Category Archives: community

2010, Year of the geek?

Posted on Thursday 24 December 2009 | Leave a comment

Its customary at this time of year for folks to publish predictions, so, not to be left out here are mine.

The fundamental changes that have come about in everybody’s lives in the last year and which continue to some extent, have demanded a new approach to marketing – “New Model Marketing” – and for a few years now I have been just one of many people propagating four mutually-dependant ideas that are at the heart of this new Paradigm.

  1. While short term benefits can be gained by a tactical approach, the evidence proves that sustainable growth and long-term success is dependent upon a strong brand community.
  2. We’ve focussed for too long on making promises to consumers through beautifully-crafted, compelling marketing communications, but all too often organisations have failed to deliver and customers have been disappointed.  Its time to walk the talk and deliver those promises.
  3. Marketing is the process of matching an organisation’s resources to customer needs. That means its involved in everything an organisation does at every level. Marketing is not a separate department and it isn’t communications (although communications are involved)
  4. Efficient businesses are successful businesses.  With the performance bar forever rising and every organisation looking to reduce its costs, the only hope an organisation has to gain ground is to achieve more with its investment.  That means eliminating inconsistency at every level and ensuring that every element of a business works together to achieve synergy.  That’s “integrated marketing”.

Insights and new kinds  of data management and analysis are essential if we are to achieve the necessary levels of efficiency and new ways of communicating with members of our brand community – that’s employees, investors and partners as well as customers – will be essential to the development of these relationships and the growth of any business.  I have always included IT people in my Full Effect project teams, but until recently we have been struggling like everyone else with Heath Robinson adaptations of tools designed for accounting purposes.  Now, at last there are early signs that the IT guys are on-board and applying their skills to the kind of solutions we need.

My predictions for 2010 are:

1 – 2010 will herald the arrival of the first of a new generation of data management tools that will really make a difference.  Its not that the nerds have been slow to do their job, but that marketers failed to get their brief in on time and the direction that the treadmill has taken ever since was dictated by the bean-counters who beat us to the draw.  However, the computer guys have hung around their new marketing mates for long enough now, the penny has dropped, they’re on the job and the potential of the great hardware that we have been developing in recent years will finally be realised with the emergence of a new kind of software that will bring us closer to the reality of delivering unique and compelling messages to individual customers rather than bludgeoning (and frequently pissing-off) broad segments.

I’m not one of those people who believes that there are aspects of marketing that cannot be measured.  I’m looking for a return on every dime my clients invest, which means I don’t get a lot of Xmas cards from the old PR school that seems to me to exist in a kind of mystical, non-accountable fug. This year I’m counting on the arrival of tools that will enable me and other marketers to more clearly understand the influence of every communications tool in our integrated strategies.

2 – This year we’ll see someone new step in and show us what “new media” is really all about. I despair at the failure of traditional media to respond to the opportunities (yes I did say opportunities!) presented by the arrival of on-line.  The paid for v. free debate continues, but we are still at the starting blocks as far as either option is concerned.  Steve Davies’ Skiddmark looks like a promising model, but there’s more out there and the race is on.  Hold on to your hats!

3 – Someone is about to get their act together and deliver a real user-driven experience that combines attractive programming, quality production and quality delivery. I have been very disappointed recently by a few mobile content providers.  Perform Group look as though they might be getting there, but where are the others?.  Let’s see who turns up for the party.

4 – Social networking will come into its own with the first of a new generation of communities driven by intuitive computing that more closely reflects the kind of judgements we all make about the people we mix with – another step closer to the deep and meaningful “Brandships” that have been at the heart of Full Effect Marketing for years.  I  don’t belive that FaceBook is a panacea.  I’m all for social networking (Its what my Brand Discovery programme is all about), but there are millions of businesses for whom the current social networking venues and resources don’t add up to anything, but a distraction from the real game.  Web 2.0 is a blunt instrument, but if you aren’t already involved you’ll not be ready to make the transition to WEb 3.0 which is where the real benefits will emerge.

2010 – new levels of accountability, relevant media, the content we want and real understanding of our customers. – Bring it on!

→ Leave a comment

Posted in brand, Brand promise, branding, brands, brandships, communications, community, data, data analysis, efficiency, Full Effect, Full Efffect Marketing, integrated marketing, integration, media, on-line, on-line publishing, phil darby, promise, publishing, Social marketing, Social networking, The Full Effect Company, Uncategorized, Web 2.0, Web 3.0

The community value of a one-pound pee

Posted on Tuesday 10 March 2009 | 2 Comments

desperate-for-toiletI have just been reading through the comments on a LinkedIn Post, which started when someone asked whether Michael O’Leary is right to charge a quid to pee on his RyanAir flights.  The comments, as usual range from the amusing to the folks who just don’t get it from any perspective, but that’s life.  So too are brands and, putting aside for a moment the misassumptions and misunderstandings of what Michael O’Leary actually said and in what circumstances, there couldn’t be a better example of what branding is all about.

