Organization Age & Size Impact

A key role of brand management is to create and reinforce an identity that promises relevant points of difference to consumers. Smaller, younger organizations have an advantage in this area for a number of reasons:

Leadership
Smaller|Younger Organization: An entrepreneur with a vision and passion Larger|Older Organization: A seasoned executive with experience in running large, complex enterprises

Size
Smaller|Younger Organization: A small number of people who work closely together and often share the entrepreneur's vision and passion Larger|Older Organization: A large number of people in different divisions and departments with different functional backgrounds and allegiances, often very much decentralized

Business Scope
Smaller|Younger Organization: Usually focused on one core product or product category
Larger|Older Organization: Usually offering a wide variety of products and product lines, many times in multiple business categories and even in different industries

Brand Structure
Smaller|Younger Organization: Usually one brand
Larger|Older Organization: Often very complex including multiple brands, sub-brands, endorsed brands, etc.

Organization Infrastructure
Smaller|Younger Organization: Rapidly being built to support the entrepreneur's vision
Larger|Older Organization: Many assets, systems, processes, organizational levels, etc. Very difficult to change.

Corporate Culture
Smaller|Younger Organization: Usually strong based upon the entrepreneur's personality.
Larger|Older Organization: May evolve as new top managers are added. May be very strong based upon the legacy of a strong founder or a current strong leader. Companies that have long and rich histories often have entrenched cultures.

Marketplace
Smaller|Younger Organization: The business category is often in its infancy with many positioning possibilities for a new company.
Larger|Older Organization: Industry is often mature or maturing. Sometimes declining. Competitors are much more entrenched with few, if any, viable marketplace positions not taken. (Recently deregulated industries provide notable exceptions.)

Decision Making
Smaller|Younger Organization: Usually very quick with fewer decision-makers.
Larger|Older Organization: Depending on the organization design, the decision making process can be very cumbersome.

Financial Resources
Smaller|Younger Organization: Often scarce as the organization is growing rapidly and reinvesting all available cash flow. May be less scarce after an IPO.
Larger|Older Organization: Usually substantial including cash flow and borrowing capacity.

Primary Marketing Method
Smaller|Younger Organization: Publicity
Larger|Older Organization: Advertising

Brand Identity
Smaller|Younger Organization: Often evolving, but easier to encode in standards and systems (because the organization is starting with "a clean slate").
Larger|Older Organization: Often strong and entrenched, but more difficult to codify due to the scope and complexity of the enterprise and the inconsistencies that have arisen over time.

Brand Awareness and Esteem
Smaller|Younger Organization: Usually low or non-existent
Larger|Older Organization: Often high

Brand Differentiation
Smaller|Younger Organization: Usually very high
Larger|Older Organization: Usually declines over time as more and more competitors enter the market

The first two laws of branding in Al Reis and Laura Reis' book, The 22 Immutable Laws of BRANDING are as follows:

* "The Law of Expansion: The power of a brand is inversely proportional to its scope"
* "The Law of Contradiction: A brand becomes stronger when you narrow its focus"

Clearly these first two laws favor smaller, younger organizations.

Brand identity firms will tell you that often they can create much stronger brand identities for smaller, younger companies because those companies have fewer constraints (existing logos, store décor and signing), more focused businesses and stronger business visions. They also have a more coordinated marketing function (often a department of just a few people). Conversely, large organizations usually have separate product development, advertising, promotion, public relations, sales and marketing research departments (to name a few).

Read more...

The Importance of Color

Color is an important consideration in your brand identity system. Colors have a significant impact on people’s emotional state. They also have been shown to impact people’s ability to concentrate and learn. They have a wide variety of specific mental associations. In fact, the effects are physiological, psychological, and sociological.
For instance:
•Non-primary colors are more calming than primary colors.
•Blue is the most calming of the primary colors, followed closely by a lighter red.
•Test takers score higher and weight lifters lift more in blue rooms. •Blue text increases reading retention.

