Branding Strategy Insider

Brand Building: Is ‘Function’ The New ‘Emotion’?

The ‘emotional’ revolution that has engulfed the marketing world is undeniable: brands are constantly seeking to win our wallets by way of our hearts.  The mythmakers of Madison Ave did so by crafting poignant stores that masked products’ imperfections or downright uselessness.  Though today’s marketers are forced to meet a slightly higher standard of credibility, their goal is still to teach us how their brand is supposed to make us feel.  It seems it’s not enough for soap to clean and moisturize – it must also compel us to philosophize about what it means to be beautiful. 

Psychology, and more recently, Cognitive Neuroscience, have elucidated the critical role emotional plays in our day-to-day existence.  We have entire brain regions dedicated to expressing, perceiving, and processing emotions, and so it is no surprise that emotions lie at the core of many of our decisions and behaviors.  But marketers have, for the most part, misinterpreted the implications of our biology for their brand-building activities.  

The most successful companies in the world understand that brand and business growth don’t result from the kind of emotion that is manufactured in an advertisement.  Instead, these companies channel all of their energy into creating magnificent products that add true, tangible value to people’s lives.  Emotion – and the financial commitment it inspires – actually emerges as an organic side-effect of satisfied functional needs.

Bill Bernbach: Facts Are Not Enough

Should rational thought take precedent over instinct? In this speech to the 4A’s (the American Association of Advertising Agencies) 1980 Annual Meeting, advertising legend Bill Bernbach, outlines his personal philosophy on creative genius.

Let me read from a Wall Street Journal story of last year:

“A woman swallowed a pill. It contained only a little milk sugar, but she had been told it was a powerful drug. Within 10 minutes she was suffering severe reactions – first stomach pains, then diarrhea. Her lips swelled and her skin broke out.”

“After taking the same pills two other patients also displayed profound reactions. The experiment was a classic demonstration of the effect of a placebo.”

“The patient believes in it, so it works. From antiquity to this era of medical enlightenment the placebo has been the single most potent and versatile tool for relieving the sufferings that man is heir to,” says a report published last year in the Proceedings of the Mayo Clinic.

“Be it mother's kiss or voodoo drums, leeches, purgatives, poultices or snake oil, the wondrous effect of placebo therapy is undeniably evident.”

“Placebos,” wrote Henry Byerly of the University of Arizona's philosophy department, “can accomplish real cures of realdiseases … real cures of imaginary diseases … imaginary cures of real diseases … imaginary cures of imaginarydiseases.”

Placebo effect isn't limited to drugs. Lancet, a British medical journal, reported on the fad of using magnetized bracelets to treat cuts and abrasions. Eight volunteers given bracelets that weren't magnetized (but not told of non-magnetism) showed just as much insensitivity to heat pain on the back of the hand as eight other volunteers with magnetized bracelets.

And, whether you like it or not, that's the way the human mind works.

How Brand Marketing Is Destroying J&J

Johnson & Johnson is in deep trouble.  As explained in a recent article in the New York Times, the company has gotten caught distributing medicine that’s gotten moldy, has bits of metal in it, or was made in facilities that government inspectors found to be unsanitary.  They’ve been forced to recall so many products that some consumers are finding it difficult to locate J&J products.

If they’re still looking for them, that is.  There’s been a steady erosion of J&J’s market share in favor of generics, partly because people no longer believe that a product with the J&J label on it (or one of its 92 product brands) is of higher quality. That’s very bad news for a company whose market strategy assumes that people will pay more for a branded product.

J&J’s management seems helpless to fix the company’s manufacturing problems.  But that’s not surprising, because J&J is a perfect example of a company where top management didn’t just drink the brand marketing kool-aid, but poured it down their gullets, with a kool-aid chaser.

Communication Gives Brand Marketing Teams The Edge

In the marketing world of we often think of the “brand” as the impression of a product, service, company or person held by existing or potential customers.  Marketers go to great lengths, rigor and sometimes pain-staking efforts to develop a particular brand strategy.  As a result of this due diligence many brands are successful. On the other hand many more brands exist in mediocrity. 

How do great brands become great brands?  There are many factors, some obvious, some not so obvious. Today, I would like to explore the not so obvious.

If you are a leader of a brand team the answer to that question may be found by looking at your communication process. What are the common threads that help lead products to success across verticals?  Simply put it it’s the people that are on the team and their level of commitment to the strategy. For example in the next staff meeting without notice ask your team to write down and then recite the core brand strategy. If they do know the strategy ask them how and why it was developed.  In most cases at least half of the team will not be able to give thoughtful answers to these questions.  That’s because often brand leaders don’t take time to get their team bought in to the strategy.  The cause and effect circumstance is that half the team is rowing the boat at a different cadence or worse yet in a different direction. Leaders often give transactional orders and assignments and then check to see if the assignment has been completed.  If brand managers don’t know why and where their assignment fits into the strategy then the assignment becomes a task without meaning. As a consequence the brand manager starts to play the do the task, hit the deadline to check the box game. 

