|
 |
| The ABC's of Great Brands
|
|
|
By: Bill Nissim, August 2005 ©
Great brands encompass three characteristics that possess a winning combination when executed correctly.
The road to branding success requires a unique discernment of the value proposition being offered followed
by vision, patience, and perseverance. By combining these characteristics and method of execution, great
organizations (i.e. Brands) emerge from the landscape of mediocrity.
As with all brands, the voyage from obscurity to trusted products/services occurs when adhering to a
disciplined process referred to as the ABC’s of branding: ATTRIBUTES, BEHAVIOR, and
CIRCUMSTANCES. What do these ABC’s have to do with great brands? The lack of a solid foundation for
a brand will ultimately undermine its future success. This foundation goes beyond the logo and brand fascia
and provides the underpinnings of legitimacy and ability to deliver real value. The type of reasoning that both
buyer and seller share enables the origin of a relationship. The setting by which the foundation and behavior
can be acted on must be appropriate in many respects. Altogether, this hypothesis suggests that an
Appreciable Brand Triad forms the basis for great brands.
The discussion begins with presenting the ABC’s of great brands and applying the “Triad Brand Test” as the
metric for success. After the ABC’s are reviewed, an introduction of this concept will be expressed through a
case study. We’ll use Southwest Airlines as an archetype to exemplify and support this theory.
Attributes:
Whether you are discussing people, places, or things, attributes are the basis by which you compare, contrast,
and distinguish levels of acceptance for use and/or consumption. Everything we do on a daily basis draws
upon attributes to discern and validate who we are and our place on this earth. Do you believe that? Why do
you buy a certain car, brand of clothing, or a cup of coffee? Additionally, why do you connect with certain
associates, friends, neighbors, etc? Conversely, why do you reproof, reject, and distance yourself from other
products or services? Whether we want to admit it or not (intellectual verses emotional), we rely on
associations (a.k.a. brands) that surround the attributes of people, places, and things.
I recently queried a highly educated associate of mine and asked why he drove a certain brand of automobile.
Being an engineer, his response was both highly analytical and quantifiable; he supported his logic with facts
such as MPG, weight-to-horsepower, and the practical use to get him from point A to point B. When he was
asked why he didn’t buy a smaller, less expensive car that could do the same job, his response was- “I
wouldn’t be caught DEAD in that particular car.” Touché!
In short, attributes are indeed imperatives in our daily discrimination process and forms the basis by which
we make choices. Attributes alone will not satisfy anyone. There must be a foundation and process by which
these attributes are executed and delivered to form such perceptions. In the following aspect of the
appreciable triad, we will examine the foundations that create a strong bond between perception and reality.
The old adage seems to hold true – we shop intellectually but we purchase emotionally! Next, we will
consider behavior in response to attributes and what that means to us as consumers.
Behavior:
Would you consider yourself a rational consumer? Most of us would answer yes. Interestingly, what we do
and how we do it often defies rational thought despite our best intentions. Several years ago, I attended a
speaking engagement hosted by Tom Peters. During his presentation, he broached the topic of human
behavior and mentioned a personal experience he had at the grocery store. Despite his high level of education
(two Master Degrees and a PhD.) and rational thought process, when he attempted to buy generic table salt
at the store, he ended up purchasing the Morton Salt Brand (Blue label, little girl and umbrella). He
admittedly couldn’t bring himself to buy the white labeled, store brand (emotional) even though he
(intellectually) believes that salt is salt, regardless of the package it comes in.
Don’t we all behave the same way? You walk into a store to buy a can of soup. You see two products on the
shelf: one has a no-name white label, another red with the brand name Campbell’s TM written on it. Which
one would you buy? Remember, the type of reasoning that both buyer and seller share enables the basis of a
relationship. As a consumer, you are buying more than a can of soup and this purchase reflects who you are
(at the cash register), the perceived quality you provide your family (brand trust), and what you deem as
acceptable in your world (values). This synergy between behavior and attributes, however contrived,
becomes the paradigm by which we consume.