•Yellow evokes cheerfulness. Houses with yellow trim or flower gardens sell faster.
•Reds and oranges encourage diners to eat quickly and leave. Red also makes food more appealing and influences people to eat more. (It is no coincidence that fast food restaurants almost always use these colors.)
•Pink enhances appetites and has been shown to calm prison inmates.
•Blue and black suppress appetites.
•Children prefer primary colors. (Notice that children’s toys and books often use these colors.)
•Forest green and burgundy appeals to the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans and often raises the perceived price of an item.
•Orange is often used to make an expensive item seem less expensive.
•Red clothing can convey power.
•Red trim is used in bars and casinos because it can cause people to lose track of time.
•White is typically associated with cool, clean and fresh.
•Red is often associated with Christmas and orange with Halloween and Thanksgiving.
•Red and black are often associated with sexy and seductive and are favored by porn sites.
•Black clothes make people look thinner.
•Black is also associated with elegance and sophistication. It also seems mysterious.
•Black is the favorite color of Goths.

Colors also have a functional impact on readability, eye-strain, ability to attract attention, ability to be seen at night, etc. This is important in choosing colors for signing, website pages, prints ads, and other marketing media.

•The most visible color is yellow.
•The most legible of all color combinations are black on yellow and green on white followed by red on white.
•It is no surprise that most traffic signs use these color combinations.
•Black on white is the easiest to read, on paper, and on computer screens.
•Hard colors (red, orange and yellow) are more visible and tend to make objects look larger and closer. They are easier to focus upon. They create excitement and cause people to over-estimate time.
•Soft colors (violet, blue and green) are less visible and tend to make objects look smaller and further away. They aren’t as easy to focus upon. They have a calming effect, increase concentration, and cause people to under-estimate time.

Usually, it is advantageous for a brand to consistently “own” certain colors, which provide an additional recognition cue. The George Eastman House International Museum of Photography and Film in Rochester, New York has taken a different, but equally effective approach. They intended to communicate that they are a fun and vibrant organization that features much more than artistic black and white photography. So, the “e” icon in their logo appears in a rainbow of colors. Each business card features the logo with a different color. The name itself always only appears in black and white.

Obviously, colors are an important part of any brand identity system. Testing the affect of a new brand identity system’s colors is well advised. It is important to consider that color associations will vary by individual, and especially culture, due to the cultural context and previous experiences with the colors. All of the impacts of colors are equally true of music, scents and sounds. For instance, studies have identified that music has an impact on supermarket sales, mental concentration, achievement on standardized tests, factory productivity, clerical performance and staff turnover, among other things.

Read more...

The Branding Of Language

"Do you Yahoo?"

"Did you Xerox the report?"

"Did you FedEx it?"

"Did you see the messenger Rollerblading?"

It's the branding of language.

Once upon a time, using a brand name as a verb was anathema. It was behavior that would drive a trademark lawyer crazy.
But more and more marketers are deciding that the grand slam of branding is to become part of the language - in effect, having your trademark substitute in everyday usage for the type of action or service that your mark identifies. Could there be, they argue, any clearer expression of a leadership position?

We saw a restaurant review recently which mentioned a purveyor who "FedExes her Maine lobsters" to a top chef. The appearance of that ersatz verb does not necessarily mean the purveyor is actually using the services of the FedEx Corporation. (The lobsters could be coming via UPS or DHL.) The point is, they're being shipped overnight - and to say "to FedEx" is to darn near say the same thing.

"Have you Windexed your windows?"

"Did you get your house Terminexed?"

"The drains were Roto-Rootered."

When brand names enter mainstream language, they often "lend an air of reality to a story," to quote the stylebook of the Associated Press. ("He fished a Camel from his shirt pocket may be preferable to the less specific cigarette," says the style guide.)

Why?

Because fishing a Camel from a shirt pocket - instead of a Newport Light - or wearing Nikes into the lecture hall - instead of Keds -- tells you something about the protagonist. Such is the scope and impact of brand associations.

The internet generation, increasingly casual about the protectability of names, is leading the way in the branding of language. "Do you Yahoo?" is not the rallying cry of users; it's the clarion call of the company itself, in mass media messages costing hundreds of millions of dollars.

Similarly, you hear talk now about "googling" (using the popular search engine google.com) to get a line on something or somebody.

"MountainDew me," kids will say at a party.

Once upon a time, this sort of trademark flippancy would turn trademark lawyers apoplectic. Use the brand name generically, they would warn, and you lose - over time - your trademark rights. 'Tis true. Look up common words such as "aspirin" or "escalator" in the dictionary and you'll realize they were once registered trademarks.

But that transition takes time. Decades. And in today's hyperactive world, marketers are more concerned about getting known now, today, immediately -- than losing their naming rights later on.

Which is why they often encourage the use of their precious brand names as everyday words.

Read more...

What Is Branding?

A comprehensive guide to the world of branding
It is an exciting time for branding. As everything becomes global, good branding becomes more crucial. "What is Branding?" is an accessible guide that makes sense of this complex subject. It explores the process of branding, and shares insights that can be applied to practical challenges.
Outlining the components of branding (positioning, storytelling, design, price, and relationships), what it can be applied to, and what it can achieve, "What is Branding?" will help ensure the success of branding for any product, service, person, or place.
Case studies included in the international portfolio of campaigns explain what makes them work, why they matter, and what can be learnt from them. Analysis focuses both on design know-how and on theory, looking at how professionals wrestle with abstract notions of perception, culture, and love while at the same time solving the nuts-and-bolts problems of package design, sign making, and web technology.

Read more...

Lufthansa Italia

winging it?
There is an air war brewing that is changing the way European airlines operate. Driven by a sputtering economy, airlines in Europe are gradually departing from the one government/one airline model. They are increasingly looking to cross-country mergers, sometimes involving private investors, as a means of survival.

Alitalia is a case in point. The Italian government-owned airline filed for bankruptcy last August, and a group of private Italian investors stepped in. Then, in January 2009, Air France-KLM (itself a merged airline) bought a stake in Alitalia.


That action precipitated the creation of another airline’s new brand: German carrier Lufthansa quickly launched a separate operation, christening it Lufthansa Italia.
Lufthansa had an interest in buying a stake in Alitalia but lost out to Air France-KLM. Rather than cede the lucrative Italian routes, Lufthansa took a calculated risk and created its own new brand. It’s the first time Lufthansa has established a carrier outside its home market of Germany.
Granted, Lufthansa is an established worldwide brand. Known for its German punctuality and efficiency, Lufthansa has fared better than most European airlines. Still, the question is, will Lufthansa be able to bring the same magic to Lufthansa Italia?
Lufthansa Italia may have taken off suddenly, but Lufthansa has already shown commitment to the integrity of the new brand. Lufthansa has set up the airline as a separate subsidiary based in Milan, Italy. The airline adorned two Airbus jets with the new airline’s name and designated the planes “Milano” and “Varese” after two Italian cities. Previously, Lufthansa had named its planes only after German cities. Lufthansa Italia started operations in early February 2009, flying out of Malpensa (Milan) Airport to Paris, France, and Barcelona, Spain. More aircraft were scheduled to be added in March, and routes to Brussels, Bucharest, Budapest, Lisbon, London and Madrid were scheduled to be online by the end of March.
Lufthansa says it will imbue the new Lufthansa Italia with “reliability and high quality blended with Italian flair.” The airline says it has developed “special Italian-style in-flight services” for Lufthansa Italia (although it doesn’t specify what they are). The planes are configured to seat 138 passengers in business and economy class. Lufthansa’s operations at Malpensa Airport will be upgraded to include dedicated check-in counters, more quick check-in terminals, refurbished gate and baggage reclaim areas, and a new and improved Lufthansa lounge.
Also in February, Lufthansa Cargo announced the launch of freighter services between Milan and New York and Chicago, taking advantage of Alitalia’s failed cargo operations. Lufthansa said it will use the freight capacity of its Lufthansa Italia jets to increase the company’s Italian cargo business.
There was another motivation to starting Lufthansa Italia. Lufthansa Executive Vice President Karl Ulrich Garnadt told ATWOnline.com that the airline will seek an Italian Air Operators Certificate so that it can gain the right to fly to Eastern Europe and other non–European Union destinations.
For the present, at least, Lufthansa Italia will need to operate primarily as a budget airline. That’s because there is heavy competition for the Malpensa routes. But according to Der Spiegel, competition could also benefit Lufthansa Italia: “… there's a good chance Lufthansa will obtain flight rights on the lucrative route between Milan and Rome for the first time. Until now, the lucrative route has been largely reserved for Alitalia and Air One, but after their merger there is significant probability that the European Commission will require that the route be opened up to other competitors” (January 13, 2009).
Upstart airline brands have succeeded in Europe before. Richard Branson’s Virgin Atlantic famously came on the scene in 1984 to challenge British Airways’ monopoly. The two airlines have been fierce rivals ever since. Ryanair, arguably Europe’s most successful low-fare airline, began flying between Ireland and London in 1985. By 2006, Ryanair had carried a record 42.5 million passengers, and became the world’s first airline to carry more than four million international passengers in one month. Today Ryanair owns 30 percent of Aer Lingus, Ireland’s national airline and Ryanair’s former archrival.
Lufthansa Italia may have a different kind of challenge ahead, however. Alitalia is still a formidable brand. It has been in existence since 1946, and it has carried the colors of the Italian flag in its logo, a stylized capital A, since 1969. Italian air travelers could well remain committed to a brand that has been closely tied to their homeland for more than sixty years.
On the other hand, Alitalia has endured union strikes, poor service, management problems and a recent bankruptcy. With private investors and Air France as part owner, Alitalia is moving further away from, not closer to, its Italian roots. That presents a market opportunity for Lufthansa’s new venture. If Lufthansa Italia can show it is well run, competitive and respectful of Italian culture, this upstart airline could quickly make gains with Italian travelers. They will likely pick superior economical service over loyalty to a former national airline that is in serious need of a makeover. This is the new global economy, after all.