I’ve said it before and I’m sure I’ll say it again – brands are communities and we interact with them in a way that mirrors the relationships we have with our friends. – that’s why I call the relationships we have with brands “Brandships“

Its a fact, think about it.  I bet the people who you know who have a large circle of close friends all have vivid personalities.  Insipid people, though they may not upset a lot of people, equally don’t enjoy large communities of really close friends.  You know, the kind of friends you really love as opposed to those that you just hang out with because there’s nothing better to do.  And these are the ones that count.  They are the friends who, when times are tough, rather than just sympathise with you, will rally to your assistance with practical help and support.

When I think through the close friends that I have I see a number of people who sometimes piss people off with their views or style, but could never be accused of not telling it like it is.  I know where I am with them.  I’ve been put in my place a few times by some of them and I genuinely value their criticism, unlike the acquaintances I have who are always very politically correct, inoffensive and full of platitudes.  The latter group are motivated by the fear of rejection.  They just don’t want to piss anybody off and therefore succeed in neither annoying nor endearing anybody.

Brands are EXACTLY the same.  Look, around.  There are  insipid brands everywhere that people buy, simply because there is no alternative.  They are often brand leaders, which means both that they have been able to get away with this approach and why they are vulnerable to lighthouse brands that emerge.  The lighthouse brands being the strong characters in this scenario.

Right now the economic downturn has created a level playing-field and we find ourselves in the era of the lighthouse brand.  Its going to be difficult to succeed just because you don’t piss anybody off (although size and resources alone will enable the biggest to weather the storm).  Today friendships really count, we value the genuine help and support that comes with a close friend.

Of course, its not enough to just go shouting your mouth off, you do have to back it up with actions and those actions have to be consistent with what you are saying.  That way you reinforce your message, live up to your promise, reassure people that you are genuine and transparent.  Its that reassurance that you are someone who others can know and trust, derived from consistency, that makes for a really great friendship … and Brandship.

I’ve been thinking about this for a lot of years.  Full Effect Marketing with Brand Discovery at its core is firstly a process of self-discovery for brands.  Getting to understand the real you, not the “you” that you may have been trying to pass yourself off as for years because you felt that’s what people wanted to hear.

If it turns out that you don’t have what it takes to be popular we can set about addressing the issues, but we won’t create another veneer, instead we’ll make fundamental changes.  Its rare though that there won’t be something about you that’s interesting or attractive to others and that’s the foundation upon which we will build your new community of Brandships.

Making it work will involve firstly getting all your stakeholders behind the promise (your “Brand Promise”) that is inherent in your personality, and gaining their commitment to playing their part in its delivery.  Brand Discovery is the process that I use to achieve this.

So, how does this relate to Mr O’Leary and RyanAir?  Well, firstly I have to clear up the usual mess that has been make by the press, by pointing out that it wasn’t quite as reported. It was a TV interviewer who asked Mr O’Leary how far he would take his stripped-down travel model and suggested that he could charge for using the loo.  O’Leary took the chance to reinforce the RyanAir personality, which embodies fresh thinking, anti-establishment, not taking the press as seriously as they take themselves and a load of other stuff, by saying, in effect, “why not?”

Because you can’t be all things to all people, being true to your inner brand means that people will either take you or leave you, but at least their choice will be real and the result will be strong Brandships that’ll take you through thick and thin.  You’ll succeed if a lot of or most people like you, or if a minority that take you to their bosoms are able and prepared to pay handsomely for your product or services and, as I said, over time you can make adjustments.

Michael O’Leary did a great job of reinforcing his Brandships and in the process gave everyone a choice.  The facts speak for themselves.  RyanAir is an outstandingly successful business, with a very clear Brand Promise and a lot of people who just love them.

→ 2 Comments

Posted in brand, brand character, brand development, Brand Discovery, Brand Model, brand name, Brand promise, branding, brands, change, communications, community, consistency, Full Effect, Full Efffect Marketing, internal marketing, management, marketing, phil darby, promise, The Full Effect Company

The next publishing revolution

Posted on Monday 19 January 2009 | Leave a comment

magazinesThe common dilemma of on-line publishers has always been whether they should derive revenue from subscriptions or advertising.  The choice for most has been the arguably simpler advertising route. But times have changed and some at least are being forced to question that wisdom.  Is it too late?

