Leading Brands Lead

No, I am not talking about the "Leading Brands" that used to be a comedy group, although how could one have resisted the pitch? Leading brands lead because they are far out ahead creating something that has value to the people who need and want "it."  The people managing those brands are not afraid to dare a little, to make choices, to limit number of features, for example, to go all the way to the edge.

I remember a conversation I had once with the person who was the lead business development for a major agency in New York city. He was talking about an internal project the agency was working on around launching new brands in a competitive marketplace. A few things he said back then stuck with me for years.

Two of them were that (a) people do not necessarily know if they'd buy or like something conceptually. Yes, who would have thought that we would fall in love with a device that you essentially need to replace once the battery runs its life? At the tune of hundreds of dollars. And that (b) bold statements work better than timid improvements. You can ratchet back something that is way out there, but you'd be hard pressed to get anywhere with something that is mediocre to begin with.

Average is the enemy of memorable, we have know that for a long time. How do leading brands stand out? In many ways, it all comes back to the experience they offer, which then feeds the perception of the brand. I would also consider three other characteristics that those brands have in common with leaders.

Uno (1)

They have the ability to improvise based on context and available information. What is improvisation? According to the entry on Wikipedia, it's the

practice of acting, talking and reacting, of making and creating, in the moment and in response to the stimulus of one's immediate environment. This can result in the invention of new thought patterns, new practices, new structures or symbols, and/or new ways to act.

This invention cycle occurs most effectively when the practitioner has a thorough intuitive and/or technical understanding of the necessary skills and concerns within the improvised domain.

Improvisation and leadership go hand in hand because leadership has that built in ability to forge ahead and create new competencies. More and more as we talk about this three-dimensional conversation between people inside organizations with brands and customers, improvisational skills are taking center stage.

Enjoy this performance by Tommy Emmanuel.

The thing is we never have all the information, nor we may have the luxury - time, attention, resources anyone? - to be able to go down several paths. And testing is imperfect for the reason I outlined above - people may not know what is possible until it is available to them, maybe through sampling it first when others have it.

In case you're interested, there is an Applied Improvisation Network.

Due (2)

They focus on one or two characteristics that set them apart, even though they may have much more to offer. Yes, we have been talking about key differentiators for years. Yet, when we look at marketing messages, what we see is a sea of sameness. Why? Inability to choose one thing and commit to it.

Culture can be a differentiator. Personality can lead you to think differently.

Tre (3)

They spend more time where it counts, with customers. It is easy to see the world through the lens of busyness that colors our days. Immersed in the day to day programs, meetings, stuff to do, we may lose touch with those who really matter to the health of our brand. 

Ask yourself and your brand, what commitment am I willing to make to do what I know I should do? This is akin to the description of a dream leadership coach Marshall Goldsmith described in an article for Fast Company:

"You know, I am incredibly busy right now. In fact, I feel about as busy today as I have ever felt in my entire life. To be honest, a lot of the time I just feel over-committed. To be real honest - given what is going on at work and at home - sometimes my life feels a little out of control.

But, you see, I am working on some very unique and special challenges right now. I think that the worst of this will be over in four or five months. After that I am going to take a couple of weeks and get organized. I am going to start working on my personal development. Then I am going to start spending some more time with my family. I may even start my 'healthy lifestyle' program. After that everything is going to be different -and it won't be crazy anymore."

The time to talk with customers is now.

We're not in the times where we were in the fulfillment business anymore. Today we are in the demand creation business. Yet, many organizations are still behaving as if we were still taking orders galore. If you want to be in that position, you need first to focus on leading.

Comments

[Justin Foster]

Excellent post! I'm consistently amazed how many companies are clinging to old definitions of brands and branding. Being a "leading brand" is no longer about "awareness", but (as you said) about truly leading.

[JohnatDELL]

Really enjoyed this post. In the end, I think most will agree that customers actually manage your brand. Listening to customers and then acting to give them what *they* perceive as value can be an powerful differentiator.

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Justin -- Marketing has not changed, what changes constantly is how we do it and where we do it.

@John -- A subtle distinction I see between leading and managing - great managers turn people's talent into performance, get people done through work, while great leaders rally people towards a better future. So I think customers infuse brands with their experience, yes. However, a leading brand takes customers to their future.

[Gordon Whitehead]

Fantastic piece on leading brands. You write very well, easy to read and great content.

[mvellandi]

I am inferring that you're using 'leading' as both an adjective and as a progressive verb.

The former is measurable if weighted factors are defined and complete data is available within a defined sample set; if not, it's a qualitative assessment open to personal -> group interpretation.

I like the verb version as it makes us curious - how? What are they doing that is special? etc..

