The B2B Brand Debate

.co – dependency: Should You Rely on the Next Domain Craze? Part II

Kristy Yamamoto — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 23:30:44 +0000

Last week, we talked about the introduction of the.co domain and the failure of previously introduced domains (like .biz). The real question is: why should you and your business take .co seriously?

GoDaddy.com is pushing the new .co hard – the domain registrant is trying to make .co sexy – or at least as attractive as a .com domain. And GoDaddy.com is not the only company that believes the new suffix will last:

According to the .co registry operator (.CO Internet SAS), Overstock bought the new website (and “related” sites) for $350,000. That coupled with GoDaddy’s Super Bowl commercial mean that two major online players are betting big bucks that .co will catch on. How does that affect your company?

Overstock calls their new website an “investment in the future.” They recognize it as an extension of their brand, which has become known as “The O.” They are using the URL as a way to proactively reinforce their identity. Additionally, Overstock’s tactical reasoning behind the shortened site is that with the rising use of smart phones, a short web address is easier to type on a touch screen. O.co will be used simply as a shortcut directing traffic to the original website.

Although we can’t recommend a hefty website purchase like Overstock’s, there are much, much cheaper ways to make sure your brand is protected online.

As with any online presence, your number one priority should be to protect your intangible capital: your reputation, your trademarks, your brand. Right now, buying “yourcompany.co” is a cheap and easy way to do so. It’s a proactive way to be on the defense and offense. Not only does an additional URL reinforce your identity and prepare you in case .co does catch on, but it protects you from someone else using it against you. You could potentially find yourself in trouble if someone else buys your web address at a .co name and refuses to sell for a reasonable price – or worse, a competitor or disgruntled employee could use it to post negative messages about your company.

The short .co has the potential to catch on fairly quickly – especially with the backing of two large consumer brands like GoDaddy and Overstock. What’s our stand? Be prepared – better to be an early adopter than completely out of luck.

What do you think? Will you buy any .co domain names or take your chances?

.co – dependency: Should You Rely on the Next Domain Craze? Part I

Kristy Yamamoto — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:39:10 +0000

If you watched the Super Bowl last week, you probably remember this commercial from GoDaddy.com:

Although that probably left you reflecting on the wonders of plastic surgery, the real question you should be asking is this: What does .co mean for my business?

The .co domains have been on sale since the summer of 2010, but the release happened quietly and without much attention. This memorable commercial is a clear attempt to bring .co to the forefront.

This is not the first time a new domain system has been released. Remember .biz? Introduced in 2001, .biz (short for “business”) is restricted to, obviously, businesses. But it never really caught on. Today, a company that uses .biz for their primary web address is perceived as small, suspicious, and inexperienced – would you type your credit card number in to a .biz site? I wouldn’t either. The assumption is that a .biz company is less legitimate than a stronger .com-endorsed firm. Today, companies prefer to use a .com name, even if it means spending thousands of dollars to purchase the right web address.

What went wrong with .biz? Part of the issue could have been the timing. In the year 2000, the web had not reached the critical mass it is at today. URL availability hardly played a role for business decisions. Although in 2001, the web was already exploding (think dot-com bubble), many companies operating outside of the B2C arena did not fully embrace the web – they certainly did not foresee the make-or-break significance the internet would have in the future of business. An alternate domain was not needed at the time as there was still a fair amount of online real-estate available in the .com realm.

The original failure of .biz has tinged any chance of success today. People generally prefer the familiarity of a .com, or the specificity behind a .org (usually for non-profits) and .edu (educational institutions). Other domains have been introduced and also failed to make a splash. .tv also appeared in the early 2000s – although it originally fell flat, it is beginning to gain popularity among entertainment and online television sites.

What do you think? Why did .biz fail? Did it fail at all?

Next week, we’ll talk about what .co means to your business.

Challenger Branding

Ray Baird — Tue, 08 Feb 2011 22:32:59 +0000

It’s the concept of using disruptive strategy and creative concepts to fight against the status quo and mammoth brands. Basically it’s how to take over the number-one Brand Position. That was the subject of our Presentation at the 2011 Corporate Image and Branding Conference.

Every once in a while, we run into a company that’s created a product, idea or service that truly has the ability to turn the market upside down. Enter Pegasystems. One of the fastest-growing software companies in the industry. Founded by Alan Trefler, one of the smartest CEO’s I’ve ever worked with (at 19 years old he was the world’s chess champion). His vision and idea was to change the way companies program business software—actually his big idea was to eliminate the need for software coding by IT—saving companies millions of dollars by automating the process. Something that would put companies like Oracle and SAP on notice. The idea would put businesses back in control of their destinies and rival the competitive set. So what was the challenge?

Like most technical companies, branding is not their gig. It’s not in their DNA. So they resort to speaking in industry jargon . Enter RiechesBaird. Working with the Chief Marketing Officer, Grant Johnson, we created a brand position, creative expression and language to re-energize the brand and differentiate Pegasystems from the competition. The idea of “Transforming the way business works” was at the heart of our “Challenger Brand” concept and theme that promised to drive change in the marketplace. The brand strategy has been integrated into all communications and is now hitting the street.

Challenger branding is a wonderful concept and powerful way to reshape a business, change an industry and break from convention. It’s also one of the strongest ways to build a brand. The only caution being, you’d better have the goods. Making a promise of this magnitude must be delivered upon or you are toast.

If you’d like to study the concept, check out the book, Eating the Big Fish by Adam Morgan. It’s chock full of outstanding “Challenger Brand” examples. If you’d like to see or discuss our philosophy, or see the Pegasytems work, get in touch. So, is Challenger Branding right for you? Let us know what you think.

Live From New York!

Ray Baird — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 23:13:51 +0000

By Ray Baird

While the snow is falling on the streets, I am tucked inside the Westin New York at Times Square learning and sharing corporate branding ideas with the brightest minds in the field at the 2011 Corporate Image and Branding Conference. I am bringing Orange County along for the ride with blog posts from the event at www.OCMetro.com.

Some of the biggest brands and best branding minds have come together to share stories, ideas and best practices. Companies like IBM, Toyota and PNC Bank are in attendance, just to name a few.

To start the day, I attended a presentation titled “Survival of the Fittest” by Thomas O’Toole, United Airlines Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer. He detailed the critical importance of corporate identity amongst the emergence of social media. O’Toole spoke about importance of managing the corporate brand, but admitted that controlling the brand in the new era of social media is nearly impossible. Guiding the brand, being consistent and being proactive is top of mind, and integration is critical. Transparency is everything. Check out more of his insights here.

Internal branding and working with employees to improve the brand experience are hot topics at this year’s conference. Kimberley-Clark and 3M senior executives shared some thoughts on strategy, buy-in and the endless journey of improving the brand experience. Read more of their ideas here.

Well, it’s my turn to take the stage for RiechesBaird’s Challenger Brand presentation. More on that a bit later.

Good Branding Gone Bad

Ray Baird — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:05:53 +0000

The recent news about Motorola splitting the company is a great example of good branding gone bad. Smart brand strategy, brand architecture and brand positioning are supposed to clarify and simplify a corporation’s brand, not complicate it. More importantly, it’s supposed to give an organization a unique and defendable single-minded proposition that clearly differentiates it amongst the consideration set–that’s corporate branding.

From my point of view, somewhere along the way somebody let the business structure get in the way of the corporate brand and the possibilities of its future. Motorola is a well-known company with outstanding innovation, but this new brand strategy does not playing to their strengths or investment. In fact, if you visit the Motorola website you’ll quickly notice two different colored logos. Why is this necessary? They share the same name?

Secondly, you’ll quickly notice sub-divisional titles of Mobility and Solutions. At this point things are already confusing and only a detailed explanation can help, which is not a good communication path. Finally, after entering the mobility site, you discover sub navigation of “Business” and “Solutions”. But wait a minute—I thought “Solutions” another site? Confused yet?