Early in the on-line publishing revolution proponents appear to have developed a consensus that said it wasn’t possible to have a model that generated revenues from both subscriptions and advertising.  Its easy to see how they arrived at that decision, the criteria for ad. sales is, after all, site traffic, but traffic is limited when payment is required for access. 

However, with advertising revenues falling and costs escalating, more than a few publishers are wishing they could go back and start again.  Readers are happy of course, and its a brave and optimistic man who will hang his reputation on persuading them to pay for what they already have for free.  Besides, while free access, will broaden your visitor profile, advertisers expect tight targeting and to some extent that’s what the web is all about.  So, is there another solution?

Maybe its time to change the way we view publishing?  That’s all types on-line and off.  Last year I was involved with a number of publishers who were all, internally at least, questioning their traditional understanding of the business they were in.  All healthy stuff. 

To me, publications have always represented the epitome of a brand.  I have said many times in this blog and elsewhere that brands are communities, held together by common interests, beliefs and values and publications, especially specialist press, are just that.

Mature operators in other sectors have come to recognise that selling anything is a whole lot simpler and requires far less investment if everyone you approach shares the same perspective.  That’s why brand development is so important.  The problem for publishers is that so few of them have leveraged their communities as, say an fmcg brand might do.  Basically, they have set up a really great store, but it has a very limited offer.  My belief is that now is the time for publishers to recognise that their business isn’t necessarily publishing, but that this is merely the means they have to gather an audience to whom they can make revenue-generating offers of pretty well any products and services that might appeal to their community members.

I’m not the only person who is thinking this way.  One of the UK’s biggest publishers (it wouldn’t be fair for me to say who) are developing a new strategy on this basis already and others are certainly discussing it.  I am working with another right now whose future clearly lies in diversification.  Of course, there is always the danger that diversification stretches resources and distracts managers from their core business, but we are developing a model that overcomes that and I can see a number of alternative routes to the same objective.

You don’t need me to tell you that times are hard and they’ll get tougher yet.  If your business is struggling now you are likely to be among the millions of victims of the economic downturn, so what better time (I guess you could have done it already) to take a radical look at your business model. 

There’s a silver lining in every cloud and if a publisher sees their future in owning interests in diversified businesses that could be fed by his community, there are a whole lot of struggling businesses with great products who are open to a very favourable deal right now.  And, once you get your corporate head around the paradigm shift, a switch like this isn’t that difficult to bring about, and it can happen very quickly.

I realise, that there are publishers who have so far been able to perfect that balancing act between subscriptions and advertising.  The result is usually a really great, tightly defined and high value community that advertisers prize.  But it is a balancing act that’s going to get tough to carry off and this doesn’t exclude these publishers from the opportunity.  In fact, it could be even more lucrative when starting from a base as stable as theirs.  Worth a thought I think.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in advertising, brand, brand development, branding, brands, business strategy, change, communications, community, Full Effect, innovation, marketing, on-line publishing, publishing, strategy, The Full Effect Company, tradition, Uncategorized, web site

Future-proofed brand consulting.

Posted on Monday 20 October 2008 | Leave a comment

Earlier this week I caught an interview with the clinical psychologist and author Oliver James on BBC Radio 4.  Oliver James for those who have never heard of him (and I was one of you until this week) has written a number of books that focus on an affliction that he calls “affluenza” which, he claims is rife in the UK.  Now, I have never read any of his books and I haven’t studied his “teachings” but he made a few comments during the interview that struck a chord with me, especially in light of the current economic and environmental climate.

His basic premise is that people in the UK are especially unhappy and stressed because their values are shot. He claims that our lives revolve around the mission for affluence and ownership.  According to James we have entirely lost our sense of values, we confuse want with need, we see ourselves in terms of the stuff we own and indiscriminate ownership of anything and everything is our primary goal.  The more we own the more we need to acquire.  The process is perpetual and ultimately frustrating, to the point that we are unhealthy both pysiologically and psychologically.  He’s got us sussed then!