Read more...

China court sides with Starbucks

A Chinese court has sided with the Starbucks coffee house chain in its battle with a Shanghai rival over their use of the same Chinese name, news reports said.
The dispute in China's booming market for gourmet coffee highlights the country's struggle to mediate trademark disputes, a new concept for the communist legal system.
A Shanghai court ordered Shanghai Xingbake Cafe Corp. Ltd. to stop using the name Xingbake, the name used in Chinese by Starbucks Corp., the Shanghai Daily and China Daily newspapers said. Xing, pronounced "shing," means star in Chinese, and bake, or "bah kuh," sounds like bucks.
The Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court said the Shanghai firm engaged in "illegitimate competition" by using Starbucks' Chinese name and imitating the design of its cafes, the China Daily said.
Judge Lu Guoqiang's ruling Saturday also ordered Shanghai Xingbake to pay Starbucks 500,000 yuan, or $62,000, in damages, the reports said.
Starbucks opened its first cafe in China in 1999. It later caused a stir by adding outlets in Beijing's imperial palace and at the Great Wall, north of the Chinese capital.
Foreign rivals and Chinese upstarts have jumped into the market to compete for well-heeled customers who pay up to $6 for a cup of coffee — more than the average Chinese worker makes in a day.
Starbucks sued Shanghai Xingbake in 2003.
The Shanghai coffee house argued that its name was valid because it was registered in 2000, before Starbucks applied for its own Chinese trademark.
Starbucks rejected that, saying its name and mermaid trademark were registered in China beginning in 1996.
The Shanghai Daily report Sunday said the Starbucks ruling was the first of its kind under a 2001 Chinese law meant to protect well-known international trademarks.
Foreign companies have complained for years that the Chinese government is failing to stamp out piracy of copyrighted or trademarked goods such as movies or designer clothes.
More recently, Chinese companies have begun to turn to the courts to protect their own names. A Shanghai soft drink maker, Yaqing Industry and Trade Co., lost a lawsuit last January against the Coca Cola Co. and its local bottler over the name of a new beverage.
Yaqing claimed the characters for Coke's Qoo fruit drink — "Ku-er" in Chinese — were too close to those of Yaqing's Kuhai drink. But a Shanghai court ruled that the two names were different enough that consumers wouldn't confuse them.

Read more...

Franchising For Dummies

If you want to own your business but don't want to start from scratch, maybe buying into a franchise is the right choice for you! Franchising can be a great way to get started in small business without taking the huge risk of founding and building a company on your own. But before you jump in there's plenty you need to know in order to make sure you do it right.Franchising For Dummies, Second Edition gives you all the inside insight and smart advice to make sure you pick the right investment opportunity and make the most of it. Written by one of the nation's leading franchise consultants and by the late Dave Thomas, founder of Wendy's International, this fun, friendly guide is packed with guidance from top industry professionals. Packed with practical resources you need to succeed, this handy guide will help you: Pick the perfect franchise opportunity for you Find an ideal location Raise the capital you need to launch your franchise Manage daily business operations Understand complex legal issues Work and communicate with your franchisor and other franchisees Read and understand a Uniform Franchise Offering Circular Expand your business and buy new franchises Full of handy resources-including sample forms and agreements and a listing of available government resources-Franchising For Dummies, Second Edition is a great way to discover a great franchising opportunity, get started, and achieve your dream of small business success and independence.Note: CD-ROM/DVD and other supplementary materials are not included as part of eBook file.

Franchising For Dummies
by: Michael Seid, Dave Thomas
Edition: 2, illustrated, revised
Diterbitkan oleh For Dummies, 2006
ISBN 0470045817, 9780470045817
408 page.

Read more...

Starbucks - The coffee giant under attack?

Since founding an entire industry around brewed coffee 15 years ago, Starbucks has enjoyed roaring success - and the success continues. The third quarter results in 2007 showed that the revenues increased 20% to US$2.4 billion and net income increased 9% to US$158.3 million.
But as always, such success attracts competitors. Starbucks has no dearth of competitors. McDonald's, Dunkin' Donuts and Burger King are some of the fiercest of competitors of Starbucks in the United States. So serious are these other players that a 2007 Consumer Reports' head to head comparison of coffee from all these four brands declared McDonald's the winner. McDonald's, a new entrant into the coffee sector beat Starbucks. Such reports beg the question: Is Starbucks under attack?
Competition is the reality of business. Successful companies and their brands have always attracted competition. Well managed companies have always thwarted such competition and have succeeded. But in this case, it is not just competition. An underlying change in Starbucks' main customer base is altering the strategic landscape for the coffee giant.
Affluent women and professionals earning an average US$92,000 a year were the core customer base of Starbucks. These customers bought the Starbucks' idea of coffee with a context rather than just a product. As such, they were not too price sensitive. But over the years, Starbucks' quest for growth both within the United States and also globally has acquired a new set of customers. Compared to the original group, this new generation of customers is less educated, less affluent and more price sensitive. To complicate the matter further, many of the aforementioned competitors have decided to compete on price. Given the combination of factors, Starbucks seems to be under attack.
What can Starbucks do to retain the leadership position? For starters, Starbucks will have to strengthen the brand, its brand equity and its many touch points. In many affluent cities in the US such as New York City and Boston, Starbucks outlets get too crowded and customers just walk out to a competitors' café. That has to be corrected right away. More importantly, Starbucks should focus the attention once again on the brand experience. Starbucks is not just about a cup of coffee, but is about the ambience, a third alternative between home and work. Such a focus on the overall brand experience will divert the customers from a singular focus on price.
Finally, Starbucks should launch new products (new combinations of coffee) to cater to its changing base of customers. These actions should allow Starbucks to continue to have a strong hold on the coffee market, refresh its brand and gain new territory for its brand equity.

Read more...

BRand Sense

Martin Lindstrom's groundbreaking new book BRAND sense, has just been released worldwide by Simon & Schuster. With a foreword by one of the all-time masters of marketing, the distinguished Dr Philip Kotler, Professor of International Marketing at the Kellogg School of Management, and endorsed by CEOs and chairmen from various companies ranging from McDonald's to Disney and Mattel. BRAND sense is being touted as the marketing book of 2005.
Three neglected senses From the first newsprint ads that appeared over 150 years ago, to the computer-generated, special-effects bonanzas that dominate our lives in the 21st century, brands have been built and emotions tapped into by using only two of our five senses. Sight and sound! Brand communication has reached a new frontier. In order to successfully conquer future horizons, brands will have to find ways of appealing to the three neglected senses.
It can be done! BRAND sense will tell you how.
The fresh smell of a new car...
Drawing heavily on the data of his extensive research, Lindstrom's discovered some remarkable facts. BRAND sense proves how the smell of a new car, or the perfect sound of a closing car door, plays a major role in selecting what model is purchased. Ironically, a new-car smell simply doesn't exist. What the consumer smells is an artificial odor that's been sprayed into the interior, creating a sense of quality. Now the generic "new car smell" is about to be branded along with the sound of a closing door - just like Singapore Airlines has patented the smell in their cabin. Likewise, the sound and feel of Kellogg's cornflakes crunching in our mouth has been created in sound labs.

40% of all brands are to include Sensory Branding by 2006
If brands want to build and maintain loyalty, they are going to be forced to establish a strategy that appeals to all our senses. This is a fact that no serious brand-builder can ignore. It is estimated that 35 per cent of the world's Fortune 500 brands will include a sensory branding strategy in their marketing plan by the end of 2006. Quite simply, their future survival will depend on it.