I do like the photography and design of the site, but that’s about where the positives end. What does this say about the Motorola corporate brand strategy, which is critical to long-lasting differentiation.

My counsel would be to take a page out of Cisco’s’ play book and roll up these divisions underneath a well-thought-out “Inspirational” brand strategy. Be a branded house. Invest in one brand, manage one brand, and do not let business complexity get in the way of brand clarity.

But that’s just my opinion, what’s yours.

Avoiding A Holiday Card-tastrophe

Kristy Yamamoto — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 22:25:24 +0000

Every year, companies spend thousands of dollars on company holiday cards and gifts. While company holiday cards are a fun, festive gesture, it’s important to remember that a consistent brand identity is important with all touch points your company has with the outside world, including holiday cards. If you are not viewing your corporate holiday cards as a seasonal ad, you are missing a great opportunity to enforce corporate branding, and you even risk diluting a strong brand strategy with inconsistent messaging.

How do you ensure that your holiday money is being spent effectively and is reinforcing your brand image in the market?

WHO CARES? WHY NOT JUST SEND A CARD?

Of course – sending a card is primarily a fun, thoughtful gesture. At the same time, you want that gesture to build brand loyalty and not forgotten in the shuffle of the season.

What happens when you send a card? You hope that someone will open it, enjoy it, and take note of who it’s from. If it’s a physical card, you hope that they’ll display it on their desk or at reception for all visitors to see and enjoy. But at the very least, you hope they open it and spend a second or two to look at it before it gets trashed. In any case, your goal as the sender of that card should be to make sure that everyone knows who it’s from as quickly as possible. Whether it’s a split second on a computer screen or a month on a reception desk, that card represents your corporate brand to the client.

As a representation of your firm, your holiday card spends precious time in front of your clients and prospects. Just like any marketing communication like an ad, business card, etc., your company holiday card should match your overall brand personality. Whether you are sending the card as a season’s greeting or a personal “thank you” for a year of successful business, your card needs to resonate with the brand strategies you’ve worked so hard to build.

A boring card that will not be remembered is a waste of money. The worst possible scenario is a card that is incongruent with your brand – a card that does not match your brand identity will confuse your clients and can potentially erode your brand equity.

Have you received a really impressive holiday card and had no idea who it was from until you looked at the envelope or “From” line? If that nice card didn’t make an impact, the money could probably have been better spent elsewhere. Or have you ever gotten a generic card with a stamped signature from a close friend or client? Did you think twice before throwing it away? Or worse, were you hurt that they didn’t take the time to sign it or write a personal note?

The impact of a company holiday card should not be underestimated – that’s our stance. How do you express your brand during the holiday season?

The ABCs of Corporate Branding, Letters T-Z

Guest Blogger — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 22:19:00 +0000

The ABCs of Branding

Throughout the years we’ve come across many definitions for terms akin to the world of branding. Too often the explanation is overly complex or contradictory, which leads to confounded and cynical clients. So we decided to take a crack at putting together the best definitions for common branding terms, especially as it pertains to corporate branding.

B2BBrandDebate.com is posting these branding definitions to stir conversation. Your insightful feedback is strongly encouraged. After all, this blog is about debating brand strategy and these definitions serve as the core of our practice. So send in your approvals, contradictions and additions to the ABCs of Branding.

So far we have covered the letters A and B, the letter C, D through I, L through P and R and S. In our final statement we review the letters T through Z.

Tactic
A specific marketing activity, one of many, initiated to help achieve a strategy.

Tagline
A line of text attached to a corporate signature that helps to provide category specificity to a business (Xerox – The Document Company) or provide dimension to a brand relative to its positioning (Avis – We Try Harder) or its vision (Safeway – Ingredients For Life).

Tone and Manner
The written or aural characteristics a communications piece must have to effectively reflect a brand’s personality.

Trademark
A trademark law term for a registered mark that is applied to products only.

