Mark Ritson's response to cover story 'Actions speak louder than logos'
Share
I am honoured to have sparked such a vibrant and open debate within the pages of Marketing Week on the merits of repositioning and rebranding. But let¹s be careful with our terminology the two concepts mean very different things. In a rebrand the company changes both the identity and positioning of the brand for example BP, Yodel or Consignia. In repositioning the identity stays the same, but the marketer tries to change the things that the consumer associates with the brand for example Bernard Matthews or HMV.
I have been asked several times by clients to help them either rebrand or reposition their brands. Each time I have tried everything in my power to dissuade them from the task. I explain that the vast majority of brands are fixed to their original positions by consumer memory, core competence and brand heritage. I challenge the managers to explain why they are in such a hurry to impose their own agenda onto a brand that usually existed within the business long before them. Then I try to introduce them to a third option brand revitalisation.
Brand revitalisation is a two-step process. First go and find out what your brand¹s intended, original positioning was. Use historical archives. Use interviews with the founder of the brand. Visit the original home of the brand. Talk to the original consumers who have adored the brand since its inception and ask them why they first loved it. Boil all this down to the core DNA of the brand. Don¹t change it. Don¹t modify it. Just humbly decode and articulate it.
Then re-interpret this original positioning for 2010. The great paradox of branding is that to be consistent to a position a brand must keep changing. What sexy meant in 1970 is very different from 2010. And yet if a brand is to retain that association across the decades it must alter its tactics, product mix and communication. Not because it is changing its positioning, but because it is trying to stay true to it.
You cannot call yourself a brand manager until you visit the places, people and period in which the brand was born. If more marketers did, they would be much more reticent to attempt brand repositioning and the inherent arrogant ignorance for the past that it inevitably entails. Rather than focusing on a few brands that have successfully changed their spots, let¹s instead list the great brands that have stayed leopards through the constant revitalisation of an unchanging core position. Instead of O2, Bernard Matthews and HMV - let us speak of Chanel, Heinz, Rolex and the BBC.
And let us also speak about respect. Respect for heritage. For provenance. For authenticity. And for brands.
Readers' comments (7)
Michael Beverland | Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:00 am
A great example of not being able to reposition--Dove. Lot's of money wasted on being different from the fashion industry when Unilever ultimately could not deliver on it because of their business model. Heritage matters and needs to be respected, just check out the Van's campaign throughout the London Underground
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | Thu, 17 Jun 2010 4:50 pm
Absolutely spot on in every respect.
You'll note the lack of grey haired clients lining up in MW this week to praise respositioning and rebranding. The smart ones have stayed away from it, the less smart have tried and failed.
Agencies and consulting firms love to tempt clients into repositioning/rebranding because of the cash required. But good clients should be much more reticent to start monkeying about with the magic that got their brand famous in the first place.
Ritson is right on this one.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:04 am
Oh, Mark: how right you are. All I can say is that I have copied and saved your wise words to inspire me for the next client meeting with some silly twentysomethings who got their degrees in a cornflake packet.
The key (and desperately unfashionable) issue here (is time. It IS possible for a brand to be repositioned but the customers are largely in charge of this: the best we can do as marketers is provide good stewardship over the process. Brands can become known for something different but it happens organically - slowly. It can't be rushed.
But that doesn't fit the agenda of an arrogant brand manager who'll be in his or her next job in 18 months.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Lex Thornely (@lexjt) | Sun, 20 Jun 2010 8:45 am
This is a great post and it was when reading that a brand must "alter its tactics, product mix and communication", it struck me that two good alternative examples - rather than out and out big corporates - include Madonna and Kylie Minogue. Madonna more so I guess but both have adapted their music style and offerings (product) to maintain brand loyalty among fans (customers) and to attract new fans (therefore increasing sales and market share) through producing - dare I say it - ok music that fits with the popular genres of the time, while staying true to their music beliefs/heritage.
Alongside this product adaptability, both have also revitalised their 'brand' (consumer facing profile) to continue to appeal to a broad base of fans/customers.
It's all about staying true to the brand but keeping it fresh and desirable - whether through a neccesary re-brand, repositioning or just revitalisation.
Thanks for a great post Mark
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
James Mugodo | Mon, 21 Jun 2010 3:23 pm
Makes sense. As the doctors say, "First do no harm".
I am curious though to know some of the special cases where you would consider a re-branding double by-pass. In your opinion, which past rebranding exercises met the due diligence/criteria required to undertake rebranding (or should have undertaken one, but didn't)?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jim | Mon, 21 Jun 2010 4:22 pm
I think a perfect example of successful brand revitalisation is British Gas.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Al King | Fri, 25 Jun 2010 9:15 am
And this just in:
DSGi to revive Dixons Retail group brand -
DSG International, the owner of Currys, PC World and Dixons.co.uk, has reported a return to profit as it reveals it is to return to its former group name Dixons Retail to harness the strength of the brand.
Rebranding doesnt work. QED.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment