The roots of branding

Mon, Jun 8 2009 11:40 | Brand Strategy, retail, authenticity | Permalink

So...carrying on from the idea of "there's never been such a good time to create a brand", we thought we'd have a go ourselves.
Whilst brand strategy is all very intellectually rewarding (and still our proper job!) both Jonathan and I have (a not very well hidden) artistic streak. Both having been trained as designers we have over the years maintained a strong interest and practice in drawing, painting and illustration and have a deep love of letterpress printing, pattern paper and book design. We decided to dust off the printing press and create a brand offer combining the best of today's empowering technology with our love for the smell of ink, texture of paper and satisfaction of pattern. And bring to bear our branding expertise.
Starch Green is something we love doing and gets back to our roots as artist/designers - and is an excellent exercise in developing an authentic brand and seeing if we can grow it organically with a community of customers - we like the idea of 'viral' word-of-mouth growth, responding to what our customers like best and hoping they'll become advocates. A few key drivers that we have learned from developing brands are:
  • authenticity is king
  • real brands take time 
  • believe in what you do
  • listen to customers
  • reward advocates
Our aim is to develop a brand that is charming and delightful. We have an offer of handmade design that stretches the not very great distance from wood engraving and pattern paper, through what is these days known as graphic design but we might prefer to call commercial art, to artefacts decorated with our pattern papers. Our inspirations are Ravilious, Picture Puffins, Curwen endpapers and the growing band of artist/retailers inhabiting Artisania including St Judes, Harrington & Squires, Labour & Wait and Rennies. 
While Brand Guardians consultancy carries on from strength to strength, there's a thrilling excitement about creating a new brand that is all about doing things because we like them. Listening to Start the Week on Radio 4 this morning Katie Mitchell, opera director, asked Sir Peter Hall on what basis he put his repertoire in Bath together. His answer, "The basis is entirely egocentric based on the plays I want to do and the actors I can get." Which leads me nicely to the other ingredients of branding that we hope to exploit:
  • a vision that we are passionate about (what we want to do)
  • that we are able to do (available 'actors').

Kate

Another day, another launch...

Tue, Mar 31 2009 03:09 | Brand Strategy, brand thinking, brand name, brand architecture | Permalink

welcome


It’s always nice when a brand you have been working on finally gets to launch, but it’s especially nice when the brand that emerges fulfils the promise you saw when you first won the job - and extra extra special when it is a johnson banks design.

It’s a little over a year since I first went to see Debbie Bannigan, the CEO of Swanswell Charitable Trust, a drug and alcohol charity based in the West Midlands, and although she had a number of specific issues about the existing brand image, her main brief to me was ‘give me a brand my people and service users deserve’.

Nice brief eh?

Ones like these don’t come along very often, and true to her word, Debbie set the bar high, but was invariably open and positive as we closed in on our solution. As all our clients will confirm, I never tire of telling them brand development is less about invention, and more about archeology. We know the solution is ‘in there somewhere’, it just has to be revealed.

So we spent a fair amount of time talking to everyone we could; interviews, workshops (I like workshops because someone will usually have the solution without always knowing it!), service users (they swept away a few of my own personal pre-conceptions), in fact anyone who would talk to us.

Debbie also had a compelling vision for where she wanted to take the organisation – expansion of the service, expansion beyond it’s traditional regional base. We got a very enlightened bunch of trustees to buy in to all these new plans and endorse a new vision and mission.

Once we had done our brand strategy ‘thing’ (capabilities, competition, customers, vision and mission etc) we pitched out the visual identity work. We were delighted when our old friend Michael Johnson of johnson banks won the pitch, he impressed everyone with his usual combination of creativity, wit and charm.

Michael and his team did a great job, interpreting our creative brief, and bringing to life a brand idea that is both eye catching and engaging.

So what are the highlights?

1. We got rid of the multi-various names Swanswell had been operating under (and there were quite a few) and re-named everything Swanswell

2. We broke away from the generic market language (which tends to be rather grey and neutral) and adopted a defiantly upbeat message – ‘Change and be Happy’ (no glass half empty here!).

3. Michael came up with a great visual device/metaphor that underpins the identity, something we call ‘crumple’. The logo (and many of the other components of the identity) is a half crumpled piece of paper with the name written on it (see below) – this device illustrates the process service users go through as they change their habits of substance abuse – from crumpled to smooth. We even have business cards that staff have to half crumple before they hand them out, so they have to explain what it means (we’ve had amazing feedback on how well this works, it’s funny, surprising and amazingly touching!).

4. Michael developed an entire visual look and feel that helps to simplify the language and messages for the brand, that is distinctive, fresh and like nothing else in the sector.

5. We have a very hard-hitting photographic route suitable for advertising and promotion, which we are holding back until the right opportunity arrises.

6. Michael and his team have diligently worked through the minutiae of stationary, leaflets, printwork and ‘stuff’ to ensure the brand embeds itself into every nook and cranny of Swanswell (lets face it, designers never make money on this stuff – but it has to be done). They oversaw a quick ‘re-skinning’ of the existing website, which will undergo a more significant upgrade later in the year. Oh, and lets not forget creating a comprehensive visual identity manual, powerpoint templates etc etc.

7. We have taken every staff member through the brand story – ‘the why where what when how what-if’ of their new Swanswell brand.

Well I could go on, but I’m sure you get the picture… Why not visit the website?

Thanks to everyone who worked on it – the management team, their clients, the service users, the designers, the trustees, the staff, the printers, the web designers…. I love you all!

Jonathan

oldswanswell1
Swanswell Charitable Trust - before...


line


Swanswell - after...
webleaf1
get
line
change1
line
work
line

thank1

Jonathan Mercer

The New England Kit

Tue, Mar 31 2009 10:16 | Brand Strategy, brand experience, fashion, England, authenticity, nostalgia, tribes | Permalink
Now I'm not an all out, rattle-waving football fan, but I do like to watch a good match and I always get a thrill watching England play. And it's been hard not to be aware of the controversy surrounding the new England kit revealed on Saturday at the friendly against Slovakia. 5 Live's Alan Green even went as far as calling it "grotesque".