In the interview, he pointed out that people in other European countries are more content because they have more of a “make-do-and-mend” approach to life and he’s right.  My experience of Central European countries is that this is very much the case.  People there don’t throw things out when they break down, they fix them and if they can’t be fixed they are stripped of components that might serve to fix something else at some later date.  Prague’s local council periodically park a skip in the street where my part-time home is, for people to deposit larger throw-out items.  Things like broken TV’s and electrical equipment, furniture and other stuff that won’t fit in a bustbin.  (Councils in the UK should try this insead of making us trek to the not-so-local tip whenever we need to dispose of something or charging some exorbitant fee, on top of our local taxes, for collecting them).  The notable thing about this is that anybody (notably ex-pats) who throws anything into these skips is treated with rasied eyebrows and tut-tutting from their neighbours for being so frivolous and wasteful and you’ll often find as many people taking stuff out of the skips as you will folks depositing items there.  Now that’s re-cycling!

Depending on where you look in the Czech Republic you will find people who make-do-and-mend sometimes because they can’t afford to buy new things, but mostly, just because they just don’t see a reason to buy new stuff when old stuff continues to work.  The aesthetic is irrelevent.

The result of this disregard for how things look is a community where long “heavy metal” hairstyles and Iron Miaden T-shirts are still de-rigeur, homes are furnished with a mish-mash of hand-me-down furniture and where, until very recently, many cars were of questionable roadworthiness.  To this day its easy to spot the country people who come to Prague to visit their city-dewlling relatives by their dress and carrier-bag luggage.  As an English friend of mine commented – “Czechs just have no style”.  He was right, and, mostly, they don’t care, but does it matter?  The answer has to be “no”.

Oliver James would, I guess, argue that this is how things should be and I’m sure that Maslow would agree with him on the basis that his “self-actualisation” (the highest point in his hierarchy of personal evolution) leaves brands and acquisition behind.  Remove the need to justify your existance by ownership of stuff and life is much simpler.  We would all be happier and more fulfilled.  You might even find time to do something truly worthwhile.  Its not easy to get a Czech to work overtime at weekends even if you pay them double time.  They just don’t see why they should give up their free time to get more money that they don’t need.  

A friend of mine is convinced that within twenty years we’ll all be getting around on horses and growing our lunch in our own back yards and with the world economy patched up, but clearly in a long term decline, oil resources drying up with no viable alternative on the horizon and the US and Australia set to run out of water any day now, its a scene that’s easy to visualise.

The irony is that while Central Europeans may have a healthier perspective than we do right now, that’s all set to change,  There’s a growing clammour among the young in these countries to be like their counterparts in the West.  In fact their acquisitiveness is frighteneing at times.  They are desperate to have everything that we have, even though they earn less and branded products are largely significantly more expensive than in the UK.  It makes you wonder how they’ll deal with the resultant stress, given that they arean’t really aclimatised to the condition.

If my friend with the horsey theory is right, our mobility in future will be limited by our capacity to walk and we will revert to a world of tribes.  Communities, each with its own personality, values, style, dependent for success on membership – brands in fact.  I have to say that I’m somewhat relieved to know that, worst-case scenario, I’m still in a growth industry!

→ Leave a comment

Posted in BBC, brand development, branding, brands, central europe, community, consulting, developed markets, Full Effect, Full Efffect Marketing, marketing, Maslow, phil darby, recession, social groups, The Full Effect Company, Uncategorized

Why the recession could be good for business

Posted on Monday 13 October 2008 | Leave a comment

Today the UK government has called time on the excesses, self interest and downright bad management of the financial services sector, by taking control of British banks.  Whether it will have the desired effect remains to be seen, but frankly, its about time.  I lost patience with the sector a while back, when a leading FS manager told me that it wasn’t in his interest to “put customers first” and now we are witnessing the product of this mind-set.

I’m not a fan of this government, but it does seem that they’ve got this right and for once I feel the Britain is looking bold and decisive.  UK Gov’s move may not produce a level playing field, but hopefully it will create a more sensible game, however the fall-out is sure to continue with customers far from relaxed about choosing financial patners. And that’s where the potential is.  Ultimately, the banks and financial institutions that are first to persuade consumers and businesses that they can be trusted will triumph.

Trust, is the very basis of any Brandship – the relationships between brands and their stakeholders – so its easy to see that, given the revelations of the last few weeks, the brand equity of banks is as low as a limbo-dancing gnome.  For now they are all tarred with the same brush.  We all know now that for years banks have been tricking us into believing that they were on our side while craftily lining their own pockets with our cash, so for any financial services business to dig themselves out of this one is a big ask.  However, that’s the challenge they all face and its clear that the same old, same old just isn’t going to cut it.  This time they have to be transparent and build brands with real integrity.  Attempting this feat with their existing management in place would be like a paedophile applying for a job as a kids’ swimming instructor, and that’s why the government stepping into the management shoes will, at least, give a few of them a chance.  Now its a case of a massive change management process and that can only be good for business.  Who’ll be first to the tape.

