Rethinking brand consultants

Strategy is often a misused word, but strategy simply answers the question: how? So in today's world of communications clarity of thought and execution is more important than ever.

In the 90s ago brand strategy used to be the domain of the "full-service" agency, but when agencies became more disintegrated and specialised into creative shops, the ownership of strategy fell into the brand consultants (the same thing happened with the media planning). 

Twenty years later, I really doubt whether the client has gotten a better solution with several marketing partners instead of one. Cheaper? Probably. But having separate units for branding, media and communications cannot result in effective end-products (also known as the advertising).

In the best interest of both the client and the advertising agency, we as planners must challenge brand consultants when their solutions don't cut it.

Comments

[fredrik sarnblad]

Well said Leon. I have nothing to add.

[Mats]

I am client, and I don't agree with either of your columns. There is good and bad strategy, and there are good and bad brand consultans and creative agencies.

I also don't agree with your definition of strategy. "How" to me is tactics. Strategy should answer "what and why".

[Leon]

I agree that there are good and bad brand consultants and ad agencies. But besides ones practical experiences, the discussion is about method. Brand consultants are in general too disconnected from the reality of market communications. This way of working represents top-down-thinking that’s too theoretical, too long-term and too slow for the realities of today. Just consider the fact that a brand platform can be totally useless if the market changes unexpectedly. There needs to be an intermediate layer between the brand platform and executions, and I think the agency has the potential to deliver this. The how-what-and-why, the strategic versus tactical, is one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is the idea that strategy IS execution.

[fredrik sarnblad]

Brand platforms are great and can be very helpful, but they're living documents and often need to change/evolve with the environment the brand lives in. At the end of the day, consistency doesn't turn people on to motivate action. It takes a lot more than that, namely understanding people...brand audiences and how to acquire their permission to play a part in their lives, however small.

I agree that there are good and bad agencies and brand consultants. Irrespective of this, my experience tells me that brand consultants typically produce structures, models and templates whereas (good) agencies' tend to treat brands and brand communication in a less static fashion - an unfolding story.

I appreciate that there is a need for structure and consistency on some levels in the marketing mix, but towards the end of increasing sales or margin through strong brands, the output is key, never the process or model. And the approach needs to be reality-based and efficiency-focused whether you are an agency or a brand consultancy. The only way to help brands secure a larger share of their future is to generate insight-led creativity, not static, theoretical models and structure.

[Leon]

That's a good explanation Fredrik.