I think it's fantastic. It has tapped into the mood of a nation. It's reserved retro styling, soft, aertex-like appearance, and neat tailoring sums up beautifully the nostalgia-austerity-mend and make do era that we have now entered. Rather than the gaudy go-faster stripes, chavvish cut and wealth flaunting designs of the past this kit has introduced a bespoke reserve, requiring that, as Simon Mills says in the Guardian today, "every England player's ham-sized thigh and ripped chest was measured for size." Not only is this expression of Brand England hitting the crest of the national mood wave, it's also creating a level of interest and excitement way beyond that of just watching football (if that is possible!)

As a complete sense of Englishness oozes through every fibre the three lions look better than ever and the logo of Umbro proud and relevant. Established in 1924 this English brand has been tailoring kits for the England football team for 85 years. Their approach to this season's kit is refreshing and sensitive, involving the primary customers, the team, and distilling the essence of the brand beautifully. The website announces, "Once again, Umbro brings together the traditional values of classic tailoring with modern fabric technology and a revolutionary design philosophy. The new England kit is the proud result. Honoring the past, looking forward to the future. The right shirt at the right time. Tailored by Umbro. Tailored by England."

If the welling pride and ham-sized thighs and ripped chests haven't made you feel like a lie down, watch this...

Kate

Subcultural creatives

Fri, Mar 13 2009 01:03 | Brand Strategy, authenticity, tribes | Permalink
Many brands succeed by their attachment to a tribe or their ability to "find a parade", as Marty Neumeier promotes in his excellent little book 'ZAG'. Reading Tom Heuerman's latest pamphlet 'The Cultural Creatives' I see that brand Obama's success was largely due to the wave of Cultural Creatives in the US nurturing the right climate for his optimistic leadership.

Cultural Creatives have a lot of resonance with the Brand Guardians leadership. The basic values of authenticity, engaged action, idealism, globalism and ecology, and the importance of women are close to our hearts and implicit in our work. We are also highly sympathetic to the less than perfect creative process. In the article Heuerman says, "Creativity is messy and inefficient. Mistakes will be made as we move beyond our knowledge. Not all will be done well. Such is the nature of transformational change."

The thought of influential tribes and cultural leaders reminded me of the extraordinary 'Exactitudes' project by Dutch photographer Ari Versluis and profiler Ellie Uyttenbroek. Their work brings a visual analysis to ideas of individualism and identity. They were featured in an episode of 'The Culture Show' last year (which incidentally briefly shows our eldest son as a 'bonkerboy').


Perceptiveness and sensitivity to cultural tides are heightened at the moment, and essential to chart our way to a better future.

Kate

The best time for branding

Mon, Feb 23 2009 02:43 | Brand Strategy, brand thinking | Permalink
"Recessions force you to be more creative and mean that the fundamentals of branding can be rewritten. I think people will be looking very hard at their branding to position themselves post-recession."

So says Dave Allen, former Brand Union CEO and two weeks in to starting his new brand consultancy, BrandPie. There are a number of aspects of this comment that I rather like:
1. Changing the way we think about branding, being more creative is grist to our mill
2. Preparing for post-recession - an optimistic view is always appreciated
3. Branding is great value now - you can rewrite your brand now ready to be ahead of the game come the upturn
4. There is a wave of new brand consultancies starting with a few people offering real expertise and experience 

Creative thinking
One of the things that we have tried to stick to over the years is our creative heritage. We are trained as designers and use our creatively wired brains to help solve problems and communicate clearly. We have never embraced marketing speak and the complexity of brand valuation, but offered sharp minds that use the eclecticity of design thinking to add richness and common sense to brand strategy. At this time there is a re-evaluation of the value of branding; is it relevant, is it worthy, is it useful? What is useful is cutting through marketing-babble, getting a sense of 'the after-taste' of a brand, the commonality that triggers customers understanding and communicating this effectively internally and externally. Brand or be branded has never been more relevant. Have a look at this great soliloquy
on branding. But brands have to be managed creatively, innovatively, with customer empathy and with a real sense of how the business it represents fulfils the brand promise - and accordingly how well it is run to deliver a great product, great experience and a sense of good value. Indeed the idea of brand valuation is a vacuous idea if it is expected to have value despite the poor management of the business - the two concepts are completely symbiotic and that's why brand is so important to businesses - not because it's an intangible value that can be added to the balance sheet, bought and sold, or add pence to the share value.

Optimism
Not much to say on this except that what we know is that recovery is all about confidence. The war time posters were all about a gritty resolution that would see out the rather grim reality all around, our current favourite of course being "Keep Calm and Carry On." It won't be long before "Dig for Victory" becomes even more relevant as the unsustainability of our farming/retail sysytems become ever more apparent.

Great Value - do it now
According to a report by The Survey Shop, commissioned by the Principle Group called 'Implementation, Rebranding and Design' this is a great time to consider rebranding:
  • 56% of marketing directors of blue chip companies believe that a downturn could be the best time strategically to rebrand 
  • 63% of business leaders agree that the act of launching a new brand identity in uncertain times signals a bold embracing of change 

  • 65% of business leaders believe that rebranding would help large corporate institutions get back on track 
What's more, I think most branding agencies will welcome your business, be particularly responsive, have an eye to the future of brand thinking and a new reality and be very good value for money. And when the tide turns, as it will, you'll be ready with a shiny, well-placed brand to embrace the new world order.

Small, close, independent and in control
The current wave of start-up consultancies with senior brand figures establishing small and personal businesses feels like  a trend that is finally catching up with us. We have stuck to our guns over the years, determined to be the people that do the work, the thinking in our case, and talk to clients rather than run a business. This hasn't always been fashionable, but is great for our creative juices, insatiable appetite for new challenges and inspiration, and our work life balance. Being essentially 'creatives' we are far more at home in a studio surrounded by art, crafty objects and living clutter than in an office with clean-cut lines and open-plan sterility. 

Michael Peters describes his new venture as a completely different approach to branding, "We will be working directly with clients around my kitchen table." Which is both extraordinarily refreshing and a convenient strategy to take in difficult times - I'm pretty sure he has a jolly nice kitchen table too. Smaller groups can offer well-managed costs and low overheads. Shaun Bowen, who has just left Pearlfisher where he was Creative Director to set up B&B, comments,  "Keeping it small, you can get back to having relationships with clients where it's just you and them. You can be selective about clients and have that intimacy - with big consultancies, constantly chasing big accounts, you're missing opportunities to work with smaller challenger brands that want to make it big." 

The other thing we have fiercely guarded is our independence. Here's a last word from Dave Allen (who gives some good do's and dont's here) that resonates with our philosophy, "There used to be loads of independent groups, but over the past 15 years these have all been bought by the big conglomerates," he says. "It's now very difficult to get independent advice, in my view. We've tested out this idea with clients, and it resonates." Us too.

