The Planning Lab

The Mother of All Branding Literature

The Mother of All Branding Literature

The one thing your brand should focus on

Here's an article I wrote for Superbrands that was published last week on their blog. 

As somebody working in marketing it is very likely that you are drowning in everyday problems. And if you’re like most other companies, it’s also very likely that the solutions you’re working on deal with yesterday’s problems rather than capturing the opportunities of tomorrow. 

Things hardly get easier as solutions are plentiful. You don’t have to look further than down this page to be bombarded with the latest fixes that will make your brand better. But how do you know what’s the right remedy for your brand’s competitiveness? 

For simplicity’s sake there’s one thing your brand can focus on: 

Creating momentum.

Momentum is what psychologists call the smallest unit of time perceivable by humans. It lasts about 0.06 seconds. In physics, momentum is the product of two physical entities – mass and speed – and means ”directed thrust”.

Momentum can also occur in marketing communications, at the point of contact between people and a brand. For example, the time it takes for a person to look at an ad is 1.7 seconds. 

Contrary to what  most people think, the point is not to turn the 1.7 seconds into 2.7 seconds with your brand. It’s about turning the 1.7 seconds to  something much stronger: a lasting experience. From this respect, the 1.7 seconds is not that different from love at first sight. 

Creating a lasting experience from what used to be low brand involvement has become harder, however. Brands of today are increasingly being judged by what they do, not what they say. Brands therefore have to appeal not only to senses but create new the ways for people to both think and act.

When thinking about innovative solutions for your brand, think about what made the Trojan horse successful. As you might remember from history class, the Greeks tried to enter Troy for over a decade with massive brute force but without accomplishing anything. The effective solution became a wooden horse that the Trojans instantly let inside. The rest is history. 

In a world where conventional brand building fails, momentum is the force a superbrand needs, and the best tool for creating it is unconventional creativity – powered by powerful insights about how to turn something inside people’s heads, rather than just turning heads. Make this happen, create your own Trojan horse.

Thanks to Louisa at Superbrands for inviting me to be a guest blogger. 

The one thing your brand should focus on

Here's an article I wrote for Superbrands that was published last week on their blog. 

As somebody working in marketing it is very likely that you are drowning in everyday problems. And if you’re like most other companies, it’s also very likely that the solutions you’re working on deal with yesterday’s problems rather than capturing the opportunities of tomorrow. 

Things hardly get easier as solutions are plentiful. You don’t have to look further than down this page to be bombarded with the latest fixes that will make your brand better. But how do you know what’s the right remedy for your brand’s competitiveness? 

For simplicity’s sake there’s one thing your brand can focus on: 

Creating momentum.

Momentum is what psychologists call the smallest unit of time perceivable by humans. It lasts about 0.06 seconds. In physics, momentum is the product of two physical entities – mass and speed – and means ”directed thrust”.

Momentum can also occur in marketing communications, at the point of contact between people and a brand. For example, the time it takes for a person to look at an ad is 1.7 seconds. 

Contrary to what  most people think, the point is not to turn the 1.7 seconds into 2.7 seconds with your brand. It’s about turning the 1.7 seconds to  something much stronger: a lasting experience. From this respect, the 1.7 seconds is not that different from love at first sight. 

Creating a lasting experience from what used to be low brand involvement has become harder, however. Brands of today are increasingly being judged by what they do, not what they say. Brands therefore have to appeal not only to senses but create new the ways for people to both think and act.

When thinking about innovative solutions for your brand, think about what made the Trojan horse successful. As you might remember from history class, the Greeks tried to enter Troy for over a decade with massive brute force but without accomplishing anything. The effective solution became a wooden horse that the Trojans instantly let inside. The rest is history. 

In a world where conventional brand building fails, momentum is the force a superbrand needs, and the best tool for creating it is unconventional creativity – powered by powerful insights about how to turn something inside people’s heads, rather than just turning heads. Make this happen, create your own Trojan horse.

Thanks to Louisa at Superbrands for inviting me to be a guest blogger. 

Where substance still rules

Inspired by friend of mine (a laid-back creative director, now who would have guessed that?), I've been thrown in to the esoteric world of hi-fi products (still the affordable end of it though). 

This world is quite the opposite of modern branding. Product quality rules and package design looks like shit. I really hope it stays that way. 

Brand strategy fail

Most non-iconic brands have strategy documents that look something like this. 

My guess is that defining brand values is more of an exercise in wishful thinking than anything. Sort of like defining how the perfect man/woman should be like. Doesn't hurt to throw in a couple of extra keywords does it? 

Cases where brands take core values seriously - i.e. executing communication strategies upon these, are rare. 

Where substance still rules

Inspired by friend of mine (a laid-back creative director, now who would have guessed that?), I've been thrown in to the esoteric world of hi-fi products (still the affordable end of it though). 

This world is quite the opposite of modern branding. Product quality rules and package design looks like shit. I really hope it stays that way. 

Brand strategy fail

Most non-iconic brands have strategy documents that look something like this. 

My guess is that defining brand values is more of an exercise in wishful thinking than anything. Sort of like defining how the perfect man/woman should be like. Doesn't hurt to throw in a couple of extra keywords does it? 

Cases where brands take core values seriously - i.e. executing communication strategies upon these, are rare. 

Risk, creativity and innovation

Classic finance theory states that the higher risk you're willing to take, the higher will be the potential return. And although the world of communications doesn't use advanced equations or formulas to calculate risks, the same relationship between creative risk and potential award holds (both in terms of efficiency and profits for the client and in terms of creative awards for the agency).

I believe that this perspective is lacking in most agencies and for most clients, because advertising is often seen as an expense that should be risk-free rather than an investment with a variable return. As a result, clients often choose the safest solution. Agencies that try to convince a client that the more creative solution is the way to go are perceived as pushy and reckless. 

There are of course several ways of mitigating risk (i.e. shifting the curve downwards) through a strong agency brand, research data, planning, experience and other informed choices, but the risk-reward principle in the creative industry remains. Why? Because the creative risk lies in innovation and finding new ways of connecting with people. New ways are by definition unproven and no guarantees for success can be given without lying.

So if we want to stretch higher along the risk curve, we have to ask ourselves several questions: how much risk are we willing to take? What type of clients are we working with and can we expect them to take creative risks? What type of people does the agency hire and why do clients hire us in the first place? Or maybe advertising is just a world of chaos and there's no way of determining anything? If that's the case planning is surely doomed. 

Risk, creativity and innovation

Classic finance theory states that the higher risk you're willing to take, the higher will be the potential return. And although the world of communications doesn't use advanced equations or formulas to calculate risks, the same relationship between creative risk and potential award holds (both in terms of efficiency and profits for the client and in terms of creative awards for the agency).

I believe that this perspective is lacking in most agencies and for most clients, because advertising is often seen as an expense that should be risk-free rather than an investment with a variable return. As a result, clients often choose the safest solution. Agencies that try to convince a client that the more creative solution is the way to go are perceived as pushy and reckless. 

There are of course several ways of mitigating risk (i.e. shifting the curve downwards) through a strong agency brand, research data, planning, experience and other informed choices, but the risk-reward principle in the creative industry remains. Why? Because the creative risk lies in innovation and finding new ways of connecting with people. New ways are by definition unproven and no guarantees for success can be given without lying.

So if we want to stretch higher along the risk curve, we have to ask ourselves several questions: how much risk are we willing to take? What type of clients are we working with and can we expect them to take creative risks? What type of people does the agency hire and why do clients hire us in the first place? Or maybe advertising is just a world of chaos and there's no way of determining anything? If that's the case planning is surely doomed.