I asked Leon Kaye from www.GreenGoPost.com to guest blog for me this week. Leon is one of the few voices that hold the fine line between “green” progressiveness and business pragmatics.
****
Despite the economic downturn, companies and consumers continue to demonstrate an interest in green products and sustainable business practices due to concerns about energy independence, the world we will leave for future generations, waste management, environmental pollution, and the general desire for a healthier lifestyle.
Unfortunately, many companies offering “green” products have difficulty in communicating their message properly. Some simply fall into the trap of slapping such labels as “natural,” “green,” and “eco-friendly” like logos on their products. Others determine that the “green” consumer segment is too narrow to pursue. And meanwhile, the pitfall of screeching “WE’RE GREEN!” to the market may turn away shoppers who are averse to sanctimonious preaching.
Companies often become frustrated in identifying a strong green brand because of their failure in two areas:
- Brand attachment: developing a strong emotional attachment between their brand and their customer base.
- Target audience: conveying a broad solution for the general market without zeroing in on a specific consumer behavior or trait.
Brand attachment involves four stages of consumer behavior. Let’s use the supermarket chain, Trader Joe’s, as an example:
Brand consciousness. The customer hears a TJ’s ad, starts shopping there, enjoys the consumer experience, and appreciates the fact that they offer organic or vegetarian products.
Brand preference. Over time, the customer determines that shopping at Trader Joe’s makes him/her a healthier person, and feels their products are reliable and well-priced.
Brand dedication. The customer internalizes the TJ brand’s core values and messages, and believes he/she is in the demographics to which TJ markets: single person or young couple who live the bourgeois bohemian (bobo) lifestyle.
Brand affection. Even if the competitor has better prices (Fresh & Easy) or superior quality (Whole Foods), the customer’s commitment to TJ’s is such that he/she becomes a proud alpha-consumer, and will happily pay a premium for their goods.
The goal of attaining a strong brand attachment is reaching the last stage. Many companies in the green space try to skip from steps 1 to 4 by slapping on a few trendy words or a tagline in their marketing efforts. But in order to forge a brand identity that will strongly resonate with their customers, they need consistent branding practices that gradually drive the customer from the “brand consciousness” stage to the “brand affection” stage.
The second point of branding, target audience, is a bit more difficult. The idea is to become indispensible to a wide spectrum of consumers. Without appealing to a wide audience, the company and its products become marginalized within a narrow market segment, and fail to generate optimum revenues.
San Francisco-based Method tackles this issue brilliantly. Method’s products are 100% plant based and are offered in recycled plastic bottles. Their product line is about as green/eco-friendly/sustainable/natural as you can get. Nevertheless, you do not find these overused terms in their literature. Note their tag lines: “people against dirty” and “a cleaner clean.” Method’s management has found that consumers will pay a premium for quality, and their products convey technology, cleanliness, intelligence, and innovation – appealing to a wide audience.
Their strategy has worked. Who buys from Method? Parents who want a clean environment for their children, young professionals who want their space to smell good, real estate agents who want to buy nice housewarming gifts for their clients. And they buy Method’s products through Target, Lowe’s, Costco, and Bed Bath & Beyond: stores that appeal to a wide audience, and are known for their competitive pricing while selling environmentally friendly products without bombarding consumers with bland “green” messages.
These points are just the beginning in building a strong green brand. The main idea is that being green is more than putting a leaf on the bottle and saying you are saving the planet: your company’s brand needs to demonstrate inclusiveness while making customers feel that you are making their life easier. It’s great to recycle, but companies need to stop recycling the same old tired words.
If you or your clients have asked you to work on a green branding or marketing campaign, we would like to hear your experiences!
***
With 15 years in sales training and international business development, Leon Kaye has most recently developed corporate sustainability strategies and training programs. Earlier in his career, he lived in South Korea in the mid-90s. Mr. Kaye then moved back to the US to lead IT and sales training projects, and later, he sold business services to large corporations. A Silicon Valley native, he currently lives in Los Angeles, where he is editor of www.GreenGoPost.com and leads GGP Media.
Showing posts with label branding. Show all posts
Showing posts with label branding. Show all posts
February 2, 2010
January 13, 2010
Why branding strategy and change management are inseparable
Happy 2010! I wish you all the best, health, success, and prosperity this year and beyond.
I’ve been quiet over the past few weeks mostly because of the holidays, but also because I’ve been insanely busy with strategic branding projects for two clients. People think of a brand in terms of a name and a logo – generally a visual look along with a name that’s recognizable, like Coca Cola or IBM. But Coca Cola and IBM didn’t become what they are from their names or logos.