Value Chain Analysis
Narrowly viewed for our purposes, this is a consulting tool used to evaluate the activities of a brand from production to consumption. It is used to determine the branding implications of these activities, how the brand is being used, and where improvements can be made to better communicate the brand to its audience. In larger contexts, it is the evaluation of all steps in a manufacturing to sales process to determine where improvements can be made to create value for customers.

Value Proposition
This is the accumulated benefits (functional, emotional, self-expressive) a brand communicates or needs to communicate to develop a strong and sustainable customer relationship.

Vision is realized through Mission, Strategy, Objectives and Goals.

Vision
A company’s declared reason for being – why it exists, an ideal, often without a time. While all companies have a responsibility to create value for their shareholders, increasing shareholder value is not a vision; it is an Objective. The best companies, those that sustain their market prominence in turbulent times, all communicate a compelling Vision to the marketplace. Vision is realized through Mission, Strategy, Objectives and Goals.

Visual Audit
A narrower focused analysis than a Communications Audit centered only on the visual components of a company’s or its competitors’ brand or corporate identity.

Visual Identity
A term used to refer to only the graphic elements of a brand (name, logotype, symbol, colors). Sometimes used interchangeably with Corporate Identity or Brand Identity (compare to these terms).

Wordmark
A hybrid cross between a logotype and a symbol. It is a logotype that has a graphic device interwoven within it (eg, Hyatt, Gap, Linksys, etc).

Namedroppings.com Drops Hammer On Motorola

Guest Blogger — Tue, 30 Nov 2010 23:34:44 +0000

Not sure if you have heard but come 2011 Motorola will officially have a split personality. Fresh off the heels of the first quarterly report of increased sales in four years the timing is interesting to say the least. The decision itself, to become a two-headed brand, was well debated by Alan Brew in his post Two Motorolas, one huge branding mistake. So while the masses recover from the New Year’s Eve festivities, the maker of mobile phones and two-radios will become known as Motorola Mobility and Motorola Solutions.

Motorola's brand is about to be divided in two, but only one is likely to survive.

Brew makes a lot of great points about Motorola’s inability to truly comprehend the importance of branding. He states, “Brands have always been about product; Motorola is just a company name.” Brew also goes as far as to predict one of these new brands will survive and one will falter. Hard to argue against his insights. So, rather than pile on, we’ll make a bold prediction.

And the winner is…Motorola Mobility. Why? Well, ultimately a brand like Motorola will thrive through the prominence of its products. While bar-code scanners and two-way radios are excellent items to produce they will pale in comparison with the recognition around Motorola phones and set-top boxes.

That’s our stance on this debate? What’s yours?

The ABCs of Corporate Branding, Letters R-S

Guest Blogger — Mon, 29 Nov 2010 23:30:30 +0000

The ABCs of Branding

Throughout the years we’ve come across many definitions for terms akin to the world or branding. Too often the explanation is overly complex or contradictory, which leads to confounded and cynical clients. So we decided to take a crack at putting together the best definitions for common branding terms, especially as it pertains to corporate branding.

So far we have covered the letters A and B, the letter C, D through I and l through P. This time we review the letters R and S.

Research
Qualitative and/or quantitative data on branding or identity issues that is gathered and analyzed to validate or steer a positioning and/or creative direction.

Revitalization (Brand)
The process of making a brand relevant to its current audiences by reassessing a brand’s positioning and the equity of its brand identity elements and modifying or changing each where necessary.

Segmentation
The practice of separating potential or existing customers into groups based on like characteristics, e.g. personality attributes, demographics, psychological make-up, and lifestyle, to name a few. The purpose is to know these groups well, to better market brands to them.

Service Brand
A brand applied to services that are intangible, with no physical presence, usually provided personally to a person or organization.

Service Mark
A trademark law term for a registered mark that is applied to services only.

Signature
The permanent lock-up and relationship among a logotype with a symbol where applicable, and with a tagline where applicable.

A silver bullet brand profoundly infuences the image of another brand.

Silver Bullet Brand
A brand or sub-brand that profoundly influences the image of another brand. It is used as a positive change agent to alter another brand’s image.

