Please Trust My Brand

Why?  Because I Said So!

One of the cornerstones of brand building is building trust.  Regardless of its positioning, a brand that can't be trusted is likely a brand that will not be purchased.

Many times in my career, I’ve worked with brands whose market research uncovers a 'trust' deficit.  And, as a result, ‘trust’ gets shoehorned into their marketing strategy. Unfortunately,  brands that do this have as much a chance of building trust as the proverbial polyester clad used car salesman who tells you that the car he is trying to sell you was owned by a little old lady who only drove it to church on Sundays.

Like people,  the only way for brands to build trust is to be trustworthy by being true to themselves. And any attempt to try to ‘message’ trust in communications will likely backfire, and ultimately erode trust even further.  

While this seems fairly evident, there are several recent examples of well known brands attempting to tell me why I should trust them as they pull the wool over my eyes.

Last week, I was a bit astonished to receive a 17 lb package from Restoration Hardware containing a shrink wrapped stack of 13 'Source Books', including the personally irrelevant 'Baby' and 'Child' books.  But what really got my attention was the cover page of the mailing that prominently stated: 'Heavier Load = Lighter [carbon] Footprint'. 

And not only did RH call this out on the mailing, they actually issued a press release telling everyone about how this mailing was part of their sustainability initiative!  Perhaps they were  trying to overcompensate for previous criticisms of their mailings?

Personally, I was dumbfounded and, a bit insulted that RH would try to convince me of something that was so apparently disingenuous, and surprised that they could be so out of touch.

And apparently, I was not the only one to react this way. 

Twitter was abuzz with comments like: 'Wow restoration hardware not gonna be accused of tree hugging.  WTF, get the internet'

Someone was actually moved to create a 'Stop Restoration Hardware Catalog mailings'  Facebook page. 

And BloombergBusinessweek wrote a not so flattering article on  the subject.

Instead of being lauded for their sustainability, RH earned a fair amount of negative social and traditional media.This is a classic example of how a brand's actions speak volumes (no pun intended)!

The real shame here is the missed opportunity for RH to advance its true brand story.  RH states that they are 'curators of the finest design in the world'.  And the idea of producing 'sourcebooks' is actually aligned to the way a curator should behave.  And while sending a massive stack of catalogs might not be the most efficient way to reach your audience in the digital age, if you had stuck with that story, catalog recipients may or may not have liked you more, but they wouldn't have learned to mistrust you.

But this isn't an isolated case.  Earlier this year, I spent a month in Australia.  It was right around the time that General Motors announced that it would no longer produce Holden cars in Australia.  Over the years, Holden has been a unique brand in General Motors portfolio.  A brand created specifically for and built in Australia, Aussies felt a deep affinity to and pride in the brand.  Thus, Aussies felt as if they had been slapped in the face when GM decided that they would take 3,000 jobs from Australian soil, and begin importing rebadged Chevrolets from China.

While this action alone was enough to chip away at Holden brand equities, the Aussie wounded pride would likely have healed over time.  But then, Holden betrayed every Australian's trust by saturating the airwaves with a campaign entitled, 'We're Here'.  The ads feature smiley Australians staged next to Holden cars saying 'We're here', while  a voice over tells the audience that Holden has been in Australia for over 100 years, and, 'while we will no longer make cars IN Australia, we'll always make cars FOR Australia' .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XZndLtBfoU

Needless to say, the Aussie audience was not fooled.  This ad, instead of instilling confidence and trust in Holden fired up the negative earned media machine with

Tweets like: 'Dear Holden, your 'We're Here' ad is utterly ridiculous...you won't be here...cut the crap', and numerous parodies on YouTube.  

And of course, it earned negative editorial press. 

Holden, like all brands should have known better than to try to message trust.  For in the end, a brand's behavior will define it better for its audiences than any words it chooses to use to describe itself.

Of course, Holden is owned by General Motors, the company that was recently exposed for  instructing their employees to use deceptive words to cover up dangerous product defects.

Death to American ‘Brand Colonialism’

Why Americans Need to Think Globally If They Want Their to Brand Survive Locally.

There’s an old joke that begins with a series of questions about multi lingual skills and ends with the answer to the question ‘What do you call someone who speaks only one language?’ Of course the punch line is ‘American’.