Here’s how I define a brand: an identity. And an identity is a lot more than a name and a logo. It’s how the company operates, how it’s perceived, how it sees itself. It’s an all encompassing exclusive idea that is embodied in all the offerings and communications, and has the power to change perception and preference. It switches rational analysis to an immediate emotional reaction.
Case in point I: Apple. An all encompassing brand, provoking immediate emotional reactions.
Case in point II: Enron. An all encompassing brand, provoking immediate emotional reactions.
See how powerful a brand is? (yes, a brand can be negative – remember, it’s an identity)
In order to strategically brand (or rebrand) a company, i.e., discovering its identity, three criteria need to be examined:
1) Where is the company at?
2) Where does it need to be?
3) How is it going to get there?
The reason for the breakdown is that the business world is non-static: companies change, product offerings evolve, executives (and therefore their strengths) move around, new markets develop, old markets get commoditized. And sometimes in a short amount of time, a company can find itself in the wrong space in the market with little customer traction and downward revenues.
Where is the company at?
This is probably one of the more difficult exercises for companies to perform (I compare it to therapy). It involves taking a deep look at your strengths and weaknesses in the product line, the service offering, the staff, and the operations to answer the question: who are we and what is our purpose? How an organization identified itself, say, 5 years ago, can be drastically different from its current position. And because of the dynamics I mentioned, this exercise often uncovers surprises along the way (that shouldn’t really surprise anyone).
Where does the company need to be?
This involves taking the binoculars and taking a far and wide look at the market and where the company needs to be. Two major mistakes are made in this exercise:
1) Going after a busy space with a lot of competition (if they’re all selling red balloons, we should be doing the same). This can be the topic of several blogs on its own, but the idea is to move into an empty space: less competition = more money.
2) Not moving far enough from the current position. It’s easy to stick around where you are, but if where you are is such a great space, why aren’t you making money? This takes a lot of guts and ambition, but sometimes where the company needs to be is far away from its current position. As long as the expectations are reasonable and realistic, it’s best to be honest about where the company needs to be regardless of how hard it’ll be to get there.
How is the company going to get there?
Believe it or not, this falls into place faster than most people expect. Once the picture is clear as to where the company is and where it needs to be, the actions that need to be taken become very clear, very fast. This is where change management comes into play: shuffling the staff, redoing the product line, repositioning the company, and communicating internally and externally. This is an emotional process that I’ve written about it in the past, but it is very rewarding with the right tools and processes in place.
The visual identity, corporate messaging, product naming, and a host of other activities that are typically considered “branding” are the result of the changes that occur as the company defines its identity and its place in the world.
This is a scratch on the surface for branding/rebranding companies – there’s so much more that comes into play which makes our jobs more interesting and rewarding. But I want to leave you with this: if someone tells you they are a brand strategist, the first thing you should find out is how much they know about change management. It’ll save you a lot of headache down the line.
I’ve been quiet over the past few weeks mostly because of the holidays, but also because I’ve been insanely busy with strategic branding projects for two clients. People think of a brand in terms of a name and a logo – generally a visual look along with a name that’s recognizable, like Coca Cola or IBM. But Coca Cola and IBM didn’t become what they are from their names or logos.
Here’s how I define a brand: an identity. And an identity is a lot more than a name and a logo. It’s how the company operates, how it’s perceived, how it sees itself. It’s an all encompassing exclusive idea that is embodied in all the offerings and communications, and has the power to change perception and preference. It switches rational analysis to an immediate emotional reaction.
Case in point I: Apple. An all encompassing brand, provoking immediate emotional reactions.
Case in point II: Enron. An all encompassing brand, provoking immediate emotional reactions.
See how powerful a brand is? (yes, a brand can be negative – remember, it’s an identity)
In order to strategically brand (or rebrand) a company, i.e., discovering its identity, three criteria need to be examined:
1) Where is the company at?
2) Where does it need to be?
3) How is it going to get there?
The reason for the breakdown is that the business world is non-static: companies change, product offerings evolve, executives (and therefore their strengths) move around, new markets develop, old markets get commoditized. And sometimes in a short amount of time, a company can find itself in the wrong space in the market with little customer traction and downward revenues.
Where is the company at?
This is probably one of the more difficult exercises for companies to perform (I compare it to therapy). It involves taking a deep look at your strengths and weaknesses in the product line, the service offering, the staff, and the operations to answer the question: who are we and what is our purpose? How an organization identified itself, say, 5 years ago, can be drastically different from its current position. And because of the dynamics I mentioned, this exercise often uncovers surprises along the way (that shouldn’t really surprise anyone).
