you’re likely to discover a whole host of brand touchpoints you never thought of before. And by thinking about the best ways bring your brand values and attributes to life, you might identify opportunities to create new brand touchpoints. (Also you can always contact me to learn more about how a Brand Touchpoint Wheel might be a helpful tool for your organization.)

When it comes to your brand, no touchpoint is too small to make a big impression.

related posts:

• america’s next great restaurant episode six recap
• corporate reports are brand touchpoints
• birthdays and brands

The new laws popping up which require restaurants to post calorie counts next to food listings have me concerned. This may come as a surprise to those who know me – after all, I am a fitness enthusiast and I try to practice healthy eating.   So the nutritional content of food is really important to me.

But I just don’t agree with the menu labeling laws.  Here are my reasons why I think they’re bad for business:

1.    where to draw the line?

Most laws currently require the posting of calorie counts only.  But if you know anything about food, you know that calorie counts can be very misleading.  Not all calories are created equal.  Calories from protein are generally good; calories from sugar and fat are generally not.  Calories from good fats are OK; bad fats, not so much.  By limiting the nutritional information required to calories alone, lawmakers are actually doing a disservice to the people they’re trying to serve.

But, on the other hand, if you don’t put a limit to the nutritional information required, information overload is bound to happen.  “Nutrition Facts” labels might work on packaged foods but they’re not sensible for restaurant menus.

Below is the nutritional information menu provided to every guest at PF Chang’s – it’s 5 pages long and the data is overwhelming, even to someone like me.

So where do we draw the line?  Who’s to say that milligrams of salt should be disclosed but grams of fat shouldn’t?  Or whether or not grams of fiber should be broken out from total grams of carbohydrates? There’s no clear delineation.

Now, I’m the last person who says that just because something is difficult, it shouldn’t be done. (I love challenges and place tremendous value on perseverance.) That’s not what I’m saying here.  Rather, the difficulty of doing this actually points to the fact that it shouldn’t be done.

Lawmakers shouldn’t be determining what nutritional information is important enough to warrant being called out on a menu. The consumer should be the one who determines the right information for him or her.

PSAs can be deployed to educate the public on the value of different information and restaurants should make detailed nutritional information available to anyone who seeks it out — but the decision should be rest with the consumer.

My second reason for concern over menu labeling laws is related to the first.

2.    respect for the consumer

Regulating restaurants in an attempt to try to get people to eat healthy is like mandating that television networks tell people to cut back on TV watching because it’s detrimental to their mental development or requiring companies which make alcoholic products to tell consumers that drinking is bad.  There are no such laws because these points just aren’t true.

Eating at restaurants, even fast food ones, is not an inherently bad behavior – it’s only dangerous when it is done in excess.  Consumers know this and we should have enough respect for them to let them make their own decisions.

I don’t say this from a Libertarian point of view – I say it from a brand one.  Companies want to have authentic, trusting relationships with their customers – this is only possible if companies exhibit behaviors which demonstrate respect for them.

So again restaurants should make nutritional information available to people, but they shouldn’t force feed it to them as if to suggest they’re not capable of making smart decisions on their own.

3.    brand-building

Restaurants fill customers’ needs and desires for convenient meal solutions, or for treats, or for access different products and tastes – and in some cases, for healthy foods.  Good brands know their target customers well enough to know want they want and need — and know what and how to communicate with them in order to meet those needs.

If a restaurant is trying to appeal to a discrete segment of consumers who care about nutritional information, the restaurant’s communications touchpoints – whether menus, brochures, websites, whatever — will reflect this.  But if such consumers are not part of the brand’s target audience, then the company shouldn’t be forced to clutter its communication with irrelevant messaging.

Focused and streamlined messaging is an essential tenet of brand-building. No law or regulation should require that a restaurant violate it.

I’m sure there are many who disagree with my concerns and I’d like to hear from you.  Please let me know your reactions to what I’ve said.

The other day I found myself doing something quite curious – after having placed an item into my grocery cart, I turned around, took it out, and returned it to the shelf.  That momentary act wasn’t strange because I’m generally a decisive person — but rather because of what caused me to reverse my actions.  My change of heart was prompted by a ½” inch square – or actually, the absence of it.

