Running global / regional brands are very difficult – because not only do you have the nightmare of cultural differences to contend with, you also have corporate attitudinal variances that tend to mean there is little consistency in approach – other than ‘get the money in’.
Of course there is not one perfect solution, however one thing that can – and should – be done is ensuring the core brand idea is truly understood by all the companies marketing teams.
I don’t mean this interms of a corporate look or endline … but interms of them truly appreciating what the underlying message of the brand communication is because this not only ensures brand ‘message’ consistency but also allows the local markets a degree of flexibility to ensure their communication can be relevant and resonant to their own market conditions.
What’s frustrating – to me at least – is that most companies talk about the importance of ‘ideas’ and then continually demonstrate there lack of understanding about what they are and how they should be used.
One solution to counteract this is to be dictatorial in your approach to creativity [ie: Apple] however this stops cultural differences being taken into account which often leads to communication that has little or no relevance to its audience whatsoever … however ‘cultural difference’s’ are often a convenient ‘excuse’ to justify communication that not only has little to do with the core brand idea, but little to do with consumer needs/wants.
I’ve found an interesting example of this and it’s sadly a sort-of client of mine … SONY.
I should point out this execution was created by a local market team [whereas we only deal with the regional/global marketing divisions] however it highlights how a brand can be undermined when a local market acts in isolation to the rest of the company – even if they are doing it for what they perceive to be the ‘right reasons’.
As I said it’s a very fine line between brand consistency and profit – however I do believe more companies should reward their local markets if they achieve their goals whilst adopting the overall brand idea – because without this ‘incentive’, old habits [read: the path of least resistance] raise their ugly head time and time again.
OK so back to the Vaio ad.
I appreciate when iMac first offered different colour ‘flavours’, it was a novel approach because before that, computers were only available in grey or black … however in these times of multi-colour ‘everything’, I think saying you can have a Vaio in a number of colours is hardly motivating – especially as every other computer manufacture offers the same deal.
And what the hell is this “MY COLOUR, MY OBSESSION” sub-line?
Is anyone really that obsessed with a particular colour – apart from Prince and purple, ha!
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate how customisation is incredibly important in consumer decisions but as I said, when all you say is that your product is available in every shade that everyone else offers – you have to question its power to ’sell’ stuff. And don’t think I’m saying they should go on and on and on about the technical specs of the computer because I’m not.
The whole idea behind our FEEL strategy [which is something they’ve ignored even though it was created to differentiate SONY from the competition whilst also allowing any product to be advertised – something many brand ideas fail to do] was that SONY creates products that reawakens your feelings and emotions – not because of what they do/look like – but because of how the experience makes you feel.
Then we come to that awful headline: WHO’S YOUR DADDY
Eh?
OK … so they are obviously trying to target the ‘yoof’ segment but whilst ‘bling culture’ is alive and well [especially in Malaysia where this ad was created] surely there’s a better way to do this – a way that can build some value in the Vaio brand rather than just go after any teen with enough cash in their pocket to buy one.
If Apple represents creativity – what could owning a Vaio say about you? Judging by this ad, it’s that you’re rich and tasteless – which I’m sure is not the sort of thing SONY really want to be associated with.
A brand is something that has an unshakable emotional hold on people …. Virgin has it … Apple has it … NIKE has it … and I want SONY to have it because they are a great brand with some truly fantastic products however in my opinion, communication like the Vaio ad above undermines their potential rather than enhances it.
I am sure someone will tell me it has been incredibly successful – but I don’t think it is going to be doing much for the longer-term value of the SONY [or Vaio] brand.
And don’t throw the ‘Brand is vanity, profit is sanity’ bollocks at me – I know my/our jobs are to make clients wealthy – I just don’t believe only focusing on the short-term is in the best interests of the organisation … infact I KNOW only focusing on the short-term is not in the best interests of the organisation, however when we’re in a World occupied by greedy shareholders, sub-standard Marketeers and an ad industry who’d sell their own mother for $5, what can we expect eh?
I hope this is an isolated incident – SONY truly do have the power to reach even greater heights than they once enjoyed – but it will require the organisation to remember that once they led change rather than reacted to it.
They’re getting there, but this sort of thing doesn’t help, especially as the Asian population [be it young or old] are way, way, waaaaaaaaay smarter than most companies give them credit for.
To be honest, a fair dollop of blame should be aimed firmly at the feet of ad agencies and research companies because so many of them continually claim the region is ‘under-developed’ [interms of marketing sophistication] so encourage the dumbing-down of communication because they say this is the only way people will ‘get it’.
Whilst that might be true when the ads are 30 seconds of ‘eye candy’ with a post rationalised strategy behind it [Cadbury’s Gorilla anyone?] we have to remember that on top of the internet allowing the masses to judge brands/communication on a global scale, not just a local one – this is a part of the World that sees subtext in almost everything [which influences their actions/attitudes dependent on the myth, legend and/or rules they’ve been taught/learnt over thousands of years] – so I am pretty sure an ad that engages their brain will be, at the very least, as appreciated and enjoyed as the sort of drivel they are force-fed each and every day thanks to the arrogance and ignorance in many of the marketing masses.
As I said to one client recently, Mr Bean might be easily digestible but he’s not very satisfying and certainly not the sort of ‘brand’ you’d want to invest a truck load of money with … so I beg companies to ditch their lowest common denominator approach and treat their customers as adults – both interms of what they do, say, create and behave – because not only will it positively differentiate them from the masses, but it will be a significant investment in their longer-term success.