Communications
and PR

Find out how JMC helps your organization thrive in the new era...
start

Archive for the ‘Branding’ Category

What should be the voice of a brand?

Monday, March 1st, 2010 by John Mallen

By: John Mallen

Special circumstances aside, I believe that a brand should be a stand-alone entity. In our world, the brand is JMC Marketing Communications & PR – long name but it communicates 85 percent of what we do. We have a tag line, and just the other day, a contact of ours got the tag line and wrote about it as being the brand: “You folks are communications in the real world.”

I’d never thought about the tag being a stand alone, but it really is – maybe even better than the brand itself!

My point here is that a brand has a place within the organization that owns the brand and in the minds of customers and other stakeholders. But when the organization speaks, the brand doesn’t.

The company can be the first person narrator, as in “We greatly appreciate your business.” But the brand is always referred to by the speaking organization: “We value your selection of Acme products. Acme consistently outperforms competitors …”

The key principle is to always make the brand stand alone as third person, that which is being referred to. Even when “we” the organization are speaking, we treat the brand as a valuable third person entity. We call it by name and speak to its attributes.

Most Trusted Brands

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010 by Gretchen Reed

by: Gretchen Reed

Market research firm Millward Brown recently published its “Most Trusted Brands” list and there were a couple of surprises.

As reported in Brandweek, though consumer packaged goods dominated the survey, two service brands – Amazon.com and FedEx, topped the list, which is based on a “TrustR” (trust/recommendation) score compiled from polls conducted by Millward Brown in the U.S. and globally.

The top ten brands listed were:

  1. Amazon.com
  2. FedEx
  3. Downy
  4. Huggies
  5. Tide
  6. Tylenol
  7. Toyota
  8. WebMD
  9. Pampers
  10. UPS

Surprised to see Toyota on the list? Well, data for the study was collected in 2009, prior to the disclosure of Toyota’s recalls, which could account for the brand’s standing.

But notice the number 6 brand – Tylenol. Here is a brand that has been plagued by multiple recalls and PR crises, but has weathered the storm. As Eileen Campbell, global CEO of Millward Brown noted, “Doing well in a crisis actually builds trust.”

Maybe Toyota can learn from Tylenol’s example, although the recent ads I’ve seen lead me to believe that they just hope the crisis has magically disappeared – or that a rebate or discount can erase the damage done.

It should be interested to see who does – and doesn’t – make next year’s list.

Brand Ambassadors

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010 by Gretchen Reed

A recent negative experience with an ISP installer reminded me of the often-overlooked role of employees as brand ambassadors.

Especially in service businesses, employees are not only the company’s “face,” but, to some extent, its “product.” The way employees perform reflects directly on the reputation of the business, for better or worse. This interaction is often far more powerful than any advertising campaign or PR effort.

We often encourage our clients to enlist their employees as brand ambassadors, but in order for this to happen, there must be both management commitment and employee receptivity.

First, management must make a considered effort – not just pay lip service to – sharing the company’s goals, vision and values. They also need to lead by example by not only saying what they will do, but actually doing it.

On the employee side, employees who are treated fairly, rewarded for excellent performance and, just as important, called on inferior performance are much more likely to behave in a way that makes their employers proud – and customers happy.

In the case of my ISP experience, the next time a competitor’s direct mail piece arrives or commercial airs, you can bet I will be paying more attention. I guess that makes the installer a brand detractor, rather than ambassador. And just how many of those can a company afford to have?

What Are You About?

Wednesday, February 10th, 2010 by John Mallen

I just revisited a blog by Steve Rubel called “How the Leading Social Sites Describe Themselves” Steve’s piece is well worth the read. He observes that when one reads how major social Web sites describe themselves — Twitter, digg, Friendfeed and others — it would be difficult to tell them apart by simply relying on the descriptions themselves.

It’s an observation that applies too often in multiple segments and in many vehicles ranging from brochures and videos to ads and even exhibits — maybe especially exhibits.

One of the products most in demand from our marketing communications firm is the JMC Messaging Platform(TM). The platform takes shape as a document in which we distill the essential elements of a brand — things such as how it should be positioned in the minds of stakeholders, or what the value proposition is to a customer group.

But the first and most debated element in virtually every JMC Messaging Platform process that I have worked on is the definition of the business — how the organization describes itself. One would think that such a straightforward statement would be the simplest. Not so! It doesn’t seem to matter whether the organization is a closely held business or part of a multinational organization. When we meet with the leaders in our facilitated brand messaging workshop and begin with that fundamental question, most of the time it opens a lively debate.

When there is little debate, the reason is typically that an official milquetoast-like definition has been developed and the language is, as Rubel observed, so bland as to be meaningless.

No reason to delve into the organizational psychologies at work. That could take forever. But there is good reason to suggest that it does pay for the leaders of any organization to wrangle through a process of clarifying how the company or its brands describe or define themselves. If the message is muddled to those of us on the outside, how must it be to the people on the inside? And contrarily, if the people inside are clear about the definition of the organization, how much more likely are they to relate to and resonate with the publics that enable success?

I’m with Steve Rubel. Describe yourself! It’s job No.1 for any customer-facing activity.

Are Tactics Wagging your Marketing?

Thursday, September 17th, 2009 by John Mallen

I like how this article in yesterday’s Fast Company draws attention to the importance of the corporate brand ( where the corporate brand is needed) and reminds us that strategy not glitzy tactics should be guiding the marketing.  Tactics are great, but need to be marshalled toward an end.

” … With the growth of the Internet and social technology tools, personal branding activity and opportunities have exploded. On the other hand, in some ways, the arc of Web 1.0 to 2.0+ (not to mention this current economy) has seduced many marketers into being focused on tactics at the expense of strategy including branding. Hot media tactics often substitute for the “strategy.”

Thanks to Kevin Randall, Director of Brand Strategy & Research at  Movéo Integrated Branding for these words.  The remainder of the article is also a great primer on the  important elements of a brand.

When You Are the Difference, PR Rocks

Wednesday, August 27th, 2008 by admin

In recent weeks I’ve found myself slicing and dicing attributes of various clients’ offerings to isolate a core component of branding and marketing success – differentiation.

It’s about answering the prospect’s question, “Why should I choose you?”

Sometimes the differences are minimal and pretty much meaningless. Does the buyer even care?

What I have seen in many cases, there is one differential the buyer does care about: you, your brand, or your company. What’s different and persuasive, it turns out, is who and what you are.

Sometimes it may be all that you need.

When you or your organization brand communications is a big part of what customers love, then success means  keeping in touch and maintaining great relations with your customers. PR rocks.

Differentiate? Or What?

Sunday, March 30th, 2008 by admin

Differentiation has become a holy grail in PR and branding. It’s evangelized most fervently in Differentiate or Die: Survival in our Era of Killer Competition, by Jack Trout and Steve Rivkin, published in 2000 and now reissued in its second edition.

I like Jack Trout’s work and like many in the communications business, I love touting how my client’s offering stands apart from everyone else! To what degree is it different? Does that even matter? Does the difference have that much to do with the value proposition? Not all the time.

For a fresh view of differentiation, take a look at Matt Kurchaski’s blog Define or Differentiate? A Marketer’s Dilemma. “Too many companies ask the question “how can we be different” when they should be asking ‘what does the customer want and how can we deliver better than the other guys?’. ” Matt offers a crisp summary of a thoughtful article by Eric M. Morgenstern, APR, Fellow PRSA just published by The Counselors Academy, which is part of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA). The full text is available for purchase through the PRSA.

There’s a lot to think about here. It’s, well, different.