Insight Categories: Brand Strategy

One of my favorite clients recently sent me a link to Private Wealth magazine. There I found a very interesting article that discusses how high-net worth (HNW) clients make choices selecting an investment advisor. Which do they rank higher, expertise or brand? Before reading the article I would have thought that while brand is important, expertise has to win out. (And this coming from a person who makes her living off of branding no less!) The authors, Russ Alan Prince and Bruce Rogers have proven me wrong. They submit that “…the ultra affluent want to work with exceptional experts. So you might conclude that expertise trumps brand. In a perfect, rational world, that would be correct. However, the world we inhabit is far from perfect and rational. In sourcing the ultra-affluent, it turns out, brand outshines expertise all the time.”

They have created an expertise/brand matrix that I think can be applied to most professional services businesses. Most professional organizations want to be in the upper right hand corner—Talented Leading Authorities: they have the expertise to do an excellent job for their clients and they will “have the opportunity to do so,” as they are well-known among their target audience.

A person who is an Incompetent Leading Authority has the brand awareness and visibility—but no skill set to accomplish the tasks. The authors make this point, “Talented Leading Authorities and Incompetent Leading Authorities are actually on the same playing field. The reason is really quite simple. When it comes to choosing professionals in complex, specialized and unfamiliar fields, the ultra-affluent and their advisors are usually incapable of making proper evaluations.”

Professionals also do not want to be in the Hidden Talent box. This translates to a person who is very experienced but has no visibility and a weak brand. They have the knowledge and skill set to meet their clients’ expectations, but no brand recognition—so they remain invisible. In situations where a Hidden Talent is matched against a Talented Leading Authority, brand will cast the deciding vote for the latter. Prince and Rogers conclude that in building an HNW practice, Leading Authorities dominate. “Incompetents are rarely successful except for the rare wealthy client or two—often relatives. Hidden Talents tend to stay hidden. Hence, the competition is among the Leading Authorities—and, as we’ve stated, they’re on equal footing.”

The Private Wealth article was clearly addressing the financial services industry. But really, it is applicable to any service professional. You can be the best thing since sliced bread, but if no one knows about you, you are toast. And we have all run into examples in every industry where we expect to see an expert only to find that the King is wearing no clothes. Unfortunately when there are no ways to get an objective assessment, consumers fall back on brand. Famous imposters will continue to steal business from the Talented Leading Authorities based on name alone; witness the success of Bernie Madoff.

I remember as a kid in the 1950s looking forward to my mom opening up a can of Del Monte fruit cup for dessert every Thursday night (there was nothing as good as picking out the grapes from the fruit cocktail). Some nights it was Del Monte brand half peaches or canned peas for dinner. In the ’50s and early ’60s canned fruit and vegetables were the food of choice and Del Monte was the most favored brand. As one of my colleagues said, “I would not have eaten Libby’s even though they had a much better jingle.”

I have not given a thought to Del Monte for years and years—I never eat canned food any more. Driving home one day last week, I heard a report about Del Monte settling a lawsuit with Barclays. And yeah, I was surprised to find out that they are still in existence.

How can a brand virtually disappear? I did a very unscientific study of 20 people of varying ages on the Del Monte brand. I asked them what products Del Monte produces and if there was any emotional reaction to the name. Almost everyone older than 45 knew the brand and had fond recollections of eating Del Monte canned food. The company was defined as “wholesome,” “family,” and “quality.” The age group from 35-45 knew the name, and most could only identify the fact that Del Monte made some kind of food product. A few said that they would never buy their products since they never buy canned foods. The adjectives used were less positive since the association with “canned” was a negative with this group. The last group 25-35 had no idea what Del Monte produces. For them the brand simply did not exist. Looking at the Del Monte website, I was surprised to find out that in addition to their canned food line, they have a large product line that geared to pets. All of these sub-brands are marketed independently and not under the Del Monte name… which I think is probably a very good thing. After all, who wants to buy canned fruit cocktail from the same group that produced canned cat food?

The Del Monte brand has become less relevant as our tastes in food have changed. In the ’50s and ’60s, convenience was king, it was still hard to ship fresh food globally, so the produce you found at the stores had to be in season. You could not get peaches from Chile in the dead of winter, so Del Monte’s canned peaches became a good substitute during the winter months. As fresh fruit and vegetables became more available and as questions regarding preservatives more numerous, canned fruits and vegetables lost favor and a mighty brand started to wane.

