I'm bored with the brand conversation

Branding does not have to be this convoluted idea that companies belabor over for years.  Building a brand that resonates with target audiences is important, yes.  It is something many companies struggle with, however I think that is more of a result of misunderstanding the purpose of a brand and how to use it than the nature of branding itself being some mythical beast marketers and company leadership are meant to chase.

David Warschawski blogged about the idea some years back, "This means our profession must become expert at how great brands are created and nurtured. And we better start helping our clients build resonant brands from the ground up. If we don't, others will, and we will move even further from holding that coveted seat at the table.

More and more, C-suite executives want to know how to build and grow great brands, not how to execute a great marketing campaign. If you can lead the charge in clarifying a company's brand, build a brand from the ground up, or strengthen a floundering brand—you will have a strategic seat at the management table and your purview and influence will grow astronomically."

Since 2007, when the above article was published I think the trend Warschawski speaks of has continued on some level.  C-suite executives who are removed from marketing are always looking for some magic bullet to shoot their brand to the top.  I have also seen some shift toward the opposite strategy: tactical overkill.  In this instance, companies are too comfortable in a brand and focus all of their marketing energy on the tactical end with little regard for how what they are doing relates to the brand, challenges the company or meets their customer's needs.

More than five years after this blog post, most companies still do not have the right balance of brand leading strategy and strategy supporting brand.  Here are a few things to remember.

1) There is no magic bullet.  The "perfect" brand without effective tactics that introduce and then continue the brand conversation with customers is useless.  Conversely, if not backed by a compelling story that moves the customer to do something, every marketing tactic out there combined cannot make up a sufficient marketing strategy. 

2) Silos are preventing brand genius.  The marketing team cannot sufficiently develop and execute integrated campaigns that have real value when they are not given access to the goals and objectives of the company, the vision for the brand and the support of other departments.  C-suite leaders (or clients) demand brilliance from marketing (and don't get me wrong, we are indeed brilliant), but they do not often understand all of the moving parts it takes to build a great brand and do not permit the access and resources needed for marketing to succeed. Hence, the concept of marketing earning a spot in the C-suite being so coveted.

3) Brands need to be a little flexible.  This is where marketing genius is necessary.  It seems counter-intuitive in a way that a brand that is worked so painfully on to become standard and recognizable among a larger audience should be open to change.  But, like people change, brands need to change some too.  Brands can become stale and irrelevant.  Openness to the adoption of new tactics, i.e. new ways to give audiences an interaction with the brand, are a great way to avoid staleness.  Adhering too strictly to brand rules and standards for too long defeats the purpose of what a great brand should do: connect with people.

The delicate balance act of branding is something marketers are working to master and that non-marketers are still trying to grasp.  One thing that I hope both can agree on is that the talking about "the brand conversation" is boring; let's put our brands in action as they are meant to be used... before they get boring too.

Year-end Means Best of Lists...

Approaching year-end, I love a good recap or best of  list.  Please enjoy this one I came across, "50 Best Websites of 2012" from Time magazine.  Many of these sites are not only well-designed for the eye, but also provide a wondrous service or fulfill a niche that earned them a spot.

There is a lot of crap on the internet.  Good, or fun sources for news or better yet, something that makes the day go a little faster or your job a little easier makes for a list that everyone can use.

Personally, I love Buzzfeed, a site that is also a big fan of lists. Check this one out, posted just today: Grumpiest Cat Show Photos.

On a marketing note, lists actually make for great PR tactic, when done properly.  If you are an industry expert or leader in your market creating an official list recognizing best of products, services or other companies creates a great opportunity to reach out to some companies that could be prospective clients or referral partners.  On the other hand, for the right company, creating a list that is a little weird or silly can have good news value or lend itself to social media conversation. Going the practical route also has it's advantages, providing a list of best practices, tips or again, products that is useful to a customer can help create loyalty and show value.

Have you used some of the sites on the Time list? Let me know which are your favorite or send me a link to a  list that caught your attention recently (Does not have to be related to cats, I just happen to be one of those people).

"A Strategic Pacesetter"

More great insight about the value and evolution of public relations… The idea of “creating a larger dialogue” as is suggested in the article referenced below is one of the biggest oversights that companies make when it comes to the integration of their marketing and PR strategy.  Putting the PR function in a silo, restricted to mindless distribution of press releases or generation of byline articles or whitepapers about the same tired topics outside of any strategic context  is simple a waste of time.

