A Brand Refresh vs. Repositioning. Which is Best for your Brand?
Your brand is the umbrella to everything you do as a company. It not only guides your decisions and actions internally but guides your external image, distinguishes you from your competitors, and lastly helps your customers know what you do.
But what happens when your company grows, your product extends well beyond your original offering and/or your brand no longer reflects who you are and what you do? The quickest response to this problem would be to scream for a brand refresh, but is that actually the answer? A new strategy is certainly needed and with that may come a rebrand, but depending on your company, your industry and current identity a brand repositioning might be a better answer the problem.
The two solutions seem rather similar but actually vary in a significant way, and can be likened to a house, yes; you read that correctly a house.
Refresh:
In a nutshell, a brand refresh is the term given when an established company changes it name, logo, and/or its overall look and feel. A brand refresh generally addresses the external facing identity of a company, cosmetic changes if you will. Similar to painting a house or changing out the flooring, a refresh will take time and cost you money, but it’s about changing the surface level image of your brand.
Refreshing a brand generally occurs when a company’s image has become outdated or misleading to the type of services or products it provides, which can all impact the company’s brand equity or sales goals if it is consistently being misunderstood.
Repositioning:
Unlike a brand refresh, which is more of a cosmetic change to a brand’s image, repositioning is strengthening the foundation.
Brand positioning is the very core of your brand, and provides a clear and concise voice to tell your brand’s story. When a company looks to reposition its brand it is looking to go much deeper than simply changing the external image.
Repositioning highlights a company’s evolving role in the marketplace, and integrates new practices that build brand equity both internally and externally. It’s about changing perceptions. Unifying your internal audience with a consistent message will not only make your company stronger but more appealing to your external audience because they will get a true sense for who you are, and understand what you stand for.
There are certainly times when a company will undergo both a corporate refresh and repositioning concurrently, and a lot of times that makes sense but before you begin either initiative take a step back and decide which is best for your company and brand. It is important to determine whether your brand is need of a facelift or and complete remodeling from the ground up before moving forward.
Red Bull is Killin’ It
As someone who holds a deep passion for the branding and marketing industry, I tend to informally monitor a brand’s progression over time. Just like most people in the business, I’m a bit of an industry critic – some brands I naturally root for and some I root against. Today, however, I want to talk about a brand that I’ve always been pretty unbiased towards… that is, until recent years. The other night while I was cooking dinner, watching television and browsing my iPad (welcome to 2012), my attention was briefly apprehended by Red Bull’s new TV spot. Not only was I impressed by the production value – impactful, dynamic clips of the Red Bull Team overlaid with an emotionally charged, motivating melody and voice-over – but it also caused me to say out loud to myself, “Wow. Red Bull is really killin’ it.” And here’s why.
Progression
Red Bull has been a pretty interesting brand to follow over its relatively short life. It was first developed and sold in Austria in 1987. It didn’t make it to the U.S. until 1996, and by that time Red Bull was starting to establish itself globally. And not only establish itself, but establish an entirely new product category. Red Bull was really the first to pioneer the global energy drink marketplace, which anyone would describe as courageous, risky and bold. So even at its pioneered essence, Red Bull was founded on characteristics it has spent so much time, money and effort trying its best to embody.
Flash forward to present day and a completely saturated (and regulated) marketplace, and Red Bull is still the world’s #1 energy drink company. In 2011, Red Bull pulled in $471 million in U.S. sales and held 44% of the energy drink market share, according to SymphonyIRI. But how do they continue to stay on top in such a crowded market? Well, the simple answer is branding. Red Bull has managed to create something that reaches far beyond its product offerings and even its industry. It has created a movement, a culture, and even a world – the world of Red Bull.
Here are a couple of ways Red Bull got there:
Vision
From the beginning, Red Bull realized how you market a product is just as important as the product itself. That’s why it invested in relationships – with people and brands that reflected similar characteristics. In 1989, Red Bull sponsored their first Formula 1 driver. Now, it’s hard not to see a Red Bull sponsorship at a sporting event - they even own a professional soccer team. And within the sporting world, they absolutely own the extreme-sports segment. Skateboarding, skydiving, wakeboarding, cliff diving, rock climbing, surfing… you name it, and Red Bull has some sort of stake in it. But it doesn’t stop at sports. Dance, music, film and gaming are just a few other categories that Red Bull is exploring. Its vision spreads far and wide, and there are no signs of slowing down.
Consistency
Consistency is what develops reputation. Red Bull has remained consistent at a high level for the majority of its existence. Red Bull’s messaging focused more on functionality in the early years as the product was introduced, and now has switched to a much more emotional approach. But even with the shift, its overall positioning has remained consistent. Just ask any consumer about Red Bull and their response will most likely leave you with, “It gives you wings.”
Execution
You can have a great idea, but if you can’t execute, nothing will ever come of it. Fortunately Red Bull knows how to execute, which might be its strongest attribute. Its efforts began with animated sketch-art advertising, to help showcase the product in an amusing, but functional manner (who can forget the “Pigeon” ad). Red Bull’s more recent marketing efforts have become wildly interactive and social, focusing more on the lifestyle it has created that surrounds the brand. Consumers are regularly visiting its website to explore and discover the world of Red Bull, looking for opportunities to hang with the brand. Red Bull even has its own media company, Red Bull Media House. So not only is Red Bull the content feature, they are also the content producer. Pretty amazing.
The remarkable thing about Red Bull’s brand is the fact that it has matured in such a short period of time. It went from a new product in a new category, to a cultural influencer in less than 25 years – not many other brands can say that. Without Red Bull, it’s hard to say where extreme-sports would be today. And I’m excited to see what’s in store for the future.
Smellvertising
Have you ever walked into a store and been overwhelmed by a particular perfume (think Abercrombie & Fitch)? If so, then you’ve experienced scent advertising first-hand. Yes, scent advertising. And this can include everything from perfume samples in magazines to freshly baked cookies in a grocery store. Traditionally, brands tend to capture audiences through sight and sound, but not with “smellvertising”, as some industry experts are calling it. And lately scent advertising has been elevated to an entirely new level.
McCain Foods, a snack food company, has developed an innovative advertising campaign for their “Ready Baked Jackets,” – baked potatoes that cook in just 5 minutes. Their campaign targets hungry customers at bus stops by way of scent. The company has placed artificial potatoes at bus stops around the UK. With the touch of a button, the smell of a freshly baked potato fills the air. McCain is hoping that the smell of its baked potato will resonate in people’s minds (and stomachs), and in turn make them curious enough to pick up a box next time they’re at the grocery store.
Scent is a powerful vehicle. How many times has an aroma replayed a certain memory in your mind? It happens to everyone, and nostalgia can be a commanding sensation. But is the smell of a baked potato while waiting in a crowded, dirty bus stop while you’re running 10 minutes late for your morning meeting really going to make people run out and buy it?
Time Magazine points out that some people may associate the baked potato with these bus stops and not want to purchase it. After all, bus stops don’t exactly induce any warm, fuzzy feelings. Also, McCain is using smellvertising for a product that is not readily available to people at a bus stop. If people are hungry, they might choose a product that is readily available and that can be easily consumed while waiting for the bus.
To use smellvertising successfully, your company should be conscious of the surrounding environment. If the product is not readily available, the impact of the smell may be lost in a consumer’s daily routine If the smellvertisement is placed close to the store or supermarket where the product can be purchased, there is a good chance customers will go purchase the product after they smell it.
So will smellvertising become the next big trend? Well, it’s hard to tell. Without any measureable return, it’s going to be tough for brands to adapt the tactic. Regardless, here are some general pros and cons.
Contributed by: Keena Classen
The Flip-Flop Games of 2020
On September 13, 2012, the International Olympic Committee will decide which city gets to host the 2020 summer Olympic Games. Although it is over half a year away, many of the bidding cities are already campaigning for a bid. Last week, Madrid revealed its logo for the 2020 Games, but the outcome wasn’t exactly gold-medal worthy. The disappointing logo design has sparked conversations all around the world, which has left the city of Madrid with a lot of flak.
Madrid held a national contest where Spanish citizens could submit ideas for the potential Madrid 2020 Olympics logo. Luis Peiret, a 22 year old student, won the competition with his design that is supposed to read “M20,” with a play on the 5 Olympic rings behind it. Since its release, the logo has faced a swarm of criticism. The lettering on the logo is confusing. The “M20,” (standing for Madrid 2020) is oddly cropped, which gives the impression that the logo reads “20020”. The five oval shapes behind the white writing do not look like the original Olympic rings which are Blue, Yellow, Black, Green, and Red. Instead, all of the colors have been brightened and a purple ring has replaced the original black ring. Many people have also suggested that the colored ovals overlapped by the white text look like a group of flip-flops. The Flip-Flop Games of 20020 anyone?
