That question arises for me when I periodically check out a reality show. The people and the places in these series are apparently "real." They are not actors are they? Do the producers for shows like Jersey Shore put these "real" people up to the antics that we see them engaged in and do the directors encourage them to use fowl language in every sentence? My guess is that in most cases the answer to these questions is yes.
If that is the case, are these reality shows authentic? Being "real" for people in their everyday lives could dilute the show's brand. For example, if Pauly D is shown going to the grocery store that might seem to be more authentic than showing him clubbing with his pals. Is the shows brand more important and authentic or is the real people brand more important and authentic?
When the organization/MTV understands its mission and core values and those align with the employees/The Situation and the customers/viewers like you and me, then the reality show is authentic. That results in brand champions and a sustainable brand. Buzz and hype result in short-term wins and brand inhibition.
A few years ago I had the pleasure of presenting a brand strategy workshop at a UCDA conference in Toronto. One of the participants in that session was Christine Prado, Art Director at Clemson University. During that session I got to know Christine and have been impressed with the work she does at Clemson ever since. Her leadership skills have now landed her as the President of UCDA. One of my favorite organizations on the planet, by the way. Today, Christine takes time out of her busy schedule to share her views on what it means to be a brand champion for one of her favorite brands, Idea Paint.
"I was looking for a
solution to painting our basement rec room after moving earlier this summer.
The room needed to be a place to unwind and have fun, but chalkboard paint
would be far too dusty. For fun, I googled dry erase paint. Ideapaint.com
popped up. It was a beautiful site, with clear instructions and thoughts about
how it could be used.
"The cost of the paint
is breathtaking. Take a gallon of premium paint you’d buy at your local
hardware store, make it a quart and add a zero to it. Still, the site made the
paint look so much fun that I couldn’t resist. I ordered two quarts.
Immediately, I got an auto-response. But this was not your ordinary
auto-response. Instead of coming from customerservice@ideapaint.com
or donotreply@ideapaint.com or
any of the ordinary places, it came from awesomeness@ideapaint.com. I felt
brilliant for ordering it.
"Several days later, all
with appropriate email updates from Idea Paint, I got my package. It came in
two beautifully designed boxes. I was to open a can of 'this' with the enclosed
paint opening key that you’d pay $3 for at your local hardware story, pour that
into a can of 'that', stir with the marked 'stick.' All this was to happen only
after following the prescribed directions, printed on clearly worded
instructions that turned into a poster you could hang up, warning you to let
the paint cure before you attempted to draw on it.
"I put the paint up
immediately, having done all the prep work prior to receiving the paint.
Several days later, I got an email from a personal representative of Idea
Paint. He sent me the directions again, along with video instructions on
applying the paint. I responded that I had already completed the work and it
seemed to be just fine and included a few shots. He wrote back, saying it
looked great.
"I’m just blown away by
the personal touch and the well-thought out design of the whole product. And I
can’t wait to draw on it. A few more days and we can dig in."
Christine Prado
Art Director, ClemsonUniversity
President, UCDA
Christine, thanks so much for sharing your experience. Today you and Idea Paint are the Brand Champions of the Day!
I now have a new favorite book on brands and branding, Delivering Happiness by Zappos CEO, Tony Hsieh. I was first introduced to Zappos a few years ago by one of my colleagues. He raved about the customer service experience delivered by the online shoe company, Zappos. Like any good brand consultant I did my homework and realized that this company was very much in alignment with what we profess to our clients, especially education brands. Last year I featured Tony Hsieh as a Brand Champion of the Day.
The Zappos brand is built on the brand promise of delivering happiness, a set of 10 core values and a culture centered on customer service. I am an advocate of building sustainable brands based on mission, core values and stakeholder engagement. So when I see a company that lives and breathes a similar philosophy I am a champion of their brand. I wanted to learn more, so I read Tony's book.
If you want to read a about best practice in brand building, and the art and science of how to recruit and retain brand champions, I encourage you to read Delivering Happiness. After all, isn't that what life and business is all about?
I am not sure if your local newspaper has engaged in using wrap around print ads on the front page or not, but mine has and it is annoying. This is an example of what Seth Godin would describe as interruption marketing. I don't know about you, but I want to see what the main headline is on the front page, not an ad for a sale on top sirloin steaks at the local supermarket.
A few days ago the ad was for a special section on education. Even as an education brand consultant and someone who is the target audience for this ad, I do not want to see this on the front page and interrupting my line of sight and my expectations when I pick up the paper. In the case of this ad, I think it dilutes the brand of the school sponsoring the ad and the newspaper brand.
As Seth Godin says, we embrace permission marketing, we do not embrace interruption marketing. Wrap around ads look and feel very 20th century. No wonder people are not buying newspapers anymore and many are going away. Where is the 21st century branding. I guess some newspapers are so desperate for ad revenue, they will do anything. Including diluting their own brand to make a quick buck. This approach does not do much for recruiting and retaining brand champions.
