Peter Fisk leads GeniusWorks, a strategic innovation business based in London and Budapest, Istanbul and Dubai, that works on brands, innovation and marketing. He is a best-selling author of twelve books on marketing and strategy and works as a strategic consultant across sectors, sharing insights, ideas and next practices. His recent clients include American Express and Coca-Cola, GSK and Marks & Spencer, Microsoft and O2, Philosophy and Red Bull, Shell and Virgin, Vodafone and Volkswagen. He brings 25 years of experience, working with over 150 companies, in more than 30 countries. He was previously the transforming CEO of the world’s largest marketing organisation, the Chartered Institute of Marketing.
When you talk about revival of brands, in which case is it an easier proposition – service brands or product brands?
First we need to clear what we mean by a brand today. In the past, brands were symbols of ownership, they defined the manufacturer or the product, which made them largely functional, and limited them quite a narrow domain. So as a product category declined or was superseded, then the brand died with it.
The best brands today are about people. They are symbols of aspiration and affinity. They capture the type of person I want to be, about intangible values and emotional aspirations. That makes them much more agile, they can stretch across many products and categories. Look inside every pair of Nike shoes, and it talks about its dedication to the high performance of the athlete (that’s you – helping you run faster, score a better goal, or even just look good). Coca Cola used to be about “refreshment” (functional), now its about “happiness” (emotional). BMW used to be about performance, now its about joy. Second, we need to get clear that few people love and trust companies today. And similarly, they have limited affinity to brands. People usually “love” brands because they love being part of a community. A great example is Harley Davidson. So “once loved” brands can be incredibly valuable, if they represent something which people still aspire to – values, emotions, aspirations. Of course this is easier to achieve with service brands, rather than product brands. Pan Am would be an example of this, representing a “golden age of international travel” with glamour and style.
An old, dead brand that has the right values, could be a great way to build a brand faster – do you agree?
Yes, of course! An example might be The East India Company, that still had a heritage that lived in people’s heads many years after the business died. The values, or “the story” lived on about the discovery of premium, exotic products, and the business reinvented itself as a premium goods brand. Too many companies think they have created a brand because they have a strong name or logo. This is far from the truth. This is particularly the case in Asian markets. Whilst many of the world’s best technologies, innovations, products and services now originate from China, India, Korea, Malaysia and beyond they are held up because the lack of depth, or emotion in their branding. Samsung recognised this problem a few ago, and looked to the yin-yang of its national flag for inspiration. It had strong yin, but weak yang. It needed to become more human, intuitive, and emotional, and therefore focused all its engineers on the subtlety of human-centred design. Through these more balanced values, the brand was perceived much better by consumers, and Samsung is now on its way to leading the world.
Gone are the days of traditional media vehicles like TV, Print and Radio. Today companies are choosing to invest a great deal on the social channel as well. How critical are social networks to pumping life into dormant and dying brands?
Social media is an essential part of building any brand – dead or alive. This is because brands are ultimately reputations, which can be built (and destroyed) in hours and days (because of the speed at which ideas can spread), rather than months and years (like in the past). Of course building a brand requires all of these factors – the full media mix – and most importantly a clarity of what the brand is about (having a “higher purpose”), who it is for (having a “core audience”), and relevant and distinctive story. The same is applicable when you talk about bringing back an old brand to life. But social media is much than a Facebook page. It’s about creating a series of platforms by which you contribute and support your audience in achieving their purpose.
Most companies have killed brands when they didn’t need to. Compaq, Texaco, ICL, Brim, Borders, TWA – there are examples aplenty. Your thoughts on this.
True. Most companies kill brands when they don’t need to. They confuse the brand with the product – they kill the brand because of the poor performance of the product, and their desire to exit the category. Compaq was killed, having being acquired by HP. The business didn’t understand how to manage two brands, so they killed one. Today, they probably wish they had both brands, as Compaq would be a powerful “value” brand to compete against new entrants like Acer, allowing HP to be more premium like it should be. MG brand was killed by poor management. It was used by Rover as a way to make a poor product seem attractive. Having once been a great pioneer of sports cars, MG had many fans driven by nostalgia. But they were deeply disappointed by the cars. The product was poor, the production was expensive, and the business failed, and the brand followed. Companies increasingly need to manage their portfolios of brands and products.