Strong brand strategies have to change and evolve. While Del Monte has developed a line of fresh fruit cups and puts their name on fresh fruit such as bananas, one wonders if it is too little too late. Their brand can not escape the association with “canned” products.  And so it is no surprise that the corporate giant is on the sales block.

JK Moving Services is no longer the area’s best kept secret. Fresh from a brand overhaul, the nation’s third largest independent mover is quickly gaining ramping up marketing efforts, and attracting customers preparing to move their families, their offices, and their employees. Armed with solid research, Grafik helped JK identify a distinct competitive advantage, and leverage an astonishing string of ongoing testimonials. The newly revamped brand architecture includes smart new naming conventions that highlight the mix of services, as well as platforms that promote cross-selling.

Grafik’s comprehensive program touched every aspect of the brand including a powerful brandline (What Matters Most), and a new corporate logo. We redesigned JK’s trucks and uniforms, developed a full suite of print and online sales materials, managed a significant website overhaul, and established  a robust social media presence with active Twitter and Facebook accounts, SEM, and a company blog.

With a mandate to convert prospects into clients, Grafik made a strong recommendation to transfer media dollars spent on conventional placements to online paid search and key words. We also simplified the call to action by removing the myriad phone numbers found on all their previous materials and replacing them with jkmoving.com — a change most notable on JK’s most prominent advertising presence, the moving trucks.

The company that appeared to be a local “mom and pop” moving company now feels like a national carrier of choice. Of course, the work is just beginning. Look for more great things to come from JK Moving Services.

I’ve a couple of friends who have changed their names as adults, but I must say I often find it difficult to embrace this without having some context around their reasoning. I often “forget,” or truthfully—even resist the change and call them by their former names until I know a bit more about why their old name wasn’t good enough. I find even if it’s none of my business, I still want some help adjusting.

Renaming an organization can often encounter similar challenges. Dedicated employees who have long worked for an organization in the midst of such a change, if not properly informed, might feel mislead. External audiences who have done business with a renamed organization might wonder what prompted the effort. And shareholders will, no doubt, wonder, ‘is it worth it?” But a change for the right reasons can often be a good business decision when an organization or its industry has evolved.

The Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, (AIAM) approached Grafik to rebrand their organization. Let’s start with some context. While the association members are some of the most respected and forward-thinking automobile manufacturers in the world, the association itself was often passed over by the media to weigh in on key issues that effect the industry including policies on free trade, government mandates and more. The organization also suffered from dated, but nagging perceptions that the association was comprised of “foreign” manufacturers—this, in a time when just about every manufacturer collaborates across borders. Rebranding offered the organization an opportunity to update its image and better define their voice. The new effort would also allow them to improve their communications tools to members and the public.

Another factor, the timing was right. AIAM was planning to move their headquarters from Virginia closer into DC for a stronger physical presence near Capitol Hill. This meant they would need to develop new signage and change their address on all past communications tools.

Grafik began with a series of interviews to get a pulse on the organization’s goals, communication efforts to date and marketing resources. We knew that naming might be something to consider, but needed a deeper dive to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of such an effort.

Just as important, we knew if we were going to suggest a new name it had to be memorable—something easy to say, after spending years getting lost in Washington DC’s association acronym soup. We learned that even answering the phone for the organization was at times, challenging. “Hello, this is A-I-A-M.” Or, “Hi this is Aim.” If the front desk wasn’t comfortable saying their name consistently, how could they expect others to?

While considering the name, the show had to go on. Grafik reviewed their communications tools and competitive set to compare how like-minded organizations were communicating. The website, their primary marketing tool, was difficult to navigate and failed to surface the information that defines their industry leadership, innovations and investments in the U.S. market. In tandem with our rebranding strategy Grafik began an interactive discovery process to create the next generation website with new tools to publish content and get their message out as needed.

Still considering a name change we began exploring creative execution including the logo, brand thematic and voice of the organization. We developed “Ahead of the Curve” which captured the history of leadership and innovation that the association’s members have aspired to. Then, after brewing a witches’ potion and sacrificing a designer who unwittingly stayed late at Grafik, we proposed “Global Automakers” as the new name to move forward with.

