It is difficult to avoid politics these days. Right now, both political brands are becoming parties that do not stand for anything but stand against everything or stand for everything. Having a relevant, differentiated brand promise applies whether you are a political entity or a packaged goods offering.
If you believe that creating and activating a brand promise, especially in our current environment, is too academic, please think again. One comment recently offered on the current success of General Motors is the relevant differentiation of GM’s portfolio brands.
This article is part of Branding Strategy Insider’s FREE newsletter. Join the world’s smartest marketers and subscribe here for actionable insights delivered directly to your inbox.
In a New York Times article discussing GM president Mark Reuss, a top executive at Hearst Autos and former editor-in-chief of Car and Driver, Mr. Eddie Alterman said, “Mark’s one of the all-time-great product guys. Each brand coheres in a way it hadn’t before — all Buicks feel like Buicks, all Cadillacs feel like Cadillacs.”
This brand coherence can only occur if you know what you wish the brand to stand for in the customer’s mind. After all, a brand is a promise of a relevant, differentiated experience delivered time and again.
If you love automotive history, GM was the company with the most distinctive vehicle segmentation under CEO Alfred Sloan, called the ladder of success. Based on affordability and styling, the vehicles were designed not to compete with each other but to create an array of brands that would keep customers in the GM family. As one aged and increased their purchase power, drivers could work their way up the ladder of vehicles: Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, Cadillac. These brands had relevant, distinct brand promises reflecting who the customer was. At the top of the ladder, Cadillac was considered “the doctor’s car.” Being a doctor meant spending power and prestige. Cadillac was the ultimate aspiration for a driver.
Over time, with a focus on efficiencies and effectiveness, those segmented GM brands began to blur, losing their relevant differentiation. Brands Pontiac (2010) and Oldsmobile (2004) were shuttered (aka phased out or discontinued), as was the ground-breaking, no-haggle Saturn line of cars.
With three brands (GM recently sold its overseas acquisitions, Opel, Saab and Vauxhall; Australian Holden was phased out), the ability to focus on the brands’ promises became manageable.
There was a moment, though, in the early 1990s, when GM decided to articulate and design around a brand promise, using Pontiac as an example.
Participating on the team under the auspices of the Pontiac leader, Lynn Myers, we developed a brand promise for Pontiac and a specific statement for the Pontiac Grand Prix. In the GM ladder of success, between Chevrolet and Oldsmobile, Pontiac was affordable, practical with an emphasis on vehicle performance.
By the 1990s, Pontiac was considered to be GM’s “performance” division.
Our construct for creating a brand promise, the Brand Pyramid with its 5 levels, involves
- understanding and committing to a definition of the core customer you wish to have for the brand based on their values,
- the functional benefits that the brand does very well for these core customers,
- the emotional and social rewards that the core customer receives when the functional benefits are consistently delivered in a quality manner time after time,
- the personality of the brand that appeals to and attracts the core customer, and
- the features of the brand that support the functional benefits and emotional, social rewards for people with specific values who are attracted to the brand personality.
Once these elements are generated, the most appropriate words are used to fill out the following framework:
For people with these values…………
Who seek these rewards………….
Our brand ……… with this personality……….
Provides these benefits………
Because it has these features………….
For Pontiac, the brand promise was:
For driving enthusiasts, who wish to be perceived and feel as a “driver in control “ with a desire for others to “Look at me,” bold, exciting, youthful Pontiac delivers handling and performance because of Wide Track (“wheels pushed out about 5 inches wider toward the outer edges of the car body, creating a stable, planted stance that improved handling and reduced body roll”), a cockpit dashboard and in-your-face-design.
The 1990s Pontiac Grand Prix revived Wide Track. Using the Pontiac brand promise the Pontiac Grand Prix brand promise statement was shortened as,
“For driving enthusiasts who want a feeling of driving control, bold Grand Prix provides superior handling because it has ‘wide track’ ride.
The Pontiac project never moved forward after this work. A new market research individual arrived at GM and the project was shelved. There was no appetite for continuing.
This happens.
A larger brand project at Ford some years later created a “Marketing At Ford” booklet and a presentation at a completely full Cobo Hall of Ford employees across all brands. Unlike GM where the brands had at some point been clearly segmented with relevant, differentiated promises, Ford was unable to generate the brand promises for its brands. Ford and Mercury were identical products except for the grilles. The relevant differentiation was price. Lincoln team members struggled to articulate what Lincoln stood for. This still seems to be the case. There was confusion and dissent over what the Ford Corporate brand was relative to the Ford vehicle brand. Although not unusual when the corporate name and the brand name are the same (viz. Electrolux AB and Electrolux appliances), this stumbling block pushed the brand activation off the table.
Brand promise work is essential. Brand awareness and brand familiarity will take you only so far. At some point, hopefully from the start, the brand must be familiar for something relevant and differentiated.
The Brand promise construct and statement seem so simple to create. But finding and agreeing to your articulated vision for a brand takes a lot of groundwork and teamwork.
Brand should strengthen competitive position, pricing power, and enterprise value. The Blake Project helps make that happen.
Here are a few caveats.
First, avoid genericization. Be specific. Using generic, category terminology creates generic brands.
Second, brand promise creation is not template management: template management is not brand management. Filling in the blanks without the important specificity – just to check off a box and say “Done!”- is a waste of resources.
Do your due diligence. Have the most complete understanding of the desired core customer. Know this person as if this person were your best friend. Know attitudes, interests, and opinions in terms of the personal values of this person. Again, specificity is critical.
It is really good news for customers, and for GM, that Chevrolet, Buick and Cadillac are focusing on being relevantly differentiated not only by product and price, but by their relevant, differentiated experiences.
Contributed to Branding Strategy Insider by Joan Kiddon, Partner, The Blake Project, Author of The Paradox Planet: Creating Brand Experiences For The Age Of I
At The Blake Project, we help leaders turn brand into a disciplined driver of financial performance — strengthening pricing power, competitive position, and enterprise value. Email us to start a conversation about enduring profitable growth. For The EBITDA.
Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project, a strategic brand consultancy focused on turning brand into pricing power, growth, and enterprise value.