Well it is that season again, when most political candidates and their non-brand strategy advisers sink to the depths of mud-slinging ads. Every election campaign candidates say they will no lower themselves to slamming their opponent(s) with television ads that border on slander. And every campaign witnesses the vast majority of candidates doing just what they said they would not.
When are they going to learn that the people who they want to influence, you and I, hate this stuff? When are they going to learn that they dilute their own brand, rather than their opponent's brand by listening to Mad Men and Women who create this advertising junk? When are politicians going to learn that this approach is the least effective way to recruit and retain brand champions?
I think the problem is that candidates and their inner circle think in terms of a short-term campaign, while we voters are expecting a long-term brand strategy. The same problem that most organizations face. It is called brand alignment folks. Figure it out!
I was saddened to learn that longtime journalist and broadcaster, Daniel Schorr had passed. I looked forward to his insights on Weekend Edition and Week in Review on NPR. No matter the topic, how over worked it might be or the sensitivity of the situation, one could always rely on Mr. Schorr to provide a unique perspective and learn from his wisdom.
With degrees in history and communications management, I found Schorr to be someone that I could relate to in both of those arenas. His experience and longevity as a journalist is unmatched by most. I first became fan during his work with CBS and later CNN and NPR. I was a champion of the Schorr brand. To me his brand represented respect, professionalism, independence and knowledge.
For all he contributed to our world, Daniel Schorr is the Brand Champion of the Day!
Just like advertising campaigns, taglines and logos, too often spokespersons and mascots are developed in a vacuum. They are created by an in-house team and perhaps an advertising agency with little regard for the organization's brand, its mission, core values and stakeholder engagement. As a result spokespersons and mascots are out of alignment with the brand and its brand champions. The outcome usually does not meet or exceed quantifiable expectations.
There are exceptions. I think the Verizon guy and the Progressive gal are strong associations with sustainable brands. Even though he has got a great deal of viral buzz, my jury is still out on Old Spice dude. The best example that I can think of for brand alignment and sustainability is the Energizer Bunny. It keeps going and going. Unlike other brands, Energizer has not got caught up in the mascot of the day trap. They know who they are and what they stand for. Talk about your long lasting brand champion!
What comes to mind for you in terms of best and worst case spokespersons and mascots?
One of my all time favorite television programs, Mad Men, returns tomorrow evening for its fourth season on AMC. I look forward to seeing the latest complexities that these 20th century advertising executives are tangled up in this year. Led by dapper Dan Draper, these men and a few women really are nuts.
Not just because of their personalities, but because of what they advocate. Big ad campaigns with big budgets. Much of the reason people in the 21st century do not like advertising and think it lacks authenticity is because of the advertising agency model that was established by people like the Mad Men.
As a brand consultant I help organizations understand that if they embrace a model based on mission, core values and stakeholder engagement, they brand is much more likely to be sustainable. If on the other hand, they prefer to limit their view to a Mad Men model then it will be just another marketing scheme.
The former allows you to recruit and retain brand champions. The latter allows you to spend a lot of money. Stay tuned!
Someone is probably saying, "USC? You have got to be kidding me. After all that mess!" Yes, USC. I think the move that they made this week naming Pat Haden as their new athletic director is one that enhances theie brand. Too often institutions of higher learning in the States, especially those with winning sport programs, allow themselves to be defined by athletics, not academics. This is as much as academic move as it is an athletic move, and I applaud it.
As you may know, Pat Haden played quarterback for the Trojans and then for the LA Rams. He has since been a respected college football announcer for NBC Sports. What you might not know is that Haden was a Rhodes Scholar. Not too many quarterbacks or athletic directors can make that claim. Not many brand bloggers can either. I have always thought of Haden first as a scholar and second as a quarterback.
Perhaps USC is thinking the same thing. It is refreshing to see an institution of higher learning rediscover their mission and core values. I have no doubt that Haden will take the higher education brand to a new level. Today he is the Brand Champion of the Day.
Next week at the monthly gathering of the Brand Cafe in Denver participants will discuss (perhaps debate) the differences in building a sustainable brand strategy for non-profit and for-profit organizations. Many of our attendees are consultants like me who work with both types of organizations. Other participants come for the non-profit world and some from the for-profit world.
It will be interesting to compare and contrast experiences and perceptions. I believe that whether you work with or for either, the process of developing a sustainable brand should always be based on mission, core values and stakeholder engagement. My experience tells me that both entities want this, but that non-profits are more mission driven, while for-profits are like their name says, more profit driven.
I believe that both non-profits and for-profits have the same ability to recruit and retain brand champions. What do you think?