Kate

That Microsoft brand thing...

Thu, Sep 18 2008 05:23 | Brand Strategy, brand experience, brand realization, naming, advertising | Permalink

I have been meaning to write an article about the new ads from Microsoft, you know the ones – with Bill (Gates) and Jerry (Seinfeld). I had developed a theory about just what Microsoft might be up to, but before I could put the proverbial finger to keyboard, the interweb became awash with rumours that the ads have been pulled, or have possibly ‘done their job’ – depending on the spin you believe.

For those of you who haven’t heard about them (where have you been?), or seen them – here they are (assuming youtube continues to show them that is).


So what was Microsoft up to?

Well before I go too far, I have to express an interest in Microsoft, having just worked on an assignment to help rebrand most of the advertising revenue generating businesses within Microsoft – snappily called Microsoft Digital Advertising Solutions (MDAS for short) into – wait for it – Microsoft Advertising.

Now I know you may think that job didn’t need a whole heap of consultancy thinking, but as I like to think – great brand ideas in hindsight should always look kinda inevitable. The fact was that working with Microsoft was a delight – and that they really do have more big brains than you can shake a stick at, but unfortunately they are mostly huge brains that would rather focus on technology and products and functions and ‘neat stuff’ than branding – so this is where we came in.

So, far far away on another Microsoft planet (it really does feel that big) some big Microsoft brains have been pondering the ‘b’ word (brand – keep up), and why they aren’t the most loved brand on earth, as they rather feel they should be.

For 25 years they have increasingly dominated the I.T. world – particularly with those two huge cash cows, Windows and Office, but somehow their enormous portfolio of industry dominating products and services still doesn’t seem to add up to a great brand – why not?

Well, like most brand problems, the answer is incredibly simple, and incredibly complicated all at the same time. For why?

Microsoft is a very very complicated company (however hard it tries to simplify it’s organisational structure), with some very complicated products, services and propositions. It has a vast workforce of smart people coming up with smart things – and mostly what Microsoft loves best is coming up with more and more new smart things.

I have to admit I have sat through more than one meeting at Microsoft where I hadn’t the least idea what they were talking about (but hey, I am a brand consultant), and as I have already said – Microsoft is an awfully big and complicated place.

On the other hand, you have a company like Apple, that has been socking it to Microsoft on a daily basis for the last few years with their ‘Get a Mac’ campaign – you know the one – ‘Hi, I’m a Mac, and I’m a PC’ (I’ve included a few just for fun – see below).



Obviously Apple aren’t the only competitor, but for brevity lets stick with them.

I may be an aknowledged Mac fanboy, but even the most diehard Microsoft fanatic has to admit that Apple have successfully positioned themselves through this campaign at the expense of Microsoft, and we have heard barely a peep from Microsoft in defense.

Apple want their brand to stand for simplicity and elegance, with a hip and stylish panache, because they truly feel that the purpose of their products is to be simple and elegant – ‘they just work’. Their vision is delivered through the customer experience, and they are fanatical about every aspect of the experience – user interface, visual identity, websites, products, they all seem to be guided and created by one hand (and we all know who – right?).

The fact is Apple probably has the single most well managed branding programme on the planet – and it shows. They clearly pay top dollar for design talent, but what most impresses is the sheer attention to detail – it ALL looks so consistent – not in a uniform, dull and boring way, but in a beautiful, stylish cool looking way. And make no mistake – this cost a lot. But it works.

Alas Microsoft just doesn’t have such a well connected vision to experience. In fact Microsoft seems to think what it does is just too diverse to have any singular visionary idea that can be translated through a consistent brand building experience.

Don’t get me wrong, there are lots of really smart branding people within Microsoft, but the empire is just so large, so very VERY large, that very few people get a sufficient overview to draw a sufficiently singular and collectivising vision together, and the organisation doesn’t have the will or the discipline to deliver a consistent and desirable customer experience.

Microsoft is run much more as a business than a brand, so where all decisions within Apple feel like they have come personally from the hand of Steve, the decisions passing up and down the layers of management in Microsoft just don’t appear to have any cohesiveness – and that’s assuming you actually understand what most of the guys are talking about, because from my very limited experience and perspective, the one thing Microsoft really seem to enjoy is complexity.

And so this is where I think the super smart guys from Crispin Porter & Bogusky came in – the hottest advertising agency on the planet – and tasked (or challenged – you choose) to come up with an advertising campaign that will help to reposition Microsoft (and most likely create a repost to the Get a Mac campaign) with some sort of coherent Microsoft vision.

Crispin Porter & Bogusky have made a reputation creating smart, funny, insightful and effective advertising (and like all advertising guys – they all use Macs! But like a challenge) and the feeling is, if they can’t do it, nobody can.

But what is that singular vision, and how to coalesce it into a 30 second advertisement. We all know advertising on it’s own won’t solve the vision thing (right guys?), but I’m sure the Microsoft troops and their friends would at least like something to make them feel better about being at Microsoft.

So what was the big idea (at least so far…..?) because much of the commentary (and there has been lots) in the blogosphere has been along the lines of ‘what is this about?’


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/18/business/media/18adco.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

http://valleywag.com/5051455/microsoft-to-announce-jerry-seinfeld-ads-cancelled-tomorrow


http://daringfireball.net/2008/09/theres_nothing_there


Well, for what it’s worth, here is my view on what the advertising is all about….

Apple is cool – the ads are cool, the products are cool, Steve J is cool.

Microsoft is not cool, the products are not cool, and Bill G (and Steve B, especially Steve B) are not cool.

But…

Apple is kinda smug. And PC (John Hodgman in the Get a Mac ads) is kinda sweet in a not cool way. And whilst Microsoft is not cool, it is useful, and it is successful, and and (take care now – hold back the Microsoft instinct for world domination) it creates some useful products which – ahem – mostly work.

So….

Lets portray Microsoft (ie use Bill – because he IS Microsoft – and incidentally, who knew he could be so funny?) as a personality living in a dreamworld of hyper normality – Shoe Circus, Grannies that mow the lawn – ie create a rich everyman world where Bill (Microsoft) is part of – a world where Apple wouldn’t fit in, because it is just too cool and elitist.

Microsoft is anti-cool, just like the rest of us. And by making Microsoft just like the rest of us, they mis-position Apple as an outsider.

