According to Harvard professor, Youngme Moon, hostile brands are “brands that play hard to get.” The antithesis of “feel good brands,” hostile brands defiantly demand a decision – love me or leave me.
NEW THINKING
According to Harvard professor, Youngme Moon, hostile brands are “brands that play hard to get.” The antithesis of “feel good brands,” hostile brands defiantly demand a decision – love me or leave me.
In the business of marketing, words matter. Sadly, marketers disagree over basic branding terminology. Through overuse, the terms ‘mission’, ‘vision’, ‘value proposition’, ‘mantra’, ‘essence’, and ‘identity’ lack precise definition. The confusion makes strategic thinking about brands more difficult and undermines marketers’ credibility. If marketers can’t agree on basic terms and frameworks, how serious can the business of brand strategy be?
When conducting a brand audit, the simplest models often work the best – BCG’s Growth-Share matrix, a SWOT analysis, an organizational chart. These models work because they distill tons of information, identify what’s important and are easy to grasp.
If you have ever named a boat, a pet or a child, you know how difficult it can be to choose the right name.
The ultimate goal of any brand effort is differentiation. Setting your product apart from its competitors is an essential first step toward creating preference and loyalty. According to research firm, Millward Brown, “Brands that are perceived as being different have a much higher potential for growth than do other brands.” Consequently, identifying and communicating meaningful points of difference has become the focus of much strategic branding work.