The Blake Project, the brand consultancy behind Branding Strategy Insider, delivers interactive brand education workshops and keynote speeches designed to align marketers on essential concepts in brand management and empower them to release the full potential of the brands they manage.
An ingredient brand is a well-known brand with well-known qualities that is included as a component or feature of another brand or product to enhance perceptions and the marketability of that brand or product. The ingredient brand calls out unique features or performance and is often used to increase the acceptance of a product or brand that is using a new technology identified by the ingredient brand.
Following are some examples of ingredient brands:
- Dolby Digital
- Plus a touch of Downy
- HEMI (Dodge)
- Hybrid Synergy Drive
- Intel Inside
- Contains Scotchgard Protector 3M
- (Dupont) Teflon
So, what leads to successful ingredient branding?Read More
This is the time of year when many marketing departments decide how their particular share of the industry’s enormous marketing spend will be applied in the following year.
In practice this means senior marketers make predictions for the coming year, perform an objective review of the performance of the previous year’s expenditure and then finally allocate their spend across their chosen marketing investments.
The vast majority of firms still use a top-down budgeting system. Senior managers decide on the total marketing budget for the year and leave marketing to allocate it accordingly. This figure is usually calculated in one of two ways. In its most pathetic form, top-down budgeting involves senior management looking at last year’s budget and then increasing it or decreasing based on expectations of turnover.
Or else they apply an ‘advertising:sales ratio’. Senior managers estimate how much they expect to sell in the coming year and then apply a completely arbitrary percentage to this estimate. Thus the marketing budget is set.
The problems with a top-down approach should be obvious. It is non-strategic, takes no account of new initiatives within the company, and ignores changes in the external market.
It also involves estimating how much a firm expects to sell before making any decision on marketing spend, thus inferring that marketing is an inconsequential expense, rather than integral investment. Firms that use the top-down approach are hindered in their marketing strategy, long before that strategy has even been devised.Read More
For years, I have lamented the lack of marketing savvy used in developing city and town mottos, taglines and slogans. A very small portion of these are effective in highlighting their municipalities’ unique value propositions. Most sound good but say nothing. Some actually make you want to stay away. Others are just downright inane. Here are a sampling of municipality mottos, taglines and slogans – the good, the bad and the ugly.
Effective (they allude to a unique quality or benefit):
- Las Vegas: “What Happens in Vegas, Stays in Vegas”
- New York, N.Y.: “The City That Never Sleeps”
- Hershey, Pa.: “The Sweetest Place on Earth”
- Austin, Texas: “Keep Austin Weird”
- Eagle Pass, Texas: “Where Yee-Hah! meets Ole!”
- Cleveland, OH: “Cleveland Rocks!”
- Santa Fe, NM: “The City Different”
- Jim Thorpe, PA: “The Switzerland of America”
- Coachella, CA: “City of eternal sunshine”
- Nashville, TN: “The Music City”
- Belleview, WA: “City in a Park”
- Rockland, ME: “Lobster Capital of the World”
- Freeland, PA: “The most happening place on Earth”
- Madisonville, KY: “The best town on Earth”
- Glendive, MT: “Where the best begins”
We get it so wrong don’t we? We develop ideas and look to see if they’ll work by intricately studying people’s actions and reactions. We poll them. We survey them. We sample them. We question them exhaustively. Whereas, what we should be doing, according to Dr. Art Markman, is studying our customers’ habits and developing products and services that fit with how people want to behave.
That way, they’re already pre-disposed to take an action. After all, habits drive actions, not the other way around. All a brand has to do is encourage a new habit and tie the accompanying actions to their brand specifically.
Habits form, says Markman, whenever and wherever there is a consistent relationship between the world and an action. That means that “unless you are in a business where you interact with each customer only once, your customers have habits related to their interactions with you.”
Strong brands capitalize on those routine behaviors. But to do so, says Markman, brands may need to change some habits of their own:
Stop asking and start observing – What people tell you they do, and what they actually do can be very different things, Markman says. If you really want to know how people behave, you need to watch what they do rather than listen to what they say they do. In other words, most brands need to get out more – into the marketplace, watching how people go about their lives, and figuring out how, where and when they can fit in.Read More
Brands are all about habits. But as this article in Time reminds us, sometimes the best thing a brand can look to do is to change a habit – even if they helped create the habit in the first place. Of course, brands tell themselves they do this all the time – but for many brands, the focus of their problem solving is on increasing consumption.
Their answer to a pattern they feel they know and understand is more of that pattern.
But the insight here is that changing a habit for the better doesn’t necessarily mean just offering the consumer more of what they have, or more of what the brand perceives consumers want.
In the context of the fast food industry for example, generosity is not a competitive advantage. When everyone’s offering bigger portions, the portions aren’t more generous. They quickly become the new normal. The pattern itself hasn’t changed, it’s just got bigger.
One of the reasons why brands are so reluctant to change patterns is that they take so many of their cues from what they perceive to be consumer behaviors. What they don’t always stop to do is check whether those “normal” behaviors are how people want to behave, or whether in fact they are simply how people do behave because a sector is driving the behavior that way.
Here’s a pattern, by way of example. Consumers are eating the double-stack burger and barrel of chips because that’s what everyone is offering them when they order a family-size meal. And if it’s there, they’ll eat it. Habit. It’s not their fault – “The brand made me do it.”Read More