Brand: Who's Responsibility Is It, Anyway?

Brand: Whose Responsibility is It, Anyway?

A few years ago, on one steamy summer day, I sat across the table from one of the most powerful CEO’s in the automotive world.  My colleagues and I were having a conversation with him about the underleveraged value of his brand.  We suggested that his organization needed someone to champion the brand.  When he asked us who that should be, we told him that he would be the perfect brand champion.  We used the example of Steve Jobs as the ultimate brand champion to support this recommendation.

At that instant, the already warm room got a lot hotter. He was not just taken aback, but actually indignant that we would suggest that he, the CEO should be the brand champion. He told us in no uncertain terms that brand was the responsibility of marketing and, of course, us…the advertising agency. The conversation came to an immediate halt.

Having spent about half of my career in advertising, this was not the first time that someone equated brand with marketing communications. It happens all the time…even with some of the world’s greatest brands. 

Several years ago, I had the opportunity to work with one of the most iconic entertainment brands in the world, on what started out as a ‘branding’ (marketing) project for one of their underperforming theme parks.  As we dug deeper, it became apparent that it was not a marketing issue at all, but rather, a product issue.  Guests arrived at the park with high expectations that were set by the brand name, and left severely disappointed with their experience.  So, to fix it, we took a step back and developed actionable brand guidelines that could be implemented across the organization…from product, to CRM, to pricing, to partnerships, and yes, to marketing as well.  Today, that park is thriving. This positive outcome was only possible because the President of the park had commissioned the project, and thus we were able to move upstream and fix the real issue.

For while marketing communications are important in brand building, marketing communications are most effective when they amplify a coherent and desirable brand experience.

The only way to create that desirable experience is to ensure that everyone in the organization is crystal clear on what the brand stands for, and understands what they need to do to contribute to building that experience.

And who is better poised to drive absolute and coherent operationalizing of the brand, than the CEO?

Innovation = Creativity = Value

Innovation = Creativity = Value

Innovation. It drives brand value.  It is also one of the most overused words in marketing today.  That’s because it is much easier to say innovation, than to be  innovation.

Why is this so?  Perhaps it is because the word ‘innovation’ is lacking in clarity of definition.  And the dictionary doesn’t help us much, as it defines innovation as  ‘something new or different’.

So to understand what innovation is all about, it might be easier to debunk some myths by starting with what it’s not.

First, despite some marketers’ insistent and incessant claims, ‘New and Improved’ or better yet, ‘New Package, Same Great Product’ are not likely to be perceived as meaningful innovation by customers.  Incremental improvements like this will not drive significant change in brand perception or value.

Second, innovation is not technology. While technology can contribute to innovations, innovation can occur without inventing any new technology. And sometimes, technology is just frivolous.

So, what is innovation?

Fast Company's top 3 innovative brands, Apple, Facebook and Google make life simpler, richer, or more rewarding.  That’s because true innovation is driven by deep human insight. Insight gives innovation purpose. It gives innovation relevance.  Innovation without purpose and relevance is essentially valueless.

The number one brand on the list, Apple always starts with the insight that for most people, technology complicates tasks.  Facebook leverages the fundamental human need to connect. And Google satisfies human’s insatiable quest for knowledge.

But insight is only one ingredient.  The second, and perhaps more important is vision to challenge what is, and imagine what could be.  This is what separates incremental improvement from breakthrough innovation.  As Henry Ford famously said, ‘If I asked people what they wanted they would have said a faster horse’.  While insight may have established the need for faster transportation, without challenging the status quo, Ford may have started a veterinary stimulants company to satisfy this need for speed.  Instead, by thinking beyond what was, Ford imagined the mass use of internal combustion transportation.

What would each brand mentioned above be, had they not challenged the status quo?   Apple may have delivered an MP3 player that held more songs, or perhaps a cell phone with better network coverage, and little else.  Facebook might just be a better email platform, and Google just a more powerful portal. And none of them would have realized the brand value creation that comes with real innovation.

So if innovation is really about insight that purposefully challenges the status quo, then one might consider this dictionary definition:

‘the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc.’

And one can find that definition by looking up the word ‘CREATIVITY’.