Branding & Social Media
Dec|28|2009 Laura Savard and Mark Gallagher
An overwhelming number of social media “experts” are calling for companies to surrender control of their brands to a social media empowered public. Even Forrester Research went as far as to suggest that the day of the “brand manager” is dead, calling for a complete overhaul of marketing, in which brand managers are replaced by “brand advocates.”
Consumers and companies have always co-owned their brands. Remove either the company or the consumers from the equation and the brand ceases to exist. Brand managers simply manage the relationship, by managing expectations. So, what’s changed?
In the past companies promised a targeted audience a specific benefit. A relevant and compelling message prompted consumers to try a given brand. If the brand delivered on it’s promise, the brand succeeded. If that brand failed to keep its promise, failed to stay relevant, it failed in the market.
Today, the same rules apply. Yet, word-of-mouth is amplified through social media channels. This has allowed consumers to publish their own views. Either exalting or condemning a brand and often making promises on the brand’s behalf. This doesn’t mean that companies are no longer in control. The balance may be shifting. Whether in Print, Radio, TV, Internet, Mobile or Social Media, the formula remains the same. Companies and consumers share control, just as they always have.
In the past few years we’ve seen a radical shift as consumers now have the ability to converse with one another within a broad, yet highly focused digital world. Email, Facebook, twitter and a plethora of forums have provided the opportunity for consumers to share with one another and for brands to speak with consumers, not merely at them. This doesn’t mean that companies should surrender control. Companies now have yet another channel to manage consumers’ expectations.
In fact, innovative brands such as Apple, BMW and LG can’t surrender control without loosing their leadership positions. They understand that the customer doesn’t always know what they want until it is presented.
The basic building blocks of differentiation, relevance and authenticity haven’t changed. Social media simply amplifies the gap between those who understand how to connect with consumers and those who don’t.
What if consumers were calling the shots, creating the products and managing brands? Would we see revolution, evolution or outright destruction? What are your thoughts?
“If I had asked consumers what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse.”—Henry Ford
Brand Sonification
Change is Inevitable
A Product is NOT a Brand
Coca-Cola and Santa Claus
The “Value” of Brand
What is strategy?
Subtractive Thinking
RiP! A Remix Manifesto
Great post guys,
I think your Ford quote sums it up well. A lot of the time, people don't know what they want so if the consumers were calling the shots a brand's strategy would be become a mishmash of uncalculated wishful thinking.
I think the most important dynamic change here is the shifting of the power balance. Where once the gap between the brand and customer was watertight, now it is a porous membrane where ideas can flow back and forth with ease.
So sure, brands have to satisfy a growing number of customers to satisfy (or placate), but if they can harness that feedback as a competitive advantage, it will only serve to strengthen their brand.
Cheers,
Charlie
Mark — again, a thought provoking post.
This time the question rolling around is: Why do brands exist?
From a consumer point of view they are simply an emotional short cut to a decision; from a corporate point of view they are a means of greasing the wheels of commerce. So, providing consistent experiences is good for both parties in terms of satisfaction, evangelism, loyalty, margin and return on investment.
There can be no doubt that successful brands listen and respond as part of their strategy. How they choose to execute that is a tactical decision. Even if a company doesn't actively participate in social media to its fullest, they do try to respond to sales figures.
Rather than 'control' maybe 'curator' is a better choice for the active role that someone inside a company has to play to synthesize a brand promise and marshal resources to deliver on it.
I'm not sure that companies ever had a choice, either.
It's not a matter of whether or not the business drives the car, in my opinion. It's a matter of whether or not they lay the road in the right direction. To forgo a metaphor, the job of the business is not to lead the conversation, but to be aware of it and help generate positive buzz.
I whole-heartedly disagree that the "brand manager" is dead. They just have a new strategy.
Interesting post and discussion. Thanks. I think Jordan may have hit on the present day "branding" dilemma with this comment:
"I suggest that a brand IS the public perception of a product, service, or organization."
Pre-social media that assertion was easily made and defended, since mass media created a mass perception. Today, a brand is a "niche" or even an "individual" perception.
They only economical way to create a consensus "individual" perception, is to create something remarkable (think Apple). The accumulative individual perceptions, reinforced by actual experiences, create the "public" perception.
Today's consumer (and donor, voter, etc.) is, for the most part, simply too savvy and skeptical to have their collective perception "created" from a top-down, image and communication-driven approach.
Steve Jobs would agree that the consumer doesn't know what they want, but they talk about it anyway. Not so sure that anyone actually means releasing total control of a brand's product and marketing decisions to the consumer, but perhaps you should interpret those leading the discussion as suggesting that we embrace consumer participation, that we let them into our dialogue and that we join theirs. It's really all about building relationships and eliminating what used to be artificial barriers between those who created and dispatched the messages and those who received them.
We should note that there is a substantial difference between product management and brand management. Brand control can be distributed without losing control of product development.
Considering I've been giving talks about brands giving up control (http://www.slideshare.net/thejordanrules/giving-up-control) I feel like I should explain my perspective.
I don't suggest creating user-generated brands, but suggest that a brand be fluid enough with its messaging and objectives that it can bend to accommodate feedback from the community.
I suggest that a brand IS the public perception of a product, service, or organization. In that definition, brand managers are still essential in managing the brands communication – but it's also essential that they take their blinders off and realize their brand isn't what they say it is – their brand is what the community says it is.
Jordan,
Agreed! Brands live in the minds of consumers and feedback from that community is essential. Your presentation is great. However, I personally have an issue with the term "control." I believe that it's somewhat misleading. I don't believe companies should "give up control" of their brands. They never had control.
The task of brand management revolves around managing consumers' expectations, not by consistently selling a promise but rather consistently delivering on one. This doesn't mean consumers don't have a say, as they have the final vote (their cash and credit cards.) Today, with the advent of social media, they now have their tweets, blogs and posts.
Our perspectives aren’t any more synonymous, than they are mutually exclusive.
Mark Gallagher
Brand Expressionist®
Companies, their brands and how marketers planned them were once basically structured like the old medieval castles of old where they had total control over many factors of consumption.
With the rapid rise in technology which have changed and empowered people, we have a situation where companies are facing the growing change they need to become honest brokers in sharing what services and goods they offer to a community instead of "campaign" them or "advertise" them. Campaigns and ads are now being re-thought, though still small in scale, because the community is too savvy to be convinced by that alone. They alone do not build the trust that's important in building awareness, trial and advocacy.
Social media is redefining the terms of our relationships with 70 years of top-down branding. The older models of branding are being dragged along to this new day.
__________________________________________________________________
Langston Richardson | Creative Visionary – Direction – Strategy – Ideas – Execution
http://www.langstonrichardson.com | p. 202.905.2065 | e: langston@langstonrichardson.com
Coming from the brand side, social media is a great and easy way to find your target audience and get feedback. Additionally, most active consumers are spending more and more time on social media sites.
"Surrender control without giving up leadership" Love this! Excellent read!
@1day1brand @andrewfstewart
There is a world of difference between being consumer-informed and being consumer-led. The former builds brands the ladder builds ubiquity.
Mark Gallagher
Brand Expressionist®
I agree with Tom that the perception is reality in branding. You can never totally control the brand, Brand Managers do play a role in managing what they can. Helping the company be aware of it's brand and doing what they can to stay on course true to itself.