WHY BRANDING FAILS TO WORK
WHY BRANDING FAILS TO WORK
That's right. As obvious as it seems, people often forget how and why branding works. Branding is what turns mere commodities into name brands infused with value-the kind of value consumers are willing to pay for. "Yeah," you could say, "but that's different. Your product needs a unique angle to succeed...."
Let's look at history. Before there was Coca-cola, there were soft drinks. Before Godiva, there was chocolate (and before chocolate, sweets). Before Starbucks, there was coffee (although some would beg to differ).
Let's get even more fundamental and look again at Nike. Before Nike, there were simply sneakers or sports shoes. Underneath that, there was an undefined need and desire, and that was to excel. That was truly the need that Nike fulfilled and why people buy Nike. They are not buying a "sneaker." They are buying the emotional ties that align with them-being winners like the athletes who endorse them-whether walking or running, playing or competing.
What does Chanel offer? The better perfume? Maybe. What it really offers is the desire to feel, and smell, attractive-essentially fulfilling the desire to be likeable and admirable.
Ragu does not sell spaghetti sauce. It sells convenience in an overly inconvenient world, just like Kellogg's in the breakfast category. Gourmet pasta sauces offer the same convenience, but their angle is this: convenience without any compromise in taste and quality.
Turning commodities into brands
This is the ultimate acid test: Does your brand really create the necessary ties with your consumers and potential consumers to rise above an overstimulated marketplace? Very few brands do, and the smarter (not necessarily bigger) brands take full advantage of this weakness.
For those who have been in the technology markets, you'll remember this fondly from years ago. Iomega, the manufacturer of the then-famous zip and jaz removable media drives, had done a brilliant job of branding—so good in fact, that SyQuest, the former category leader, was forced to close its doors. If you'd seen SyQuest's last ads, you'd understand. Their only angle was offering a cheaper "me-too" comeback of a product, the SparQ. Besides violating nearly every principle of branding and positioning, how should it be pronounced: spark or spar-cue? Honestly, we couldn't figure it out either.
The key here is that every world-class brand today started out as a commodity and became, through specific and planned marketing activities, the name associated with that category.
The law of branding Al Ries forgot
Al Ries, the Grandfather of Positioning, came out with his now legendary "The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding." While there are some excellent points contained in his text, there are some opinion-based concepts that I disagree with. More importantly, Mr. Ries failed to include what I consider one of the most rudimentary, and abused, law in branding: The Law of the Common Denominator.
Every marketing and design decision that finds its way into the marketplace creates the brand. All of the elements of design, language, imagery, presentation as well as the consistency, style, color palette, etc. work together to create that brand. If all branding efforts are based on an intelligent analysis of the marketplace, performed in a planned and coordinated way, while adhering to the eight key principles of branding (as codified by our firm, but not outlined here), a company can create its own world-class brand.
But what if this isn't done? What if the brand, and its various soldiers (identity, marketing materials, packaging, etc.), are all marching to different drummers? Did you know that you would still create a brand? Granted it would be poor, cost a lot to "maintain," waste endless promotional dollars and invariably result in minimal presence and value-but it would be a brand. It is not an issue of should I have a brand or not. As Scott Bedbury of Starbucks and Nike fame (he's the guy behind Nike's "Just Do It" branding campaign) stated in Fast Company magazine, "In an age of accelerated product proliferation, enormous customer choice, and growing clutter and clamor in the marketplace, a great brand is a necessity, not a luxury." Fact is you've got one—it's simply a question of how good it is.
We ask our clients one simple question that tends to bring this point home: "Did your brand make any difference today?" The point is this (which, by the way, is the law): If no exact efforts are made to create, define and manage a brand, the most common and consistent elements to a brand's market presence will become the brand.
Example: a major paper company in the US produces very expensive paper promotions. Each piece is different from the other with numerous messages, benefits and offers. The outcome is a brand tied together only by the overlapping, hence common, elements. In this case, their brand has become the name, a confused incoherent company image(which in this industry equals less value and less sales) and not anything more. How did this come to be? Their various promotions always include the company name (which we'll leave out here) and the names of the various paper lines accompanied by a battery of inconsistent messages with cartoon images one time, photo images another, corny copy another time, "meaningful" copy another, ad infinitum. By default, they attempted to be everything and, from a brand equity standpoint, became nothing whatsoever.
Strong examples of great brands who use this law to their advantage are Absolut, BMW, FedEx, Campbell's Soup, Heinz Ketchup, Harley Davidson, Intel, Levi's, Lexus, McDonald's, Microsoft, Sprint, and Macintosh (with its breakthrough "Think different" campaign and the iMac). All these brands stand for something, have very strong messages, are consistent, have high design standards and control their marketplace. They leave nothing to chance and don't allow their brand to occur by default, that being the lowest common denominator between all their various media messages.
