The concept of ‘Brand’ – going beyond the definition

There has been a very interesting discussion going on in one of the brand managers’ groups that I am a part of. The group, made up of very senior brand/marketing professional, novices like me and even people who are simply interested in marketing, is not discussing any path-breaking branding ideas; instead it is debating the most fundamental question that you’d have expected to be convincingly answered at least a decade ago.

Yet, hundreds of people have already posted comments about what they thought was meant by the term ‘brand’. Needless to say, we now have a collection of definitions ranging from ‘brand as a promise’ to ‘brand as a differentiator’ to ‘brand as an experience’. One of the more enterprising gentlemen from the group even volunteered to put all these ‘definitions’ together in an attempt to give a holistic idea, if you like, of the concept of brand.

So what then is a ‘brand’? How could one define it? I know if this question is thrown open to another set of individuals, we most likely would get another set of definitions. But however tempting it is to jump in with our own definitions, I would like my readers to stop and take a step back for a moment. A ‘definition’ of a ‘brand’? Really?

Brand is perhaps one of the most, if not the most, intangible assets a business has. And a definition, by definition is extremely tangible. How could then one use something as tangible as a definition to describe or express something as intangible as a ‘brand’?

But could ‘brand’ be expressed in any other way than in words? I think it could be. And when I think long and hard about it, it starts to make perfect sense.

I think that a brand could be better expressed not in words but in metaphors. Some pioneers like Kevin Roberts (of love marks fame) have already done that. And I think this is the best way to go forward. I, however, think that successful brands are more than love marks. My biggest problem with love marks is that they are not long-lasting. Love marks is a good beginning; we now just need to build on it.

I would like to think of a brand as a wedding ring (not the tangibility but the concept, the idea of a wedding ring). Love marks are all about leaving loving memories, even of a one-night stand, or from a brand’s perspective, a great experience delivered once at one of the many touch points. And perhaps that’s the reason why most of the latest top 50 love marks (www.lovemarks.com) are flash-in-the-pan brands. How would you otherwise explain the ‘lady Gaga’ brand at number 6 on that list?

A wedding ring, on the other hand, is a commitment to that love. It’s about delivering on the brand promise at every touch point every single time, forever. And great brands do that. They are extremely committed to their customers and consequently enjoy their intense loyalty. Red Bull has done that unfailingly for the past two decades. It promises to revitalise body and mind and does it exceedingly well through not only its unique product but also through all other antics – the X-games, the music, the underground culture, and the ‘tasting’ drives and so on. Apple, Harley Davidson and McDonald’s are the few other brands that have managed to remain committed to and in turn won ferocious loyalty of its customers.

Just like a wedding ring, successful brands symbolise trust. And by trust, I don’t mean the oft-mentioned ‘trust of quality’ but a lot more than that. This is about trusting the brands with your life, or something on that scale. For instance, I have myself witnessed uneducated Indian farmers leaving a sack full of money (perhaps their only annual earnings from the harvest) in a State Bank of India (SBI) branch to be counted and deposited by the branch staff. Although SBI is by no means at the cutting-edge of banking, it still commands the respect and trust that any banking group anywhere in the world would love to command. Contrast this with most of the UK banking brands, some of them the biggest banking brands in the world, who saw their customers desert them during the credit crunch by withdrawing all their savings. Clearly, contrary to these banks’ claims and despite their advertising and CRM efforts, they only managed to maintain a transactional relationship with their customers, which is so not the concept of ‘brand’. 

That elusive emotional relationship, built over time through enduring dedication to customers, is what a strong brand all about. And when people connect with the brand emotionally, they will flaunt it openly to declare their affection for the brand and in extreme cases, differentiate themselves from others, just like happily married couples who proudly wear their wedding rings. Again, Apple, Harley Davidson and Patek Philippe stand out as perfect examples to demonstrate the point. Ardent Mac users, and lately iPod and iPhone users, not only show off their Apple gadgets but can’t even get enough of talking about them. I have heard so many Apple users tell me that ever since they started using their Apple products, they just can’t use other ‘ordinary’ products. It’s a ditto case with Patek Philippe. The Patek Philippe customers practically don’t wear their watches to know time; they use it to flaunt their status and taste. To me, these customers are ‘happily married’ to their beloved brands. On the other hand, a lot of the ‘most valuable’ global brands don’t enjoy this emotional connect. People really don’t care whether they get a Coke or a Pepsi as long as they get a cola drink. Perhaps that’s the reason why these two brands still compete heavily on price and distribution.

Having said all that, brands are as fragile as the wedding rings. Although people who love their brands might overlook some of their shortcomings and give them another chance, they could as easily discard them from their lives as they would remove the ring from their fingers. Great brands understand this delicacy. That’s why they constantly talk and listen to their customers and endeavour to improve themselves. No doubt they make mistakes but they are also quick to learn from those mistakes and put significant efforts in order to win their customers’ back. Nike after its ‘sweat shop’ scandal or Cadbury’s after the ‘insect’ scandal undertook genuine changes in the way they operated to show their honest concern for their customers’ opinion about them. Some brands on the other hand, such as General Motors never bothered about their customers and eventually lost them to better competitors.

The point that I am trying to make throughout this blog is that brands mean much more than what words could define. But brand managers could do a lot of justice to their brands if they try to look at them metaphorically. All they have to do is to translate the concept of a wedding ring and everything it stands for into brands. They could and indeed should endeavour their brands to mean to their customers what a wedding ring means to married couples. And while doing so, they must remember that it is always a two-way relationship. And just like in a marriage, brands will only get out of that relationship with their customers what they are willing put in.