Why Kodak lost its ubiquity in the blink of a shutter
One of the points I make at the end of my book, BrandSimple, was something I lifted from Andy Grove, former CEO of Intel, who commented “Only the paranoid survive.” His quote referred to those charged with managing Intel. My reference applied to anyone charged with managing a brand. While many factors drive brand success, one of the most critical is the ability to stay relevantly differentiated in your category. To do so takes a bit of paranoia.
I thought about this the other day as I read that Kodak would be dropping its sponsorship of the Olympic Games effective at the end of next year’s summer events in Beijing. A sponsorship that began over 100 years ago with an ad printed in the program for the 1896 Olympic Games in Athens. I thought about it even more as I walked by a local photo processing store on my way to work where a “Going out of Business” sign hung in the window. This store was one of the many in its franchise, all going out of business forever. I think the changes in the photography industry should be a good wake-up call to any brand not paranoid enough to worry about staying relevantly ahead of its category curve.
Shutterbugs used to have one or two relationships with photography brands – cameras and film. There wasn’t too much competition for brand managers to worry about, especially those vying for the amateur market. Kodak was comfortably in a leadership position, doing the sorts of things that leadership brands should do, like sponsoring Olympic Games. The Kodak brand was ubiquitous. Then, in the blink of a shutter, it wasn’t. The problem is that it wasn’t paranoid, or at least didn’t become paranoid enough fast enough to transform its core business in an industry as hyper fast as technology. Today there are dozens of brands competing for attention in this category. Photographers have lots of options in brand relationships, beginning with digital cameras and going on and on and on to camera phones, digital printing a la HP and Canon, online posting brands like Flickr and Snapfish, plus a good number of products from a small brand called Apple. In a market with so many consumer choices and so much change, brand survival isn’t good enough. With a nod to Andy Grove I’d say only the paranoid succeed.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Paranoia is an interesting thought.
I’ve noticed similar “going-out-of-business” themes among video rental establishments in my neighborhood. Makes you wonder if Blockbuster Video is paranoid enough? It seems that folks are moving toward the more convenient on-demand type solutions.
October 29th, 2007 at 5:15 am
Another area that has suffered first with the evolution of Video stores and more recently with the development of on-line films is the good old fashion cinemas. No longer a good saturday nights entertainment but more of a “I´ve seen it first” event. In Spain the Yelmo Cinema complexes have resorted first by offering a “live” concert of a huge local spanish band, through their cinemas this summer, for all those who couldnt buy a ticket. And more recently they are organising their cinemas as Gaming areas where everyone can connect to various viedo games on the big screen and play against each other…or learn how to play. A good example of brand evolution, remaining relevant to their consumers and so far, differentiated – who could resist playing Super Mario on a Hollywood size screen!