Posts Tagged ‘branding’

Brand Tags reveals what people really think about brands

Friday, May 16th, 2008

When speaking, I often do free association with brands, asking the audience to shout out any word or phrase that comes to mind when I name a brand.

While most brands own a few words, in my experience, only one brand has delivered consistently: Volvo. When I say it, the words “safety” or “safe” are shouted in unison. It’s almost like a cheer sometimes—kinda creepy.

Well, now there’s a website that has taken branding free association a step further.

Brand Tags is “a collective experiment in brand perception” where you view a series of logos and type in the word or words that immediately come to mind for each.

Here’s a tag cloud for a popular American brand:

That’s just a small sampling of the cloud, but you get the point.

Can you guess who this is for? I’ll bet you can.

In case you are wondering, the two largest words in the Volvo tag cloud: “safe” and “safety.”

Comment below to share the word or phrase you would like associated with your brand.

. . .

Inspiration for this post came from my partner, Bill Boyd, ABC who discovered it on a CCM discussion list.

Good things come in small packages

Thursday, May 1st, 2008

Earlier this year, I asked you to Help define the buzzword marketers love (and I hate). Yep, that buzzword was (and remains) the word “branding.”

Enter The Brand Gap: How to Bridge the Distance Between Business Strategy and Design by Marty Neumeier.

The Brand Gap, by Marty Neumeier

The first thing you notice, the book is perhaps the shortest 200 pages you’ll ever read. The second thing: you’ve probably never learned so much with so little time. A blend of sparse words, graphics, typography and images, the author makes it work—because he’s found a perfect mix of form and content.

We read the book in the Outsource Marketing Book Club, and here’s what we appreciated most:

  • The “Brand Gap” offers the simplest definition of branding we’ve ever seen, “A brand is a person’s gut feeling about a product, service, or company.” We’d like to see his definition become the definition for branding. That would clear up a lot of confusion and make it possible to diagnose a marketing problem and prescribe the treatment faster.
  • It’s such a quick read, you can ask anyone in your organization to read it and unlike some esoteric books on the topic, you know they’ll actually get through it.
  • Neumeier builds a case that companies should work with a cadre of best-of-breed external resources to get better marketing done. We couldn’t agree more – we’ve been doing that on our client’s behalf for the last decade.
  • Neumeier cuts through the brandinista gibberish and offers something for everybody—business executives, marketing managers and salespeople will all benefit from his straightforward, clear approach.

    And that might solve one of the biggest challenges branding has—getting everyone on the same page regarding what branding really is.

    Are you a fan of branding? Why or why not?

    Your agency is not your brand

    Tuesday, March 18th, 2008

    Your web designer shouldn’t use your website to promote their business.

    Does your website have a link on the bottom giving credit to the web developer? Do your email blasts include a big logo with a link taking your readers to your email marketing company’s promotional page?

    Why?

    You’ve paid good money to have your website designed, then your web developer uses it to promote their services with a link at the bottom of every page. And though you’ve paid for your email marketing too, most services have a logo as big as yours plus a marketing message and at least one link to their site.

    I really dislike these practices.

    Don’t get me wrong. You should give credit if someone is providing value to you for free or at a dramatically reduced cost. For example, most Wordpress themes are free. All the designers ask for is credit for their good work, so you should give it to them.

    But your website wasn’t free. You paid for the design, coding, copywriting, sitemapping, usability testing and more. I’ve always said that the logo or link at the bottom of your website is just as ridiculous at having your branding firm’s logo on your brochure or your ad agency’s logo on the bottom of your ads.

    Ironically, a Brandweek article published yesterday entitled “Agencies are the New Brand” argues that maybe this is the way it should be:

    Imagine, for a moment, then, that agencies did put their logos on the bottoms of the ads they created. It would hold them to a higher standard, compelling them to believe in their work as much as in the client’s brand. Picture a line of copy down the side of, say, an American Express ad: Ogilvy made this ad for American Express because, like them, we believe in the value of long-term relationships.

    The author, Simon Sinek, is a good writer and I usually agree with him. I agree that most ad agencies should increase their investment in their own brands.

    But I couldn’t disagree more regarding the agency becoming part of the client’s advertising. This is like co-branding, and co-branding is distracting. It’s good for you if you are the little guy hitching your wagon to the big guy, but the benefits to the client are questionable, at best.

    Sinek goes on to say:

    An agency compelled to reveal itself to the world would be more thoughtful—more accountable, surely—for its work, would it not?

    Hmmm. Not sure about that one, either. The agency is accountable already. If the work doesn’t work, the agency has to find new work. It’s that simple.

    If your web development firm is taking credit on your site, ask them to remove it. That’s easy.

    If your email marketing tool is promoting themselves in the footer, ask them to eliminate it or reduce it to a non-distracting hyperlink. And if they won’t do that, find a new email marketing company that will. It might cost a few more dollars per month (and maybe not) but what’s your brand worth? I know Outsource Marketing isn’t the only company that offers private label email.

    Your marketing is yours, and yours alone. Don’t dilute it with your marketing partner’s marketing messages.

    Think I am overreacting? Weigh in by commenting below.

    Help define the buzzword marketers love (and I hate)

    Thursday, January 17th, 2008

    Branding iron

    Each January, Interbrand shares its Best Global Brands 2007 report. They’ve been doing it for years, and they do a nice job of it.

    Back in 2002 we wrote an article for the Friends of Outsource Marketing entitled “The buzzword marketers love…and we hate.” Yes, the word I hated then was “branding.” I still do.

    Not because of what branding is…the intention of branding is spot on. A powerful brand creates a mental shortcut that helps break through the clutter.

    So, what’s our beef? Here’s what we said then:

    Our problem is that people use “branding” to refer to such a wide variety of concepts and activities. It used to be a terrific-looking word. But it’s slept around so much lately, we’re not in love with it anymore.

    Why is this a problem? Because many businesses have decided that better “branding” is the solution to their marketing problems. But what exactly are they thinking? A better logo? A stronger point of difference? A more integrated communications effort?

    We couldn’t summon the word-police then and we can’t do it now. But we can ask you, Responsible Marketer–

    [poll=3]

    Thank you for voting. Now, let’s see if things have gotten a little clearer in the last six years.