Winter in America gives rise to new brand logic
Recently I was asked to contribute a sound bite to a trade press article about the impact of the global financial situation upon our business in the future, which got me thinking a bit.
Sadly, one need not look far to find first hand evidence of The US economic malaise reaching The UK, but what added to my depression was the simplistic manner in which the article responded and seemed to accept the inevitability of what politicians in The US term “big government” for the marketing community i.e. a degree of federal interference akin to an entrepreneurial straightjacket (if you are to believe Republicans)
After eight years of feckless disregard and non-regulation under the Bush regime that has led the world’s economy to the edge of a cliff, one might be forgiven for believing that a continued message of consumption must now be reigned in, but this is overly simplistic.
In the true manner of the old style marketer under fire, the article in question assumed that the only brands that might flourish were those who either occupied the territory of value engineered prudence, or those who appeared notably anti-corporate in order to take advantage of the current zeitgeist. So we were, it continued, faced with a choice – consumption (bad!) or prudence (good!) This is where I began to think that the author was missing the point a bit.
In my view the idea of asking people to just consume on the basis of a fairly shallow brand image has been living on borrowed time for a while, and the economic downturn will only provide the ripe conditions to speed it on its way. New, lean, healthy brands need logic and this alternative is certainly not all doom and gloom. Some of the most exciting and freshest brands of recent years are ones which have strong logic over relatively low brand image.
In short, brands that mean something to people on their terms – whatever else is said about them. For example iPod shows you what the product does – keeps your entire music collection in your pocket; and Paypal is almost an anti-brand, but has a hugely logical hook – buy anything anywhere in the world on the web without a credit card 100% safely. Both are have huge cultural logic and use this rather a mindless promise that it somehow makes you sexier – that bit comes later and in an almost effortless fashion once the customer knows what it can do on practical, social and emotional terms.
My feeling was that this point was rather missed in the author’s efforts to pigeon-hole a reaction to the current situation along traditional marketing lines. Tell me this. How many people when times are hard, think along the lines of brand values, propositions, straplines or anything similar? Come to think of it, when do customers ever do this? My guess is not very often.
A customer thinks about most products, brands whatever you want to call them, in a very personal sense, just as they would about a social situation, a family event or whatever else.
If you doubt this, then consider the rise of branded concepts such as “Green” or more topically “the credit crunch”. The assumption of marketers that we can craft or manufacture a message for the times in an off the cuff manner is hugely naive and assumes that the customer is largely incapable of relating to a brand in any other way than the one we make for them.
Returning to the starting point of this blog for a moment, as the US election looms, I reacquainted myself the audacity of truth, written by Barak Obama a few years ago with the intent of reminding myself of the musings of the predicted president elect, written before the race for the White House began in earnest.
His view that whilst many Americans may not distinguish between conservative and liberal, right and left – ultimately big government, little government; they do understand the difference between dogma and common sense, irresponsibility and responsibility, something lasting and something fleeting, was hugely resonant.
Obama further asserted that they were out there, waiting for the politicians to catch up, and that is ultimately how I feel about marketing these days. Now we can return to the point we left a moment ago…
If we still believe that we can hope to dictate the terms on which people relate to brands with defined notions of consumption or good, we are deluding ourselves, and in this respect I feel again that the article fell short on explanation.
Can we expect people to recognize the clunky assumptions and tired tools of marketers and their brands, or will be better to create the means for them to relate to them positively and on their own terms
The trouble is that whilst marketing in the main clings to their assumed ideas like a rock in an economic storm, they will only reap the downturn predicted of the post-free market economy and almost become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I guess that just as Obama offered, the truth lies somewhere in between, but modern marketing is no longer about brand truths as decided by a brand manager, or a weary and inward facing brand pyramid. It is about brands having a personal, almost bespoke logic that a consumer taps into. Brands that have one will flourish, ones that don’t, will be in deep cultural dire straits, and when a brand is in cultural trouble, economic trouble is never too far behind, no matter what the global economic climate.
To these ends, brands with strong logic are better placed to survive the cold climates and consumer reticence. In short, brands need to choose common sense over dogma – just as the US electorate are hopefully doing now.