’

« Felix Frankfurter on semantics | Main | Russell Lynes on insults »

Unknown on giving advice

"Be careful of giving advice. The wise don’t need it, and the fools won’t heed it."

Okay, here it is. MY definition of brand. Are you ready for it? Are you prepared to blog battle me over it? I really hope not. ;)

A brand is the expectation of someone or something delivering a certain feeling by way of an experience.

My thinking is more in line with my friend Jennifer Rice over at BrandShift than with Chris at Marketonomy. I agree with Jennifer that brand "is an idea." But what kind of idea? After all, the moon is an idea.

The new moon, of no importance lingers behind as the yellow sun glares and is gone beyond the sea's edge; earth smokes blue; the new moon, in cool height above the blushes, brings a fresh fragrance of heaven to our senses.  - D.H. Lawrence

Until someone actually starts selling trips to the moon, to me the moon is not a brand.  I'm interested in the economics of the word "brand." Why do people exchange their money and/or time for an idea - be it a product, service, place or person?

The rationale for MY definition is simply that people expect something in return for exchanging their money and/or time and attention. And since we are emotional creatures by nature (Don't believe me? Read some work in behavioral economics.), that something is a feeling.

I don't care if it's B-to-B, B-to-C, C-to-C or XYZ, there is always an underlying feeling that drives each purchase decision. Therefore, the impetus for all business leaders (not just marketing) is to viscerally understand that expected feeling, and work diligently to align every single word and act around it.

If you:

  1. Understand the feelings desired by your audience (and remember, sometimes they don't fully understand them);
  2. Communicate those feelings such that they expect it from you and only you; and
  3. Deliver those expected feelings via an experience

you win . . . temporarily. Because people's desires and expectations are rapidly evolving due to changes in marketplace offerings, media exposure and new technologies.

Okay, so that's the short version. The whole enchilada is in my new book. Now . . . what do you think?

Posted April 20, 2005
Email this post

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c684b53ef00d8345d49a269e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Unknown on giving advice:

» What's with this branding crap, anyway? from Local Small Business Marketing S.T.A.K.S.
When I was a kid, there were a handful of misguided entrepreneurs in my neighborhood. My mom called 'em "no good drug dealing scum" ... but that's not important for this story. What is important is how those drug dealers remind me of "The Branders.... [Read More]

Tracked on Apr 21, 2005 6:41:20 AM

Comments

fine definition.
We have no objections, Your Honour.

seems to work: brand is…, brand-management is…, brand positioning is…
brand extension is…, branding is… …

…
it shows that you have got some product-design background.
no objections from this side of the atlantic.
///

questions:
1. has anybody here got an idea how marketing is taught these days in US business schools? i have n’t.
how is the MBA of 2005/2006 thinking? would like to know…
2. has anybody got some insight (studies/research) on organizational consequences/changes following the brand paradigm?... structures…processes…product-marketing vs brand-marketing etc.
“aesthetical action of organizations” – are there any studies out? would love to
know…

statement:
thanks, tom.

Posted by: jens | April 20, 2005 at 07:59 AM

I might be able to provide some insight into your questions Jens. And no need to refer to me as Your Honour. How 'bout Blog Master Tom? ;) Sounds more hip.

And yes . . . I was an art major before switching to economics. I also have an I.D. design award from a prior stint as a high tech entrepreneur years ago. So my sensibilities are conditioned by my experience, just like everyone else. As Nietzsche pointed out: a man has no ears for which experience has given him no access.

Most US business schools are stuck in the 50's as well. Simply take a look at the course reading requirements: Kotler, Porter, et al.

As far as organizational consequences of a shift in brand paradigm? I doubt it exists. Most innovation comes from industry outsiders with a clear view of customer desires, therefore no shift in perception is required. In fact, the word "brand" isn't a distinction for them. It *is* them.

Thanks for staying in touch.

Posted by: Tom Asacker | April 20, 2005 at 09:00 AM

Tom,

Great post, great definition. I wrote about it (with my own comments) on my blog, and wanted to leave a comment here, too. I'm a big fan of your writing. Keep it up. :-)

Michael

Posted by: Michael Cage | April 21, 2005 at 05:44 AM

I've been thinking about your definition for a day now. My initial thought was "Perfect!", and I posted a link to this article from my site.

Twentyfour hours later, my estimation for your defintion has deepened. I'm in the process of reading a book called "On Intelligence" by Jeff Hawkings (the guy who, amongst other things, invented the Palm Pilot). He proposes a new way of understanding how the brain works. Everything we experience, he says, is based on models we hold in our memory.

Your definition works perfectly in his model. I highly recommend his book if you're interested in knowing the neuroscience that may be behind our relationships with brands.

Posted by: Peter Flaschner | April 21, 2005 at 09:19 AM

hi.

i also like what peter writes on his blog about the jeff hawkings's book - not really new... sociology/philosophy and personal experience also tells you the same... still, it is great to find more evidence.

and, yes, design is first of all about creating a consistent experience.
and "brand-management" - in tom's definition would be: brand-management is creating the experiences that create a certain feeling that is corresponding with certain expectations. (somehow like this...:))

the point i am trying to make:
if we say, classical marketing has lost its appeal - and if we now - as we are doing it here - go in favour of a more design-rooted definition of a brand, where it would need the abilities of a designer /// REDUCING COMPLEXITY - MAKING ENDS MEET - CREATING WHOLISTIC EXPERIENCES - OR CREATING WHATEVER EXPERIENCES... CONSCIOUSLY!!!! - AND WITH AN EYE FOR THE OVERALL APPEARANCE...
...then brand-management becomes something like brand-orchestration and it needs a conductor (weak metaphor - nothing new either - nevertheless...)... HELP APPRECIATED!!!
...

the point i am trying to make (2): how do we sell this to our more conventional business thinkers?

perhaps like this (as buisness is strictly about "buying/producing things cheap and selling them expensive"):

"one half of your company is working on reducing costs, the other half of your company is working on creating added value.
OUR service - brand-...(fill in!) - works on both sides.

by streamlining your activities..."

AND AT THIS POINT I AM LOSING IT FOR THE MOMENT.


CAN SOMEONE TAKE OVER?
come on, jump in!


SIMPLE words appreciated...
:)

Posted by: jens | April 25, 2005 at 05:52 AM

How is brand managed

Posted by: sefa | November 27, 2008 at 04:39 AM

Post a comment