BrandSimple | BrandDigital: The Blog

Landor’s third annual list of the top ten Breakaway Brands was released in the November 2nd issue of Fortune magazine. The ranking is based on a comprehensive survey that measures brand momentum over a three year period in terms of financial gain and brand strength – how it’s appraised by consumers. As I looked over the newest top ten brands two things immediately came to mind. First, the brands on the list represented a broad spectrum of categories. TJMaxx to iPod, Stonyfield to Gatorade’s Propel, Costco to Barnes & Noble, with a few relative old-timers thrown in for very good measure. Second, the brands on the list all delivered especially well on the fifth in my top ten list of what it takes to be a strong brand. (You can see the other nine in my book, BrandSimple.) And that is, making sure that your brand strategy – what your brand represents to consumers – is in absolute alignment with your business strategy, or what you deliver. In other words, can you validate the brand experience?

While this has always been essential to brand success, it’s never been more important than in today’s totally transparent, digitally-enabled consumer environment. If you don’t keep your promise in today’s marketplace, you’ll get found out and taken down in an instant, whether by blog, text or brand-damning digital video. Should you have any doubt at all, take a look at the video of the sleeping Comcast repairman on YouTube, complete with background music by the EELS. Each of the companies on the top ten list of Breakaway Brands have the entire organization focused on delivering the brand experience just as consumers expect it to be delivered. The brand strategy is inseparable from the business strategy and it shows both in Wall Street satisfaction and customer satisfaction.

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.

A couple of months ago I wrote about Ford’s new Bold Moves branding campaign. I lauded the company for taking the initial steps required to revive its brand after years of tepid performance. Among the initiatives I cited was the introduction of the hybrid Ford Escape, a vehicle both fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly. I suggested that a really bold move for Ford would be an offer to replace New York City’s entire gas-guzzling, emission-spewing taxi fleet with these green vehicles – a public relations branding signal that would be good for Ford’s brand and great for the planet. While Ford was in no position to do so at the time, it seems that my suggestion was not all that preposterous. It appears New York City’s mayor, Michael R. Bloomberg, has a similar idea. In fact, he’d like to see all New York City cabs replaced with hybrid vehicles within the next five years as part of his PlaNYC which calls for reducing greenhouse emissions in the Big Apple 30 percent by the year 2030. In response to the challenge, Yahoo! immediately donated 10 Ford Escapes to get things rolling. While Ford may not have been in a position to do so a few months ago, I’d say there’s never been a better time than now for them to take the position of change agent in the quest to slow global warming. New York City’s environmental plan is far more extensive than that of any other major city. Converting its fleet of 13,000 yellow cabs to green would send a very strong signal to the world. Ford, by playing a significant role in this effort, would send, in turn, a very strong branding signal. A signal that would be an extremely hard one to equal in its category.

Landor has just released its 2007 ImagePower® Survey looking at green issues and green brands and, not surprisingly, it confirms what intuition would tell us. More and more Americans—40%, in fact—have gotten the message that global warming poses a major threat. More than 50% believe existing environmental initiatives aren’t enough to address the problem. Whether it’s the result of Al Gore’s Academy Award-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, or the increasing volume of business and political discussion from Thomas Friedman on down, green is definitely on the national radar screen. As such, more and more companies are beginning to look at the problem as more than a matter of concern to just tree-hugging fanatics living on the fringe of society. While, again, not surprising, when asked to identify the “greenest” brands, those in the survey did specify a number of brands that have been in the eco-space for years, Whole Foods, Wild Oats, the Body Shop, Aveda, and Toyota among them. The environmental positioning of these brands has been clear to consumers for some time. What was surprising, however, was that those surveyed also identified GE as worthy of a spot on the survey’s list of top ten greenest brands. Surprising, but heartening. And, an indication that this growing concern is leading to a growing awareness far beyond the fringe.

GE is about as unfringe-y as a brand can get. Yet, here is GE setting the bar for any huge, industrial company looking for the right way to enter the green space. First of all, it has assigned a senior executive to oversee the responsibility. Lorraine Bolsinger leads ecomagination, GE’s company-wide commitment to addressing environmental challenges on a global level and she has taken on the substantiation of the sub-branded program incredibly well. Stories on the ecomagination Web site call attention to everything from GE’s answers to cleaner, more efficient sources of energy to its on-going efforts in reducing greenhouse gases. Research and Development investments in the area have grown exponentially. In addition, Jeff Immelt, CEO of GE, has gotten out in front of the program in a major way, a key proof point for any brand looking to walk the green walk, not just talk it. Despite that only a small percentage of GE’s products are environmentally related versus, say, the Body Shop’s where all are geared in that direction, GE has been able to plant itself firmly as a leader in the space early on. This is something that will serve them well as the issue continues to grow in scope and public concern. Needless to say there is no more fringe. GE’s efforts will serve all of us well.

Welcome to Heineken’s “newest work of art.” Heineken Premium Light. While some would consider the “art” to be the clean, refreshing brew inside, I’m referring to the art on the outside. The bottle, that is, with its clean, refreshing label. It’s branding artistry at its best. In fact, it’s a powerful expression of everything the Heineken brand stands for. The premium quality you’d expect. And, the way only Heineken would convey the uniqueness of its low-carb, great tasting new product.

The bottle transcends category norms, from its non-traditional vertical typeface to the translucent pressure sensitive labeling material. For a beer whose roots go back to 1864, Heineken is pretty cool. It’s new Premium Light is cool. The packaging, cooler still. See Eyes on Creativity for another review of the label, or lack thereof.

Heineken may say “Succumb to the smooth.” I’d suggest succumb to the power of the packaging might be an equally worthy claim.

Once upon a time, long, long ago, let’s say the mid-to-late 1990’s, there was a simple brand called AOL. The initials AOL stood for “America Online.” That’s what the brand was all about. AOL was the brand known for getting America online. It was lucky enough to have what’s referred to as first-mover advantage. It was among a handful of companies that offered access to the Internet, but its appeal was to the practical, no-nonsense everyday folks. And there were millions of them. While companies like CompuServe catered to the techy types, AOL had found a gap in the market and filled it quickly by catering to the less technologically proficient who found its service both useful and easy to use. AOL offered something that was different and very relevant to a vast new audience. The fact that there was a monthly fee was irrelevant. People didn’t know any better. (Hold on - I’m getting to this.)

In my book, BrandSimple, I explain that brand success is due, in good part, to offering something that people consider different from what they’ve experienced before, and that they find relevant to their needs. Difference and relevance are two of the pillars of brand strength, the foundation of its equity. And—as if you couldn’t tell from the book’s eponymous title—brand success is also due to the fact that whatever it is that makes the brand relevantly different is simple for people to understand. In a world where brands and brand promises are multiplying like rabbits, this is critical.

Back then, AOL got it right on both counts. It offered an Internet access service that was both different and relevant (actually, it was sort of unique and relevant.), and it was easy for people to understand what this meant to them. It was a strong brand. People flocked to AOL because it made getting online and picking up email easy. This is the simple idea on which AOL built its brand equity. In fact, the brand organization used its tagline as the internal driver of all its branding behaviors, “So easy to use, no matter we’re number one.”

(more…)