The Brand is the Strategy
Or How You Can Create Your Very Own
Monopoly
By Dan Herman
Editor's
comment: Branding is about differentiation. Much of what a
product or service delivers is the same as the competition. The
brand is the key element of strategy that provides anticipated
benefits and helps to deliver those benefits.
About 95% of what
executives in competing companies do is pretty much the same all
around. This is good management. If you are CEO’ing a wireless
communication services provider services, you strive to put up an
advanced technological infrastructure with a promising future, cool
end-user phones, other devices and accessories, a great service
system, attractive added-value services, and competitive prices.
Well, this is precisely where your competitors put their efforts as
well. The 5% (give or take) that you do differently constitutes your
strategy. The CEO of Southwest Airlines, the
revolutionary domestic American airline, most of the time does
exactly what her colleagues do. But her firm offers Ticketless
travel, and serves meals in the airport during waits, and not on the
plane.
Doing well what you are
supposed to be doing – is a prerequisite for competing. It is
definitely not a strategy. Being better - is a deserving effort, yet
it is not a strategy either, especially not in the long run.
Categories tend to converge into an equable level, more or less, of
prices/costs, product quality and features, technological
sophistication, and service quality. How, then, are you supposed to
compete? Well, you could offer your clients more than what your
competition offers, for a higher price, for the same price, for a
lower price, or – offer them less value for a lower price. All of
these options can give you an edge, but usually not for long.
You could also offer
something different than what your competition does. You can cater
to a need not formerly satisfied by your category. Nokia, for
example, did just that when it decided to treat cell phones as
fashion accessories and later as entertainment devices. Even this
approach could not be considered as an insurance policy. There are
no insurance policies in the world of business. But, if it is
difficult or impossible to imitate, or it is something not likely to
be imitated by your competition – then you might just have created
for yourself a mini-monopoly of your own. Well, this is surely an
accomplishment that should not be underestimated in a competitive
market.
So, what really is a
strategy? By definition, a strategy is the way by which you are
planning to obtain your goals. In a competitive environment, your
goal is that the consumer will prefer you to your competition. That
is why the strategy is, in fact, the way by which you plan to
achieve an advantage over your rivals – in the eyes of your
consumers. Almost always, preference can be achieved only by
differentiation, by either doing something other than what your
competitors are doing or by doing things in a markedly dissimilar
manner. By being different you supply some of the consumers in some
of the buying/consuming opportunities with a good reason to want you
more (and if you are a great strategist indeed – to want you only).
There are three types of
differentiation and only one of them constitutes a strategy (or
strategic differentiation). The transient differentiation is often
achieved by promotional activities, such as a big sale. The
circumstantial differentiation consists of things like a historical
monopoly, or some kind of personal connection between the consumer
and someone in the firm, or a convenient store location, etc.
However, the differentiation we want to focus on is the strategic
differentiation, such that provides a long lasting,
circumstance-crossing advantage.
Is differentiation
absolutely necessary? In any case where the consumer must choose
between options, the answer is definitely yes. Why? Because the
consumer chooses between alternatives on the basis of the
differences as he or she perceives. Zoom-in on that sentence for a
second. Do not fall into the most common trap of all: the consumer
makes choices according to his perception of differences between
alternatives, and not on the basis of what he values most in a
product of that kind. More often than not, most of the available
options in the market offer their consumers ‘what matters most’.
Certainly, when the consumer purchases a car, ALL of the brands and
models that are considered are believed to provide those things that
are important: affordability, reliability, safety, comfort, etc. The
consumer’s choice of different brands and models could very well be
based on something secondary in importance, such as the design of
the tail lights or some gadgety features.