Where does the company need to be?
This involves taking the binoculars and taking a far and wide look at the market and where the company needs to be. Two major mistakes are made in this exercise:
1) Going after a busy space with a lot of competition (if they’re all selling red balloons, we should be doing the same). This can be the topic of several blogs on its own, but the idea is to move into an empty space: less competition = more money.
2) Not moving far enough from the current position. It’s easy to stick around where you are, but if where you are is such a great space, why aren’t you making money? This takes a lot of guts and ambition, but sometimes where the company needs to be is far away from its current position. As long as the expectations are reasonable and realistic, it’s best to be honest about where the company needs to be regardless of how hard it’ll be to get there.
How is the company going to get there?
Believe it or not, this falls into place faster than most people expect. Once the picture is clear as to where the company is and where it needs to be, the actions that need to be taken become very clear, very fast. This is where change management comes into play: shuffling the staff, redoing the product line, repositioning the company, and communicating internally and externally. This is an emotional process that I’ve written about it in the past, but it is very rewarding with the right tools and processes in place.
The visual identity, corporate messaging, product naming, and a host of other activities that are typically considered “branding” are the result of the changes that occur as the company defines its identity and its place in the world.
This is a scratch on the surface for branding/rebranding companies – there’s so much more that comes into play which makes our jobs more interesting and rewarding. But I want to leave you with this: if someone tells you they are a brand strategist, the first thing you should find out is how much they know about change management. It’ll save you a lot of headache down the line.
November 18, 2009
It’s not all about profits: “do it pro bono” with the Taproot Foundation, the nonprofit intermediary
Ever since I remember, I’d wanted to work with nonprofits to give back to the society I live in, or for a cause I care for, in an effective productive way. The problem was I never knew how to go about it. Were they going to make me stuff envelopes or answer incoming calls? (Get real, I’d never do that! – sorry, is that snobby?). Did they understand in what capacity I could help them? Did I get what they needed? Throughout my adult life I’ve worked with “for profit” entities and the concept of “nonprofit” was very foreign to me. So I always put it off and wrote checks here and there to various organizations I cared about (or to get the telemarketing folks out of my hair).
Enter the Taproot Foundation.
The minute I understood what they do, I knew I wanted to be involved. The Taproot Foundation was founded in 2001 by Aaron Hurst, the grandson of the man who wrote the original blueprint for the Peace Corp. He developed the organization as a “nonprofit intermediary”. Through a very structured process, they vet nonprofits that need high level professional help, and match them up with selected pro bono consultants, removing the matchmaking headache from the equation. They also provide highly structured processes for the consultant teams to follow resulting in very consistent outcome. They really did their homework on this!
Economic downturns hit nonprofits the hardest. Even in good times, nonprofits tend to lack strategic focus. According to studies done by Taproot Foundation, 200,000 nonprofits face significant strategic management challenges, more than half have no strategic plan, and 95% of them say their social impact would grow with pro bono support. Taproot Foundation estimates that pro bono consultants can contribute the equivalent of $1.5 billion annually to nonprofits in the US alone. This is more than the total annual combined giving of the 20 top corporate foundations, and can fundamentally change the way nonprofits operate all over the country.
The foundation started in San Francisco, and has expanded to New York City, Chicago, Seattle, Los Angeles, and Washington DC (I keep thinking there were a couple of more cities - they're expanding fast so I can't remember). The current services include project management, creative services, marketing, HR, IT, and strategic management. I met Aaron Hurst recently and he plans to expand rapidly.
I started my first volunteer service grant with them recently as a brand strategist for a local nonprofit, I was in for a pleasant surprise. Here I am sitting with a bunch of PhD’s who are trying to fix our water problems but have very little concept of positioning or branding (I made the mistake of comparing their model to B2B and the result was a roomful of blank stares – nice job, Kat!).
So here’s the bottom line. If you’ve thought about being involved with nonprofits, but can’t figure it out, Taproot Foundation might be the answer for you. The work is really rewarding, the nonprofit people are passionate about the society we live in, and there’s something refreshing about not having to talk about revenues and profits all the time.
Here are a few reasons I can think of to get involved:
It feels good to give. It just does. If you care, just do it. It doesn’t take that much time.
You can’t give money but you can give time. Tough economic times are hitting everyone’s wallets. Also, if you’re unemployed, you may not be able to give money, but you can donate your time.