Marketers could gain greater insight into attributes/behavior relationship by observing HOW people actually
behave verses WHAT people say they do (i.e. surveys). If you ask owners of CD players how to improve
this product offering, they probably wouldn’t have come up with the iPod concept. If you observe HOW
they use CD Players, their behavior would speak volumes about the gap that exists between the current
offering and a desired solution (i.e. runners use for mobile music devices). Now that we discussed two
aspects of this appreciable triad, let’s see how they relate to circumstances.
Circumstances:
The circumstances surrounding how we make purchasing decisions are situational at best! As a marketer, you
may have the right attributes and behavior in place, but if the setting isn’t appropriate, the whole concept falls
apart. For example, let’s discuss the auto industry.
Buyers were seeking the next generation consumer vehicle. Automobile companies possessed the same
relative resources, processes, and values to compete fairly for this emerging market. The attributes of design,
functionality, and capability pre-existed along with the behavior of consumers to continuously improve their
driving experience.
However, the problem for one Auto Company came into play with circumstances: the general public wasn’t
prepared to give up their gas-guzzling cars for a sub-compact, range-limited electric vehicle (EV) that this
company had so heavily invested in.
The technology of EV’s under the current circumstances was not a good fit at that particular time, and as a
result, the electric vehicle product offering died a timely death. Conversely, Japanese automakers like Toyota
and Honda took the next, logical step and created a hybrid (gas/electric) vehicle that was closer to a standard
car but with all the benefits of high mileage and environmentally friendly.
What valuable lesson was learned? Although people desire higher mileage vehicles (attributes/behavior), the
idea of a car that relies solely on battery technology (charge each night, limited range, and very small size)
defies the circumstances of main-stream consumers.
Application of ABC’s
Now that we have defined the ABC’s of branding, let’s apply it to a practical real-world setting. We begin
with a product/service that most of us have used or are at least aware of - Southwest Airlines.
Attributes:
The attributes of Southwest (SW) are straightforward: friendly, inexpensive, frequent flights, quick turns, fun
flight attendants, etc. On their web site, www.southwest.com, you’ll see their mission statement mirrors
reality:
“The mission of Southwest Airlines is dedication to the highest quality of Customer Service delivered with a
sense of warmth, friendliness, individual pride, and Company Spirit.”
Under a section called “about us,” they nicely summarize their value proposition to the masses:
“More than 32 years ago, Rollin King and Herb Kelleher got together and decided to start a different kind of
airline. They began with one simple notion: If you get your passengers to their destinations when they want
to get there, on time, at the lowest possible fares, and make darn sure they have a good time doing it, people
will fly your airline.”
Now that we understand their “public persona,” let’s briefly understand the foundation that makes this
actually work. In 1971, SW airline saw the landscape of this business as hub-and-spoke, expensive
maintenance facilities, multiple aircraft, major airports, and expensive unions as the standard formula for
operations. What was unique about SW from the start was the business model they pursued which was
contrary to the status quo. In effect, SW did quite the opposite: stayed away from major airports, use point-
to-point service, only purchase one type of aircraft (737’s), and cross-functionally trained their employees.
They also considered what the traveling public viewed as important (see graphic) and designed their offerings
accordingly. By adjusting their business model, they reduce or eliminated those offerings in which the public
didn’t view as important and increased amenities they enjoyed. For the price consensus traveler, food and
comfort was of little value compared to on-time arrivals and a “fun” experience.
The outcome of this foundation provided:
1. A low-cost business model
2. Enabled low fares to consumers
3. A profitable enterprise
The economics behind this business model appears simple, yet so many major carriers attempted to
incorporate a competing design with little success. For example, United Airlines launched “United Express” as
a method for attracting discount flyers. The problem was their cost structure couldn’t support discounted
fares and thus became a losing proposition. Over 20 years, SW literally changed the rules of this game. A low-
cost business model became the new standard for competition and spawned a similar company called Jet
Blue. In short, the attributes of an intelligently design business followed by impeccable execution makes SW
a Great Brand!
Behavior:
What shared reasoning occurred between the general public and SW that formed the basis of a mutually
beneficial relationship? Let’s consider the following: SW provided less service, less amenities, and certainly
less prestige than all other offerings in the commercial airline industry. Why would anyone want something
less – isn’t more supposed to be better?