Take away:
The logo is very important for Madrid, and as the city’s icon it would be included on everything related to the Olympics, including millions of dollars in merchandise. Something of such importance should not be done by a graphic design student. Madrid paid Peiret $7,964.44 for the logo, which is certainly a deal saying that London paid $633,138.94 for their 2012 Olympic logo. Although it can be tempting to choose an inexpensive option, it’s not worth it! A bad logo can ruin a brand. In order to be effective, a logo needs to be legible and understood by many different people, especially an Olympic logo. It needs to be memorable and leave an impression in viewer’s minds. A logo is something that is the face of your brand and represents its values. If a logo is unoriginal, unappealing, or if the logo’s message conflicts with the values or your brand, it is going to reflect poorly on your brand. Customers will not take your brand seriously and may choose a competitor with a more attractive logo (in this case, the International Olympic Committee). Madrid’s logo goes to show that it’s worth spending the extra money to have your brand’s logo professionally designed. Avoid being your industry’s Flip-Flop Games of 20020 representative.
Contributed by: Keena Classen
Pros and Cons of User-Generated Content
As the role of user-created content becomes more and more relevant, it is important for companies to consider whether to follow the trend of putting their brand into the hands of users or to keep the reigns tight on their marketing strategy. So, what are the pros and cons of letting your customers speak for you?
Pros:
Authenticity
By outsourcing publicity to real customers, a brand can appear more legitimate from the eyes of a consumer. When customers express sincere opinions of a brand, whether it is organically (social networks) or through testimonial campaigns, they are sharing experiences and opinions that can’t be made up, which makes a brand feel authentic. Because consumers are telling stories at their own free will, the message is fresh and serves as an honest testament to a brand’s quality and popularity.
Personal Connection
When a company’s communication strategy includes user-created content, it allows the brand to sit amongst its audience and act as a peer, rather than a business looking down on the world. When communication efforts are more conversational by way of Facebook and Twitter, it gives the message a personal quality that is hard to capture with traditional advertising. In any situation, it is more comfortable to be “talked to” than to be “talked at”.
As a relevant example of a brand correctly leveraging consumer enthusiasm and input, Dorito’s annual “Crash the Super Bowl” contest gives real customers a chance to share their ideas to promote their favorite snack brand.
Cons:
Control
A lot of brands are afraid to shift the power to consumers. You don’t know what you’re going to get when you turn your brand over to the masses – it’s an easy way to feel the burn of user-generated content. And the amount of time it takes to sort through consumer-created content is no simple task. Successfully using content created by customers requires around the clock supervision. Mismanagement can lead to false rumors and confusion, which can be devastating for any brand.
Honesty
Honesty isn’t always a good thing. Exposing your brand to honest customer opinion can create vulnerability. While dissatisfied customers used to be limited to word of mouth, they now have the option of instantaneously posting their thoughts for the world to see. Allowing users to speak their mind will always yield a degree of negativity, and any attempts to censor that conversation can backfire.
Lowe’s and Chiquita both recently came under attack for business decisions related to user-generated content. Both are great examples of how the freedom of consumer speech can sometimes be more pain than glory.
Takeaway:
We can all agree that consumer integration and interaction is a great opportunity for any brand. But it’s easy to get in over your head. The key is to not overdue it and make sure every initiative and platform is well managed. And most importantly - have fun connecting with your audience. Showing passion and enthusiasm will lead to have a positive experience.
Contributed by Christy O'Keefe.
The new Carolina Panthers: A good look?
The Carolina Panthers subtly introduced a new evolution of their logo this week, and I must say as a diehard Panthers fan (and a seasoned graphic designer), a part of me cringed. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not opposed to a change and the new identity isn’t necessarily worse off. But it’s the opportunities that were left on the sketching room floor that really get to me.
Starting with the wordmark – there is no doubt in my mind that the scratchy script font from the early 90's needed to be updated. When locked up with the icon, the contrasting styles made for a visual focal point battle. But the change to a generic sporty serif is ubiquitous among a thousand other teams. A prime example of opportunity left hanging.