So if Microsoft is more like us (warts and all) then we are going to feel better about them, and feel more and more that somehow Apple are just too smart, too slick, too….. unlikeable.

Of course, to follow through with this strategy, Microsoft would have to build that sense of ‘us together in un-coolness’ into something wide and deep, and then drive it into the muscle of the business.

It could be a brand that reflects what we are actually like – ordinary, funny, kind, quirky – and it could help us do the things we really need to get done, and the things we actually want to get done. It could be our friend, someone you would have a beer with (not just a Starbucks), someone you would welcome into your home without worrying about how tidy your house is or whether they will hit on your wife or daughter.

But as I have said, they just don’t have the instinct, will or discipline to collectivise that vision into a consistent customer experience. And more significantly, I don’t think many of the senior executives will want to jump on the ‘us together in un-coolness’ bandwaggon. You need great discipline to subvert your own instincts for the greater good of the brand vision.

It’s a size thing, but it’s also a culture thing, and in the end I’m not sure Microsoft really have a culture that understands or accepts the basic principles of singular visions and connected collectivised customer experiences.

But hey – it makes a gazzillion dollars a second and has bred more millionaires than any other company. So who knows what will be the next move on brand Microsoft – I for one am looking forward to what Crispin Porter & Bogusky do next, and three cheers to Steve Balmer for giving them the chance…

Jonathan Mercer

Chocolatier invests in branding

Thu, Sep 18 2008 04:48 | Brand Strategy, brand experience, retail | Permalink








Thornton’s, the chocolatier, announced improved profits this year. Profits were up 19.6% for 2007/8 as compared with 2006/7. The really big news was, though, that in the press release ‘brand’ was mentioned as a success factor. Mike Davies, Thornton’s Chief Executive was quoted, “Underpinning this growth is the strategy we have been implementing to return Thorntons to sustainable, long term profitability by investing in the brand, developing innovative products, modernising the in-store environment as well as attracting and retaining the best people.”

What is really lovely, from a brand observers point of view, is that all the elements in his strategy are aspects of how to develop a great brand. With the central premis of ‘investing in the brand’ he then surrounds that with three major deliverables of brand experience – and thereby the customer’s reason to choose Thorntons.

1. Innovative products – no brand can exist without a genuine customer experience – the brand promise must deliver at the point of impact – the quality and ingenuity of the product is defining – just as Apple has achieved, again, with its delightfully brand endorsing iPod Nano-Chromatic – a rainbow feast for the eyes before they even reach your ears. Thorntons products had begun to be less than you hoped for rather than the classic brand goal of ‘exceeding expectations.’

2. Environment – the total brand experience and all that. The benefit of having a brand that has an outlet is that you can control and enhance the shopping experience. Chocolate is a gift of a product to work with – smell, taste, colour, texture…... Thorntons has (at least) twice been the theme of Marketing’s Brand Healthcheck. In 2001 Nick Moon of Futurebrand offered the advice, “See the film Chocolat and apply the little shop philosophy.” In September 2006 Futurebrand’s Jasmine Montgomery mentioned that, “Bizarrely, the brand fails to dazzle most where it has the biggest opportunity – in its own retail outlets. Plastic bins, crowded shelves, busy packaging, cheap plastic price frames and overuse of ‘offer’ stickers on the fascia contribute to an overall diminution of the brand experience.” Her advice,”Refit all outlets and remove all ‘free’ and ‘special offer’ window stickers. The windows should be the seducers of women.”

3. Best people – this is one of our favourite brand tenets – and so often not closley enough connected to brand programmes. It is essential that brand positioning works for the people in the company and is delivered internally in such a way that it motivates and excites. We always recommend working with HR to develop recruitment and remuneration processes that build the brand and reward brand behaviour. It’s not really just about getting and keeping the best people – it’s all about the right people.

So it seems that a focused and committed approach to investing in the Thorntons brand is really paying off. Their promise of ‘The Art of the Chocolatier’ is coming to life. A comment on Qype noted, after a visit to the new shop in KIngston, “Thorntons was just re-opening, after a brief but effective revamp. I didn’t recognise them at all…This new store is the first of five to open in the UK. Known as project Ruby, it’s bright, fresh, and very inviting. The counters are white marble, with tantalising display areas, each with their own distinct appeal: children, traditionalists, ice-cream lovers and sophisticated palates are all catered for. The feel is more modern, cutting-edge and deli-delights than olde world chocolate shop.”

Hats off to Thorntons for embracing the potential of real brand development. May their success continue. (I’m still looking out for the chocolate ears…)

Kate

Brands up to snuff?

Mon, Jul 28 2008 06:44 | Brand Strategy, brand realization | Permalink
There is a small revolution going on in the tobacco sector, and the main players may not have even noticed. But it could over the next few years change the nature of the market, and save a few lives at the same time.

Snuff, (the dry tobacco that you sniff, note: not snort) the product that brings to mind elegant georgian dandies brandishing their jewell encrusted snuff boxes is making a comeback, and strong branding is a key feature of the marketing mix.

Snuff was the main way tobacco was taken 200 years ago (at least in Britain), far outselling pipe tobacco. It had taken longer for the British to take to snuff, which had long been a European passion, but during the 18th century snuff became a phenomenon - something every man and women of culture took, in astonishing quantities. Napoleon was said to use 7 lb. of snuff a month!

Snuff went into a steep decline as the popularity and availability of machine made cigarettes increased. It still survived as the nicotine product of choice by workers like miners and factory workers, where fear of fire prevented 'sparking up'.

By the 1980's snuff was down to a few specialist suppliers, the big guns of the tobacco trade having long lost their enthusiasm for the product and followed where the profits were greatest. Cigarettes.

Come the turn of the millennium and the landscape has really changed, the full health implications of smoking are now known, and the opportunity to smoke is under serious attack, it seems the game is up for smoking (at least in the 1st world countries), and smoking in public is becoming seriously difficult.

And this is where snuff might make a comeback. Firstly there is no credible medical research that shows any negative health effects. It's the inhalation of the smoke from the cigarette that causes all the diseases. There are admittedly question marks around nicotine, but no research to suggest that the sorts of quantities in snuff are any more dangerous than say drinking modest amounts of coffee or the odd glass of wine. 