BRAND sense offers to show you how to turn your brand from a two-sense product into a five-sense phenomenon. In a fail-proof six-step process it will help brands cross the all-important sensory frontier. There are innovative branding tools for evaluating where your brand is on the sensory scale. You can analyze your brand's future sensory potential, and then follow a clear pathway to build and optimize its sensory appeal. Lindstrom cites companies like Cadillac, Apple, Mercedes-Benz, Nokia, McDonald's, Louis Vuitton, Nestle, and Disney, all of whom have recently adopted a sensory approach and have seen their brands perform superbly under this new direction.

Read more...

Thoughts on Re-Branding

When does a company know it’s time to re-brand?
What process should they take to go from old and tired to current and relevant?
What are some hits and misses in re-branding recently?
When does a company know it’s time to re-brand?
Except in rare instances, which we’ll mention in a minute, it doesn’t.
Like most branding “principles” there’s little that’s black and white on this issue.

Re-branding is a judgement call that far too often, companies undertake prematurely or unnecessarily, shooting their brands in the foot instead of launching them to the new heights predicted by the change meisters. In fact, pre-mature rebranding is a serious disease that’s generally caused by three factors :

1) The NMD Phenominon (New Marketing Director) -- who feels the need to justify his being hired by putting his stamp on a new campaign, regardless of whether the current one is successfully building brand equity or not.

2) The Steinbrenner Syndrome (As in George Steinbrenner) Acting on the shortsighted
urge, because of impatience, to meddle with a brand structure that’s not
broken, and would indeed build equity over time and exposure--because
management demands more instant gratification.

3) FT-itus—(False Tired itus). There’s a notion among managers that brands
become “tired” over a finite period of time and need to be refreshed. This notion
is caused by projecting the managers’ own familiarity or boredom with a campaign onto the public, who may be experiencing an entirely opposite effect.
Great brands work because of familiarity and repetition of a great, original idea of
value, not in spite of familiarity and repetition. People love this familiarity and the trust it builds over time and through consistent performance. Changing core brand components (tagline, look and feel, key visuals, naming,etc.) too early and too often is one of the “12 Great Amateur Mistakes” noted in our book “Why Johnny Can’t Brand.” The only chance your carefully planted brand sapling has to grow into a mighty tree, is not to pull it out by the roots every 6-12 months the way too many companies do, vaulting themselves back to the starting line every time, short-circuiting any equity that might develop, and ultimately confusing their public.
Professionals fundamentally understand this and for them, re-branding as a last
resort vs. a first. They are well aware that great brands, the household names,
often remain unchanged and fully effective for decades. And there are too
numerous accounts of great, abandoned campaigns—that still, stubbornly, score
the highest in current recall and awareness studies—even though the advertising
hasn’t run for 25 years. As a result, many companies finally wake up, stop trying
to fight the brains of their public who are still playing the original messaging in
their heads like a song, and resurrect what they should never have re-branded in
the first place.
In fact, last night we saw a Saab commercial that featured jet fighters flying past
their new convertible named Aero. The announcer said—“Saabs are built by
aircraft engineers,” (doesn’t that make you believe in the design and quality?)
The “new tagline” is Born from Jets. This campaign is a resurrected classic that
Saab had departed from for many years. Saab is indeed the Swedish Jet Aircraft
Manufacturer who also builds cars. A Saab dashboard looked and felt like an
aircraft cockpit. Saab, recently purchased by General Motors, was loosing its
identity. They brought back their original Dominant Selling Idea – The cars built
with Jet Plane Standards.
We also noticed that KFC has been going back to Kentucky Fried Chicken in
recent campaigns. Another return to heritage story.
So after all the above, when do you know you should re-brand? As a flight
instructor once said to a student who was strapped into a parachute and asked,
“when will I know if I should jump,” the instructor replied “ONLY if you look out the
door and see the soles of my shoes.”
In other words, the decision to re-brand is black and white when your brand
equity has suffered a hit or a disaster that’s turned your brand impression
inalterably negative—usually because of bad product performance, a decline in
service, or some other mishap (like a major technology or market shift) that may
or may not have been in your control.
ValuJet was literally flying high the day before it’s famous crash into the
Everglades because of faulty operating procedures. Instantaneously, the brand
ValuJet no longer meant low cost, convenient airline. It meant death in a swamp.
ValuJet made the decision to rename itself, re-build its entire identity. Today it’s
doing well as AirTran.
ValuJet is an extreme case.
A less extreme but relevant example of the right decision to re-brand was
Cadillac. Cadillac finally accepted the reality that through old, tired, uninspired
product style, performance and marketing, it had driven itself into a dead end
with no room for a U-Turn. The brand that once meant the pinnacle of American
personal success, now meant blue hair grandmothers going 20 miles under the
speed limit in St. Petersburg. It meant shabby construction and sluggish handling
that had literally dropped off the radar of consideration if you were looking for a
luxury car. It reached a low point when GM thought it could fool its customers
with what was called “badge branding”—building Cadillacs on Chevy frames,
then adding leather seats and a Cadillac emblem. GM was fooling no one except
itself, delivering slow death to the brand, while the Europeans and Japanese
were adding the coffin nails with quality, innovation and panache of their own.
Cadillac had nowhere to go but up. It did too critical things:
1) It began the now famous “Breakthrough” Campaigns, set to the Music of Led
Zeppelin—hip, energetic, youthful and familiar rock n roll. But most importantly,
2) it radically changed the design and engineering of the product. So that the new
ads didn’t point me to the same old thing. It said, this is the challenging
breakthrough. See it, drive it and believe it.
Cadillac with models ranging from the Escalade to the STS and hot new sports
coupes has been resurgent—a model re-branding success story.
The process of going from old and tired to current and relevant
There is one overarching thing to remember here: Re-branding is not a
matter of painting new tail colors on the airliner, then delivering the same old
crappy service. That re-brands nothing. You have to do what Cadillac did. You
have to re-engineer the performance, the tangible experience, the perceived
value at trial—you have to change the walk—then do the talk. A “brand” is
ultimately not a logo, set of colors and a tagline. All those communications
components do is invite the audience to think about the brand the way you want
them to. The brand has to perform as advertised, or great communication only
accelerates your destruction. With some exceptions for extremely image
dependent products like fashion or perfumes for example, 90% of the brand
happens in the product experience. 10% in the telling about it. Some big re-brand hits and misses Again, Cadillac. BP oil has re-branded itself now as the “green” oil company. Can’t tell you how this has quantitatively affected sales or perception, but we hear, anecdotally, that the effort is positive. For one thing, other major oil
companies like shell are trying to emulate them now, the sincerest form of
flattery. BP is thinking about the long term equity of their brand. Misses? ATT trying to convince the world that suddenly, it was the world’s networking company, not too long ago. Another key reason re-branding’s fail,aside from changing too early and often, is the lack of credibility factor. A successful brand idea is superlative, important and believable.
You can’t just slap slogans on your company and product and attempt to
advertise it—if the public can’t believe it coming from you. If a brand proposition
isn’t credible for any reason, it’s automatically dismissed by the customer. It’s as
good as invisible. That was one of ATT’s problems.©