And then there is the icon. To begin with a positive – retaining the overall angle and shape allows for a connection to the previous brand while incorporating sleek lines that add a modern touch. Conversely, the sleek lines diminish the strong jaw line and defined fangs from the previous icon. But the most disappointing part has to be the angle of the panther's left eye. I understand the idea of perspective illustration – how one eye would be smaller than the other – but given this angle the outcome is too polarizing, making the overall appearance of that eye to seem lazy. It’s difficult to appreciate the new design with a lazy eye starring back at you…
At the end of the day, this, in combination with new team jerseys, will result in more merchandise and apparel sales, which will be great for the organization. Hopefully that small part of my inner panther fan that perished with this new logo will be resurrected when we finally get a ring… even if the new logo is on it.
Contributed by Nick Irwin, Senior Graphic Designer
Walmart Creates Own Version of Reality TV Show
Recently, Walmart has announced its own version of a reality TV show called “Get on the Shelf.” This new program is run by @Walmartlabs’ social media and ecommerce division. So exactly how does the “Get on the Shelf” program work? Walmart has welcomed all companies to submit a submission video online about why their product or products should be sold at Walmart. Fellow shoppers can go to walmart.com and vote for the products they like the most. The 3 products that receive the most votes will be sold on walmart.com, and the product that comes in first place will also be featured on the homepage of Walmart’s website.
However, there’s a twist. Along with their product idea, companies must also submit a video in which they must sing about their product or products. The “Get on the Shelf” program is set to begin the day that the latest season of American Idol premiers, which a spokesperson for the company says is a “coincidence.” Although not done purposely, the premiere of American Idol may help Walmart’s competition. If Walmart uses smart advertising and marketing techniques and is able to get people to associate the two shows with one another, people will remember to vote for “Get on the Shelf” as they are dialing in their votes for American Idol. The contest may also draw shoppers to Walmart.com and into Walmart stores. After voting week in and week out for a product, a customer is going to want to try it, and since they have seen the product on Walmart’s reality TV show, they are likely to go to Walmart to purchase it.
The competitors on the “Get on the Shelf” program are allowed to get voters anyway they like, and Chris Bolte, the Vice President of @WalmartLabs, says that this is part of the competition. Walmart will be watching how the top competitors get their votes, whether it’s through advertisement, social media, or word of mouth. Walmart may pick up some valuable marketing techniques that may ultimately help to get customers in the door in the future.
So how will “Get on the Shelf” impact the Walmart brand? The “Get on the Shelf” program is innovative. Never before has a brand like Walmart asked customers what they want to see in stores and online. This competition will lead customers to see the Walmart brand as a brand that listens to customers and puts customers first. A competition like this may place it above competitors like Target, who have not yet reached out and asked customers what they would like to see in stores. Consumers are drawn to companies where they feel valued, and the Walmart brand is using the “Get on the Shelf” program to show customers how highly they value them. Many other brands like Walmart, may also start to make an effort to reach out to customers in order to enhance their brand. By playing a more active role in choosing what products a store sells, customers are likely to get exactly what they want, making them satisfied and much more likely to return.
Contributed by Keena Classen
Iconic Brand Files for Bankruptcy
As many of you may have heard, Hostess, the maker of Twinkies, Ho Hos, Wonderbread, and many other food products we all know and love, has filed for bankruptcy. Hostess, who also filed for bankruptcy in 2009, has been fighting $860 million in debt. But do not run out to your local grocery store and stock up on all your Hostess favorites yet, Hostess has assured customers that they will continue the production of all of their delicious products.
So where does the future lie for the Hostess brand? Although filing for bankruptcy may be upsetting to the millions of Twinkies, Sno Ball, and Ding Dong fans, it is likely that it will not hurt the Hostess brand. As Maureen Farrell from CNN points out, today the internet allows people to buy anything they want and people want products made by iconic American brands, Hostess being one of them. Companies recognize this demand, and are eager for the opportunity to buy brands such as Hostess. They see an opportunity for growth and hope to revitalize iconic brands with the development of new consumer products. Companies such as The Sharper Image and Polaroid have both been revived by buyers who have expanded the brand to new areas to bring in more money.