Good resume filler. Again, if you are “between jobs”, this is a great resume filler with solid professional work. Also gets you out of the house and keeps your mind busy.
Great networking. You’ll be in a professional environment doing professional work, networking with the nonprofit staff and other consultants. I’ve personally met some great people through this program.
Ego boost. Every little bit you do will be a lot for nonprofits. And they’re SO thankful for it.
Non profits really need help. Enough said.
The easiest way to get involved is to go on their website and register with your background information. Someone will contact you and take you through the process. If they’re not in your geographical area, put yourself in the queue anyway. I suspect they’ll hit all major geographical areas soon. They’re also open to suggestions, so don’t be shy.
Let me know if you do this. I’d love to hear about it.
Enter the Taproot Foundation.
The minute I understood what they do, I knew I wanted to be involved. The Taproot Foundation was founded in 2001 by Aaron Hurst, the grandson of the man who wrote the original blueprint for the Peace Corp. He developed the organization as a “nonprofit intermediary”. Through a very structured process, they vet nonprofits that need high level professional help, and match them up with selected pro bono consultants, removing the matchmaking headache from the equation. They also provide highly structured processes for the consultant teams to follow resulting in very consistent outcome. They really did their homework on this!
Economic downturns hit nonprofits the hardest. Even in good times, nonprofits tend to lack strategic focus. According to studies done by Taproot Foundation, 200,000 nonprofits face significant strategic management challenges, more than half have no strategic plan, and 95% of them say their social impact would grow with pro bono support. Taproot Foundation estimates that pro bono consultants can contribute the equivalent of $1.5 billion annually to nonprofits in the US alone. This is more than the total annual combined giving of the 20 top corporate foundations, and can fundamentally change the way nonprofits operate all over the country.
The foundation started in San Francisco, and has expanded to New York City, Chicago, Seattle, Los Angeles, and Washington DC (I keep thinking there were a couple of more cities - they're expanding fast so I can't remember). The current services include project management, creative services, marketing, HR, IT, and strategic management. I met Aaron Hurst recently and he plans to expand rapidly.
I started my first volunteer service grant with them recently as a brand strategist for a local nonprofit, I was in for a pleasant surprise. Here I am sitting with a bunch of PhD’s who are trying to fix our water problems but have very little concept of positioning or branding (I made the mistake of comparing their model to B2B and the result was a roomful of blank stares – nice job, Kat!).
So here’s the bottom line. If you’ve thought about being involved with nonprofits, but can’t figure it out, Taproot Foundation might be the answer for you. The work is really rewarding, the nonprofit people are passionate about the society we live in, and there’s something refreshing about not having to talk about revenues and profits all the time.
Here are a few reasons I can think of to get involved:
It feels good to give. It just does. If you care, just do it. It doesn’t take that much time.
You can’t give money but you can give time. Tough economic times are hitting everyone’s wallets. Also, if you’re unemployed, you may not be able to give money, but you can donate your time.
Good resume filler. Again, if you are “between jobs”, this is a great resume filler with solid professional work. Also gets you out of the house and keeps your mind busy.
Great networking. You’ll be in a professional environment doing professional work, networking with the nonprofit staff and other consultants. I’ve personally met some great people through this program.
Ego boost. Every little bit you do will be a lot for nonprofits. And they’re SO thankful for it.
Non profits really need help. Enough said.
The easiest way to get involved is to go on their website and register with your background information. Someone will contact you and take you through the process. If they’re not in your geographical area, put yourself in the queue anyway. I suspect they’ll hit all major geographical areas soon. They’re also open to suggestions, so don’t be shy.
Let me know if you do this. I’d love to hear about it.
July 31, 2009
Starbucks Debrands for Market Expansion
Back in the early 90s, I knew someone who worked at a new coffee shop in Santa Monica, and couldn’t get over the fact that people lined up at the door at the crack of dawn before the coffee shop opened. That’s the first time I heard of the Starbuck brand, and in retrospect, I should have sold the house and bought the stock at IPO price back then, and then I would have been a gizzillionaire or something…
OK, I’m having an A.D.D. moment. Back to topic of brands.
In what turned out to be one of the most successful American brand stories, Starbucks expanded its operations from a small specialty coffee chain in Seattle to an international conglomerate with one of the best known brands around the world. Who thought about coffee brands before Starbucks? It was either Nescafe or 7-11 back then.
