How To Build A Brand In 30 Days

As previously announced, my book How To Build A Brand In 30 Days will be published by Capstone in April 2010. Along with the launch of the book I am planning a series of seminars based around the content.

Perfect for entrepreneurs, entrepreneurs-to-be, and anyone running a small business or organisation, the book and the seminar will explore brand in a down-to-earth but inspiring way. Full of exercises and concepts that are both accessible and challenging, How To Build A Brand In 30 Days will enable small brands to punch above their weight.

The rise and rise of own label

I’m frequently challenged to explain, and indeed justify, why I think brands are so important. The most robust challenge of late has come as part of a conference debate with the investment management firm Baillie Gifford.

During our debate we discussed the dramatic rise of the supermarket own label ranges. The evidence is very powerful that in the last two and a half years the percentage of shoppers’ budget spent on own label (also called private label) products has started shooting up. This would appear to be great news for the supermarkets, who make higher margins from selling own label goods, whilst being potentially very bad news for the branded goods companies where volumes and pricing are both under attack from own label goods.

Own label has evolved dramatically over the past few years. Taking Tesco as an example, own label accounts now for around half their UK sales. And it’s a zero sum game of course: every pound spent on own label goods means a pound less on traditional brands.

But own label hasn’t always been the powerhouse it is today. Turn the clock back to 1970s and own label really meant low quality generic products which were purchased only because of the price advantage they offered: groceries as commodities. The value ranges of the supermarkets, in their simple (deliberately downmarket) packaging still offer that option of course. The product quality is still not great but those value products have a place in everyone’s shopping basket depending on circumstances. The price difference is still the main driver. A Tesco own label, value range, cereal can cost as little as 70p compared to around £3.00 for the equivalent size leading brand product from, say, Kellogs.

The next step in the evolution of own label were the ‘copycat’ products. These products mimic the major label products in packaging design and colour, name, and even in features like associated cartoon characters. You only have to compare Tesco’s equivalent to Kellogg’s iconic Rice Krispies product to see just how sophisticated is the brand imitation. Of course there is still a big price difference. In this case the own label imitator is around half the price of the Kelloggs product. It’s a pretty compelling alternative, with excellent product quality.

Couple this with the fact that it’s the supermarkets that control their own shelf space and you can see a pretty formidable competitive threat to the traditional brands.

The third and most recent development in the growth of own label is typified by the Tesco Finest range, and its equivalents from Sainsbury’s (Taste The Difference) and from the other leading supermarkets.

What has been achieved in these cases is something quite sensational in a brand sense when you consider the very humble origins of the own label concept. These premium own label ranges have become aspirational brands in their own right. Remarkable I think, and a phenomenon that demonstrates how own label has truly come of age.

To read the article in full, click here

FTSE 100 bosses get a poor reception

A mystery caller test carried out on behalf of outsourced reception provider Moneypenny shows that only one in four FTSE companies rated as 'excellent' on the phone and only half know their boss’s name. The company asked me to comment on the story.

The FTSE First Impression Index commissioned by Moneypenny, has revealed a new look FTSE listing where only the friendliest and most helpful companies top the charts and share price is meaningless.

The independent survey, carried out in August and September, assessed the country’s most recognised companies against strict criteria to test telephone etiquette and build ‘First Impressions’ scores. One thousand calls were made to the 100 companies over a four week period by trained mystery callers who rated companies on speed, friendliness, clarity and knowledge. Key findings were:

First Impression Winners – The top five scorers topping the new 'index' were (in order) Experian, Friends Provident Group, Invensys, BHP Billiton, and Associated British Foods

Bottom of the pile – Bringing up the rear was Next, followed by Anglo American, Thomas Reuters, Scottish & Southern Energy and Foreign & Colonial Investment Trust

Quick but unfriendly – 74% of receptionists at FTSE 100 listed companies are answering calls within five seconds but only in 44% of calls were staff cited as 'very friendly'

Retailers forget their manners – Despite their customer service ethic, the Retail sector gave one of the worst first impressions of all

Dial ‘U’ for Unhelpful – Only 56% of receptionists knew the CEO’s name and only 8% were able to answer to simple enquiries directly

"Our experiment shows that share price means nothing when you have a bad telephone manner," said Rachel Clacher, co-founder of Moneypenny. "The bulk of our finest companies are distinctly average when it comes to making a first impression in those vital first few seconds to mystery callers. They might be quick and there might be a person, not a machine, at the end of the line but they aren’t oozing friendliness and often don’t have the most basic information."

Encouragingly more than three quarters (89%) of calls were answered by a human being, rather than a pre-recorded or automated system, while in 97% of calls the receptionist identified the company immediately, although only identified him or herself on 15% of occasions.

When comparing different sectors on their 'First Impressions' score, Financial Services came out top followed by Pharmaceuticals and Telecoms. Propping up the list were Oil companies, Retailers and Tobacco companies who all scored badly.