Over the years, I’ve worked with many great global brands, whose brand owners may or may not be American. But when their regional representatives assemble, the Americans always seem to be the loudest voice. Because they've represented the largest and most profitable market for their brand, Americans have developed an overwhelming sense of hubris. So much so that, in many cases Americans are not only the most vocal, but also have de facto double duty as the regional and global brand stewards.Thus, many ’global’ decisions reflect purely American sensibilities and the ‘rest of the world’ goes along like ‘brand colonists’, even speaking English.

But the ‘colonists’ are no longer powerless. As the middle class in Asia explodes, the American market has shifted from growth engine to cash cow. Suddenly, the Chinese, and others from developing countries have as much power and influence in branding decisions as Americans.

 But like so many Empire leaders of the past, the Americans seem reluctant to hand over the reigns to the colonists. Instead, I’ve seen them attempt to pre-empt the process by creating their own ‘global’ brand strategies. Strategies that are seemingly similar to the existing American strategy.  Strategies that seem pretty blind to other cultures.

But Americans (and any other parochially-minded global brand owners) who continue down this path will find their brand to be extinct in the not so distant future.

In fact, embracing a global point of view will not only serve the good of the brand today in developing markets, but it will also serve the future of the brand in America.

Why? Because brands that can find universal relevance crossing borders in the world today will be able to find universal relevance crossing cultures in the America of tomorrow. For tomorrow’s America will be a multi-cultural America in which whites will be a minority, and the values of Baby Boomers will be long forgotten; A multi-cultural American in which the ‘General Market’ no longer exists, and is replaced by a ‘Total Market’, in which insights into Hispanic, Asian and other cultures will be critical for success.

Brands that can’t find a universal brand truth, in a multi cultural America will run the risk of eroding their value, by losing focus as they develop multiple campaigns to appeal to different audiences.

 So, American brand leaders, why not get on an airplane and start immersing yourself in other cultures? Why not start embracing this future now by listening to and learning from your colleagues from other markets? Why not work collaboratively to ensure that you have a universal idea that has enduring relevance beyond a single audience or generation?

And who knows? You might even learn another language!

Note: The Author is a ‘Recovering American’ who has lived abroad and visited over 20 countries on 5 continents.  While her grandparents and mother were bilingual, she speaks only English and ‘Taxi Japanese’.

What Tesla Could Bring to Apple

Hint: It’s not the car

Business publications and other media were abuzz  last week about a meeting that took place between Elon Musk and Apple.  The speculation mostly centered on an acquisition of Tesla by Apple. After all, Apple has cash; Tesla operates in a capital-intensive business. There is a foregone conclusion in almost every article that Tesla needs Apple, and with Apple’s help, Tesla will thrive.

Certainly, there is a lot that Apple can do for Tesla’s business.  Who else is better suited to perfect the connected car? And, Apple can bring some of the best CRM practices to a category in dire need of such capabilities.  Ditto for their retail savvy.  And, of course, Apple’s aforementioned cash reserves don’t hurt.  But all this may miss the point of the real power of such a merger.  The answer may lie, instead, in the magic of these brands.

These are two like-minded brands. Each plays by their own rules, eschewing category conventions, letting their brand values be their guide to category breaking innovation.  Each began as premium niche players with the desire to dominate the market. Each has strong design sensibilities and relentless attention to detail.   But perhaps the most important similarity is that each has been led by a strong-willed visionary, arrogant enough to believe in what seems impossible, and make it real.

So rather than focus on what Apple can do for Tesla’s business, perhaps the press should be focusing on what Tesla, in the form of Elon Musk can do for the Apple brand.

Since Steve Jobs’ death, the Apple business has continued to thrive, but the Apple brand has lost its vision.  There has been no revolutionary product, but rather incremental improvements to existing products.  While Apple may well still be the gold standard in many categories, the competition has closed the distance between them enough to give Apple some credible competition in the categories that Apple created.  Simply put, Apple has stopped behaving like Apple. This is because Steve Jobs’ fanatical, some would say tyrannical leadership style and crystal clear vision drove the brand to set new standards in innovation and marketing.

