chrisbrogan.com» brands

The Multi-Branded Human

ceb — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 01:47:04 +0000

I’ve said several times that my next car might likely be the Cadillac CTS (maybe even the CTS-V). I like the car. I think it’s the Batmobile. Because of a tweet, I got to visit GM headquarters and drive one. Heck, I even got to meet GM’s top guy, Fritz Henderson, and talk about listening technology and what he could really learn about people’s feelings about his brand, versus what surveys reveal. I’ve owned and driven GM products since my 2nd car (Chevy Citation), including my most recent (Saturn VUE). I’d say that makes me pretty loyal to the brand as a consumer, yes?

But when we think about brands and brand loyalty, it’s strange to consider what that means from the company’s side of the equation, versus what it means from the consumer’s side. For instance, every computer in my house is an Apple except for my (rarely-used) netbook. I’m thinking of loading Windows 7 on it, because I’m hearing so many good things about the OS. Does this make me LESS loyal to apple? I’ve got an iPhone, but I’m seriously thinking about checking out Verizon’s Droid when it comes live. Does that make me a bad Apple customer?

I have two Visa cards from two different banks. Am I less loyal? I have an AMEX card. Am I less loyal?

When I work with a company, I put my business intentions around helping them succeed. To that end, it wouldn’t suit me to work for Coke and Pepsi at the same time. (Pepsi and I did some work in March, and I’m friends with some of their great team.) I visited Coke headquarters last week, and I might possibly do something different with them. Do you think that will cross streams? That I’ll somehow negatively impact the experience by working to improve business communications and human business within the organization?

A few months ago, the mix was Panasonic and Sony. Next month, it’ll be two other big brands.

Here’s the thing: we, as consumers, are in the business of using the products of multiple brands. It’s how we operate. I, as someone running New Marketing Labs am in the business of equipping companies with successful projects that move the needle. Do I overlap what I learn from one competitor to the other? No. Industry to industry? Hell yes. Why hire me if you don’t want a benchmark of what’s worked or not worked in another organization?

I’m curious as to your thoughts. I have a feeling that PR professionals might have something different on their mind than marketers and non-PR types. Just a hunch, but we’ll see how it bears out in the comments.

As for me, I don’t feel that my loyalty is what’s for sale when I work with organizations. I maintain their privacy. I perform with their best interests in mind when under their hire. I don’t divulge competitive data. Seems like I’ve got it covered.

What do you think?

The Myth of Brand Loyalty

ceb — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 02:32:56 +0000

The picture on the left is my wonderful, shiny 15″ Macbook Pro. I bought it around a month ago. It’s also the umteenth Mac product I’ve owned (not even counting iPods and iPhones) since the early 2000s. I’m marginally annoyed by the email I received from Apple in my inbox tonight. I guess I shouldn’t really care, but it’s one of those things where I feel there’s an opportunity to learn. (Gina: I’m turning the positives around for you!)

I want Apple to know that I’m their long-standing and loyal customer.

Here’s the ad a bit closer up:

So, not only don’t they know I’m reading this ad on a Macbook pro, but they also want to tell me the joys of owning a Mac, the same joys that I’ve experienced for eight or nine years and counting (and to be honest, I had the first ever Mac back in 1984, but I’m not holding a grudge that they don’t count those old ones).

What I Want From Brands

It’s very simple, I believe. I’m not 100% sure, so maybe you can correct me.

I want you to really care about me. I want you to remember me. That second one matters a lot. I want you to remember me, such that when I contact you at your touchpoints, you know how much I’ve done with you. I want you to know not to send me ads for the same laptop I’m using right now. I want you to give me some kind of relationship out of my loyalty such that I either pay less or get more for maintaining the relationship over the years, when you are the premium brand.

(Not just you, Apple. This could be written to GM or to Coke or several other brands with which I’ve had a lifelong relationship.)

I’m thinking that CRM is supposed to handle this. Companies should know that I’ve purchased their products. There’s SOME kind of key somewhere that ties it all together. Okay, I don’t blame Coke for not knowing much about me, but GM or Apple or places where I spend many thousands of dollars?

The only solution I think of in this case is a good simple database with that information widely distributed, and some kind of universal (or maybe opt-in) identity. Who knows? Maybe that’s VRM?

The Tricky Path of Brand Relationships

ceb — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:46:25 +0000

Cyndi Lauper was right: money changes everything. At least that’s what I was told in some informal surveys yesterday. I asked a series of questions to better understand people’s perspectives on products and brands and endorsements. My questions came after reading a bit more of The King of Madison Avenue, about David Ogilvy, and the rise of advertising. First, here’s what I asked:

What brands would you love to have the chance to represent passionately?

Most people had fast answers: Apple, Peets Coffee, One Laptop Per Child, Lexus. They were comfortable talking about the brands they loved, and sharing their enthusiasm.

I added a second question.

Now, if the brand paid you for the pleasure of representing them, does that change the equation? Would people’s view of your support change?

People bristled at once. Very few people suggested that this was an okay relationship. Most felt that by adding money, the opinion of the advocate was suspect. Interesting, eh?

Go another step:

So if I love Canadian Club, and could promote the hell out of it, the company should pay Crispin Porter Bogusky to make the ads?

Some people saw my point, but others held to the “money changes everything” equation. Press further:

Celebrities endorse brands for money. Do you feel they’re legit? Does it influence you?

Oh no. Not at all. Most people said that Tiger Woods wouldn’t tell you what to do. That’s not what Lindstrom tells us in Buyology, but why should I quibble?

The Larger Confusion

So let’s review:

People would love to endorse and support the brands they love.
People would be suspect of money changed hands related to that.
People don’t trust celebrity endorsements.
Advertising supposedly doesn’t work (if you listen to some).

See how those don’t really add up?

Or rather, what seems to be the next obvious step for brands would be just to build relationships of acknowledgment and appreciation between their passionate fans, but never incent them in any clear and obvious way. I imagine my PR friends like Todd Defren would be okay with that. He likes earned media.

But what does it mean overall?

I’m of the mind that content marketing is one way to supplement the declining impact of advertising. I believe the best possible minds to provide passion and insight into brands would be the customers who use them (not all customers, but those who intersect neatly the Venn diagrams of “can make decent media of some kind” and “really passionate about a product”). And yet, at least on the surface, this seems to upset or rile people.

What’s your take on it all? What am I finding here? What’s the view from your side of the street?

Photo credit quaziefoto

The Optional World

ceb — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:36:29 +0000

You don’t have to watch commercials on TV. You don’t need to participate in the sweepstakes. You can put your phone on the do not call registry. You’re not obligated to go out and buy my book. You don’t need to read my blog. You don’t have to follow me on Twitter.

Everything is optional. Everything is opt-in.

You (in this case, the consumer of things) has all the power. Use it wisely. Including, and here’s what’s on my mind today, the power to move on. If you don’t like something, move on. Forget about it. Talk about the thing you like. Why bother fixating on the things you don’t like?

One quick story and I’ll leave:

On my flight to Vegas, I sat next to a new friend from Maine, who worked at the Walmart distribution logistics center. He went on to talk about the millions each year that building paid his city in taxes, the 800 local jobs it supported, and how Walmart handled things during Hurricane Katrina. But what struck me was that I noticed that he watched my face intently the first time he said the word “Walmart” to see if I was a hater.

Every thing is an option.

Are you investing lots of energy into things you can move on from just as easily?

And you, marketer types, are you appreciating the relationship you have with the people who opt to receive your messaging, or are you beating them with it?

The Big Risk for Corporate Trust Agents

ceb — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 02:30:19 +0000

What if you made an amazing product that people loved, and could recognize by the name alone? They knew your packaging. They knew the promise of what you offered, and they were lining up to buy it. And then, what if you moved on from that product and that brand, and had to start again?

That’s the basic story of Wally Amos and Famous Amos cookies, but it might also be the story of corporate trust agents. We build relationships with these people who are representative of a company’s brand in our eyes. We’re in line for their cookies, but suddenly, they’ve got to start again with a new cookie company. Let’s talk about how that cookie might possible crumble.

Recent Moves

Charlene Li rose to prominence while working at Forrester. Her blog was there. Her presence on the web was there. When she left to go solo, this required a bit of brand extraction, or divorce, where she had to rebuild her own presence on the web to redirect interested parties to her new little plot of web real estate.

The same happened with Gia Lyons, former cool hunter from IBM, who ran off to join the Jive circus. Her presence was entangled with her corporate brand, and this meant that she had to do a little shuffling to put it all together again outside of the entity. I believe this will be more of a point to consider in coming years.

Closer to Home

My own blog has been mine since day one. When I worked with Jeff Pulver, it was still my blog. With CrossTech Media, this is my blog. They might ask me to be mindful of our company and occasionally post information germane to my business, but that’s expected. I’m their guy. Why wouldn’t they want that of me? And I love writing about the work we’re doing, like the New Marketing Summit (plug plug).

But the blog is mine. It’s my shingle. It’s where I conduct my business. Most of this business is on behalf of my organization. I’m grateful to have a company to work with, and both CrossTech Media now and Pulvermedia before supported this stance.

Best in Show

Some trust agents are already doing this well. Robert Scoble has moved his blog along from Microsoft to PodTech to FastCompany with limited scarring. Of these, FastCompany did a lot of makeover work for Robert, but hey, it’s still his site and I’m sure it’s all still his decision at the end of the day.

Jeremiah Owyang of Forrester maintains his own blog presence, though he writes pretty frequently along Forrester lines. Louis Gray is his own man on the web. Superstar Steve Rubel keeps his brand though we all know he’s Edelman’s engine. It’s a balance where, in all cases, they are mindful of their position in the communities they serve, but also respectful of their employers.

That last point bears repeating. They are respectful of their employers. This includes making sure we do our work, that we deliver value while sharing a brand, and that we keep our motives in perspective. The business we do on behalf of our company must be the driver so long as it’s our primary salary source. Anything else is not fair, not responsible, and not sustainable in the longer term.

The Risk

But now, let’s shift back to the risk. If you are the company’s cool hunter, if you are the social media rockstar, if you are the person touching the community the most, remember that jobs are not and never will be jobs for life any more. As much as people tell me this (and you and I talked about it at Blog World Expo, mister), it’s just not the kind of business environment where anyone’s getting a company tattoo these days.

To that end, consider how your world will change when you shift roles. What happens if you go solo? How do you go from being Frank Eliason from Comcast to being Frank from Best Buy? (Because if I were a major company in the US or elsewhere, I’d be doing my damnedest to hire Frank away.) How might you stake out your own little place on the web where you can be you with or without your company badge?

And business leaders, how can you protect from the other direction in this world of the half-owned brand? Are you in the business of developing a deep bench of talent? Have you thought about succession plans for your “faces and voices” people? What happens when your community manager, someone like current superstar Connie Bensen gets a better offer, and you’ve lost one of your competitive advantages?

In my company, the answer was to start a process to reach out to some of the other social media up and comers in the space. I’ve been working on that for a little while now, and I love the idea. It means that, as a strategist, I’ve started to protect my company from a risk. But have you thought that through for YOUR company?

How is this working for your situation?