If you don't have a strategy, you are hoping for success and as we all know, hope is not a strategy. But identity is a component of strategy and successful identity (however that maybe defined) is an element of strategy and not a discipline on its own.

The key to successful brand strategy is identifying segment influencers and requirements for value and matching company attributes to those needs.

Key to this is operational excellence (sales, supply chain, customer engagement etc) and, in terms of messaging, content that resonates with those segments.

As an example, I may like a company identity but if the product doesn't provide value to me and the messaging doesn't resonate with me, I won't buy it however, I may not like a company identity or I may be bored with it but if the product provides value to me I am more likely to buy it.

And it's important to note that a separate strategy is required for acquiring new customers and existing customers. But the identity remains the same.

I don't want to rant about agencies but essentially, agencies are good at creative stuff but creativity doesn't build brands. Successful implementation of the strategy does that.

As you're aware, there is an ongoing debate over which has more value, strategy (planning) or execution (creative). We expected at least one person to make a case for specialization.

The tweet you referenced was in response to a frustrated planner tweeting about how creatives simply "Don't get it!" A number of creatives from well-established agencies have also expressed their frustration with comments such as: "I intentionally ignore what planners propose. I know what's best for the brand."

We want to be very clear here. We're not saying that departments should play nice, but rather that there should be no departments. This is how it works at our own company, strategist and creative are one in the same, under the tile "Brand Expressionist" (Sorry everyone, it's trademarked).

Cheers,

Mark Gallagher
Brand Expressionist®

Too many agencies and marketers mistake consistency for integration. The former comes when everything looks the same, sharing typefaces, colors and a design system.

This is design [execution] leading the way. But the latter [true integration of brand assets] requires an idea that can only exist when strategy and execution are merged throughout the process, because understanding all touchpoint of social media, traditional advertising, pr, design, web and direct combine to enable full customer experience.

Best mix of strategy/execution depends on understanding the audience and where it lives—not on pre-set models or preferences.

The biggest finger-pointing blame-game playing I ever saw was when I worked at ad agencies. The bigger the agency the worse it was, too. I never understood why we just couldn't work together. Insecurity? Job security? If you know how to buy media and you are the account executive, why will they need me?! I don't know…I never got that.

Very good points and a great reminder.

There are those of us in New Zealand who maintain that Richard Pearse was in fact the first person to fly an airplane.

I guess if he had Black Coffee on hand back then to craft his message and get it out to the world sooner – history would have recorded a very different outcome!

Anyway, I fully agree the importance of starting with the right strategy. The execution process does need to be managed to ensure that it is effectively implemented and aligned to the strategy. Whenever another agency is involved in the execution this requires close management of the process or it can go off track.

Note – my firm works with clients on their business strategy – which naturally incorporates marketing strategy (we make no claim to offer creative competencies however, and outsource this component to other agencies).

A very detailed creative brief (supported by the strategy session notes), close working relationships, and frequent meetings are needed to obtain a good outcome for the client in my opinion.

Based on that, it raises questions about the business models of agencies today. some planners are beginning their own gigs and starting pure strategy shops.

But if we all agree that strategy without creative execution is nothing more than an expensive doorstop, does this mean the onus is on strategy shops to incorporate creative into their business models? If they don't, do they face the same fate as Samuel Langley, destined to see their strategies incorrectly implemented by creatives who have no vested interest in executing their strategy?

Food for thought anyway.

Scenario a. Individuals who have an amazing breadth of skill and a mastery of disciplines rarely found in one individual. DaVinci comes to mind. Jobs also comes to mind. Essentially, "a shitload of ability "under one roof" to be technical about it

Scenario b. Groups that "act as one" sensing each others strengths, recognizing each others strengths and contributions. Look at jazz in the day of the 60s. There was a celebratory appreciation of each musician's improv over a tune, not because they were drunk-in-love with bebop but because they were all tracking with each other's capabilities and aesthetic. But anywhere where one is seeing INNOVATION come out of a group, one can know that all the skills are working symbiotically as they should.

Aesthetics is itself HOW one lives as much as it is WHAT one does does with those skills.

I agree: "To be truly effective, brand strategy and identity must merge to be carried out as a singular discipline." To add my own similes, separating the two would like removing:

The Franken from the Stein
The Hole from the Bagel
The subtitles from a foreign movie
The sunset from the day
The silence from a Hitchcock flick
The monologues from late night TV, and finally,
The Jerry from the Seinfeld

Here is an interesting post on the future of agencies and the important role that execution is playing today and even more so in the future – http://ryanmoede.posterous.com/advertising-creati...

Especially in fast moving environments.

Great post.