Brand Packaging: Solving The Mystery Of Shelf Impact

Today’s retail environment is unlike any we have ever experienced. The complexity of brand SKUs and myriad POP materials bombards the shopper, making it almost impossible for individual products to stand out on shelf.

Despite brand marketers’ belief that the words on pack are the most important driver of purchase intent, recent studies demonstrate that they are actually the least important component of the packaging mix. In fact, the operative communications hierarchy puts color atop the list, with shapes, symbols and words following in that sequence. When approaching a package redesign it is this hierarchy of semiotics that ultimately drives sales in the store aisles.

COLORS
Studies show that on average shoppers take just five seconds to locate and select a given product, generally at a distance of from three-to-six feet. Locating that product occurs when it is visible to the passing shopper. Here visibility is measured by contrast and the physiological driver that creates contrast is color. Color is one of the brain’s three visual pathways and, since we process every object within view simultaneously, color is the mechanism that places emphasis on certain areas. In addition to enhancing on-shelf visibility, the appropriate use of color can increase brand recognition by some 80%, while also serving as an important brand identifier.

SHAPES
While color works on one level, it is not the only factor leading to product selection. Memorable shapes also initiate a cognitive process of evaluation and brand preference. Shapes often determine the first impression of a product while metaphorically communicating key benefits and advantages.  In combination, color and shape combinations can signal quality, while enhancing perception.  For instance, symmetrical shapes pair well with passive colors… triangular and diamond shapes with active colors. Color /shape combinations can also communicate brand personality, so like color, the use of shape in brand identity and design plays a role well beyond on-shelf visibility.

Brand Architecture And Franchise Brands

Branding Strategy Insider helps marketing oriented leaders and professionals build strong brands. To that end, we are happy to answer marketing questions of all types. Today, Katrin, a senior marketer in Dubai, United Arab Emirates asks…

“Hi Brad,

I was wondering if you could give me the benefit of your expertise with a brand architecture issue I'm struggling with. 

I recently joined a company who operate a diverse portfolio of franchise brands - from F&B to fashion.  The company or parent has pretty much remained invisible over the years, with the focus being on building the franchise brands.   The success of the franchise brands is key, however, we also need to build the brand equity of the company/parent brand, which I don't believe is happening.  

What brand architecture do you think would address this?    

I have always found BrandingStrategyInsider.com, and Brand Aid to be invaluable, but I'm stuck on this one. 

I would very much appreciate your thoughts on this.”

Thanks for the question Katrin. A good first step in linking a company or parent brand to the franchise brands is to endorse the franchise brands with the company or parent brand. Examples: [Franchise brand name] a (company brand name) [category descriptor] -or- [Franchise brand name] brought to you by (company brand name). Before I did this I would through research check to make sure that linking every individual franchise brand to the company/parent brand does not cause any unintended negative associations. For instance, if some of the franchise brands own very different positions in target customers' minds, linking them all to the parent/company brand may blur those differences or reduce the appeal of one or more of the franchise brands. Another way to link all of the franchise brands to the parent brand is to create a strong parent brand identity that could be applied across all of the franchise brands in a way that still provides room for individual franchise brand identities. One of the questions you will have to answer is how much of the identity needs to be the individual franchise identity versus the parent company identity. This will inform how you link the brands and which identity becomes more or less dominant.

Have a question related to branding? Just Ask…

Sponsored by: The Blake Project, Brand Consulting, Brand Education, Brand Licensing, Brand Research

Brand Naming And Consumer Behavior

In Buy Me!, his latest book, consumer behavior expert Marshall Cohen talks about how to retool your products and your marketing to one-up your competitors. Or as the book’s subtitle suggests, “new ways to get customers to choose your product and ignore the rest.”

Marshall Cohen is the chief industry analyst for The NPD Group Inc., a worldwide leader in market research and consumer behavior. He has followed retail trends for more than 30 years, and is a frequent contributor to broadcast and print media outlets.

We sat down with Marshall to talk about how naming can help – or hinder – the process of differentiating your brand and driving consumer choice.

Q: Marshall, when you look at everything that goes into selling at retail, how important is a name? Can a good name counteract bad strategy?

Yes, just look at the title of my latest book … Just kidding. Actually, what is in a name means a lot to a product. Sometimes it is the catchy name that gets the attention of the consumer. It may be because it stimulated an impulse or simply caught their eye.