You see, the product was a box of tangerines and none of contents had a Cuties sticker like the ones I had noticed on tangerines I had purchased previously.  In the split second of surveying the item, I realized they were in fact a different brand of tangerines and so I decided I didn’t want them.  I stopped to consider what had just happened – and it got me thinking about the role of brands and commodity categories.

an orange is just an orange

Generally speaking, produce is not a category in which brands have played a strong role.  Sure, Sunkist oranges

and Chiquita bananas

have been promoted through the years, but most category behavior is driven by price – and in more recent years, by source — organic vs. not or locally-grown vs. not.

But lately, I’ve noticed a trend toward more branded produce.  In addition to Cuties tangerines, products like Cherub tomatoes and Bunny Luv carrots have sprouted up.  In many cases, these branded products cost more than their “generic” counterparts – and yet, despite these recessionary times, people seem willing to pay for them.

It’s curious, especially given the recent growth of private label product.  In practically every other aisle of the grocery store, manufacturers’ brands are feeling the pressure from the store’s brands – the increased quality and consumer acceptance of private label is causing branded goods to lose facings or lower their prices.  But in produce, the reverse seems to be happening.

why branded produce

This trend seems to be fueled by the intersection of the needs of the consumer with the needs of the retailer.  Articles (1, 2)  from Grocery Headquarters magazine explain what’s going on:

Seth Pemsler, vice president, retail/international for the Idaho Potato Commission, based in Eagle, Idaho, says consumers want to buy branded produce in the same way they want to buy certain brands of packaged items. “The whole essence of brands is confidence and comfort; the idea that if I buy this brand it’s going to be consistent.”

“Intensifying competition among supermarket chains and constant price wars over center store items have led supermarket retailers to try to differentiate themselves from the competition through the use of their perishable departments, including produce, analysts say.”  Further, “consumer research continually emphasizes the importance of great produce departments as the primary criteria for selecting a supermarket to shop,” says Bill Goldfield, communications manager for Dole Food Co., based in Westlake Village, Calif.

Consumers are looking for the quality reassurance which brands promise, and retailers are looking for ways to differentiate themselves and give people reasons to choose them.  These complimentary needs have created a win-win-win situation.  Produce companies, consumers, and retailers all benefit from the rise of branded produce.

So it’s likely we’ll see even more branded produce in the future.  I just hope produce brands don’t exploit the situation and end up upsetting the apple cart of mutual-benefit.

what works

The Cuties brand actually strikes the balance well.  A few observations:

• competitive pricing – I’ve found Cuties to be priced only around 10% of above other unbranded options – and with a coupon, the price differential becomes minimal.  It’s clear the company behind the brand understands the price expectations of its target.
• perceptible product quality differential – Cuties are noticeably different from other tangerines because they’re sweet, juicy, and seedless.  The brand has come to embody this quality difference.
• well-executed brand personality – It’s not simply the use of a brand name that distinguishes Cuties, it’s the brand name itself.  “Cutie” is a perfect descriptor of the little orange balls and the name adds value to the product beyond tangible attributes.  Further the stickers on every tangerine reinforce the cute brand personality with phrases like “Root for the Cute” and “Cuties R4 Kids.”

Without these elements, Cuties would be just another brand name slapped on an undifferentiated product.  But with them, Cuties provides a great example of how brands create value.

related post:

• brands, generic-style

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

Recently I met with the folks in Cisco’s brand group and was delighted to find a few simple brand tools sitting in the place where a person’s business cards are usually found.

The first tool is a brand platform “cheat sheet” in the form factor of an i.d. badge. The front spells out the Cisco “Brand Aspirations”:

I like the simplicity and digest-ability of this. A succinct sentence conveys the Brand Promise and Position. Three words comprise the Brand Personality and six comprise Brand Behaviors. The use of bulls-eye clearly communicates that the Brand Promise and Position are the core of the Brand. And the background image supports the written concepts well.

The back of the “cheat sheet” complements the front of it, by indicating how the Cisco brand communicates:

I like the Is/Is Not approach, as I think understanding what a brand is not is often more instructive than learning what it is – especially for a business like Cisco which is already so expansive and continues to evolve.