Demand only original branding—accept no substitutes
Does branding really make a difference? Look at Absolut Vodka. In 1981, before the famous campaign began promoting the Swedish import, Absolut was selling 20,000 cases annually in the US. In 1996, sales were over 3 million cases annually resulting in an increase of 14,900%. That's going from 384 cases per week to 57,692 cases per week. All this while leaving Stolichnaya, the Russian vodka, in the dust.
May the brand be with you.
WHY BRANDING FAILS TO WORK - To learn more about this author, visit David Brier's Website.
Like this article? Share it with your friends
Before Nike, there were sneakers
That's right. As obvious as it seems, people often forget how and why branding works. Branding is what turns mere commodities into name brands infused with value-the kind of value consumers are willing to pay for. "Yeah," you could say, "but that's different. Your product needs a unique angle to succeed...."
Let's look at history. Before there was Coca-cola, there were soft drinks. Before Godiva, there was chocolate (and before chocolate, sweets). Before Starbucks, there was coffee (although some would beg to differ).
Let's get even more fundamental and look again at Nike. Before Nike, there were simply sneakers or sports shoes. Underneath that, there was an undefined need and desire, and that was to excel. That was truly the need that Nike fulfilled and why people buy Nike. They are not buying a "sneaker." They are buying the emotional ties that align with them-being winners like the athletes who endorse them-whether walking or running, playing or competing.
What does Chanel offer? The better perfume? Maybe. What it really offers is the desire to feel, and smell, attractive-essentially fulfilling the desire to be likeable and admirable.
Ragu does not sell spaghetti sauce. It sells convenience in an overly inconvenient world, just like Kellogg's in the breakfast category. Gourmet pasta sauces offer the same convenience, but their angle is this: convenience without any compromise in taste and quality.
Turning commodities into brands
This is the ultimate acid test: Does your brand really create the necessary ties with your consumers and potential consumers to rise above an overstimulated marketplace? Very few brands do, and the smarter (not necessarily bigger) brands take full advantage of this weakness.
For those who have been in the technology markets, you'll remember this fondly from years ago. Iomega, the manufacturer of the then-famous zip and jaz removable media drives, had done a brilliant job of branding—so good in fact, that SyQuest, the former category leader, was forced to close its doors. If you'd seen SyQuest's last ads, you'd understand. Their only angle was offering a cheaper "me-too" comeback of a product, the SparQ. Besides violating nearly every principle of branding and positioning, how should it be pronounced: spark or spar-cue? Honestly, we couldn't figure it out either.
The key here is that every world-class brand today started out as a commodity and became, through specific and planned marketing activities, the name associated with that category.
The law of branding Al Ries forgot
Al Ries, the Grandfather of Positioning, came out with his now legendary "The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding." While there are some excellent points contained in his text, there are some opinion-based concepts that I disagree with. More importantly, Mr. Ries failed to include what I consider one of the most rudimentary, and abused, law in branding: The Law of the Common Denominator.
Every marketing and design decision that finds its way into the marketplace creates the brand. All of the elements of design, language, imagery, presentation as well as the consistency, style, color palette, etc. work together to create that brand. If all branding efforts are based on an intelligent analysis of the marketplace, performed in a planned and coordinated way, while adhering to the eight key principles of branding (as codified by our firm, but not outlined here), a company can create its own world-class brand.
But what if this isn't done? What if the brand, and its various soldiers (identity, marketing materials, packaging, etc.), are all marching to different drummers? Did you know that you would still create a brand? Granted it would be poor, cost a lot to "maintain," waste endless promotional dollars and invariably result in minimal presence and value-but it would be a brand. It is not an issue of should I have a brand or not. As Scott Bedbury of Starbucks and Nike fame (he's the guy behind Nike's "Just Do It" branding campaign) stated in Fast Company magazine, "In an age of accelerated product proliferation, enormous customer choice, and growing clutter and clamor in the marketplace, a great brand is a necessity, not a luxury." Fact is you've got one—it's simply a question of how good it is.
We ask our clients one simple question that tends to bring this point home: "Did your brand make any difference today?" The point is this (which, by the way, is the law): If no exact efforts are made to create, define and manage a brand, the most common and consistent elements to a brand's market presence will become the brand.