While the banks are working on this one, the rest of the commercial world are considering how they can survive the after shock.  There’s no doubt about it, a lot of businesses are going to tumble in the next few months, but amid the rubble there’s a real opportunity for the bold.

As we’ve seen with banks in the US and UK, there are always bigger vultures to pick over the bones of the those that fail and in this vein a good many short-term wins will be had by organisations with strong and inviting brand communities that can offer shelter to the customers of their deceased competitors.  This will come about in two ways – pro-active, acquisition by competitors and investors of organisations and brands on the verge of a crash and reactive, mopping up by strong brands of the displaced customers of their weaker competitors.

But moreso than in the normal process of acquisition the challenge doesn’t end acquisition.  Its one thing to provide a consumer with temporary shelter, but although the cost of acquisition could be modest compared to the recent past, the real test will be whether these brands can persuade their new customers to make a home with them.  This is where I see the real potential.  I foresee a period of floating customers, like deserted wives, reluctant to commit to long-term relationships and suitor brands falling over themselves to reel them in and turn them into life-partners.  And I predict, honesty will prevail.  If nothing else worthwhile comes of this situation I be live it will convince a few more brands to stop making empty-promises and a shift to genuineness, transparency and a genuine commitment to customer satisfaction.  Another reason why the recession will be good for business.

Because brand communities are a product of their members – significantly their customers – any acquisitive organisations will also have to be wary of the risk of alienating their existing customers as the dynamic of their brand is changed by a large influx of new members, but, if they are sufficiently sorted to have created a strong enough brand community to pull off the acquisition trick in the first place the chances are they’ll have this under control too.

Its common practice in recessionary times for organisations to tighten their belts and sit it out, but the record clearly shows that this is not the path to success and it definitely isn’t the way to go now.  If you want to to make the most of the opportunities that the recession is providing you need to be pro-active, take a close look at your brand and your organisation.  Are you in shape to meet the challenge?  If not get to work.  At the end of this recession the organisations that deserve success will have it and there’ll be some gaps in the line up too.  But then again, I’ve always felt that Darwin nailed it with the process of natural selection.   I think we’ll all be better off for the clear out.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in bankers, banks, brand, brand development, Brand Discovery, Brand Model, brand name, Brand promise, branding, brands, business development, business strategy, change management, community, Competitors, CRM, customer, customer service, customers, Darwin, Full Effect, Full Efffect Marketing, internal marketing, management, marketing, natural selection, opportunity, phil darby, promise, recession, strategy, The Full Effect Company, transparency, Uncategorized

Where the growth is.

Posted on Thursday 2 October 2008 | 2 Comments

Listen! Hear that? Its the sound of the penny dropping in thousands of boardrooms around the globe. Actually, I didn’t hear it either, but its like a black hole, you might not see it, but there’s increasing evidence of it having happened. 

I mentioned a few weeks ago that I have had a few interesting discussions lately with organisations that were looking to leverage their brand community and all of a sudden it seems I am falling over organisations that are doing the same. I was in  Stavanger early this week, talking to investors, business managers and marketing services businesses and the theme emerged there and yesterday in Prague I met a marketer from a leading mobile operator who had this issue clearly in view too.  

At last businesses are realising that its not viable to rely on acquisition to generate your growth – its far too expensive and the return is modest, mainly because most markets are fully subscribed and everyone is buttoning down and tying-in their customers.  The only untethered targets are in emerging economies where you’ll be climbing over your competitors to reach the same customers.  You have to do this of course for the sake of your long-term health, but its more important than ever to do it efficiently and if you visit this post frequently you’ll know that I think we still have some way to go in developing efficient marketing.  However, that’s another subject.

There aren’t a lot of folks around right now who are looking for stuff to spend their cash on, most are struggling with the commitments they already have and those that aren’t are quickly becoming as rare as hen’s teeth.  Other than the poor inundated souls in these new territories there just aren’t going to be any new customers to chase so your growth has to come from your existing customers.  This is nothing new.  Way back in 2005 the State of Marketing Survey that was conducted by IDG for Prophet revealed that 62% of business growth was already comming from existing customers and that organisations were looking to the same segment for 72% of their growth in 2006 (it doesn’t seem that Prophet have followed up on that report so I can’t say that they were right although its a believable figure).

