For a nonprofit, I would not focus on creating a high-profile “brand message” intended for a media campaign. Doing so commits you to high levels of spending to advertise it, and a kind of vicious spiral. Instead, I’d recommend a brand approach that works through—and leverages—a nonprofit’s “direct programs” themselves. These are what make the nonprofit unique and relevant in the first place.

In this approach I would focus on building a *brand community* that could grow the brand from the bottom up. This is a slower, organic way to grow the brand, but it is affordable, and has many possibilities for cost-effective leveraging, especially in this digital age. One advantage of a brand community is that it can grow by network economies.

The future of nonprofit brands may be as social networks and ecosystems, instead of individual “brands” competing for funding dollars. (The latter is a game only ad agencies can win.) There are now digital tools that enable creation of social networks with limited resources.

A nonprofit can base its brand identity on its innovation and imaginative problem solving. These can be critical differentiating factors, and that field is wide open.

Nonprofit brands do much more than “help the disadvantaged.” They unlock value, and enrich society. This is a different way of “framing” their mission, and a better measure of the value they actually provide. Innovative nonprofits will unlock more value, elevating program participants at the top end and at the lower ends, and creating brand differentiation in the process.

Many nonprofits are highly innovative social entrepreneurs. Their brands should reflect this. A nonprofit that thinks of itself as a “charity” may in reality be an innovative brand community, with many layers of social and program value. As a community its chances for brand growth are much better.

Nonprofits that embrace “cause marketing” must be careful not to fall into the trap of becoming “a brand of fundraising.” That can ultimately lead to less emphasis on direct programs themselves, and erosion of the core brand.

My impression: nonprofits that embrace “cause marketing” tend to look alike. They are different versions of the same marketing engine.

Anyway, that’s my random barrage of thoughts, or maybe semi-thoughts and impressions is more like it. Feedback from those in nonprofit sectors would be much appreciated. In my future post I’ll enlarge on the concepts I mentioned, and probably change more than a few in the process.

Where is your brand? In a document you created, or in your donors’ lives? The Brands Create Customers blogs takes a look at this issue in The glorious (non-linear) essence of brands. According to the post, some brand-owners see their…

You’re definitely right on on the benefits of having a dynamic (non-linear) brand. Long ago, when the whole marketplace and business making were just babies in the world, brands could manage to stay somewhat linear and put, mainly because of the lack of true competition in individual industries.

Usually there was one or two (or very very few, nothing compared to now) brands in the main industries, so they could take the luxury of not really adapting their brand with time to what consumers needed; neither following consumer, lifestyle, production, etc., trends.

It’s a good thing to see many (if not most) brands have gotten this principle right for some time now, allowing change in their brands.

Great Post,
Ron E.
http://brandcurve.com