Many of the snuff manufacturers have been in business 250 years, and have had not one claim or prosecution in their records. Anti-smoking activists might prefer to suspect that snuff must surely have some problem associated with it, but the research and crucially anecdotal evidence simply isn't there, and actually tobacco (unsmoked) has traditionally been associated with many health giving properties.

And the news gets even better. Many people (including myself) have found that the best way to give up smoking is to simply take snuff whenever you have a hankering to smoke. It also has the benefits of tactile accoutrements - i.e. things to do with your hands. The tins and snuff boxes and colourful handkerchiefs give you plenty to take your mind off smoking, and you don't have to go outside to do it - you can snuff to your hearts content at your desk!

Unlike smoking, where the majority of smokers are incredibly brand loyal, the general snuff taker doesn't so much take snuff, as collect it. And there are now plenty to collect. Probably for the first time in a generation brands are launching, to take advantage of the voracious snuffers appetite for new brands and new snuff experiences.

A small collection from a snuff taker called 'Filek' on one of the many online forums

Snuff comes in different textures and moistness, and crucially in literally hundreds of 'flavour' variations. From traditional 'tobacco' aromas, to florals, menthols and mints, to citruses and spices, and more recently food and drink flavours like chocolate, coffee, cherry and grapefruit, there is even gin & tonic!

And then there is the cost - snuff is not taxed, so a snuffer can indulge their passion for new smells and textures at a fraction of the price of cigarettes. A 25 gm tin of snuff will cost you less than £3.00 and last - well a long time... A pinch in each nostril roughly equates to the nicotine of one cigarette, and there is a mighty number of pinches in a tin!

So the average 'collector' doesn't just have a handful of different snuffs, they have shelves of them, drawers full of precious tins and tempting aromas. And snuffers are passionate about their 'hobby', there are specialist websites where snuffers exchange views on flavours, qualities and everything under the sun you could think of about snuff.

There are online shops breaking out all over the world (traditional retailers don't even know most of this exists - when was the last time you saw a tin of snuff in your local newsagent? Ever?), and new brands are starting up, offering tempting new packages of nasal promise.

There are a handful of traditional manufacturers, some who have just continued (no mean feat in itself if you were established 250 years ago using a water-wheel), some who have even tried to innovate, experimenting with modern packaging concepts. Interestingly, and possibly uniquely, the avid snuff connoisseur values all the manufacturers, creating an infinite world of possibilities, and all under the noses of the mainstream smoking public, who barely know this sub-culture exists.

New brands are being developed by one man start-ups, exporting around the world, brought together by the online network of enthusiasts. One Indian manufacturer is developing 'western style packaging' as they tap into the online market, and an interesting modern touch is that the brand owners are getting very close to their customers, contributing to the online communities on a personal basis, classic attributes of the passionate brand leader. They don't just listen to what's going on, but use the forums for research, development and just to 'keep it real'.

Where will it go? How big could it get? 

Well the chances are you didn't even know it was going on, it hasn't yet gone mainstream, the major tobacco makers have shown little interest in the area, although cousins of snuff like Snus and Dip (tobacco you stick under your lip) have large and growing markets in the USA and parts of Northern Europe. These products have more dubious health implications, although still far far less deadly than the average cigarette.

It does seem that the issues of health, price, product and brand innovation, the customer's urge to collect and online distribution have coincided to create a fertile ground for a potentially huge market. 

At the moment, the market isn't probably worth much more than £100m worldwide. So if it took off, it could be worth a 1000 times that (and probably then some). The product is presently untaxed, and could cause a serious tax shortfall if customers switched in any significant quantities. How many governments could resist taxing snuff if it seriously offered competition to cigarettes. Of course if it did that, the cost to health services could liberate enormous costs in future years.

The present brands are essentially not competing with each other, such is the nature of the customer usage. If the product was to seriously penetrate traditional retail, then the stronger brands would compete for shelf space, and a more traditional competition model would resume. Brand positioning would seek to carve out space in the greater snuff landscape, seeking to fulfill customer needs. It's likely the newer entrants would do better than the traditional players, since they have not relied on heritage and habit, the new players will be more innovative and experimental.

The real challenge is how to build the market as a whole. Every player will help, but the tipping point for mass awareness is probably a long way off yet, and the anti-smoking lobby may well continue to put all tobacco related products in the same basket. Large brand owners, the manufacturers who years ago lost interest could afford the sort of lobbying and promotion that could build a real platform for growth.

It's possible someone somewhere is going to realise that snuff just could be the most phenomenally profitable replacement for the evils of smoking tobacco. Someone just might make a fortune!

It just needs one serious player to take responsibility to build the market, and the benefits of brand primacy will be theirs, but in the meantime, all the players will help to build a mutually larger market.

What if every smoker turned to snuff, how many people's lives could be saved? 

Probably the main barrier to entry is the indecorous thought of what comes out of your nose, eventually, after you have spent a day snuffing. Still it's better than the thought of what your lungs probably look like if you smoke, and you'll need more than a brown handkerchief and a good blow to get rid of that!

Some of the Interesting Brands:

A longtime german player, they have invested in innovative packaging and are extremely popular in Europe. Their mainly moist menthol inspired flavours are found widely in Europe. 

A UK startup based in Berwick upon Tweed, CEO Roderick Lawrie has created a powerful brand based around lively freshness, mostly food flavours, with contemporary branding and has been nominated for packaging awards. Roderick has spent a fair bit of time researching the market and health issues, and is a strong advocate for the benefits of switching from smoking to snuffing. Imagine the motivation if you thought your brand could actually save lives?


McChrystals: www.mcchrystals.co.uk 
Based in Leicester, England, they have a funky flash based website and a history going back to 1926, and the owner of one of the market standards - 'Original and Genuine'. 


Dholakia Tobacco: www.snuff.co.in  
An Indian company with 150 year history, they have kept their ears to the online ground, and are launching a range to suit more mainstream western tastes. Their traditional products are valued for their fineness and exotic flavour variants. The world is truly shrinking and offers infinite opportunities for the brave and adventurous.


Wilsons of Sharrow: www.sharrowmills.com 
One of the grandaddies of the english snuff market, tracing it's foundation to 1737. They also produce the illustrious Friboug & Treyer range of snuff, which was once sold from it's famous regency premises in the Haymarket London right up to the 1980's. Snuffers are grateful to manufacturers like Wilsons who carried on regardless through good times and bad.

Forums:


Online stores:


Humour:

Jonathan Mercer

One to watch...