Moreover, this tool is clearly intended for employees to insert into their i.d. badge holders so they have it with them at all times. This tactic is not new but I found the simplicity of the content and design to be quite compelling — and if I were a Cisco employee, I think I would actually want to look at and use the tool.

The other tool seems like a recruiting piece, but it speaks volumes about the brand as well. It’s actually a series of business card-like cards – the front conveys a welcoming message:

On the back of each card is one of several images and quotes from a Cisco staffer:

Neither the messages, images, or quotes are remarkable on their own, but as a whole, they represent the humanity, diversity, and energy of the brand – things that are important to communicate to potential employees, and anyone who works on or with Cisco.  I’m not sure how these cards are intended to be used, but they make me think about Cisco differently despite not being a potential recruit.  And I find them more memorable than most corporate brochure-ware.

Some companies draw a distinction between their “customer brand” and their “employer brand” — I’ve never really bought into such a delineation because I think the value you deliver and the way you do business (your brand) should be the same for customers and employees.  Seeing these Cisco tools together reinforces my view — they facilitate understanding of the brand from multiple perspectives.

Finally, I like how both of these tools are available for anybody to take. The “cheat sheet” was sitting in a dispenser on the desk of one of the people I was meeting with, right next to her business cards. The recruiting cards were prominently displayed in a business card dispenser at the reception desk.

Instead of guarding their brand strategy like a piece of corporate i.p., Cisco makes it accessible and interesting. Instead of silo-ing off their recruiting efforts, they share a taste of the employment experience with everyone. Cisco, it seems, understands the value of engaging internal and external folks with their brand – after all, we’re all brand stakeholders in some way and every touchpoint is a brand touchpoint.

I’ve been doing research on some companies and have spent quite a bit of time looking at companies’ corporate reports – e.g., annual reports, official statements, corporate presentations, etc.  I’m amazed at how many companies completely overlook these reports as touchpoints through which people experience their brands.  Often the reports are dry and pedantic or fluffy and full of corporate-speak – they don’t communicate or reflect what is differentiating or compelling about their brands.

What’s ironic is these reports are becoming increasingly important brand touchpoints.  The combination of Sarbanes-Oxley requirements and the increasing use of websites for communicating with investors/potential investors mean corporate reports are much more accessible.  And because of their accessibility, they’re used not only by the investment community, but also by prospective employees, vendors and customers, strategic alliance partners, M&A prospects, bankers, etc.

These people and groups are important stakeholders in businesses – and brands.  They’re usually juggling competing priorities and deciding among several alternatives — so opportunities to engage them with the brand should not be overlooked or underestimated.  As with consumers, if they share the understanding of what the brand stands for and the value it delivers to them and their stakeholders, they’re more likely to choose the company over other options.

Once they’ve signed on with a company, these people and groups can either build the brand or weaken it.  The values and attributes that define the brand must be embraced by everyone and every group. Just think how shoddy materials or shipment delays can negatively impact the experience a customer has with a brand.  The recent flurry of toy recalls and tainted food supplies have shown how seriously a brand can be damaged when a company’s business partners fail to adhere to its standards.  The actions of a shady salesman or an incompetent service provider may yield less critical consequences, but they nonetheless reflect on the brand.

As the number of ways different groups interact with companies grows, the importance of corporate reports as brand touchpoints grows.   Instead of churning out the staid and predictable reports, companies should determine the best ways to express and deliver their brand through their corporate communications.

Two companies stand out of as examples and inspiration:

lululemon athletica has produced an “Annual Report Video.”

lululemon Annual Report Video 2008 from lululemon athletica on Vimeo.

The six-minute piece starts off with various lululemon employees relaying what the brand means to them.  It also includes clips of the company’s leaders discussing the past year’s results and future plans, and of actual store activities, including their in-store yoga classes.  It’s a creative and engaging way to communicate key information and brand passion — and by posting the video on Vimeo, the company is leveraging the power of social media to raise the brand’s profile.

REI releases an annual “Stewardship Report” to outline the company’s activities and performance related to social and environmental efforts.

The report describes what REI is doing in terms of Community (philanthropic efforts and nonprofit partnerships centered on outdoor recreation and conservation, and advocacy), Environment (initiatives and efforts to reduce the company’s overall impact on the planet), and People (workplace and fair labor compliance with vendor factory partners).