And that’s where Elon Musk comes in.  Elon Musk not a car guy, and based upon his track record is likely to get bored with the car business very soon.  Elon Musk is however a fanatic. He is a fanatic who is always looking for the next big thing, and is not afraid to enter uncharted waters.  He made his fortune in technology, and his current business investments span everything from space travel to solar power.  He has envisioned a new form of mass transit that will allow people to travel between Los Angeles and San Francisco in 30 minutes. And he has the audacity to say is feasible! There seems to be no limit to his vision, or the categories to which he seeks to apply it.

So, if Apple were to acquire not Tesla the company, but Musk the visionary, it could mean that the Apple brand could start behaving like Apple again.

A Tale of Two Brands

Why Coke and Cadillac Can Have Such Different Takes on the American Dream

Recently, Coke and Cadillac have released polarizing ads that capitalize on their American heritage.  Being quintessential American brands, both are entitled to represent a point of view on the American Dream. Yet, these ads couldn’t be further apart in their stories or the way they tell them. Coke’s ad features recent US immigrants singing ‘America the Beautiful’ in their native tongue.  Cadillac is introducing its new electric model by featuring a monologue by an affluent American who derides other cultures who value time off, and extolls the virtues of the American work ethic and the rewards and privilege that it brings.

And while you either love or hate these ads, taken together, they are fantastic examples of how brands can credibly extend their own stories while maintaining consistent brand behavior across time and borders. They both remain relevant in ways that will allow them to grow their business in new markets and with new audiences.

Ads 100 Years in the Making

Established only12 years apart, Coke and Cadillac have existed for more than a century. Each brand was founded on uniquely American ideals, from which they have never wavered. Throughout their existence, these brands have behaved consistently..so much so that if you go back in time, it seems that the briefs for these current ads were written over 100 years ago.  

Coke: The Dream of Accessibility

Coke’s long time leader, Robert Woodruff, (who took over in 1919) transformed a floundering Coke with the vision of being ‘within arms length of desire’. Coke was defined by accessibility.  And for over 100 years, accessibility has been the driver of all of Coke’s behaviors…from its global business strategy to its warm and inclusive communications tone. 

So, the ‘America the Beautiful’ ad is no more than the latest expression of Coke’s accessibility.  It is not only culturally relevant as the face of America changes, but also serves a very specific business need.  As carbonated soft drinks lose their luster,  Coke’s share of the total beverage market is shrinking.  Coke needs to win favor with the next generation of Americans if it is to maintain its position as one of the most valuable brands in the world.  So, Coke's latest  accessibility message is designed to appeal to its new target audience.  In this way, it is advancing its brand narrative, while maintaining the plot.

Cadillac: The Dream of Exclusivity

In 1915, Cadillac ran a now-famous ‘manifesto’ ad entitled ‘The Penalty of Leadership’.  Adopting a brash, arrogant tone of superiority, this ad described the higher standards to which a leader must hold ones self if they are to continue to reap the rewards of their hard work. It even goes as far as dismissing those who cannot measure up. Thus, Cadillac has always been about how American culture rewards hard work and achievement with status, and how it excludes those who don’t.  It is very clear to see that the current ad is a continuation of this narrative, in both tone and message.

Interestingly, Cadillac (and General Motors) has made a conscious decision to focus its business in the US and China.  It is expecting China to be a significant growth engine for the future.   So it is likely not a coincidence that a brash, ‘status through achievement’ tone and message is as culturally relevant to the next generation of luxury buyers in China as it is in the US.

Advancing your brand story

So what does this mean for brand owners?  

It does not mean that brands shouldn’t evolve, or that they should stay stuck in the past. Consider the fate of another iconic American brand, Polaroid...a brand that failed to advance their story. Polaroid was founded on the idea of instant access, something that has become even more relevant today than when it was founded. But Polaroid lost the plot, and tied itself to a single product proposition, rather than an enduring brand idea.

What it does mean is that regardless of current and local cultural sensibilities, brands should not bend themselves to the point of breaking. Imagine if Coke started to make and promote 14K gold cans in China, or if Cadillac sponsored the next ‘Occupy Wall Street’? Rather, brands should look for ways to respect and advance their heritage while moving into the future. Regardless of the time or location, brands must find an audience that will be receptive to their story and make it relevant to them.  This is how great brands will own a successful future.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=443Vy3I0gJs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4hI6koIRYk