Position Your Brand To Transcend Product Categories

Have you heard of Smith-Corona? If you are my age or older, you have. If you are 25 or under, you may not have. They made typewriters, a product format that became obsolete with the advent of personal computers.

Kodak was associated with photography and film, but mostly with film and film processing. Canon, Nikon, Olympus and others were better known in the camera space. It was easier for film-based cameras to translate to digital cameras than for film to translate to digital images in people’s minds. Film became obsolete with the advent of digital photography, something that Kodak created. And the decline of film brought about Kodak’s decline. Admittedly, it is easier for a large ship to avoid an iceberg than for Kodak to switch from chemistry-based operations and personnel to digital (software) based operations and personnel. But, what if Kodak had proactively and aggressively sought to broaden its brand’s meaning well beyond film many years ago, not only with marketing communication but also with products, services and other proof points?

I spent 15 years in marketing at Hallmark. While heading up brand management and marketing for Hallmark, my personal goal was to get its management team to view the brand beyond greeting cards to include all forms of maintaining and building personal relationships. We redefined the brand’s essence as “caring shared.” This expanded brand meaning would allow for “just a little something” gifts such as candy and flowers. It would allow for electronic greetings, romantic cruises, experiences as gifts (romantic dinners, balloon rides, spa treatments, etc.) and other new products and services. And, most importantly, it would allow for the brand’s survival and growth as greeting card usage declined. I am not sure how aggressively Hallmark pursued this path, especially after I left the company.  If it had, its revenues would have grown well beyond the $4 billion level that they were at when I left the company. If not, they are likely to have declined.

Defining its essence as “fun family entertainment” has allowed Disney to offer a wide variety of products and services (movies, theme parks, themed cruises, themed communities, etc.) that make sense to the consumer.

We have worked with Bush’s to expand the meaning of their brand beyond “baked beans.” Methodically extending into other types of beans will allow for years of additional growth for them.

Defining your brand as meeting a specific set of customer needs or delivering specific customer benefits allows the brand to transcend historical product categories and therefore extend its life indefinitely. Brands don’t have to fade away. They only fade away if they are too closely tied to one or more product categories that may one day prove to be obsolete.

The Blake Project Can Help: The Brand Positioning Workshop

Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Licensing and Brand Education

FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers

Brad VanAuken The Blake Project

5 comments

  • Ignacio Molins

    August 5, 2011 at 11:11 am

    Fully agree! However it is important to remain relevant. Vague positionings like “we are in the industry of making people happy” are very difficult for consumers to realte to. We need to differentiate between vision and positioning.

  • Joy Levin

    August 5, 2011 at 11:30 am

    Great post! I would expand a bit to say that it is more challenging to position to different segments depending on each segment’s needs and desired benefits. However, doing so can further leverage a brand’s positioning and generate even greater profitability.

  • Brad VanAuken

    August 17, 2011 at 10:31 am

    Ignacio, I completely agree with you. When we help companies develop their brands’ essences, we talk about the essence having to be aspirationally attainable. For Hallmark, “caring shared” is aspirationally attainable, while “greeting cards” is too concrete and product format limiting and “enhancing lives” is too broad and vague to be meaningful or to offer direction.

  • Tom

    August 22, 2011 at 8:35 am

    So the shift is from thinking about using the features of the product or service (or even the product category) as a means of defining your brand to making the customer benefit(s) or needs the defining aspect?

    So, are you saying that brand extension is a good thing as long as it means that customers have more ways to attain the same benefit?

    I remember Laura Ries’ saying that brand extension will hurt the brand in the long term. However, she was thinking in terms of product features, not benefits. So brand extension is a good thing if the brand doesn’t deviate from the central customer benefit?

    Correct me if I’m wrong!

  • Brad VanAuken

    August 23, 2011 at 8:05 am

    Tom, you are correct. Brands promise benefits to customers. If the extension reinforces the primary brand benefit(s), it will strenghten the brand, not weaken it. People who think about brands in terms of product/service categories or functions and features risk extending brands in ways that are inappropriate or counterproductive. But people who extend the brand to reinforce the primary brand benefit(s) have a much greater chance of brand extension success.

Comments are closed.

Connect With Us