Example: a major paper company in the US produces very expensive paper promotions. Each piece is different from the other with numerous messages, benefits and offers. The outcome is a brand tied together only by the overlapping, hence common, elements. In this case, their brand has become the name, a confused incoherent company image(which in this industry equals less value and less sales) and not anything more. How did this come to be? Their various promotions always include the company name (which we'll leave out here) and the names of the various paper lines accompanied by a battery of inconsistent messages with cartoon images one time, photo images another, corny copy another time, "meaningful" copy another, ad infinitum. By default, they attempted to be everything and, from a brand equity standpoint, became nothing whatsoever.
Strong examples of great brands who use this law to their advantage are Absolut, BMW, FedEx, Campbell's Soup, Heinz Ketchup, Harley Davidson, Intel, Levi's, Lexus, McDonald's, Microsoft, Sprint, and Macintosh (with its breakthrough "Think different" campaign and the iMac). All these brands stand for something, have very strong messages, are consistent, have high design standards and control their marketplace. They leave nothing to chance and don't allow their brand to occur by default, that being the lowest common denominator between all their various media messages.
Demand only original branding—accept no substitutes
Does branding really make a difference? Look at Absolut Vodka. In 1981, before the famous campaign began promoting the Swedish import, Absolut was selling 20,000 cases annually in the US. In 1996, sales were over 3 million cases annually resulting in an increase of 14,900%. That's going from 384 cases per week to 57,692 cases per week. All this while leaving Stolichnaya, the Russian vodka, in the dust.
May the brand be with you.
WHY BRANDING FAILS TO WORK - To learn more about this author, visit David Brier's Website.
Like this article? Share it with your friends
 | |
 |
No article feedback found. |
| |
Leave Your Feedback |
 | |
| |||
Joe DagerJoe Dager is President of Business901, a progressive coaching company providing no-nonsense direction in areas such as Lean Six Sigma Marketing and organized referral marketing. What others say: In the past 20 years, Joe and I have collaborated on many difficult issues. Joe’s ability to combine his expertise with “out of the box” thinking is unsurpassed. He has always delivered quickly, cost effectively and with ingenuity. A brilliant mind that is always a pleasure to work with.” - James R. If you want to learn more about Business901, start a conversation with us. We can be found @ Web/Blog: Business901.com Web/Blog: FundingYourNonprofit.com LinkedIn Profile Follow me on Twitter - Visit Joe Dager's Website |
|||
Stephanie RobeyStephanie Robey is President and CoFounder of Pivot Positive, LLC - an Internet marketing business focused on helping people start work at home ventures. Previously, she was employed at The Search Agency with over 20 years experience in graphic design and 10 years experience in online marketing. She was responsible for launching the Conversion Path Optimization (CPO) unit where she and her team have conducted hundreds of optimization tests for online companies across multiple verticals. She is a successful entrepreneur having started and sold 2 companies and remains on the board of directors of the third, PhotoSpin.com Stephanie began her career in the direct marketing realm creating and producing direct mail for many of the major cable television companies and directly attributes her understanding of Internet marketing to those early offline experiences. Stephanie is a graduate of San Diego State University with a BFA in Graphic Arts and also holds an Executive MBA from the Graziadio School of Business and Management at Pepperdine University. Read Steph's Blog Meet Steph and Dave Sign up for our Free 7-Day BootCamp: Self Employed & Rich - Visit Stephanie Robey's Website |
|||
|
To learn more about the Evan Elite Author Program please contact us. | |||
 | |
|  |
Subscribe to David's articles
 | |
|
|  |
 | |
|
| |
 | |||||||
|
 | ||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
|
| ||
 |
| Have you written articles that would be of value to entrepreneurs? Become an expert on our site by publishing them! Expose yourself to a wide audience, drive more traffic to your website and get more sales! Click Here for details. |
|
|
 |
| Modeling the Masters: Learn the true secrets behind Walt Disney's business success factors & grow your company! Video produced by Phanta Media |
|
|
 |
"Learn straight from Evan how you can Make a Full Time Income (And More) from a Website"
Click Here To Learn More |
|
|
|
|
Get advice & tips from famous business owners, new articles by entrepreneur experts, my latest website updates, & special sneak peaks at what's to come!
|
|
|
 Cash Flow Forecast Samples Networking Royally Intro to M&A 100 Success Tips Exit Interview Document |
|
 | ||
 |
Top 50 Diversion Blogs
Top Diversion Blogs of 2009 | |
 |
Top 50 Franchising Blogs
Top 50 Franchising Blogs | |
| ||
 | ||||
| ||||
|
| ||||
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Email us your ideas on how to make our website more valuable! Thank you Sharon from Toronto Salsa Lessons / Classes for your suggestions to make the newsletter look like the website and profile younger entrepreneurs like Jennifer Lopez and Sean Combs!
|
|
|