Grafik developed the new integrated identity including the redesign of the recently launched website, and we continue to consult with Global Automakers regarding future needs.

Grafik is starting off the new year with a new client in the education sector—Gulliver Schools. Gulliver is renowned for its International Baccalaureate (IB) World School Programme, Signature Academic Program offerings, and Blue Ribbon School designation. The prominent school has been providing the finest in academics, visual art and performing arts, and athletics to its student body since 1926 from its Miami campuses.

“Grafik has a strong core competency within the education sector working over the years with such notable institutions as Johns Hopkins University, George Mason University, and Strayer University,” said Chief Creative Officer, Hal Swetnam. “Engaging with Gulliver Schools to enhance its already reputable brand is a complement to our roster of current engagements with Georgetown University and DC Prep.”

According to Gulliver’s Head of School John Krutulis, Grafik was selected “for its strategic approach to Gulliver’s branding needs and strong reputation for delivering bottom line-oriented results in the education industry.” Grafik will focus its efforts in the development of cohesive messaging, as well as look and feel for the larger Gulliver brand.

Gulliver Schools is a 501 (c) (3) private, not-for-profit, independent, coeducational, nonsectarian day school with the mission of providing a superior college-preparatory education and ensuring an outstanding dynamic learning environment which recognizes and nurtures the unique talents and gifts of each student. For more information about Gulliver Schools, please visit www.gulliverschools.org.

I was sitting in the office today bitching about the fact that we were not called in on the RFP for the DC Water renaming and logo project. I have seen the new mark around town and I like it. It has presence and a strong brandline, “Water is Life.” I asked Teddi our VP of Business Development to find out which agency produced the campaign only to find out that the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority held a national competition in 2010. The Authority invited anyone in the 50 states to take part in a speculative competition for $2,000. Presumably, since the Authority had been under fire for contaminated water and asbestos, they figured this was in part a band-aid to a poor image. And, in order to save money, they started the process by opening up a public competition.

From the press releases, I have been able to figure out that there were three winners—who each were paid a princely sum of $667. And you have to look really hard to even find the designers’ names. The Water Authority drew 177 entries from all over the country! Feast your eyes!

The Authority press release is actually pretty crafty as it does not actually say that the logo was chosen from the competition—the logo was a result of “pulling together the considerable public input from our competition.” This reads to me that the Authority  had to eventually go to a professional source to get their branding done. They do not mention the name of the firm—and it is quite possible that I could be mistaken—but somehow I do not think so.

So what has happened with this rather inconsequential speculative competition? Well, 174 people who volunteered their time for the competition got nothing. Three “winners” got $667 and their names are almost hidden from view—so no publicity at all. The Authority got to pay $2000 PLUS all of the time it took to hold and publicize a competition, sort through all of the entries, scan all of the entries, hold a judging, make a poster…. etc. And, since a Washington Post report notes that they are expecting the cost of the rebranding to be over $160,000, I would bet my eye-teeth that a professional firm actually implemented the overall identity since it is done quite well. And, while I expect that it will be hard for DC Water to own their trademark since the phrase is already trademarked, (and they would have found that out that if they went with pros) the tagline and execution is done very well.

Is there a lesson in all this? Frustratingly yes. Contests for brand expressions are rarely successful since there is no backbone to a mark or logo if there is no understanding of the brand. Holding a logo contest invites pretty symbols that are rarely on point or on brand. A brand exercise for a beleaguered organization like DC Water  should have dealt with a whole host of issues besides the mark. And perhaps when they started working with a professional firm, they were asked the right questions. We’ll never know.

These contests are rarely successful for the public as the agency they entrust with spending time and money wisely often forgets to factor in the amount of time and coordination it takes to run a contest, and rarely considers what happens if the contest nets zero appropriate marks.

Speculative contests are rarely successful for the entrants—who hope that winning may be their launching pad to success. Witness how much publicity the designers actually got—both the contest winners and the firm chosen to execute—and you can see that dreams of fame are misguided.

In the end, DC Water is lucky. They evidently ended up working with a strong designer or firm that understands logo systems and they got a fresh clean look. But they could have been equally unlucky had their contest mandated that one of the entries be chosen. In that case the DC public would have had to endure another 14 years of a poorly concepted, poorly crafted mark.