By 2008, Starbucks boasted 15,750 locations internationally feeding a typical problem with successful brands – overexposure causing ubiquity and un-exclusivity. I know, most companies wish they had this problem. A problem it is, nonetheless. In a matter of a decade, the company went from Starbucks the darling of chic barista coffee houses, to Starfux the corporate powerhouse encroaching neighborhoods. No more lining up at the storefront at the crack of dawn.
But that was so 2008.
Starting today, Starbucks is testing a new idea by converting a few of its Seattle locations into a completely new storefront: (drum rolls!) selling beer, wine, and specialty foods in addition to its current line of coffees and pastries, and (double drum rolls!) debranding the stores both from the Starbucks name and the all familiar Starbucks look. The storefronts will be named after the cross section of the streets closest to it, like “25th and Sepulveda” – I just made up that name (and no, I don’t live there).
Starbucks has recently experienced great difficulty increasing sales. The specialty coffee story has had a great run but competition has become all too stiff (McCafes anyone?). So with this, the company switches from a “coffee house” story to a “neighborhood hangout” story with food and alcohol, live music, and comfortable rustic environs. If this idea proves profitable, Starbucks will be able to convert a large subset of its current 15,000+ locations from “coffee house only” stores to “coffee house and bar and café” stores, thereby expanding into new highly profitable markets in one swift swipe.
The problem is the Starbucks brand is too engrained in the “coffee house” story, so instead of re-branding, the company drops the hard-earned brand altogether.
It’s a gutsy and brilliant move!
Can you imagine Tylenol, Colgate, Toshiba, or Ford dropping their names? There have certainly been attempts at rebranding companies or renaming certain product lines, but dropping the name altogether?
It’ll be interesting to see how this will pan out. Will the company lose its loyal customers to the unknown store names? Will the customer base feel comfortable with the hybrid of the coffee house and the bar environment? Will Starbucks eventually drop the brand from its stores and keep the coffee brand in a wholesale fashion? The possibilities are endless. But for now, the company has shown that it is willing and able to push the brand envelope beyond expectation, and risk a complete overhaul in order to open up massive new revenue streams.
Kudos to the entrepreneurial minds running large corporations!
OK, I’m having an A.D.D. moment. Back to topic of brands.
In what turned out to be one of the most successful American brand stories, Starbucks expanded its operations from a small specialty coffee chain in Seattle to an international conglomerate with one of the best known brands around the world. Who thought about coffee brands before Starbucks? It was either Nescafe or 7-11 back then.
By 2008, Starbucks boasted 15,750 locations internationally feeding a typical problem with successful brands – overexposure causing ubiquity and un-exclusivity. I know, most companies wish they had this problem. A problem it is, nonetheless. In a matter of a decade, the company went from Starbucks the darling of chic barista coffee houses, to Starfux the corporate powerhouse encroaching neighborhoods. No more lining up at the storefront at the crack of dawn.
But that was so 2008.
Starting today, Starbucks is testing a new idea by converting a few of its Seattle locations into a completely new storefront: (drum rolls!) selling beer, wine, and specialty foods in addition to its current line of coffees and pastries, and (double drum rolls!) debranding the stores both from the Starbucks name and the all familiar Starbucks look. The storefronts will be named after the cross section of the streets closest to it, like “25th and Sepulveda” – I just made up that name (and no, I don’t live there).
Starbucks has recently experienced great difficulty increasing sales. The specialty coffee story has had a great run but competition has become all too stiff (McCafes anyone?). So with this, the company switches from a “coffee house” story to a “neighborhood hangout” story with food and alcohol, live music, and comfortable rustic environs. If this idea proves profitable, Starbucks will be able to convert a large subset of its current 15,000+ locations from “coffee house only” stores to “coffee house and bar and café” stores, thereby expanding into new highly profitable markets in one swift swipe.
The problem is the Starbucks brand is too engrained in the “coffee house” story, so instead of re-branding, the company drops the hard-earned brand altogether.
It’s a gutsy and brilliant move!
Can you imagine Tylenol, Colgate, Toshiba, or Ford dropping their names? There have certainly been attempts at rebranding companies or renaming certain product lines, but dropping the name altogether?
It’ll be interesting to see how this will pan out. Will the company lose its loyal customers to the unknown store names? Will the customer base feel comfortable with the hybrid of the coffee house and the bar environment? Will Starbucks eventually drop the brand from its stores and keep the coffee brand in a wholesale fashion? The possibilities are endless. But for now, the company has shown that it is willing and able to push the brand envelope beyond expectation, and risk a complete overhaul in order to open up massive new revenue streams.
Kudos to the entrepreneurial minds running large corporations!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)