Identity without experience is superficiality. Experience without a distinctive identity is confusion.

I recently walked into the showroom of a telecom brand that promises to be "happy to help". First of all there was no happiness in sight.

In the second case it is a brand that one has experienced for over 14 years. Through the years there have been few complaints and far more moments of satisfaction. There have even been moments of actual delight. Yet they do not seem to add up. Each of the happy experiences were valued but they did not seem to reinforce any particular backbone of identity. It seemed as though they were bright ideas sprinkled like confetti—sparkling without shape or form.

So the first is a case where there is a clear identity yet it remains at an expressed rather than experienced level. Should the case outlined above be the rule rather than the exception, this brand will be in danger of haemorrhaging goodwill. Sometimes the gap between a distinctive promise based on a clearly defined identity and the actual experience gets obscured because the entire category suffers from a deficit in delivering a good experience. The argument then goes that brand A is better than brand B in terms of comparative quality, thereby apparently obviating any need to seriously deal with the actual deficit between promise and delivery. This argument ignores the "highlighter effect"—if your brand decides to highlight a facet, it then tends to be held to a higher standard when it comes to it and that may not just be versus its immediate competition within the category. Proof of the highlighter effect has been most evident in the recent woes of Toyota. While many automobile brands have had to recall cars to fix possible defects, the outrage against Toyota has been particularly intense. This is first of all because the brand’s core perceived strength was reliability which drove preference for many mainstream models even though they were less exciting than those of the competition. The erosion of faith in the core value of reliability for the Toyota brand was further exacerbated by its tardy response to the problems. So not only were its products being impacted by problems that affected its basic DNA but its response also seemed to be less than stellar in terms of reliability of accepting and dealing with the burgeoning problems. None of the backlash would have been as acute had reliability not been highlighted as an essence for the brand. Thus it does not matter if your brand matches the category in its core attribute or suffers from the same deficiencies due to category challenges. If you select a particular facet to highlight as the core identifying value of your brand, people will hold you to a much higher standard—after all why would you focus on a facet that is merely equal to or marginally better than competition?

Choosing the core identity for your brand has to be very carefully thought through and then it has to be delivered at every touch point. With greater networking amongst people, brand promises broken are quickly disseminated and admiration is rapidly replaced by cynicism. Given the increasing amount of technology available, it is quite possible to replace inadequate human interface with a far more delightful technological interface so as to protect your brand’s core identifying value. For example, at banks it is by and large easier, more efficient and convenient to transact through an ATM than a grumpy teller. So if a particular delivery system is deficient in meeting what the brand’s core identity promises then alternatives have to be developed. To not do so risks eroding the brand’s image with damage to brand value that could "cost" far more than developing a viable alternative delivery mechanism for its basic promise. Apple uses a mix of "do-it-yourself" architecture, on-line and phone-up assistance and replacement policies to reduce dependence on local service backup. This means that owners are empowered to fix things both by the simplicity of the product and assistance that enable a large number of issues to be corrected via DiY. This reinforces one of the substantial values of Apple—that of brilliant simplicity that makes it easier and more enjoyable to live with an Apple product.

In the second case, when experiences are not harnessed within a single core brand identity value, it is a very critical problem of wasted enterprise and resource. It can be worsened by conflicting experiences that actually create confusion and thus further erode perception of the identity of the brand. Defining a distinct identity and actualising it through every moment of contact between people and the brand is what builds resilient great brands. Given the rapidly growing power of Web 2.0 to build interactive relationships between people and brands that genuinely create a two-way conversation rather than a monologue, delivering a clearly defined experience based on a prime facet of the brand’s identity becomes critical. If the brand’s core identity is merely communicated through one-way channels (such as mass media) it remains a statement of intent and does not become the driver of conviction. If a brand’s identity is of caring then it must ensure that people experience it when they buy it, when they require support and when they least expect it. If it is of fun then every moment spent in the company of the brand must deliver this—its packaging, its service, its display, its initiatives, etc. This has to be delivered consistently over time, monitored for effectiveness and distinctiveness and finally backed up by communication that reinforces it.

Identity lies at the centre of a brand. As people face an ever greater deluge of information, imagery and stimuli, a distinct identity becomes critical to the survival of a brand. An overwhelming number of ideas, no matter how great each one may be, without focusing on the brand identity, will only cause confusion rather than build conviction. A clearly enunciated and expressed identity enlivened at every moment of contact creates conviction that ensures resilience and long-term health for the brand.

Today experience is increasingly becoming intrinsic to the brand’s identity. And identity must be the organising principle for the experiences that brands offer. Few brands can "sell-n-forget" whether they provide services or products or both. As has been proven through countless studies, acquiring a new customer is a lot more expensive than retaining an existing one. A consistent and defining experience becomes even more important to retaining customers and building advocacy.

As people become more aware and brands proliferate, choices within and between categories will only increase. Choices are made on an ever-growing variety of factors. Those factors could be basic "hygiene" or highly nuanced "higher order" ones. When a brand chooses to distance itself from its competition on the basis of a factor, it shines on its ability to deliver it distinctively, consistently and effectively. And this has to be experienced rather than just expressed. Experience drives people’s faith in the ability of the brand to deliver and hence their belief and conviction in the brand’s core identity. Not doing so exposes it to the "highlight effect" and ensures it is judged more harshly than competing brands that do not make promises in that area. Better to choose a smaller stage and a narrower spotlight and deliver an overpowering experience than to choose a large stage and a wide spotlight and deliver corrosive disappointment.

Harness the power of experience with a clearly enunciated and effective brand identity. Express the power of your brand’s identity by ensuring focussed, consistent and distinctive experiences.

The author is Managing Partner - Direxn: Marketing & Brand Consultancy.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed