2008 November | Dallas Public Relations Idea Grove

“I believe in getting into hot water; it keeps you clean.”

– G.K. Chesterton

Sometimes it’s good for brands to get into trouble — that is, for customers, and the public generally, to begin to question if a brand is what it says it is. In fact, I would argue that the more sudden and urgent the brand crisis, the better it is for the brand.

Whole Foods Market is a good example of a brand in crisis that has used its troubles as a wake-up call to shore up its reputation. When Whole Foods was forced to recall beef from its shelves in August in an E. coli outbreak, customers suddenly wondered whether its quality standards were really that much higher than other big-box grocers. It hasn’t helped that food prices have been going up across the board and the economy is in a shambles. In many consumers’ minds, Whole Foods had become “Whole Wallet.”

Since the beef crisis, Whole Foods has been working hard to prove that it is different — and not necessarily as expensive as everyone thinks. The retailer has blogged about the crisis, issued comparison shopping challenges, and reinforced its quality claims.

What if there hadn’t been a brand crisis for Whole Foods? What if the retailer had simply continued to charge high prices, had gradually lost its quality distinction in its customers’ minds, and little by little its growth slowed until, over a period of years, it began to lose market share?

Compared to this fate — which has befallen too many brands to count — a crisis that gets a company’s management moving sounds pretty good, doesn’t it?

I’ve managed my share of brand crises over the years, and with few exceptions, they’ve ended up being good for the companies involved.

As the Wall Street Journal’s Jerry Seib opined today in reference to our current economic troubles and the opportunity they present for President-elect Obama:

The thing about a crisis — and crisis doesn’t seem too strong a word for the economic mess right now — is that it creates a sense of urgency. Actions that once appeared optional suddenly seem essential. Moves that might have been made at a leisurely pace are desired instantly.

The same benefit is true for brands — particularly at Fortune 1000 companies, where the bureaucracy levels can rival those of Congress.

November 19, 2008 in Brand Strategy by sbaradell@ideagrove.com
Reason and Emotion Are Not Antagonists

“Reason and emotion are not antagonists.”

– Nathaniel Branden

Try as we might, it’s impossible for us to separate reason from emotion. There’s no such thing as following your heart instead of your head (or thinking with “the little head instead of the big one,” for that matter.) Virtually all of our decisions — business decisions, political preferences, life choices — are made based on a combination of reason and emotion, and that mixture is far too messy to ever isolate the point where one ends and the other begins.

Branding works because it plays on your emotions and your reason. It doesn’t give you a list of product benefits and hope you’ll rationally choose this product over a competitor. It goes after your whole mind — and frankly, you are powerless against its force, if it’s done well. You are powerless because, as Spock-like as you may think you are, you can never separate your brain from your feelings.

The Frame Is More Important Than the Picture

Facts don’t speak for themselves. They need framing to be understood — and that’s where the real battle for public opinion and brand preference takes place.

For example, “estate tax” and “death tax” are two terms describing the same thing. However, if you survey Americans, the majority favor the estate tax and oppose the death tax. But framing goes beyond simple wordplay. When done well, it aims directly at our greatest hopes and deepest fears — and ties these to our decisions, including purchase decisions.

The author George Lakoff says that, in the world of U.S. politics, Americans tend not to vote on issues; instead, they view the country metaphorically, as a family, and vote on the type of family they identify with — a family dominated by a strict father (the Republican party) or a nurturing mother (the Democrats). The emotional impact of these frames is enormous, and determines what facts resonate with the public.

Girly-Man Democrats and Erratic Republicans

For example, Republicans have been effective in emasculating their Democratic opponents by using images of the slightly built Michael Dukakis in a tank, or John Kerry windsurfing — images that reinforce the “softness” of the Democrats in the public’s mind. Similarly, the Obama campaign was effective in portraying John McCain as “erratic” — not the kind of strict father Americans could trust to lead them.

Until I read Lakoff’s work on frames, I wondered, as many political analysts have, why the public tends to line up with Democrats on issues ranging from abortion rights to a progressive tax system — but has generally voted for Republicans in national elections for the past 30 years. I was particularly interested since my own parents were die-hard Republicans despite supporting the Democratic position on the majority of issues.

The answer is that they supported the Republican frame.

Frames in Branding

You can’t brand your organization successfully without creating and leveraging frames — for your customers, for your investors, for your employees. There’s an old story about someone asking a janitor at NASA what he did for a living. His reply: “I’m helping to put a man on the moon!”

The facts are that he’s mopping the floors, scrubbing the bathrooms, and making minimum wage. But framed as part of a larger, inspirational mission, this emotional context is far more important than the facts.

Image source

November 14, 2008 in Brand Strategy by sbaradell@ideagrove.com
A Brand for a Company Is Like a Reputation for a Person — Except When It’s Not

“A brand for a company is like a reputation for a person.”

– Jeff Bezos

Branding is all about personification — giving human traits to things that aren’t human.

If you think about it, Nike, or Disney, or the company where you work are no more than a stack of papers filed by a lawyer somewhere. They are legal entities created specifically so that their activities are considered separate from those of the people who formed them (for liability, tax and other reasons.)