As such, the report not only communicates key corporate performance metrics, but also expresses the brand values and attributes that distinguish the company and make it so strong.  Certainly REI’s structure as a co-op vs. a standard corporation means such a report makes more sense than a standard annual report.  But I suspect the reason why the company issues such a remarkable report is that it is the most appropriate way to bring their brand to life.

related posts:

• the branded vacation
• brand value creation — learning and growth

Apparently my “Outside Insights” column, How to Defeat McDonald’s**,  on QSR Magazine‘s home page has prompted concern among the folks at McDonald’s.  It was intended as a service piece for fast feeders looking for insights on how to establish competitive advantage — but the Golden Arches media relations team seems to view it as a judgmental report on their strategies.

Quite frankly, I’m surprised by their reaction — but I’m curious to hear what you think.  Here’s the original piece, followed by the comments submitted by a McDonald’s spokesperson (she initially emailed these comments to me with a request for a correction to be issued.)

My “Outside Insights” column:

How to Defeat McDonald’s**
Taking advantage of a competitor’s innovation could mean rewards for any company—no matter the size.

Quick-serves fight in a hypercompetitive environment. Brands duke it out with surprising new products which seem like punches coming out of nowhere and low blows of heavy discounts or free giveaways—not to mention the pot shots lobbed between dueling sassy advertising campaigns.

All of the category in-fighting can lead to a tit-for-tat approach to marketing in which companies counter each other’s moves with products and deals so similar it’s no wonder consumers often confuse one brand’s promotions for another. This kind of combat is necessary to sustain traffic counts, but quick-serves should also be on the lookout for opportunities to rise above the fray, dominate their challengers, and solidify a sustainable victory.

Burger King has such an opportunity now. McDonald’s has blinked, setting its sights on Starbucks and launching a $100 million advertising spend to promote its new coffees. McDonald’s describes McCafé as its largest product launch in 30 years and promises many more McCafé experiences to come.

Regardless of whether or not these efforts will be successful, having all of McDonald’s eggs in one basket is good news for Burger King. Burger King can fill the void in the conversation about food and promote the superiority of its food preparation and products. Lately Burger King hasn’t been talking about its key product differentiators—flame broiling and Have It Your Way—but now is the perfect time to bring them to the forefront. These product attributes are the brand’s strongest competitive advantages, and McDonald’s has left itself open for attack.

McDonald’s isn’t the only quick-serve that has made itself vulnerable. Chinks in the armor usually emerge during launches of ancillary products, PR blunders, or M&A activity. Both Pizza Hut and Baskin-Robbins have recently blinked, pouring millions of dollars into pasta and soft-serve ice cream introductions respectively. By neglecting their core businesses and vying for consumers’ attention in new categories, these brands have created great opportunities for their competitors.

Challengers can take advantage of these opportunities by:

Acting fast: The window of opportunity may not last long. Fortunately most chains aren’t shy about touting big plans, so if you’re astute enough to sense a “blink” in the making, you can be at the ready to launch an offensive attack as soon the other guy’s initial media burst starts to trail off.

Hitting them hard: This is the time to leverage your core competitive strengths. Shore up what you do best and promote the heck out of it. If necessary, you may have to be overt about your strategy—perhaps calling out your competitor for its foolishness may be the best way to draw attention to your offering.

Staying focused: It may be tempting to follow your competitor’s moves or to take a breather while the pressure is off. But attempts to engage in the new game would only seem like efforts to compensate for a weakness—and backing off wastes the opportunity. A confident, offensive move is what’s called for.

By going for the punch when the competition isn’t looking, quick-serves have the chance to differentiate themselves in a meaningful and memorable way. Instead of fighting over chump change or market share gains of a few hundredths of a percent, a well-timed, well-placed push can secure a big win.

Case in point: Earlier this year when it seemed that Burger King was the one with its eye off the ball, McDonald’s made a big gain. McDonald’s had blanketed the market with dollar deals while Burger King was off featuring a tie-in with a TV series. The result? McDonald’s comp store sales rose 4 percent in the first quarter, while Burger King’s were only up 1 percent.