[Tim Brunelle]

Valeria -

Another great post!

"Average is the enemy of memorable..." Or "good is the enemy of great." But my favorite quote on the subject comes from Ira Glass, host of This American Life. "Everything in the world wants to be mediocre. To make something *not* mediocre requires such a f*#@ing act of will." In other words, words are often not enough.

And nice nod to improvisation. I got a BA in Jazz, and the Improvisation classes were the most valuable. But the key here isn't just a willingness to improvise -- it's also having lots and lost of practice under your belt before you step up. 99% of improvisation is harnessing muscle memory. Or as the great drummer Chester Thompson puts it, "Learn all you can, then forget it and play what you feel." If business leaders haven't studied, aren't keeping their skills/chops up, then they'll "sound" terrible when they do improvise.

Can't wait to discuss all this in person tomorrow!

- Tim

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Gordon -- thank you for your kind words and welcome.

@Mario -- yes, there is a linguistic differentiation. What is defined as leading, leads -> action verb.

@Tim -- of course you've got to have the good to deliver on improvisation. Here's a thought though, companies have more than enough expertise, and no ability to let it loose, to unleash it for the good of customers. Well, part of it is that there are different skill sets needed in some organizations to rise to the top - and those are not necessarily the same that customers care about...

[WOW! Women's World]

You are so right! Now I understand how a "leading brand" sports apparel company can charge $65 for a pair of women's work out pants. And I bought them, never thinking to look at the tag.

Julie for WOW!

[Nathania Johnson]

I really loved what you said about improvisation. I recently "graduated" from an improvisational acting program. I learned much more than acting though.

One of the key techniques is to take care of yourself (your character) in a scene. If you make strong choices and really commit to the scene and your character - it makes it easier for your scene partner(s). Sounds a lot like leadership, I say!

Another thing I learned from a book by Viola Spolin is that improvisation happens when you let go of your inhibitions. This absolutely applies to what you wrote about "sameness." True improvisers disregard the inhibitions they feel from society and their own insecurities. And once they do, they're able to create in a way that they were designed to do.

[Valeria Maltoni]

@WOW! Women's World -- welcome to the conversation. I like to get to know my readers, so feel free to drop me a note with your name, etc. It looks like you're getting started on a project there (the site says in beta).

@Nathania -- so true and thank you for sharing your learning from the program. I always wanted to take an acting class. Then I wanted to take voice lessons. But maybe they are both rolled into one when I work on expressing the personality of the brands I work on. Good lesson on letting go. We are our worst critics!

[bob visco]

would take issue with word choice of "improvise" and instead believe the (overused) word "innovate" better fits. improvise is to 'loose' for a disciplined brand approach

[Valeria Maltoni]

Bob,

Thank you for taking the time to comment and welcome to the conversation. What we're finding with the new consumer is that brands that adhere to a rigid set of guidelines and rules tend to do less well than brands that provide you with an experience that fits you vs. the process of the organization.

You are quite correct, innovation is an overused term and improvisation can very much be the ability to innovate upon receiving feedback - in the moment. I've been researching and talking a lot about context marketing. I think we will see a lot more of that from winning or leading brands.

[oboqs onibere]

very nice article.
points # 1 & 2 above are easily adapted by brands that want to lead in their various categories but point # 3, which is the most crucial because it is a factor that encourages loyalty is usually under emphasized and sometimes disregarded. I mean without the consumers how would you measure a leader? And to think that these so called brand leaders sometimes don't even have time for their loyal customers is appalling, but they easily spend all their time on massive Ad campaigns. Must times a little message via any medium expressing appreciation for patronage would definitely do the trick.

[Janet]

Great article, thank you Valeria. Agree with your choice of 'improvise' very much. Having spent a majority of my career in high tech middle mgmt, I now lead marketing for a very successful e-commerce SBO. Our experience improvising includes testing new ideas very quickly -- customer research, new marketing promos, customized selling strategies, etc. What we've learned from our quiet 'spot' tests has allowed us to refine (and profite from) our unique value add in a whole new way. In my past roles, corporate 'rules' that would have prevented us from being as nimble in the past.

[Valeria Maltoni]

@oboqs - I am putting together more thinking about the future of advertising for leading brands. The current model is quite broken, but still works enough for everyone to be going down the same "proven" path. Most times just saying "I hear you" can build more loyalty than a loyalty program ever would.

@Janet - experimenting is important. Prototypes, field observations, testing new ideas quickly can all contribute to a stronger outcome. The key is to learn when the testing is done sufficiently. There are some things that take time, especially new things, to have an impact. From feedback I receive, for example, I know that people advance new thinking on some ideas presented here sometimes weeks if not months later.