Brands Create Customers

For brand builders, it’s time to say goodbye. The age of “branding” is over. No, let me correct that. The age of branding is completely and totally finished. It’s kaput, finito, dead, and gone. Unless we all want to crawl back to the bunkhouse, strap on spurs and reek of burning cowhide, we can permanently retire the “branding” metaphor from the practice of brands.

Brand builders don’t do “branding.” Companies relapse into “branding” when they lack the vision, talent and courage to be a brand.

So, unless your name is Tex, Lefty or Lucky, please erase “branding” from your working vocabulary—now.

“Branding” was always a poor fit

For what we do, the “branding” metaphor was a poor fit from the get-go. It was a term that never accurately denoted or connoted the full nature of brands, the value of brands, what brand builders aim to accomplish, what they create, how they do it, how they work with customers, the brand experience itself (God forbid!), or how customers interact with brands.

“Branding” is skin deep

Some general points:

1. “Branding” doesn’t add value. Brands do.
2. “Branding” is skin deep. Brands express what’s inside.
3. “Branding” is never strategic. Brands are a process of strategic value creation.
4. “Branding” is imposed doctrine and dogma. Brands free customers to discover what’s new.

“Branding” disrespects customers

There are many problems with using “branding” as a blanket term to describe brand practice. The biggest problem is that “branding” disrespects and diminishes customers. It excludes them from the brand value process. “Branding” frames customers as objects to be used. There’s not much value potential in that. Does a “branding” campaign actually expect to sear attitudes, beliefs and impressions on the brains of customers? Does it assume that customers can be “branded” like cattle, and that once branded can be herded to and fro like dumb beasts?

The high cost of the “branding” mindset

I have worked with colleagues who thought “branding” was first and foremost a means of customer manipulation. Not surprisingly, the “brands” they produced were entirely skin deep. And instead of creating customers, they sent them running into the next county.

The “branding” mindset has probably done more to hold back the practice of brands than any other factor.

“Branding” burns the value out of brands

Brands are an interactive process of value creation, but “branding” burns the value out of brands. It metaphorically assumes the brander has total dominion over the poor wretch about to be seared. While this may be a tonic for sharp stabs of inadequacy affecting those wielding the brand stick, the resulting “brand” never grows beyond its initial mark. More often than not, those who do “branding” sear their own limitations into customers, perhaps permanently.

“Branding” doesn’t connect with customers

Brand value is built with customer connections, and “branding” is not connecting. “Branded” customers are not engaged. (Think about that.) A company that builds brands uses its brands to seed value creation in customers. Its brand-building is a creative, nuanced and highly interactive process that delivers value, nurtures value, and circulates value through a widening brand value net, ultimately returning more value back to the business.

A branding iron cannot compete with that.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 3rd, 2007 at 10:56 am and is filed under Brand Strategy, Brand Value, Brands, Creating Customers. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.