Stand Alone Brand
Part of Brand Architecture. A brand that is named differently from other brands that share the same name in a portfolio. Done because this brand’s image, benefits, or audiences, or combination are different from the main brand portfolio.

Strategic Planning
The functional part of a company that is concerned with where the company is going. It involves industry trend analysis, business options, and competitor analysis, among other activities, and provides options and recommendations on future business initiatives.

Strategy
Strategy involves the utilization of resources to reach a set of Objectives identified as part of your Mission. If your mission, for example, describes your business as being on the leading edge of a particular field through service excellence, the organization has to be structured accordingly to deliver that strategy.

Strategy (Brand)
This is an analytical tool for a brand that is composed of analyses of a brand’s industry, trends, regulations, and competitors; options and recommendations for the brand based on these analyses; and a defined action plan with tactics to implement recommendations (see Goal, Strategy, Tactics). It reflects a company’s mission, business strategy, values, and culture, and successfully translates these into a meaningful, lasting customer experience.

Sub-Brand
A product or service brand that has distinctive benefits, features or attributes that necessitate its separation from its parent brand (see this term) by being named and positioned differently.

SWOT (Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats) Analysis
A consulting tool for analyzing those factors that influence a brand’s place in a category or industry and its future success in its marketplace.

Symbol
An abstract or representational graphic mark that is developed to reflect one or more aspects of Corporate Identity.

The ABCs of Corporate Branding, Letters L-P

Guest Blogger — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 16:04:30 +0000

The ABCs of Branding

So far we have covered the letters A and B, the letter C and D through I This time we look at letters l through P.

Line Extension
A new variation of a product or service that shares the same key characteristics as the parent brand, but offers a new benefit.

Lock up
The permanent placement of two or more graphic elements to each other of a corporate identity, say between a symbol and a logotype (see these terms) and a tagline. How the elements are linked together always stays the same regardless of the application. See term Signature.

Logotype or Logo
The stylized version of a company’s name using typography. Outside our industry, “logo” is a common term for a company’s identifying name or mark. In our industry we clarify the term to avoid confusion with other types of identifiers.

Look and Feel
The visualized personality of a brand – typically includes imagery, illustration style (photography, drawing), typography, color palette, and how these elements work together in formats.

Master Brand
Essentially the same as a Core Brand or a Parent Brand (see these terms). Usually used with Endorsed Brand (see this term).

Messages/Messaging Strategy
A series a communication points written for a specific group of interested parties (shareholders, employees, regulators, etc) that stem from a Brand Positioning and are directly relevant to a specific audience.

Mission
Often confused with Vision, a company’s Mission represents an specific direction and purpose. It is universally shared - by employees, owners, customers and communities. Mission should be above the specifics of the current business, describing the underlying value proposition to the most appealing market.

Mission Statement
A concise declaration issued by a company, usually for employees, which outlines the company’s purpose, beliefs, values, and principles when conducting business. It’s used as a touchstone or guidepost for employees and suppliers in all business dealings and activities.

Nomenclature
A company’s system and practices for naming its business units, products, and services and the relationship and connections they must have to each other. Typically, a nomenclature system would include the holding company, operating companies, subsidiaries and divisions, business units, and all the products and services of these entities, and the relationships among them.

Objective
A specific task to be performed in pursuit of a goal (see term).

Parent Brand
The holding company or traded entity that has the capacity to stand alone (eg, Ford, Coca-cola, Levis Strauss) to represent a core product or service, or support related products and services by sharing its brand through endorsement (See Architecture).

Portfolio (Brand)
The complete collection of brands that a company owns.

Positioning (Brand)
The analytical process a company initiates to determine – based on their brand’s image, competencies, industry, customers, and competitors – how they should competitively situate their brand for optimal differentiation and market effectiveness.

Positioning Statement
A simple, concise written statement of the concept and parameters behind a brand meant to convey a brand’s supported point of distinction relative to competitors.

Promise (Brand)
A pledge or assurance of some measure of performance that a customer is intended to attach to a product or service as part of its brand image.