Competitive strategy,
the idea or concept that is supposed to deliver advantage over
competitors or even a unique status in the eyes of the consumers, is
always a simultaneous answer to two questions. The first one is: in
which consumer group do you identify a potential for buying your
product? By 'group' I do not mean necessarily shared socio-economic
and demographic characteristics or even a similarity in personality
or life style. What I mean is that they have in common some factor,
enabling you to make them an offer, which will be more attractive to
them than the options they already have, or at least a refreshingly
new one. The second question is: what could you offer them that
would help you realize that potential? The competitive strategy is a
concept, which answers both questions at the same time. HBO for
instance, saw a potential in the fact that most people in the United
States are accustomed to television series in which the main
characters are usually outstandingly handsome, and live
extraordinary lives (think about ER, NYPD, and The Practice). They
differentiated themselves with new and highly successful series such
as “The Sopranos”, and “Six Feet Under”. These series deal with the
routine lives of people who have something unusual about them, and
that something could turn their every day existences into a drama.
By the way, a strategy
is not a beauty contest or a popularity poll. The goal is not to
reach a consensus, nor is it to be OK by everyone. Experience has
taught us that the key is to make a specific group of consumers –
even a small one – think that you are irreplaceable. They will act
as your success engine, even amongst consumers who are not as
definite in their attitudes. BMW fans do not believe that Mercedes
is a bad car; it’s just that it is not a BMW. For them, Mercedes is
simply incomparable to BMW. That’s how Apple fans feel about IBM.
What has all this to do
with branding? A brand is the consumer’s anticipation for a unique
and defined experience, or for a certain unique benefit obtainable
solely through consuming/owning a specific product/service
manufactured/offered by a specific company. Thus, the anticipation
from a trip to Paris would be to experience a romantic vacation. The
anticipation from Ikea would be – “state of the art design at a
reasonable price”. It is fair to say that a brand is really a brand
only when there exists – among its consumers – such anticipation. If
this anticipation is both exclusive and attractive – you might say
that it is a strong brand. A familiar name or logo - do not suffice
to make for a strong brand.
This consumer
anticipation is evoked and upheld by the marketer’s consistent
execution of a business concept providing the consumer with a unique
benefit or with a unique/novel way to deliver a benefit. This
concept is the brand strategy, its promise and its commitment to its
target consumers. The Krispy Kreme Doughnut Theater is definitely a
unique experience. The consumers experience a process that is a
celebration of senses, with all the scents and flavors. Besides
being pleasant in itself, it supports the formation of beliefs
regarding authenticity and freshness. This is a brand strategy. The
‘third place’ – the neighborhood place you frequent in between work
and home offered by Starbucks - is a brand strategy. But, wait a
minute! It is also the differentiation - the competitive strategy
itself! These ARE the 5% that executives do differently in order to
gain an advantage. This is why the brand IS the strategy. Or more
accurately – the brand strategy is the translation of the
competitive strategy – into a language of promises made to the
consumer.
Decisions on the
specific benefit that the company will provide whatever group of
consumers - in which it identifies a business potential - in order
to realize that potential, and of which concept to use in supplying
the benefit, are decisions on the level of competitive strategy.
Even if the choice would be to offer a mainly psychological benefit,
such as in the perfume business (supportive of a consumer's
fantasy), or a social benefit, such as in the case of prestigious
pens (a symbol of status), either way, the decision is still
strategic.
The brand’s role in the
realm of marketing has changed dramatically during the past decade.
In the past, we used 'to brand’ already existing products or
companies, in order to make them more attractive to consumers. It
was definitely cosmetic branding. In contrast recently, developing a
brand means devising and implementing a way by which to deliver a
benefit to consumers. Such concepts direct the development of
products and services designed to supply the benefit, and even shape
entire organizations for this purpose. This is strategic branding.
One of its consequences is that “brand extension”, and the
carefulness that it involves, had become somewhat anachronistic. The
identification between a brand and one product category is still
possible of course (FedEx is a wonderful example), yet this
restriction is no longer mandatory. The brand ‘Manchester United’
had entered successfully even to categories such as bedding and
banking. The original category of the ‘Virgin’ brand will soon be
remembered only by few. This is the direction towards which the
world of branding is headed.
The new and strategic
role of branding has remolded the concept of branding. Today, brand
building no longer constitutes a mere manipulation of the consumer's
perceptions and desires, but it is a creation of a system that on
the one-hand makes promises and arouses anticipations, while on the
other-hand it delivers and realizes the promises that it makes.