|
 |
Brand vs. Customer Architecture
Which are more valuable - your
brands or your customers?
By
Nick Wreden
Editor's
comment: Companies pay too much attention to brands and how they
drive profitability but it is consumers who drive revenue and
profits according to this new article.
The choice represents an important strategic issue. If you
answered brands, then you'll no doubt devote attention to increasing
the value of your brands. You'll pay homage to such concepts as
"brand equity," "brand image" and other buzzwords. You may even pay
consultants who promise to refurbish your "brand
architecture," defined by brand guru David Aaker as "that which
organizes and structures a brand portfolio by specifying brand roles
and the nature of relationships between them and their markets."
Unfortunately, that answer is wrong.
The answer can only be customers. Your salary, profit, equipment and
even budgets for advertising and PR come from customers. Without
customers, there can be no profitability, and without profitability,
there is no business. By contrast, brands can have little
relationship to the success or profitability of companies. Consider
"Sock Puppet," Commodore, Skytrain and other brands or brand images
that have died, not for lack of great branding, but for the lack of
customers. GM recently announced that Buick and Pontiac may follow
Oldsmobile to the brand graveyard, discovering, like so many others,
that all the "brand equity" in the world cannot pay a single
healthcare or other bill.
So it is time to re-evaluate the conventional wisdom that
characterizes so much brand babble today. Instead of "brand equity"
and "brand architecture," companies must now focus on customer
equity and customer architecture(sm).
Customer equity represents the lifetime value of customers. It is an
invaluable tool for determining the 20% of customers who generate
80% of profits, and for identifying the 15% of customers who, on
average, are unprofitable. Customer architecture represents a
structured methodology for identifying and delivering economic,
experiential and emotional value to customers. Just as important, it
is an invaluable tool for extracting value from customers, either
through improved pricing or more cost-effective resource allocation.
Customer architecture is based on proven, well-defined strategies,
goals, objectives and tactics. The strategy revolves around customer
segmentation. Ideally, that segmentation is based on customer
equity, but it can also be based on behavioral, geographic or even
channel segments.
Once customers have been segmented in "gold," "silver," "bronze" or
other categories, then the goal becomes differentiation. Products,
services, pricing and operations must be differentiated according to
the customer value to the brand. Special emphasis is given to the
golden 20% who generate the bulk of profits.
Goals fall into six maximization categories: campaign,
profitability, resource, knowledge, operational and results.
Campaign maximization involves various tactics to improve
acquisition branding. Most campaigns today measure success by how
many leads, prospects or customers are generated, without any
consideration to the potential profitability of those customers. Why
would you want to acquire an unprofitable customer, or one who might
defect at the first opportunity? Based on the segmentation strategy
and differentiation goals, campaigns are generally structured and
executed to attract prospects who share the same characteristics of
existing profitable customers.
Profitability maximization is based on brand penetration, an
umbrella term for customer, account and product penetration.
Customer penetration represents share of total customer spending in
your category, while account penetration is the number of persons or
units at a customer who are purchasing from you. Product penetration
represents the range of offerings purchased.
Resource maximization results from customer planning, a two-step
process. The first step is forecasting customer profitability
growth, based on existing brand penetration and customer input. The
second phase is matching resources, which range from sales force
time to trade show party invitations, to increase the profitability
of existing customers. Obviously, golden, or high-potential
customers, will get the lion's share of marketing and sales
resources.
The constant need to know customer wants, needs and, most important,
how they hold you accountable, drives knowledge maximization.
Knowledge maximization results from Six Sigma's "VOTC" (voice of the
customer), customer councils and visits, product and other
collaboration, interactive communications, etc.
The goal of operational maximization is customer-centricity.
Customer-centricity involves more than segmented customer service.
It also involves leadership and change management, R&D/product
development and pricing. One overlooked area is compensation and
pricing. Unless the organization, and especially the sales force, is
compensated based on retention and customer profitability, they will
continue to concentrate on acquisition, inevitably resulting in the
20% (or greater) customer churn that steals profitability.
Results maximization depends on measurement, measurement,
measurement. By using surveys/audits, financial analysis, and
operational and other reporting, companies must measure customer
equity growth, retention, lead conversion, sales cycle length,
responsiveness and other areas.
Do customers ever think about or care about your brand architecture?
Does your "brand architecture" make a measurable contribution to profitability? Do customers really care
that you have, in Aaker's words, "organized and structured a brand
portfolio by specifying brand roles and the nature of relationships
between them and their markets."
Not likely.
So all this means that you might as well play with Lego blocks as
develop a "brand architecture," If you truly believe that customers
represent the strategic foundation of your business, then invest in
a customer architecture today. After all, without customers, even
the most organized and structured "brand architecture" will collapse
like a house of cards.
|