But a stack of legal papers can’t make decisions, or have a personality, or do anything but sit there. And we’ve established that the corporation is distinct from the people who created it or who run it; they can leave the company at any time. The only thing that really holds a corporation together is its shareholders — and they’re here today and gone tomorrow as well.

So really, there’s no there there — is there?

Well, yes and no.

Brands Create Continuity

You see, whenever a shareholder sells his or her stock in a company, the buyer has certain expectations of continuity. And the people the shareholders entrust to run the company are expected to maintain (and increase) the company’s value by meeting these expectations — not only in terms of sheer dollars and cents, but by having a predictable business model that shareholders can count on for the long term.

And that’s where branding comes in. Branding communicates the continuity of a company’s business model — to shareholders, to customers, to employees. It says, “This is the kind of person we are — if we were actually a person.”

So Disney is family-oriented, fun, magical. Nike is outdoorsy, rugged, adventurous. And so on and so on. To the extent a company’s products, advertising and other projections of itself support these traits, the brand has continuity — which over time, can become a company’s most valuable asset.

In this sense, it is like your reputation or mine.

Corporations as Wannabe Humans

But there’s a point at which branding is not the same as reputation. At a certain point, we must face the fact that while people actually are human, corporations are merely wannabes. This has all sorts of implications for PR — and specifically, for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programs.

I help companies with their brands for a living. I think one reason I’m good at it is that I don’t blow sunshine up people’s behinds. So here’s the deal:

Corporations are not human. And that’s a good thing, because if they were human, they would be sociopaths. This isn’t a cheap shot. A sociopath is a person who is interested only in their personal needs and desires. By definition, corporations are designed expressly to serve the interests of their shareholders — and only those interests.

ROI of CSR

Yes, CSR programs can do good. The thing to keep in mind is, these programs only exist to the extent shareholders can be convinced that the spending will ultimately boost the bottom line — like any other marketing expenditure. It’s the equivalent of doing something good so someone will see you doing it.

People are smart enough to know when someone is doing good for the right reasons — and they value these efforts far more than they value the efforts of those who do it for appearances’ sake (like corporate brands).

So what does this mean in terms of dollars? Let’s say you’re a large corporation that spends $50 million annually on CSR. Now, let’s say the public only values your spending about half as much as they do that of a grassroots organization whose motives are considered pure. Well, that means you’re spending $50 million to buy $25 million worth of good will.

Maybe you’re Exxon, and considering your reputation, this still sounds like a pretty good deal to you. Or maybe there are other places to better spend your money.

All of which is to say that a brand for a company is like a reputation for a person — except when it’s not. To keep your bearings, and hold on to your soul, in today’s corporate world, it’s important to know the difference.

Image source

November 12, 2008 in Public Relations by sbaradell@ideagrove.com
A Gentle Tongue Can Break a Bone

A ruler can be persuaded through patience,
and a gentle tongue can break a bone.

– Proverbs 22:4

I’ve never been the loud, brash, in-your-face type. As a child, I was naturally shy — to the point where I was afraid to answer the front door of our house. I was introspective … always drawing, writing, thinking.

Seems like a recipe for becoming a librarian, an actuary or a taxidermist (Norman Bates, anyone?). But instead, I ended up a newspaper reporter and, ultimately, a PR executive and spokesman for billion-dollar companies. I present to Fortune 1000 executives, speak to large audiences, and talk with classes of college students all the time.

So, did I change? Not really.

I say this to offer hope to those of you who are afraid you don’t have the “outgoing personality” you need to succeed in public relations. Frankly, the PR field has too many surface smiles and surface thinkers, and not enough going on underneath. That’s something we introverts can use to our advantage.

Introverts vs. Extroverts

Let me explain what I mean by an introvert. An introvert is not someone who can’t do well with an audience. Many of the world’s best actors, musicians and other performers are introverts. They do it because they love their work — not because they love the crowds.

An extravert starts with the love of the crowd and works backward. What do I need to do to capture their attention?

An introvert starts with the love of the work and moves outward. What do I need to do to share this work with others?

In PR, extraverts are a dime a dozen. They’re the ones who get off to fast starts in their careers, who seek out every opportunity to gladhand and namedrop, who learn a little about a lot of things and a lot of people. They spread themselves around and gauge their success by how many people they know (or appear to know.)

Introverts are the ones who actually find their employer’s or client’s business model fascinating. They take the time to study the company in depth; to understand the competition; to know what marketing strategies are working and not working in the space, and why. They’re the ones who aren’t satisfied with glib answers.

They’re also the ones who have better long-term potential to form relationships of mutual respect with journalists and other influencers — not to mention the CEOs of the companies they serve.

Share What’s Inside

Talk to your clients and the media honestly, knowledgeably and with a genuine interest in your subject matter, and you don’t have to be loud to have influence. A gentle tongue can break a bone.

The key for introverts is to recognize this and to fight through their shyness to let others know what they have to say. To borrow another proverb from the Bible, don’t hide your light under a bushel. You’ve got a lot of talent to give; you just have to know where to put it.