The first and the most important lesson is to avoid hype without substance. The end is coming for brands created by hype alone.
The year 2010 is turning out to be a bad year for brand icons. Not a day passes without the news of some brand icon stumbling.
There are some very simple but important lessons to learn from these recent brand debacles.The Democrats in the US lost a senate seat that they held since 1952. This is regardless of the fact that the "we can" brand icon is in office having succeeded one of the arguably most unpopular presidents in recent US history. It was a senate seat held by another icon, Ted Kennedy, who despite being encumbered by scandal was able to build resilient bipartisan respect and regard. Although the electorate was considered to be strongly Democrat-oriented and knowing that the Republican winner could possibly hobble healthcare reform, one of Mr Kennedy’s most cherished goals, Republicans still chose to elect him. This was not just a "local" election but has been treated as a referendum on Obama as evidenced by analysis and commentary that followed this stunning result exemplified by Time magazine’s cover story entitled "Now what?". How could a brand called Obama, who just a year ago had unprecedented approval scores, suddenly stumble so badly and witness a precipitous decline in popularity?
|
|
| Rupin Jayal |
An automobile brand that stands for reliability suddenly faces the prospect of having to recall millions of products either due to a design deficiency or a manufacturing defect. Unfortunately, rather than immediately face up to that fact and express unconditional regret, the brand then proceeds to act coy and seemingly grudgingly accepts the problem. The issue is so huge that The Economist devotes a cover to it entitled "Toyota slips up". This isn’t just a case of an automobile brand facing a hitch or a hiccup. This is the world’s largest and the most respected automobile brands failing its customers on the one single attribute that forms the backbone of the brand. This is like Apple producing an impossibly complex product, Rolls Royce scrimping on quality or a fashion brand creating an outdated collection. In a world besieged by uncertainty Toyota has been a bulwark of reliability. This value was so powerful that it could even get away with some rather boring models because of the sheer peace of mind owning a Toyota brought with it. That is what makes this recent brand debacle so acutely dangerous for the brand.
Golf—supposedly the game of the gentlemen with a powerful icon who has probably done more to widen the appeal of the game than any other legend preceding him. His brand stood for much more than just sporting success. It stood for the growing confidence of a community as they move into spaces that seemed to exclude them in the past. He represented inspiration for possibly millions of youth who felt that they could achieve their dreams; that it was all possible. Such a powerful icon stumbled on the same lack of self-control that almost brought down an icon resulting in endorsement contracts being publicly withdrawn and a storm of disappointments.
These are the three cases of iconic brands stumbling. Other brands have exhibited feet of clay in the past. So what makes the failure of trust of these brands so noteworthy?
The first is the context. Trust is a value that is under grave threat today. The greatest attack has been from the financial service brands that once used to represent the ultimate guardianship of people’s trust but have now been rapidly transformed people’s perception into money hungry villains. Many of these legendary guardians of wealth and trust made choices driven by profit and greed that gambled away both the people’s trust and their wealth along with it. Given the scale of bad decisions and the impact it had on the global economy this was no ordinary denting of trust, it was the whole scale erosion of it. So this is the time when people are seeking brands and entities they can believe in and ones who they believe will shelter them from the storms of uncertainty that besiege them.
In this climate of uncertainty brands have an even greater responsibility to safeguard the trust that people repose in them. This isn’t just a matter of good business or governance—it could impact the future of how people treat promises and the sheer amount of effort it will require for any brand or entity to gain the trust of people.
The first and the most important lesson is to avoid hype without substance. The end is coming for brands created by hype alone. The current President of the United States was buoyed by irresistible promises illuminated by the kind of oratory that had seemed to pass with the passing of an earlier generation of legendary global leaders. It is ironic therefore that the same "great communicator" who was able to capture the hopes, aspirations and yearning of an entire nation in just two simple words, has seemingly failed so completely to articulate his most important and ambitious policy initiative. At every occasion the hype seems to have overshadowed substance. The advertising seems to have been better than the product.
The second lesson to be learned is that just because you have convinced people of your message does not mean that you own them. As the victor of the recent huge upset in Massachusetts said "With all due respect, it’s not the Kennedy seat and it’s not the Democrat’s seat, it’s the people’s seat." No brand "owns" its audience though some behave as though they think they do. People own the brand and nowhere has this become so apparent as in the rise and fall of the Obama brand. Has he displayed incompetence? Has he displayed arrogance? Has he been ineffective in tackling the horrific economic conditions bequeathed to him by the previous administration? The fair answer to all those questions is "not really". However, by seemingly taking his worshipful base for granted and the power of those who hadn’t supported him too lightly, Obama faces plummeting approval. Toyota, by first failing people in its backbone value of trust and then handling it in a less than forthright way risks losing a reputation and the erosion of a customer base that has taken years to build. Increasingly iconic brands that fail to match expectations that they themselves create will be granted less and less latitude and their promises will be treated with greater scepticism. And the interconnectivity, through the Internet, of increasingly active consumers will only strengthen this. Today the laudable reaction of Johnson & Johnson when faced with the Tylenol crisis would no longer be considered praiseworthy; it would be a question of brand survival. Brands are "elected" by people and just as in a healthy democracy, can be voted out of the market irrespective of how long they have been around or how exemplary their past record may have been.
The third lesson is that seemingly unrelated issues can derail a brand. Tiger Woods is still arguably the best golfer today which is the reason why he has become such an icon in the first place. The problems that have damaged his iconic status are unrelated to his game. Similarly brands have faced challenges not just from a benefit poorly delivered but from areas unrelated to their main function. Hence manufacturing practises, social impact, employee and work related issues (discrimination, harassment, etc) can today bring down an iconic brand. To remain a powerful brand means ensuring that the brand and every stakeholder upholds and continually reinforces its core values. Nothing is unrelated if it can create an adverse climate for a brand. Just like people are today quite willing to accept unrelated product offerings from brands that they respect deeply, they can lose that respect for reasons that could be unrelated to the brand’s main function.
The final lesson is that most brands cater to people who do not belong to the minority elite and rarefied empowered strata of the society but represent the hopes and aspirations of a much larger and often, less empowered part of the society. They have to be even more cautious of delivering on their promises because this majority, comprising the largest "consuming" population, understands that their wallets are their most powerful weapon. Today they know the power of that weapon and they use it mercilessly. Even the Obama miracle was fuelled by the wallets of millions of ordinary people who believed in his "brand", rather than just the massive vaults of big industry. Today his seeming inability to deliver on his promises has resulted in a significant number of this group using their power ruthlessly. When brands depend on people for whom the "cost" of misplaced trust is high and fail them, the resultant backlash is swift and often irreversible. Hence promises must be made with great care and assiduously maintained.
As Jerry Della Femina, author of "From Those Wonderful Folks Who Gave You Pearl Harbor" says, "There is a great deal of advertising that is much better than the product. When that happens, all that the good advertising will do is put you out of business faster."
The author is Director-Strategic Planning at M&C Saatchi.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Gucci outlet, July 03, 2010
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