Thu, Jul 17 2008 01:05 | Brand Strategy | Permalink
The Co-op has just announced its takeover of Somerfield's - making it the fifth largest supermarket chain in the UK. I've seldom read a more ambitious statement from a CEO, "This is great for our business and in my view propels us back to the Premiership of food retailing. People talk about the big four. I hope people will soon talk about the big five.” He talks of the deal leading to a renaissance of the Co-op brand. 

And I think he's got a point. The headline in Times Online was, "The Co-op ready to capture the magic of the Sixties with £1.6bn Somerfield deal." Indeed in 1967 the Co-op had 25% market share and was Britain's biggest grocery store. But I hope they do more than get bigger, I want them to recapture some of the essence of sixties shopping - cleaner, simpler, sustainable.

The Co-op have been doing a huge amount of re-branding and advertising lately to establish their ethical credentials and do have a great deal of credibility in the area. I think they are also poised to be the really green supermarket. There's a gondola of green ideas that will both tap into their core values of social responsibility and co-operative practices, suggest that intangible nostalgia of 'when things were better (and more green)', and create a modern, ethical brand with new ideas for the current environment.

Already I'm hoping that they come up with genuinely new ways of selling fresh produce, less packaging, less air miles, more seasonality. They are 'the UK's largest farmer', according to their website, which gives them a great opportunity to take control of the supply chain, get organic, sort out their chickens and eggs (chickens first presumably) and provide produce in a sustainable and responsible way. I'm hoping they re-introduce the habit of getting your deposit back on your bottles - glass or plastic. As a child this was always a useful way of getting a bit of cash to buy a few sweeties. Perhaps revolutionary re-designs of their shops to reduce energy use, capture natural energy, re-cycle stuff, fill your own bags etc etc. They could way out-green all their competitors. They already have over 4,000  branches (I think this must include some banks and funeral directors as they only have 3,000 grocery stores after the takeover...) powered by wind and water. They are the UK's most eco-friendly retailer (YouGov Online Poll 2007). They sell over 180 Fairtrade products.

The Co-op has so much brand authenticity. From their website, "A co-operative is a business, but more than this, it is a group of people acting together to meet the common needs and aspirations of its members, sharing ownership and making decisions democratically." This seems so right.

I want them to do well. I want them to save the planet. After all they are "good with food". And I'll keep watching.


Kate

Perception? Reality?

Wed, Jul 9 2008 02:16 | Brand Strategy | Permalink
Some brands seem to work better in my head than when I encounter them for real. This experience is often paired with a twinge of sadness. A strange empty nostalgia for something I can no longer grasp. One such brand is Woolworth's. It's poor performance is well documented but in my mind I still expect a brand experience that fulfils my internal brand image.

New look F. W. Woolworth in Gallowtree Gate, Leicester in 1965

I suspect outside the UK, may be in the States, or South Africa, New Zealand or Australia things are very different. In a description by The Exquisite Art Company in South Africa, "The Woolworths brand is a symbol of quality, consistency and trust, earned through its efforts to continually innovate and adapt to market demands." 

A far cry from our UK experience summed up neatly in this Brand Healthcheck in Marketing Week by Pragma from October 2006, "Shopping at Woolworths these days can hardly be described as a pleasure. A cacophony of visual noise bombards you (half price, price crash etc) setting the expectation of cheapness and bargains. Aisles are often cramped and stock piled high, the in-store radio is often loud, as are the gawdy colours of the merchandise." Pragma also kindly give some good advice, headed up with "Re-establish traditional core brand values with a modern interpretation." 

I'm thinking it's unlikely that any of Woolworth's management team were reading Marketing Week that day. Just in the way that I have a nostalgic brand vision built in the 60s and 70s, Pragma look back to thirty years ago for clues, "The brand stood for convenience, value and reliability." Convenience is an odd value these days, it seems too easy. Convenience is all sorts of things now: shopping from home, getting everything in one place, easy to park... What is convenient about Woolworth's is that it is always there. It is in the middle of every town. It is even in those odd seaside towns when you need to buy a CD player for the holidays. But in my head it is full of useful stuff. And often it has the useful thing I'm looking for. It does household (although this seems to be diminishing), it does toys of the bright plastic variety, it does games, it does children's sandals, it does dressing-up clothes. But it doesn't do much better, or more reliably than anyone else. And I think it has so much potential. It could be the Google of shops - you want something - you'll find it here.

Inspiration for the current Woolworth's team could well come from the rather eccentric Woolworths Virtual Museum. It's rich with history, innovation, architectural confidence and price quizzes. It's delightful. I found out that the first modern record department was in Leicester (the very shop in which my own Woolworths internal brand picture was created) in 1965. The Annual Report described it, "The gay record corner is well-equipped to meet the demands of the most with-it teenager."  The site also evokes the Fablon, floor tiles and cafeteria I remember so well.
The shape of things to come - the first modern Entertainment department in F. W. Woolworth of Leicester (No 49) in 1965
There are a few high street retailers that fall into this mis-match between the brand in my head and the one I walk in to. WHSmith is definitely one. Smiths used to be an Aladin's cave of, well, magazines, books and stationery. I still remember a rather cramped store in the Market Place in Leicester that was a treasure trove of 'going-back-to-school' goodies - and had wood panelling. Over the years the range has been denuded and 'rationalised', the book offer has been canabalised by the likes of Warterstone's, the environment has been modernised and sterilised, yet cluttered in an annoying way. I still want to go in to Smiths and enjoy a browse and buy a good pen, but the experience I get seldom delivers the brand I expect. 

Boots has faired little better. Again the march of modernisation has delivered a discomforting mixture of sterility and disorganisation. A blandness in the design and signing leads to an almost perpetual sense of an inability to find anything. Added to that discomfort is the blaring '3 for 2' signs that are always difficult to fully know which products they actually relate to.

I don't know whether these are just the ramblings of an old nostalgic, or whether there really is a lesson to be learned about getting back to core brand values. I certainly believe that a focused, differentiated offer is a good start. A clear purpose and aligned brand experience is a joy. Some experiences fulfil the brand in my head: Waitrose, Cath Kidstone, The Apple Store, Starbucks, Waterstone's, Carluccio's. The Marks and Spencer brand perception helped it survive a rocky time recently, people felt good about it long after the reality had slipped, resulting in a rallying 'Your M&S' campaign. Things are looking hard again, so can their brand pull them through?

