Can a brand be bland?
These days it is almost impossible for any conversation with a marketing person not to include the word ‘brand’.
Now that’s no bad thing except, except, except…we all have subtly different perceptions of what that word actually means.
For some (like me) it’s primarily a gesture towards reputation – to others it is about the visual representation, the consistency of messaging, a focus on the positive attributes, an exercise in keeping up with the Jones’, aspirational value and/or a logo. Or a combination of some/all of those. I could go on.
And that’s part of the problem – the word itself has become hackneyed. Much like ‘solutions’, ‘unique’ and ‘innovative’. Which is troubling. Fundamentally we are in the business of communication – and if we don’t communicate in a way that the actual audience (not the client, nor our agency peers) understands, then we have failed. It’s as simple as that.
Back in the day I used to work for an agency where we produced meeting notepads that featured a ‘Bullshit Bingo’ section, full of the dreadful ‘marketing-speak’ that used to drive us all around the twist (I wish I’d pinched a pad or two to remember all the words that featured, but I do recall that my favourite was ‘moving forward’ – which was code for ‘I’m bored of and/or unprepared for and/or ignorant of this bit, can we skim it?’, to which the answer was usually a collective “No!”). You slipped into cliche and someone would ring your bell. Clients loved it. It was unpretentious. It was self-effacing. It was fun. And it turned out that clients much preferred simple, uncomplicated language to elitist marketing code words.
Now isn’t that a thing!
Which brings me back to ‘brand’.
I increasingly find myself reminding those people who champion brand over all else that the REAL object of the exercise, and the reason for our existence, is to sell more stuff (whether a physical product or an ethereal service).
Brand (and/or brand reputation) is only ONE of the factors at play when an audience is considering a purchase.
There is often a hierarchy of factors, and this can be fluid – sometimes brand is at the top, other times it isn’t. Consider this: If you’re dehydrated are you REALLY going to get too twisted about the fact that the only shop on top of the mountain doesn’t stock your preferred brand of bottled water? (NOTE: Does anyone really have a preferred brand of bottled water??). Wouldn’t availability, or your ability to pay, be more important at that point? All things are naturally relative.
Moreover, in a congested market (in whatever sector) if all brands are trying to take the moral/ecological/ethical/emotional/economic high ground to enhance their brand, just what value does that high ground actually have? It then descends into a messy, undignified bun fight.
But hey, isn’t our job actually just to get our product noticed?
One of my heroes Dave Trott once said something along the lines of ‘when you’re shopping in a supermarket try to be aware of why YOU put a product in your basket…’
In that moment we are the audience, the great unwashed, reacting to a combination of inwardly digestible/digested information (pun intended). Often we’re not thinking very hard about it at all.
Of course we will always strive to do the very best for those who pay our invoices – but we cannot (and should not) be seduced by account profitability, and conveniently forget the job we have been tasked with.
We must not dwell on over-complicated nuances, and instead remember the thing we’ll be actually measured by…did we have a positive effect on sales?