Category: Brands

I Love You

I know- that is a strange headline for a post on a marketing blog. Bear with me and I will explain.

I am composing these thoughts from the comfort of my home. About 30 miles up the road, life is anything but comfortable. The Nashville area has been devastated by flooding that followed more than 13 inches of rain over the weekend. The extent of the damage is jaw-dropping, and the loss and suffering experienced is difficult to imagine. The toll of economic loss and emotional distress are simply incalculable at this point.

Amid the unbelievable pictures and accounts of the flood’s impact, one comment stands out. A Facebook friend, Marcus, posted “I Love You Nashville.” As soon as I read that statement, I knew that Nashville will prevail in this ordeal. Deep rooted passion like that expressed by Marcus and undoubtedly shared by many other Nashvillians demonstrates that while there is pain and damage to overcome, their love for Nashville will inspire rebuilding that will make their city as great, if not greater, than before.

What’s the connection to marketing? Marcus’ comment led me to ask myself how many students would say the same thing about my organization, Middle Tennessee State University? Would your customers say the same thing about your company? About you? Would employees in your organization say “I love you” to their employer? Would residents of the community where you do business say it?

Customers can develop feelings of attachment, commitment, and yes, love for your brands and company. They purchase your products loyally, eagerly tell others about you, and stick with you during tough times. What are you doing to build loving relationships with your customers? Hopefully, you will never have to endure a catastrophic event like a flood to find out which of your customers love you. And, if they experience a similar devastating experience, it is your opportunity to tell your customers “I love you.” It has been encouraging to see several businesses in the Nashville area take this step already.

Brett Favre on Branding

I have a confession to make: I believe I am falling under the spell of Brett Favre. I have resisted the urge for years, but I have finally succumbed to his magical powers. As I watched the nearly 40-year-old quarterback carve up his former team, the Green Bay Packers, I thought about the qualities Favre exudes. Brett Favre’s mystique offers lessons that can be applied to branding, whether it is personal branding or managing a product brand. Here are four characteristics (would you expect any other number?) of Favre’s personal brand that any brand would benefit from possessing:

1. Distinctive – There are other quarterbacks, some of whom are very good, but there is only one QB with Favre’s style. He is not different for the sake of being different (like Cincinnati Bengals WR Chad Ocho Cinco), but he is genuinely different. Relevant difference is a key to winning in business and in life.

2. Consistent – Favre’s performance level has not changed dramatically over the years. His style of play is basically the same, and he shows up to play regardless of pain or injury. Brands must be consistent, too. When one encounters your brand, there should be no question about your identity and values.

3. Passionate – Favre cares deeply about what he does. Maybe that is one reason why he has had difficulty retiring from the game. He digs down and delivered some of his greatest performances when in the spotlight as he was against the Packers on Monday Night Football. Brands with passion resonate with consumers and the public. Authentic passion is noticeable; pretending to be passionate is not necessary!

4. Fun – Why is this guy smiling on the field when there are 11 people trying to hit him and hit him hard? He’s having fun at what he is doing. While carrying out 1-3, never lose sight of why you are doing what you are doing. What’s your purpose? What’s the mission you have set for the organization or yourself?

Thanks, Brett for the branding lesson. Now, if we could only get John Madden’s take on what we can learn about branding from Brett Favre!

GM: Reinvention or Repeat of Failure?

GM turns the page to a new chapter in its 100+ year history today. The bow of of “Reinvention” brings the promise of a new GM. The “Reinvention” commercial includes a prompt to visit a web site detailing the plans of the new GM (http://www.gmreinvention.com). Given what we have seen from the old GM over the last 10-15 years, our expectations should be rather low.

An interesting statement from the commercial is “There was a time when eight different brands made sense.” Oh really? When was that time? A significant problem GM had for years was too many brands. It has not been a problem only recently; the glut of brands led to resource wars within the company. The result was that all brands suffered. GM’s problems are hardly new. It should not have taken being forced into filing bankruptcy protection to bring about radical changes at GM.

A major reason GM was reluctant to declare bankruptcy was it was concerned the effect it would have on customer confidence in the company. Would people be willing to buy cars from a company that had filed for bankruptcy? Months of negative press about GM had the same effect. The company could have been well on its way to making a new GM if it had faced realities sooner. Now, many people are skeptical that GM can reinvent itself given that it squandered its rich heritage over the last two decades with inaction and infighting.

Link: Ad Age – “New Ad Introduces Consumers to ‘New GM'”

Saturn: The End of a Great Brand Experiment

I was disheartened to hear General Motors plans to phase out the Saturn brand as part of its fight for survival. Saturn, along with Saab and Hummer, will be phased out in 2009. These brands have been on the chopping block since GM’s financial troubles came to a head last year. In addition, the Pontiac brand will be phased out in 2010 as well as major reductions in employee headcount and dealerships.

Of all the announcements made by GM President and CEO Fritz Henderson today, elimination of Saturn is particularly sad from a marketing standpoint. Saturn was launched in the early 1990s with the promise of a new era within GM. Even the ad slogan supported the notion: “A different kind of car, a different kind of company.” Consumer response to Saturn was very strong in the early years. Then, consumer preferences shifted toward larger vehicles and SUVs. Saturn was ill positioned to meet that trend with its focus on economy cars.

Saturn also suffered from a lack of resource support within GM as well as bad managerial decision making. One role for Saturn was supposed to be to serve as an experimental brand. For example, the EV1 electric car that Saturn tested in the mid 1990s would have put GM ahead of competitors in the race to offer alternative fuel vehicles. The EV1 was tested in California, and the company eventually destroyed all of the vehicles once their leases expired rather than move forward with production.

I own two Saturns and have followed the brand closely for more than 10 years while researching it for a case study I prepared and subsequently updated for marketing textbooks. From a brand building standpoint, GM did many things right to get Saturn off the ground. GM’s Henderson made an interesting statement at the press conference announcing the changes saying “brands are good for offense.” The problem is GM is in defensive mode. The company is resizing itself to reflect the reality of a smaller U.S. auto market. Saturn will be missed… at least by this owner.