So, there’s still no doubt that the emphasis has to be on growth from existing customers (in fact it might be moreso) but factors like the arrival of recession mean that even this cash cow is about to become tougher to milk.  So where is the easy growth going to come from?  The answer to that question takes us straight back to The Brand As A Medium, one of my long time causes, but, of course, to to be in this game you first have to have a strong brand community. Don’t say I didn’t warn you, I’ve been promoting the need for brand development for years.  If you weren’t listening and didn’t get your brand in shape you are in trouble because you don’t build the kind of brand strength you will need to make this work, overnight.  In the past I’ve managed to deliver measurable results from brand-building programmes over a twelve month time-span, but, everything is tougher now and if your brand isn’t sorted already, you need to be thinking in terms of a three-year development phase before your community offers third parties any real value.  Sorry, but these are the facts!

Before you jump from your executive balcony though …  If you start now, and I mean this minute, today, and run a brand development programme in parrallel with an operational efficiency drive you might just emerge from the recession fit for battle.  Note please, I’m not saying you’ll achieve growth to match that of the businesses that did their prep.  You might get something short term, but for you payback will come when trading conditions improve.  Never before has Full Effect Marketing and programmes like Brand Discovery been more relevant.

→ 2 Comments

Posted in advertising, brand, brand development, Brand Discovery, Brand Model, brand name, Brand promise, branding, brands, business development, business strategy, community, efficiency, Full Effect, Full Efffect Marketing, integrated marketing, internal marketing, management, marketing, media, phil darby, strategy, The Full Effect Company, third-party advertisers, Uncategorized

The truth about baseball.

Posted on Thursday 11 September 2008 | Leave a comment

OK, so now its official!  America’s biggest brand community, the sport that is synonymous with US family life is English!

Yes, baseball was invented in England.  Well, according to the newly discovered diaries of Englishman William Bray who records a major baseball game being played in the Surrey town of Guildford way back in 1755!  That’s more than twenty years before the American declaration of independence!  There’s no doubt about it, like mountain biking, hamburgers, apple pie and a whole lot more, baseball is just another hand-me-down that Americans have plagiarised!  The evidence is now on show at the Surrey History Centre.

Oh, and, one more thing.  It was a womens’ game, but then again we Brits always knew that, didn’t we?

→ Leave a comment

Posted in American, Baseball, brand, community, Full Effect, Full Efffect Marketing, guildford, phil darby, Uncategorized

There’s a right way and there’s a wrong way …

Posted on Friday 5 September 2008 | Leave a comment

I’ve just spent two weeks looking into a company whose brand has massive awareness.  Great, you might think, but no, because while everyone has heard of this business, it seems to me that they have massive negative equity.  Like Walmart?  No, way worse than that.  This business seems to be universally hated!

I say “seems to be” because I can’t say for sure – they have no research.  A basic omission you may think, but they didn’t seem to agree and don’t want to pay for any.  I did the usual on-line checking, but this was hampered by a massive web farm they had set up to control negative comment and social networking (a sure indication of a business that had their priorities up their arse!).  It seemed to support my intuition, but I didn’t come up with enough hard facts.

Staggeringly, this business is big, number one in their sector with fourteen years of YonY growth.  How did they do it?  Actually, it isn’t that big a mystery.  They succeeded on a rising market, with no competition, where all they had to do was turn up and set out their stall, then count the money – and they milked it!  Inexperienced and sometimes just plain stupid management had made just about every mistake in the book, screwing customers, suppliers and partners alike.  However – and I love it when this happens! – they seem to have reached the end of their road.  Economic conditions, social change, emerging competition and saturated markets have conspired to hack their share value to bits and turn their business into a Shadow of its former self – send for the consultant!

After that imagine how refreshing it was to come across not one, but two businesses that had got it all right.  Sadly, they are not my clients, but in an interview with Time Magazine’s The Curious Capitalist John Mackey, CEO and co-founder of Whole Food Markets and Kip Tindell, CEO and co-founder of Container Store, gave me the kind of lift that’s only possible when all your firmly held beliefs are affirmed in a single action.

These guys tick all the boxes in my Full Effect Marketing philosophy and Brand Discovery programme.  In this lengthy interview they explain how important it has proven to them as entrepreneurs to have defined the parameters of their brands up front.  They didn’t tackle this in a particularly formal way but, as is the case with so many great entrepreneurs they each instinctively created what I call a “Brand Model”, without which their businesses, and anybody else’s, would not be scalable.