I hope Woolworth's can re-invent. They're not in a good financial place and it's hard to invest when the competition and potential returns look challenging. But a clear purpose and genuinely differentiated offer would be a good starting place.
Kate

A brand icon for the noughties

Tue, Jul 8 2008 12:33 | Brand Strategy | Permalink
















A couple of months ago I was disappointed to see that my local Oxfam had closed – and I assumed that the newly opened Oxfam Books round the corner was now a replacement rather than an addition to the empire.

How very very wrong. The shop has now reopened as an elegant and inviting Oxfam Boutique. No smell of old ladies. Junky white elephant stuff artistically displayed round the back. Appealingly labelled fashion items. I loved everything about it.

Oxfam has been the gold standard of charity shops for longer than I can remember. It has also clearly articulated what it does – tackle poverty, probably most accurately the effects of poverty, as perhaps the political implications of ‘Make Poverty History’ make the task a tough gig. What struck me most poignantly, whilst standing in the Oxfam Boutique in Chiswick, was the brilliantly successful brand that could both be the face of fundraising in innovative, topical and reciprocal ways, as well as the face of effective, credible aid giving.

In the 60s we had an Oxfamilybox at home.
The innovative idea was that you made the box up (it arrived as a flat piece of card) and passed it around at mealtimes when you were appreciating your food and worrying about ‘starving Biafrans’ – the first serious famine that I can remember – and maybe the first one that got decent TV coverage. My interest in graphic design was kindled by the brilliant name/perpetual branding that ran right around the box. It still plays around my mind like one of those Escher staircases that has no end. 

Oxfam had been born in 1942 as the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief and openend the first of its shops in Oxford in 1948. Their innovative thinking and willingness to invest to accumulate (for which charities always gets criticism) has now really come of age. The boutique has beautifully captured the freecycling-recycling vibe in an elegant way. Those canny enough to know have always used charity shops as a source of ‘individual’ fashion – especially those amongst us with an art school background. The concept of reusing cast-offs is so green that it hurts. So much more ethical than the five-minute thrill of the Primark frenzy (despite the fact that we are now stressing over those children who are unable to help provide for the family as it’s unethical to employ them – help!) The boutique has cleverly divided its sustainable fashion into five categories (or is that sub-brands?):
  • Loved for Longer (which I think is a lovely idea) – high quality donated fashion
  • Fair Trade Fashion – labels like Green Knickers, People Tree and Wright and Teague
  • Reinvented (which I think is truly inspired – and inspiring) – pieces reworked by young designers and fashion students
  • Made with Love – accessories made by volunteers
  • Good Fashion Sense – designed to be different: organic, recycled, alternative fibres…
This is brand success indeed. I felt a mingled sense of pride, ehthusiasm, nostalgia – and more importantly probably, a strange willingness to pay the not inconsiderable prices attached. We are no longer talking ‘jumble sale’ prices – a trend that has been eeking in over the past few years but now seems more justifiable. And the very definition of a brand.

The whole Oxfam identity has been recently overhalled and refreshed by Interbrand. The new strapline, ‘Be Humankind’, which I think is delightful has met with, I think, surprising, controversy. Some people say they ‘don’t get it’. Some say it’s not campaigning enough. I think it has a touch of the Oxfamilybox about it. A compilation of appropriate words in a new and moving way.

What can we learn from this as a brand story? It’s a brand with authenticity, focus and purpose. It has been modest in its expansion over 60 odd years. It’s invested where it had to to create reputation, recognition and convey a message. It’s lucked into a trend. Respect to this brand icon.
Jonathan Mercer

Small is the new big.. (or how we run a distributed agency)

Fri, May 23 2008 02:04 | Brand Strategy, brand realization | Permalink
If you happen to be a fan of 37 Signals (which we happen to be – and if you don’t know who they are – try this {http://www.37signals.com}) you might read their blog {http://blogcabin.37signals.com}, which recently had a great quote about size – ‘“If you think you are too small to be effective, you have never been in bed with a mosquito.” -Betty Reese.

Now we are a decidedly small branding agency – there are less than 10 of us. We have been bigger, but about 5 years ago we decided we wanted to be smaller.

We tend to see the ‘branding agency landscape’ roughly fitting into 3 sizes:

The big – probably over 100 people, maybe lots of offices around the world, working on huge brands, and soaking up miles of PR related column inches and blog pages. You know the ones – Interbrand, Futurebrand, Landor, Wollf Olins – often the grand-daddies of the branding world.

The medium – these are the 30 to 100 guys – with a big tidy business, maybe more than one office.. more ‘middle aged’ – happy with their position, doing good work for established clients – but somehow less ‘newsworthy’.

The small – the 1 to 30’s – one office, maybe hot young gunslingers on the way up, or more long in the tooth and ploughing a more lonely furrows on the way down. Maybe one big client and a few smaller ones, or lots of ‘prospective’ breakthrough clients.

Except we don’t really fit into any of these – because we work differently – and a lot of it is thanks to our friends at 37 Signals… and we think it’s the future for a lot of businesses…

We are small, but we have a number of offices, on several continents. We have a range of clients – from HUGE to tiny. But the way we work now – well I don’t think we could have done it even 5 years ago very easily.

We use a suite of tools that help us stay small, stay connected, keep us apart (in a good way – less travelling), help us manage our business, organise diaries, manage our clients, keep them connected, store all our crucial documents and data, and most importantly help us to be creative. Sounds good eh? And it doesn’t cost much…

This is what we use….

1. Phones for ringing people
3. Basecamp for project management {http://www.basecamphq.com/}

4. Highrise for storing and logging all our client-centric correspondence and ‘stuff’ {http://www.highrisehq.com/?source=37s+home}

5. Backpack for our ‘corporate intranet’ {http://www.backpackit.com/?source=37s+home}

6. Campfire for running online chats {http://www.campfirenow.com/?source=37s+home}
7. Macs and iPhones because we love them (one of our partners does own a PC - but it’s days are numbered…)
8. A few great applications like Keynote, Pages, Numbers – but most things end up as pdf’s.
9. Some local servers, but once again, their days are numbered…
10. Small IT bills – few hundred dollars a month max

What we don’t have (now) is:

1. Any IT staff – or indeed any ‘junior’ staff at all
2. Big servers with VPN and tricky stuff like that
3. Large maintenance agreements to manage big hot servers and ‘kit’
4.Trouble finding stuff like files and presentations and pictures etc..
5. Anxiety about ‘stuff breaking or crashing’
6. large pieces of capital investment
7. No time to talk and meet with clients
8. There are probably more things but I’m bored with this list now…

The four core products (which all run in a browser) – Basecamp, Highrise, Backpack and Campfire do everything we need, and help us do things better, without the need for IT support or training. You should check them out to see all the things they do, but the most important thing they are is SIMPLE.