Clacher added: "Banks and financial institutions seemed to have turned on the charm and despite the flak they are getting generally in the media, they give callers a feeling that they care. Retailers on the other hand were poor, and their customer service ethic definitely doesn’t translate from the cash till to the switchboard."

Clacher concludes, "All too often, if a CEO called their own switchboards they would be shocked. With our index we want to send the message that getting your first impression right on the phone plays an important part in what you sell and the money you make. By highlighting the best and the worst amongst British household names we want to start the debate on what businesses can do to improve."

I think that perhaps the biggest surprise in the survey is that retailers don’t seem to put much effort into how they deal with phone enquiries. Of course the great majority of their customers are dealt with in store rather than by phone, but the phone impressions may be worryingly indicative of their attitude to communication, which is a crucial aspect of brand.

Overall I think that poor scores in this survey have to be laid squarely at those responsible for training. All staff in any organisation should have core knowledge of their company, from their boss’s name to info on complaints procedures. A receptionist, even for a company which doesn’t get that many phone enquiries, is one of the front line brand representatives for the company.

Too often I think receptionists are taken for granted when they should instead be superbly trained, kept informed, motivated and incentivised to provide great service. The winners in this survey should congratulate the receptionists and those who train them. Those who didn’t fare so well should not blame the receptionists, but look closely at their company culture, training and their brand meaning.

Swiss brands can cut it

Switzerland may be a small country in terms of land and population but it is one of the richest countries in the world with a disproportionate number of influential global brands - Nescafé, Nestlé, Credit Suisse, Rolex, Omega, Lindt and Longines to name just a few. Switzerland has a legendary reputation for high quality, precision and luxury and clearly understands the value of branding - its government published a comprehensive corporate identity manual for ‘Brand Switzerland’ because “a focused and strong brand definition is necessary for successful positioning in the international market.” In fact, the inherent value of ‘Swiss made’ brands is so high that the country is considering new laws to protect ‘made in Switzerland’ and Swiss cross labels. They would potentially make it legal to use the well-known Swiss cross (white on red) as a marketing tool but restrict the Swiss coat of arms to government use only. This would have a direct impact on Victorinox, who has used both the Swiss cross and the coat of arms for 100 years to make one of the country’s most iconic products – the Swiss Army knife. Whatever happens, Swiss brands are sure to continue cutting it on the global stage.

Brands get social

As more brands rush to jump on the social media bandwagon and harness the power of social networking websites such Facebook and Twitter to become ‘friends’ with their customers, they do not always receive a warm reception. These social media sites need to offer brand-friendly business solutions to increase their own revenue and profitability but not at the cost of user experience. There is a danger of popular platforms like Twitter – and the brands that use them - alienating users with heavy handed promotional attempts. A recent report told how Ford has recruited 100 ‘agents’ who are rewarded with free use of a car in exchange for spreading the Ford Fiesta gospel throughout social media. Two basic principles underlie the difference between effective and clueless use of social media by brands: the content has to be engaging, and it has to be authentic. Paying bloggers to promote a product will be quickly seen through, and sending followers corporate-speak marketing messages is likely to alienate them. Brands must remember that ‘social media" means two-way communication so they must listen and respond, not just broadcast.

Tories take tips from brand Obama

With their party conference taking place in Manchester this week, the Conservatives have looked to America and brand Obama for inspiration leading up to next year’s general election. The Tory party is launching Myconservatives.com, an online campaign network to help drum up support from non-members that inspired by the digital marketing techniques used by US president during his successful election campaign last year in the hope they can match Obama's success.

Gone Phishing?

Scams that use a brand's own recognition and trustworthiness against it – such as phishing – is a growing trend that has been dubbed ‘brandjacking’. It is an increasing threat to trusted brands such as PayPal to Amazon, which are being targeted by criminals to trick consumers into handing over sensitive personal information. ‘Brandjacking’ hit a record high in the second quarter of 2009, according to a recent survey by MarkMonitor. It identified financial services brands as the most abused, accounting for 80% of all attacks during the period. The exploitation of popular social networking site brands to steal login and password information rose nearly 170% year over year. Pharmaceutical brands were another target. What is most worrying is how these brandjacking scams undermine the very strength of the brands they leverage. Furthermore, many companies may not even been aware that they are under attack.

Class of 2009

Interbrand has just revealed its latest list the top 100 most valuable global brands for 2009. Google has notched up the biggest rise in brand value, which grew 25% over the past year to reach nearly $32bn. In growth terms, it was closely followed by Amazon, which saw its brand equity boosted 22% to almost $8bn.There were double-digit rises in the technology sector for BlackBerry and Apple, which made it into the top 20 global brands for the first time. Meanwhile, retail brands Zara and H&M also experienced brand value growth, despite the recession. The economic climate has, unsurprisingly, led to declines in the value of brands in the banking sector. UBS is this year's biggest faller in the list with its value halving over the past year, while financial firms including Morgan Stanley, HSBC and American Express also saw double digit falls.

Subscribe

If you've been forwarded this by a friend, you can subscribe here.

Visit the website

If you are interested in finding out more about all things brand, you can visit my website here.