Once you have this the rest is possible, if not always simple.  I still have a struggle sometimes driving my clients through the process of internal marketing – sharing the model, its reasoning and constraints with employees at every level and getting them behind the cause, but as John and Kip knew, empowering your employees is the vital key to growth.  The client, whose tale I opened this post with, complained at our first meeting that he was forced to micromanage because his people weren’t up to the job.  I argued that things aren’t always what they seem and that I usually find that the “people” aren’t always the problem that they seem.  “But what if they are the problem?” he asked.  “I guess you have to have a clear out” I replied.

Of course you have to have great people to have a great business, and John and Kip both underline how important it is to recruit the best, but how great they are is very much dependent on how well you manage them and again, instinctively John and Kip knew this.

A great business is built around a great brand.  Every brand is a community that all your stakeholders play a part in creating.  Again, after my experience with the client I feel the need to clarify – stakeholders are investors, suppliers, partners, employees as well as customers.   You have to ask yourself “Are these people, who I want to do business with going to want to be a part of my community?” and when you get a “yes” you then set about making them feel as welcome, engaged and comfortable as you can.

These two talk about the importance of engaging your employees and your suppliers, how vital it is to share information with your community and confirm that though there will undoubtedly be leaks as a result the advantages vastly outweigh the disadvantages.  They talk about the innovation and risk – both requisites of business growth, best quality and satisfying and delighting.  I could have filled this post with clips from the interview, but go there and read for yourself.

It didn’t take me two weeks to realise that what my client wanted was for me to paper over the cracks in his business.  He didn’t want to change it,  I doubt that he would even be flexible enough to do so and I suspect that anything I would do would be too little too late anyway.  I’m not even sure even now that he recognises how serious his situation is.

Unsurprisingly, he isn’t a client any longer.  Which is a pity, because I do love a challenge, I hate to give up on anything and I could see the glimmer of a couple of opportunities, but I doubt I would have been able to persuade him to explore them.  To quote John, or was it Kip, “Life’s short and then you are dead” so I’m off to find my next project.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Brand Model, brand name, Brand promise, branding, brands, business development, business strategy, change, community, container store, customers, employees, Full Effect, Full Efffect Marketing, honesty, internal marketing, john mackey, kip tindell, marketing, phil darby, The Full Effect Company, transparency, Uncategorized, wholefood market

Jerry Springer nails National Branding

Posted on Sunday 22 June 2008 | 1 Comment

I was watching Question Time on the BBC in the UK yesterday evening and one of the topics of conversation was the recent Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. I don’t want to get into the details of the treaty here, but basically it opens the door to the expansion of the EU.

The debate last night turned to the different attitudes of people in different countries to the EU or more specifically a central government. One of the points made was that while some people at least were happy with the idea of a central management system of some kind they maintained that the right of government as such and in particular law making should remain with the individual member states. The main reason seemed to be the belief that laws define a community and in particular nations, and I tend to agree.

Jerry Springer (I can’t imagine how he got there, but he did) who I’m being uncharacteristically generous when I say, was just about holding his own among far more eloquent and knowledgable speakers said that the individual states in the US had from many perspectives lost their identity and that the general move there and elsewhere around the world is toward a far less state-aware attitude, a point that other delegates were quick to point out to him did not apply to countries/states outside of the US. However, he was shrewd enough to identify that the real subject here is not so much national pride, but pride in community (my word not his) and “community” is equally likely to apply to any belief system, set of values or brand (again his viewpoint, my word).

Jerry was somewhat hampered by his limited vocabulary, but those who took the time, as I did, to try to work out what he was trying to say would have realised that he actually hit the nail on the head. Sadly it seemed that the rest of the forum didn’t take the time and the point was missed in one of those short embarrassed pauses that could be replaced by the phrase “what the **** is he whittering on about?”.

Jerry’s point was that though there are people who still retain pride in their nationality, this is but one of an infinite array of communities to which we as individuals may choose to belong. Communities are encapsulations of a common interest, values or opinions. Most traverse national boundaries. We can be British by birth but European, a treckie or anything else for that matter, by adoption. Lord knows, if our identities were compulsorily identified by nationality, nominated or natural, I’d be hard pushed to elect a country, I’ve lived in so many. I only remember that I started out in the UK because that’s where my mother hangs out and she’s not moved in all this time!

Happily, we don’t have to define ourselves by nationality, which defines the challenge that I frequently refer to in my on-going debate about “National Branding” and one to which the UK is sadly failing to rise. Its OK for some, but others prefer to hang their hat on a sport, or other special interest. There are communities like FaceBook or World of Warcraft, the mythical world that keeps millions of sad bastards worldwide glued to their computers for days and nights on end. For these people this is their world and how they want to be identified. This perspective is the playing field where brand communities compete for members with nations, interests, movies, music and many more delineators. You don’t even have to be an exclusive member of any one community, you might feel it takes a few communities to accurately represent your personality, interests or values and while one of these that you choose might be a country, your national brand doesn’t have to be your primary definition. We also migrate between communities as we age, as we fall victim to outside influences, as fashions change or brand change or disappoint us.