Read more...

All about brand identity

Since the appearance of its initial slogan -- 'Just do it' -- Nike has cultivated the universal values associated with sports and the Olympic movement: surpassing oneself, determination, competition, accomplishment. This is where the brand's ethic, its vision of the world, and what it believes are situated.
What is the identity of a brand? Our first answer might be that it is what the brand 'says' to consumers -- making a distinction between what it says and how they understand it.
The notion of identity is still too little used by managers, and that's a shame, because to our way of thinking it offers some very useful and concrete glimpses into the essence of the brand phenomenon itself. It constitutes the foundation and the federating element of all the activities we have designated as being manifestations of the brand.

We sometimes have a tendency to confine brand identity to the intuitive, affective sphere, which the company's concrete and methodical processes cannot influence. Yet tools for analysis do exist, originating in the field of semiology, with which this area can be at least partially rationalized and provide very concrete lessons about managing a brand. . .
Brand ethics and aesthetics
Of all the tools available today, semiology is, in our opinion and based on our experience, the discipline best suited to aiding a manager in defining, prolonging and defending the identity of a luxury brand. From our perspective as non-specialists but convinced users, we would like to take a moment to discuss this discipline.
First of all, what is semiology? Imagine two 'No Smoking' signs, one of which gets its message across better than the other. Is it possible to describe exactly what makes one more effective than the other, without the discussion becoming simply a matter of subjective tastes?
And is it possible to describe it in general terms, to aid us in, say, designing another type of sign (for example, a "No Parking" sign)? In broad terms, that is the project of semiology.
Its aim (according to Greimas) is to describe, as objectively as possible, the process of production of meaning, and generally of all the practices of signification that make up cultures. But it can be extended, Jean-Marie Floch adds, to a certain disposition of the mind, curious about anything that has (or could have) meaning.
If we accept the validity of applying semiotics to the study of brand identities, we are making the following basic premise: brands are systems that produce meaning...