What’s the downside? Er…

Well, theoritically there are of course some potential downsides, but any risk is still much less than the alternatives – at least as far as we are concerned.

The benefits however, are that they allow us to manage our clients and their work, and our time and our ‘stuff’ more efficiently, and quicker, and easier. They essentially allow us to get on with what we are paid to do, help solve our clients problems with minimal problems.

This article was written straight onto a section within Backpack, edited (or at least looked at) by all the partners. All our work is managed in much the same way – so whether an assignment is in the USA, or London, or somewhere just outside Paris – we can work and share our ideas, thoughts and conclusions – without the automatic need for unnecessary plane trips, or long tiring journey.

Don’t get me wrong, we do get out though, and we spend lots of time with our clients, wherever they are – in fact that was one of the reasons we chose to work this way – more time dedicated to our clients.

Our objective is to add real ‘grit’ to any branding project, to ask the ‘unaskable’ and challenge the status quo. I guess our role is all to often to be the ‘mosquito in the bed’ – and we have found that by spending less time and effort managing our business, we can spend more time and effort helping our clients to run their businesses.

Bzzzzzzz
Jonathan Mercer

Do you get it?

Fri, Jul 20 2007 04:41 | Brand Strategy, brand realization | Permalink
by Eric Goodstadt 
CEO - Brand Guardians USA 

The separation between those who get it and those who don’t continues to grow... 

Putting the brand first is the difference between growth and stagnation. 

Recently, Fortune Magazine published their annual edition of America’s Most Admired Companies; if you study these annual lists like I do, you would see something very distinct and telling about today’s business environment. All top 10 companies are known for focusing on a higher purpose beyond financial performance. Ironically however, they all are also among the top financial performing companies in the world. 

What is this correlation between a higher purpose and significant financial performance? 

As a former executive member of a few public companies, I saw first hand the pressures to meet the streets expectations. These pressures could, and often would, force executive teams into decision-making purely based on financial results, rather than what was in the best interest of the company, the clients and employees. For me, one of the final straws during my career was listening to a CFO’s plan to add a million dollars to the bottom line profits. His route to do so was by deferring a larger portion of the healthcare cost to the employees, whom at this point were already carrying more than 60% of those expenses. 

When you look at the top 10 admired companies, you see an impressive group of organizations that act purely on their beliefs and have amazed the street by consistently performing financially. Whether it is GE’s Immelt bucking the cut throat tactics of Jack Welch for a more nurturing culture with an emphasis on becoming an environmental responsible organization, or Howard Schultz of Starbucks offering part-time employees a comprehensive healthcare program. Each of these companies and their leaders ignored the street and followed a higher purpose to drive their actions. Although this idea of a higher purpose may sound spiritual, it is actually a sound business strategy grounded very effectively in their respective brands. 

For Howard Schultz it was has been written many times over that he never created Starbucks to be the best coffee maker in the world. Instead, he wanted to create a special respite, or 3rd place for humanity, in our hectic over anxious society. With this brand essence, Starbucks does a lot more then just make innovative and delicious drinks. They are among the most charitable organizations in the world, they offer comprehensive healthcare to all employees who work as little as 20 hours a week, and they consistently create environments that reward their customers with the respite the brand promises. 

Conventional wisdom would say to cut back on the funding to third world farmers for education and clean water, as the charity is too far removed for the average consumer to care. Conventional wisdom would also say to eliminate expensive healthcare costs for part-time employees (just ask Walmart, which is no where to be seen in the most admired list) and to replace those expensive, soft, and cushiony lounge chairs with cheap durable plastic ones. In the end, while conventional wisdom may provide short-term financial benefits, it has always been the long-term consequences that Howard Shultz has been concerned with. His vision for Starbucks has helped countless people in third world countries have a better life and has also provided over 145,000 employees and their families with quality healthcare coverage. In addition, if you judge success by the consistent throngs of loyal people jamming their tranquil store locations, Starbucks has succeed in achieving not just third place status but quite possibly a 2nd place stature among its customers. 

Some will argue that Starbucks, while admirable, is quite unique and shouldn’t be an example for all to follow. To counter that argument, let’s take a look at a company that once was the darling of the street, until the star lost its shine in the 1990’s only to be resurrected by an unconventional choice for CEO. 

AG Lafley was universally agreed to be a shocking selection to take over the CEO position of the ultraconservative Proctor and Gamble. The spiky gray haired CEO looked more like an advertising executive then a groomed successor to the CEO position, but he has proven to be the wisest choice the company could have ever made. P&G has become one of the biggest companies in the world on the basis of maximizing productivity and efficiency of its value chain. 

In its long storied past, the company would have never be confused with a leading design company, as it traditionally chose to sacrifice style and design for low cost production. However, as the technology age has exploded and the consumer has migrated to experiential buying preferences, AG Lafley saw that P&G’s tried and true operational behaviors were no longer valid in this new world. Ignoring his critics and some long time P&G traditions he sunk millions into redesigning packaging of the companies most popular products. In addition, Lafley consolidated brands counter to P&G tradition, creating flagships like Mr. Clean, as well as forced his management to look outside the P&G walls to find new innovative ideas. 

So while the street criticized Mr. Lafley for sinking millions into the redesigning of a $4 shampoo bottle, it was Mr. Lafley who realized that for today’s consumer the design of the shampoo bottle and how it looks in the shower is just as important as the product itself. 

In the end, both of these companies, and the other 8 organizations that appear on Fortune’s list of Americas Most Admired Companies, know something that unfortunately most companies refuse to accept. They know that if you put the brand first and execute the brand promise for the benefit of the company, customers and employees, the financial rewards will come. 

So whether or not you are number 1 GE, embracing its brand of innovation to create environmental friendly solutions, or number 7 Apple destined to be the enablers of melding life and technology, or number 8 Google who is determined to create unique user experiences (for both consumers and employees), it is finding your central purpose that will lead your company to its greatest success. No one can argue with the financial performance of these top 10 companies, and if each one of them achieved this success by honoring the brand holistically, wouldn’t it make sense that your company could benefit form doing the same?
Kate