An example of this in action is the current European football championships (no its not “soccer” its European so its definitely “football) from which we Brits, because we are pants at the game, are excluded. Having paid up-front for the rights to televise the event well before England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland were sent back to their changing room, the networks had to set about garnering some interest from us. It seems it wasn’t much of a challenge. Brits have adopted competing nations and supported them through the campaign because they represent something that we can relate to – Croatia because we admire their grit in rebuilding their nation after their war, Turkey because some guy offered you fifty camels for your girlfriend last time you were on holiday there, Portugal because its where Manchester United’s Ronaldo comes from, or the Netherlands … well … because you like orange!

Once again its all about brands. Brands are present in every aspect of our lives and smart marketers (and Jerry Springer) understand that and use it to their advantage. Its called brand-building.

→ 1 Comment

Posted in BBC, brand, brand development, Brand Discovery, Brand Model, Brand promise, brands, community, Full Effect, Full Efffect Marketing, Government, Jerry Springer, marketing, National Branding, phil darby, Question Time, social groups, strategy, The Full Effect Company, Uncategorized

How five Nazi hookers and a gastric band will screw your brand.

Posted on Friday 6 June 2008 | Leave a comment

I woke up one morning earlier this week to these news stories.

  • Daytime TV presenter and fat womens’ icon Fern Britten’s gastric ring
  • Formula one’s Max Moseley and his frolic with five hookers and a Nazi uniform
  • A debate on whether we should allow people to own dangerous dogs (and what constitutes a dangerous dog anyway?)
  • The so far pathetic attempts of all concerned to combat knife crime in Britain.

(I think the last one was slipped in to add levity to the news schedule but it didn’t get as much airtime!)

I guess it won’t surprise anybody to learn that I hold views on all of these, but the two that strike me as being relevant to this blog are the first two. I’m not suggesting that Fern Britten was involved with Max’s big night out (now there’s a thought!), but the two are closely connected.

The thing is, there are different factions that would, for differing reasons, have these two high-profile personalities lynched, or at last removed from their positions. But why?

The argument for firing Fern is that she made a big show of her weight loss, explaining at every opportunity that she managed to reduce her dress size from elephantine (even though she got down only to “shire horse”) by studious exercise and healthy living and, it has been claimed, even added to her income by endorsing a diet club. On that basis, so the accusers say, she is a fraud.

Max, on the other hand denies nothing, apart from the Nazi uniform (It was probably just an old number of his Dad’s that was hanging in the wardrobe!). However, he is the senior representative of a brand (Formula-one) that is trying to maximise appeal by attracting families and new member countries and cultures where Nazis, not to mention sex, may be taboo.

The case that a few people are trying to make against both of them is that they are unable, or a least less able than before, to fulfil their professional roles now that the cats are out of their respective bags. My feeling is that if Fern wants to tie a knot in her gut or Max likes getting his rocks off with the entire Womens’ Fascist Movement good luck to them. However, there is a point here.

Both of them represent powerful brands Fern, if not a brand herself, certainly represents the brand that is the daytime TV show she co-hosts. Max, as I have already said is definitely the face, or a face of Formula-one. As we all know any organisation, be it a TV show or a motor racing franchise, depends for its success, largely upon its brand and the biggest antidote to brand development is inconsistency. So ask yourself, are the now well-publicised activities of these two consistent with the Brand Models they represent. I guess the answer has to be “No”.

Here’s the real dilemma though. Brand managers are paid to be obsessive about eliminating inconsistencies in their brand communications, but its clear that in these cases it isn’t quite that straight-forward. I can visualise the analysts right now comparing models of the cost of removing these two from their posts against the cost of the damage their recent actions have wrought. It seems that on balance, Max has, for the time being at least (although when he comes up for re-election in a couple of years I don’t reckon much for his chances) pulled it off with a vote of confidence from representatives of the franchise. Fern seems to be holding on without acknowledging anything and it seems the dogs have run off to bark at something else. So, with damage limitation having done their stuff, its now down to the brand development folks to repair the damage.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in brand, brand development, Brand Discovery, Brand Model, Brand promise, brands, communications, community, Full Effect, Full Efffect Marketing, management, marketing, phil darby, Uncategorized