During the nineties, the “do-it-yourself” phenomenon occurred and companies like Lowes and The Home
Depot burst onto the scene. The Home Depot grew from 145 stores and $3.8b in sales in 1990 to 1890
stores and $73.1b in sales by 2004; they were named the most admired specialty retailer by Fortune
Magazine in February 2005. Their corporate web site states:
“The Home Depot is committed to offering the ultimate home improvement shopping experience. With about
40,000 different products, trademark customer service and guaranteed low prices, The Home Depot stores
cater to do-it-yourselfers and do-it-for-me’s, as well as home improvement, construction and building
maintenance professionals.”
Whether you are trying to reach a certain destination or fix a broken lawn sprinkler, the behavior remains the
same. In both cases, people will actually accept less for a good price. The behavior has achieved balance with
attributes (business model) for delivering what they want, when they want it, for a discounted price. In both
cases, these companies are organizationally excellent at the value they deliver!
Circumstances:
Let’s start this discussion with the concept of “under and over-shooting.” What does this mean? When you
want to fly from Orange County, California to New York, NY, you have many choices available. Not only
does your range of options include a variety of carriers, but various levels of service. The middle of the road
would consist of a fair price, a reasonably comfortable seat, and a palatable meal.
To “over-shoot” this event, we would spend thousands on a first-class ticket, sit in a big leather seat, and eat
a gourmet meal served on china tableware. To under-shoot, we would sit in cramped seats, eat a bag of
pretzels, and have more than two connections with unusually long layovers. The circumstances in which
people fly vary depending on the dimensions presented.
In today’s environment, the ability to rationalize value is primarily a function of available information. If you
rely on a travel agent, your span of available dimensions is severely limited and reliant on the assessment of
others. As with the travel agent, how far your under or over-shoot your desired experience may never be
known or occur after-the-fact. Conversely, the Internet provides a wealth of options that allows the user to
select attributes/circumstances and compare the results. In effect, our ability to determine the circumstances
in which we travel, to a large extent, falls to the consumer. Next, we will draw these three concepts together.
The following section presents this connection theoretically and conceptually.
Appreciable Brand Triad
So, how does one use this triad to create a Great Brand? This theoretical model plots Attributes, Behavior,
and Circumstances on equally spaced points of a triangle. Each of these three aspects interacts with the other
on the periphery as well as on a 3rd dimension (center of model).
To apply the model, first compare your products
attributes to how people generally behave. Using
customer focus groups, surveys, and other
qualitative & quantitative data, determine if the
attributes are in balance with the audience’s actual
behavior (=0 on the AB line is perfect harmony).
Once a point along this line has been established,
repeat the process for the two remaining lines AC
and BC of the triangle.
It is possible that a point can fall outside of the
lines, as with real life. For instance, let’s use
“Tazo Tea” and the AC line as an example. The
“Attributes” (rich in flavor, consistent quality, etc.) are desirable; however, assume the product is not
conveniently sold (Circumstances). The point on the AC line will move away from “Circumstances” and
toward “Attributes.” If this combination happens to exist and prevents an interaction or purchase to take
place, then a “disconnect” occurs between your audience/offering and this point will fall outside of the
triangle. Conversely, if your point resides within the triangle, your brand has become part of the consumer’s
identity.
Now that you have plotted all three points, consider the depth to which the consumer “owns” your brand.
The center point (0,0) defines perfect balance of all three constituents. The beauty of plotting your current
state and considering a desired position will allow you to define a strategy to achieve a great brand!
Conclusion
What constitutes a great brand? By applying the concept of an Appreciable Brand Triad, we were able to
define what attributes, behavior, and circumstances are, and if executed correctly, how they enable the
foundation for brand greatness. We postulated this theory by citing two brands that have achieved both
financial and brand success (SW and Home Depot). Although the dynamics of the plotted points on the
Appreciable Brand Triad are in constant motion, their general locale suggests three things: an intelligently
designed business model, proper positioning of ABC’s, and flawless execution. Taken together, the
opportunity to formulate or re-design a Great Brand resides in the hands of business leaders each day.
Bill Nissim consults with organizations on strategic branding
imperatives. His website www.ibranz.com contains reference materials, links, and helpful
articles on the many facets of branding. In addition, Nissim released his first book
“The Brand Advocate” to provide a tool-kit for the marketing practitioner.
|
|