With the emergence of interactive online channels, PR is no longer confined to sharing boring, brand-inflating babble with the media (which reporters want little to do with, by the way).  We can share engaging, meaningful stories and information directly with the target publics.

Here are a couple of my favorite highlights from a brilliant article by Stuart Feil, in ADWEEK.  The full article also includes some pretty impressive case study examples of the possibilities that PR has to offer when given the opportunity.

“From spotting trends to crafting messages that will resonate in the community to being able to react quickly to shifting market attitudes, PR agencies have long been able to develop the ideas that get press coverage.  And as social media has amplified what consumers and influencers say about companies and brands, PR’s expertise in reputation management has become more crucial.”

“By planting a seed for a larger dialogue—something beyond products and services—these campaigns often look to activate and engage consumers to take action and change the way they approach an issue or brand.”

Tell me how many companies you know that think of PR as “driving creative engagement”. It's time for 2013 strategic planning. Invite the PR department to the table.

Hallelujah! Credentials to Support a Theory Familiar to those 'In the Know'

The end of the PR vs. Marketing debate will be one of the happiest days of my professional life.  It seems that this era is closer than ever before.  Read this: Will Media Convergence end the 'PR or Advertising' Debate?

Major conferences and the founder of Twitter recognizing that PR and Advertising are all marketing is one step closer to freedom from my silo.  If there is one consistent frustration that I still do not understand about this industry (and by this industry I do mean marketing inclusive of all supporting pieces) it is this: Organizations in every industry, large, small or in-between feel the need to divide marketing into as many individual silos as possible.  PR, paid advertising print and broadcast, social media, digital communications, direct marketing, etc, etc. almost certainly all have their own in-house designated expert.  That expert might work with an outside firm to support their one area of expertise.  Larger organizations might have multiple firms for different purposes, all manged internally by different people.

This is absolutely insane to me, and frankly a little insulting.  Why shouldn't PR be included in major, strategic planning?  How can we prove value if we are not privy to the overarching marketing goals?

People like to talk about integration of tactics and surface level stuff, but very few marketing professionals I encounter are hip to this concept of total integration from the top down.  And the classic, the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing becomes more evident and more frequent as brands find themselves in more spaces in online and traditional media.

So, since marketing people love a solid third party credential to show value... I've got the founder of Twitter on my side.  Argue with that!

See also:
And http://www.usatoday.com/video/news/1839139560001.

"I think we should be on the Twitter," said non-marketing business guy.

Organizations of all shapes, sizes and industries are starving for content, and they might not even realize it.  PR and marketing guys, this is a golden opportunity for us to shine.  On how many occasions in recent months have you been approached with one of the following conversations?

• "I think we should be tweeting or on the Facebook or something."
• "So what do you think about this social media thing for MY  business/industry?"
• "Well, we need a Twitter account and a Facebook page to get the word out."

Swap out any one of those 'Twitters' or 'Facebooks' for 'blog', or 'social media' or another specific site.  I have been doing this for a few years now, and I get it... non-marketing people sometimes need a loooonnngg time and a lot of convincing to catch on to the expertise that their marketing team is offering them from the start.  No problem. So, the boss or the client or whoever it is, is coming around now and saying this is it. Now is the time for us to do the online content thing, go forth and make it be.

The step some companies are missing here is the CONTENT. Should most organizations have a presence in these online spaces? Most likely. That does not mean that all of these channels make sense for every situation.  There is an opportunity for marketers to be creative here.  To satisfy the demands of the person you answer to and the organization's customers, marketers need to be generating content over a number of channels, but while interesting is important, engaging and relevant are key.

Organizations in any industry need to understand how to create this kind of content for their audiences and goals.  Leadership should also understand that no single blog or social media profile is the magic bullet for "getting the word out" about anything.  These are simply additional channels for sharing messages, and an integrated approach, as always, is best.

Here is a great article for getting started with a content strategy, Create Brilliant Content for your 'Boring' Business from Lauren Fairbanks of the Young Entrepreneur Council.

It is possible (likely even) that your organization should in fact be on "the Twitter".  However, there are many factors contributing to using these online content  tools effectively including relevancy, engagement and participation.  Consult a marketing expert to develop a content strategy that is integrated and realistic for your organization.