I feel that filing for bankruptcy may be a blessing in disguise for the Hostess brand, as it may lead to much overdue change within the brand. Hostess, which was started in 1925, does not seem like it has changed much since. With society’s needs and wants constantly changing, a brand must also change to fit these new demands. Although Twinkies, Ho Hos, and Sno Balls have brought great success for the brand, I think new products or new additions to existing products are needed to draw customers. The Hostess brand is strong and the American people know what the brand stands for, but with new products being put on the market every day the Hostess brand has a lot of competition. Today the new, innovative products are the “must haves” and are usually the products that are craved by consumers. If Hostess can mix things up and give old products a new twist, it may once again produce “must have” treats.
Contributed by Keena Classen
Branding Politics
How are branding and politics related? Does a political candidate as an individual constitute a brand? Should maintaining a candidate’s brand be at the forefront of campaign strategy? There are mixed reviews from experts in the industry, but in today’s political climate it’s impossible to ignore the importance of a candidate’s logo, slogan and brand identity.
“…getting a politician elected might be the ultimate marketing/branding challenge.” M.B. Moore, Infopop Corporation
Based on the efforts of potential 2012 presidential candidates, it is obvious that branding has become a part of political campaigning, and an important one at that. Political campaigns have all the ingredients necessary to create a brand – every campaign has a name, most have a logo and one would hope that all have a message behind which voters should want to stand. The Obama 2008 campaign may be one of the more successful examples of political branding. Using repetition and simplicity, the iconic logo of the campaign, "really changed the way in which design can be used effectively for a candidate," says Debbie Millman, president of the design division at Sterling Brands. "He had a really powerful message--that 'change' message--and he repeated it over and over and over again. The consistency of that identity was even stronger than the identity itself. He owned the idea of change."
While Obama’s campaign seems to represent the gold standard of branding strategy, the Republican candidates of the 2012 election fall short of branding success despite their efforts. According to experts in the graphic design industry, "Nobody (in the race for the Republican nomination) is taking the branding seriously," Millman said in an article published in AdWeek in November. The logos behind the leading candidates lack the inspiring confidence of Obama’s rising sun.
AdWeek ran a piece recently asking creatives to critique the current political logos:
"The 'R' is really awkward. It looks like it wants to fall over, without that leg to stand on." –Karl Gude, graphics editor-in-residence at Michigan State University
"Ron Paul's identity system rivals Verizon's for the winner of the busiest logo award. It also looks like a slasher took to the letter 'A.'" – Debbie Millman, president of the design division at Sterling Brands
"A nice reinterpretation of the Hilton logo. Did they provide him with a swag donation for his campaign?" –DM
"His branding and website look like a banking identity. Is it intentional?" – DM
"It's sort of nothing. It just looks like a big pill that you take." – Scott Stowell, founder of the design shop Open
"I'm seeing 'Rick Sant,' and then 'Rum' on the right. Unless you know Rick Santorum, you wouldn't know that's an 'O.' You think his name is Rick Sant and he's into rum." – KG
In addition to logos, the verbal behind a candidate’s brand is a core part of their campaign success. Mitt Romney has branded himself as the anti-Obama candidate. While this message has gotten him wins in both Iowa and New Hampshire, what happens in November will be the true test of whether this identity proves successful enough to persuade voters to oust a sitting president.
Ron Paul, although not the likely winner of the GOP nomination, provides an interesting case of brand identity. As one of the oldest candidates to ever pursue the presidential office, his message and brand appeal to younger voters for their unorthodox nature and outside-party alignment, proving that with the right message a brand can appeal to unexpected markets.
Contributed by: Christy O'Keefe
Google This and Google That
There are certain brands that fascinate me and I can never learn enough about them. Google is one of those brands. I recently finished Douglas Edwards’ book “I’m Feeling Lucky: The Confessions of Google Employee Number 59” and I can’t stop talking about it. Just ask my coworkers – it’s been Google does this and Google did that for about three weeks now.
The book is an interesting look into the company as it was first starting up until it went public. I love how Edwards lets us in on key meetings that determined how the tiniest of details would be presented first through the search engine and then through AdWords, Google News, etc. As a believer that a true brand lies in the details, I could not get enough of these insights.
In addition, the book talks a lot about Google’s culture and showcases examples of how the company brought that culture to life in its TGIF meetings, office space and decision making. As with many successful brands, the strong culture is the foundation for the Google brand and its distinct voice.
As Google’s first dedicated brand marketer, Edwards helped to build and set standards for one of today’s most iconic brands. While this is only one employee’s perspective, it is definitely worth adding this book to your “To Read” list.
Have you read it yet? Let us know what you thought.