The hinge
The first of these semiotic tools is the "hinge," a simple framework developed by Jean-Marie Floch to bring out the different levels of analysis or definition of a brand universe . . . . . .The use of the hinge is relatively simple. It aims at characterizing the brand's identity through its expression and its content -- that is, at giving a formal definition of its aesthetic and of its ethic.
The aesthetic study is fairly easy to put into practice, especially if the brand in question is a very "typed" one, where the colors, shapes and materials are resolutely baroque or classical. In this domain, the contribution of Jean-Marie Floch, who updated the work of Heinrich Wolfflin, has been essential.
Note that generally, the Northern European brands -- Jil Sander, Ikea, Helmut Lang, BMW -- and North American brands-Calvin Klein, Donna Karan, Coach -- have an aesthetic of the classical type, characterised pictorially by:
# Clearly defined lines and contours, emphasizing individually recognizable elements
# Space divided into easily identifiable zones, each with its own autonomy
# Closed shapes, visible in their entirety: planes
# Impressions of stability: symmetries
# Saturated colours.
On the other hand, Mediterranean brands -- Loewe, Ferragamo, Dolce & Gabbana, Rubelli, Majorica, Lamborghini, Versace, Roberto Cavalli -- have a tendency toward the baroque, characterized pictorially by:
# lines delineated by shadow effects: curves and criss-crosses
# open forms, which can appear accidental
# each part losing its autonomy and taking on meaning only in association with the rest of the work
# movement treated in depth: volumes
# chiaroscuro and deep colors.
The study conducted on Loewe in 1996 by one of the authors, who was its president at the time, in collaboration with Creative Business and Jean-Marie Floch, led to the development and the communication of the concept of a "minimalist baroque" aesthetic.
These apparently contradictory terms met with much success with the press. In the late 1990s, this Spanish fashion brand -- a century-and-a-half old and often referred to by the French as the 'Iberian Hermes' -- had good name recognition, associated with quality and a strong presence in Spain and Japan, but was still weak in the other markets.
Struggling to achieve international status, and also suffering from the absence of a charismatic founder in its history � unlike Chanel, for example -- Loewe had the appearance of a slightly 'tired' brand.
The characterisation of the brand's aesthetic effectively transmitted the message of a brand that was faithful to its roots (the baroque) and with a strong desire for modernity (minimalism, which at the time was still in vogue). That message was coherent with the recruiting of designer Narciso Rodriguez, who was himself a blend of modernity and respect for tradition.
The study of the brand ethic, on the other hand, is considerably more difficult, above all for brands that were not founded by a creator with a strong personality, or that have squandered their heritage. Certain brands are so clearly positioned that the task is easier. Take Nike, for example.
Since the appearance of its initial slogan -- 'Just do it' -- Nike has cultivated the universal values associated with sports and the Olympic movement: surpassing oneself, determination, competition, accomplishment.
Nike, remember, is the goddess of victory. This is where the brand's ethic, its vision of the world, and what it believes are situated; "what it stands for," to use Jean-Marie Floch's expression.
The launch of the controversial Mecca-Cola in France in November 2002 is a very significant example of a brand that directly communicates the values underlying the ethic of its brand identity.
Its bottles and the opening page of its website say: "No more drinking stupid, drink with commitment!" and ൒ per cent of our net profits, for Palestinian Childhood. 10 per cent for [local] charity-an NGO." This is clear to everyone, without the need for a semiotician to translate.
Another recently successful brand is Camper. The Spanish shoe manufacturer expresses very clearly which brand ethic it wants to promote through its slogan 'Walk don't run': a whole philosophy of life.
In certain cases, setting about finding the permanent values the brand has expressed since its inception is a frustrating process. It sometimes leads -- as was the case with Loewe -- to a recognition of the non-existence of a brand ethic.
Such a situation has an advantage in that it leaves open a very broad field for the choice of values, but it also shows that the brand has had no obvious permanent values over time, and, therefore, has been perceived in a very imprecise way.
Using a semiologist who is experienced in the study of the corpus of brands is an absolute necessity in this type of research.
The role of the semiologist consists not only in finding possible meanings beyond the signs, but also in determining precisely the objective procedures to be used in constructing that meaning. By describing in detail the nature of a brand's identity and the means of its expression, the semiologist will help the manager perpetuate that identity and prolong its life.

Read more...