With competition so fierce in the quick-service arena, brands must exploit every advantage. Those who are fighting to win will be ready to hit with their best shot when the other guy isn’t looking and let the consumer declare a T.K.O.

Comment submitted by McDonald’s spokesperson:

My name is Danya Proud, and I serve as a company spokesperson for McDonald’s USA.

This article is missing a lot of the facts about our business and how we continue to promote our core menu items and customer favorites.

We most definitely don’t have, “all our eggs in one basket,” as this article suggests. These assumptions are not only incorrect, but misleading to QSR’s readers, and our customers.

I would be remiss if I didn’t point out the tremendous success we have had, and continue to have, through promoting our core menu – including Big Mac, Chicken McNuggets and most recently, Quarter Pounder with Cheese.

And, while McCafe Coffees and the promotion of our new line of mochas, lattes, cappucinos and hot chocolate continue to be a significant area of focus, and business opportunity for us, rest assured, we have not, and will not, take our eyes off the fries, or, any of our other core menu items, for that matter.

As always, we continue to have a holistic approach to all of our marketing efforts, to ensure a balance between promoting new menu items and our core equities.

Our customers are at the center of everything we do. Now more than ever, we are looking to provide our valued customers with everyday affordability, across our entire menu.

Thanks for the opportunity to provide the facts about our business.

What do you think?

I’m surprised that McDonald’s would take my POV as a factual report on their business — and be concerned enough to write their own “correction.”  I’m a strong advocate for managing all of a brand’s touchpoints, but this seems to be taking it a bit too far.

Am I wrong?  Also, please let me know what you think of the piece itself.  Thanks!

** FYI:  I had submitted a different title for the piece (“When the Other Guy Blinks”) — QSR Magazine’s editor changed it to “How to Defeat McDonald’s” — perhaps that caused more ire?!

Last week my husband and I were out on holiday — it was a delightful vacation and a wonderful brand experience, an REI brand experience that is.

To explain, REI has a division called REI Adventures which offers more than 140 different trips on every continent.  The last REI trip we took was to climb Mt. Kilimanjaro in Tanzania and to safari in the Serengeti.  This time, we headed to Loreto, in Baja California Sur, for a week-long kayak/bike/hike trip.

(This is the view from the top of one of our climbs.)  Both trips have been extraordinary ways to immerse ourselves in the REI brand.

REI says,”We inspire, educate and outfit for a lifetime of outdoor adventure and stewardship.“  Every brand touchpoint of the REI Adventure experience reflects this promise.  From captivating promotional literature, to  biodegradable luggage tags, to helpful customer service agents — they all carry the same message about REI’s commitment to getting people outdoors in an inspirational, educational, and responsible way.

But here’s the thing — REI doesn’t just talk about their brand values, or ensure their materials consistently express them.  They deliver those values through the vacation experience.  Some examples:

• Being “active caretakers of the environment” isn’t just some corporate-speak that REI uses to placate critics — the guides who REI contracts with are friendly, knowledgeable locals who share REI’s brand values, so they actively worked with the hotel we stayed at to ensure it adhered to practices that minimize the use of natural resources.
• REI’s stewardship also is demonstrated through the meaningful cultural exchanges the tour participants have with the region’s people — in Tanzania, the tour included a bike ride on the backroads of Mosquito Creek to visit a budding school that one of the guides personally contributed to building (with his money and his hands).
• REI Adventures goal is to “get people outdoors” to go to the places people have always wanted to go and to do the things they’ve always wanted to do.  It’s clear the guides are there to help you live out those dreams — they know how to (gently) push you to do ride out a sandy patch of trail or take the plunge into a deep swimming hole so that you really do experience the adventure that you seek, and that the brand embraces.

This isn’t meant to be a commercial for REI — rather it’s another way for me to explain what I believe a strong brand is all about.  A brand isn’t just about a message to communicate, or an image to portray — it’s the actual delivery of the bundle of values and attributes that define:
•  a product or service’s value that is delivered to its customers, and
•  a way of doing business

REI embodies this approach and perhaps that’s why, despite experiencing the pressures of the recession, the company remains profitable.  Last year, they paid out the highest dividend in their history, opened nine new stores across the country, and kept their co-op remains debt free and with a strong balance sheet.

Thanks, REI, for a great vacation, and a valuable study in brands.