Another consideration is that the name is easy to remember and share with others, so word of mouth (still the most popular form of recommendation for products) becomes even easier or the name becomes so familiar that consumers jump on the popularity bandwagon. As in, “I’ve heard of that somewhere, so it must be good…I should buy it.”

Q: Do retailers know something about naming that would benefit other marketers?

Should Premium Brands And Commodity Brands Mix?

We are happy to answer marketing questions of all types here on Branding Strategy Insider. Today, John, a VP of Marketing in New York City, New York writes…

“We have created a couple of brands – each with a distinct and separate mission. Both brands will be moved online soon.

We are testing the concept of selling online through Amazon.com

One brand is a higher end, design led brand. The other brand is for more commodity type items. Both target inside the home.

Here’s the scenario:

· We want to test the concept of selling online

· There is an internal group who wants to sell the commodity brand item under the design brand to gauge potential of the channel

o Reasoning is that the design brand is trademarked and we can go forward immediately

o Then, if successful, thought is we can migrate to the commodity brand and there is little risk to the design brand if “only a few” people see it

· I advised against this because I believe each brand should stand on its own at all times and there should not be any crossing of the two

 I am reaching out to get your expert point of view as well as those of BSI readers.”

Thanks for your question John. In general, I would advise against mixing brands, especially ones that are more upscale or unique with those that are more commodity-like. This can create marketplace confusion and dilute the perception of the more unique/upscale brand. If, for some reason this has to be done, I would limit the test as much as possible in time and scope so that as few people as possible are confused. I would also make sure that all vestiges of the mixed branding completely disappear after the test.

We are happy to help John. Have a question related to branding? Just Ask…

Sponsored by: The Brand Positioning Workshop

Silencing The Critics: 10 Years Of Apple Retail Success

The last thing we need is another sermon on Apple’s success.  It is the most valuable brand in the world according to WPP’s BrandZ ranking, climbed 21 spots to #35 on the Fortune 500, and has now usurped Microsoft on every conceivable metric of financial performance.  But on the 10-year anniversary of the opening of Apple’s first two stores in Tysons Corner, Virginia and Glendale, California, I thought it would be worthwhile to explore the often-overlooked role of Apple’s pioneering retail experience in the brand’s resurgence and sustained momentum.

Legend has it that at the turn of the century, Steve Jobs hired McKinsey & Company – knowing full well they’d tell him retail stores were a terrible idea – just so he could prove them wrong.  Whether or not it was intentional, he did.  Apple now operates 324 stores in 11 countries, and in the 2010 holiday quarter alone, retail stores brought in 75 million visitors, nearly $4 billion in sales, and a $1 billion retail margin.  Apple’s stores consistently account for 15-20% of the company’s total revenue, in effect writing the business case for their own existence.

Yet as marketers we know that more often than not, it is a great brand that lies at the core of a thriving business, and so it is also important to understand Apple’s stores from a brand-building perspective.

What Is An Optimal Structure To License Brands?

Best-in-class manufacturers, such as Coca-Cola, General Mills and Kellogg's, often license brands such as Disney, the NFL or the Beatles into their company to increase sales, reach a wider consumer base, and in general, improve their business results. To optimize the acquisition of these licensed properties, most of them employ a centralized business structure and approval process.  The structure, which can take on many forms, typically looks something like this:

In this type of structure, each group interacts with the other to optimize the management of their acquired licensed properties, specifically:

• Brand Managers set their business objectives and then develop strategic plans to achieve them.  Part of their plans may involve using licensed properties.  When this occurs, they look to the Marketing Asset Managers to identify the right properties to help them meet their goals.
• Marketing Asset Managers (MAMs) are tasked with determining those licensed properties that will best help the Brand Managers achieve their business objectives.  As part of the strategic planning process, the MAMs will meet with each Brand Manager to understand their objectives and their licensed property needs.  They then compile a list of all the properties requested by the brand managers to determine whether a property has been requested by more than one brand manager and who else may benefit from these assets. From here, the MAMs lay out a plan to leverage the assets to help the brand managers meet their objectives.  The MAMs then brief the Business Affairs Managers on the specific rights or deal terms they need for each licensed property to be acquired.
• The Business Affairs Managers (BAMs) are charged with negotiating all licensing deals. The BAMs are negotiation experts who have a deep knowledge of the licensing industry and the properties currently held by the company or desired to be held.  Once the BAMs understand from the MAMs what terms they must acquire from the licensed property owners, they develop a proforma of the cost to achieve the license. The BAMs then brief a designated Approval Authority on what properties they have been asked to license.