Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, appeared on this morning's Sunrise program charged by the ubiquitous Kochie and Mel with casting some sort of spell to cure Harry Kewell's groin injury ahead of the Socceroo's first World Cup game against Germany on Sunday (Euro time). Much easier than inviting Fortescue's Andrew 'Twiggy' Forrester into a super mining tax lovefest - or is it mining super tax, or a mining tax for super? Never mind.
As an avid Liverpool supporter, I can assure all that restoring the health of Harry Kewell's groin has eluded some of the best sports medics in the world. So if Kevin747 can resolve this issue, it will go a long way to kick starting his own move back up the political premiership ladder. We await the outcome, but no doubt Kevin747 will be relieved that the nation's focus will, for a few days at least, turn to the Socceroos' first match against football powerhouse, Germany.
And talking about invitations and the World Cup, I should actually be in South Africa rubbing shoulders with the hoi polloi of the global business community. You see, one enterprising conference organiser sent me an invitation about a year ago to attend a conference in Cape Town. It starts just after the World Cup and I found myself thinking back to the glory days of the 1980s when corporate boon doggles were the norm and major events were geared around the CEO's or the Chairman's overseas holiday plans.
I admit being extremely tempted to leverage the World Cup to the benefit of my employer. I mean what's $15,000 to attend a conference when you can schmooze and talk about football all night in local bars with people you're never likely to do business with?
I perused the list of registered corporate luminaries. Unusually for the invitations I normally receive, I noted it was not littered with US thought leaders touting their latest business tome. Instead, it had glitterati from European firms, like VW, Mercedes, Siemens... you get the picture (not many Greek luminaries I hasten to add). All there to promote their brands during the World Cup before opting for the conference add-on with its commercial imperatives of African wildlife safaris.
Luckily, as brand thought leaders, we all know brands are built on relationships. And there's no better place to reinforce those relationships than running up some executive expenses during the World Cup. Did I hear you say: 'But it should be around customer relationships.' ?
Don't worry it is. All these execs will want to be your mate when they return with their new suntans and they have to work out ways of chatting with you about the price increase on your next European car. The customer relationship is simple. You've just gotta love that car.
Whether your watching at home, or schmoozing in Cape Town, best of luck to you and your team. Keep an eye on Harry Kewell. If his groin suddenly goes up in flames, so might our Prime Minister.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Microsoft and Google collude to murder the corporate font
Last week I was chatting to my mate Nige, a guy who appreciates a good font, especially if its full of red wine. We were talking about branding and a project I am imminently to be involved in. We came to the somewhat belated conclusion that the nerds had finally engineered the death of the corporate font.
So this blog entry is my official announcement of the font's demise in my future branding strategies. When everything was delivered in print or in tightly controlled, rasterised audiovisual media, fonts were part of corporate identity.
But today, we are constructing channel strategies in which consistent visual image is less important than useability by Microsoft-conditioned office workers and, even more importantly, less important than comprehension by the bots that scour the net on behalf of search engines.
Don't be misled. I'm not celebrating the demise of the font, merely acknowledging that in many applications, passionately policing the corporate brand guidelines is poor business strategy and definitely not career-enhancing. Anything Google is blind too is brand poison these days.
And, in turn, the Google generations have been rendered blind to the role of careful typography in corporate presentations. For instance, I reviewed a presentation the other day for one young colleague. I confess - it was a Powerpoint presentation (50 lashes stretched over a template!). I've almost given up trying to police the use of the 'brand guidelines' font in the headings. But I did have to remark on 'inconsistent' font usage.
When challenged as to what I meant, I pointed out that it was nothing to do with using the 'proper' font, but about at least using the same font on every screen! 'I never noticed,' was the response. I rest my case.
Corporate visual guidelines are fighting a rear guard action against the overwhelming force of convenience (i.e. corporate fonts being loaded and available on on every Microsoft-compromised machine in the office) and the search engine gods. Optimal speed, delivery and effectiveness is triumphing over optimal presentation.
The hair on graphic designers is noticeably shorter and more geek-like these days. But they still swear a lot. These days it's about having to work with HTML and bloody clients wanting to be on Google's first page. They rant against a world that believes it is far more effective to be ugly and out there than pretty and invisible.
So I'm going to strike a compromise in my next brand phase - I'll let you employ any Microsoft font as long as it's not Times Roman. After all, I am a man of principle! Furthermore, I hereby authorise an invasion of Microsoft's R&D facilitites to search for hidden WVDs - Weapons of Visual Destruction - that have yet to be unleashed.
So this blog entry is my official announcement of the font's demise in my future branding strategies. When everything was delivered in print or in tightly controlled, rasterised audiovisual media, fonts were part of corporate identity.
But today, we are constructing channel strategies in which consistent visual image is less important than useability by Microsoft-conditioned office workers and, even more importantly, less important than comprehension by the bots that scour the net on behalf of search engines.
Don't be misled. I'm not celebrating the demise of the font, merely acknowledging that in many applications, passionately policing the corporate brand guidelines is poor business strategy and definitely not career-enhancing. Anything Google is blind too is brand poison these days.
And, in turn, the Google generations have been rendered blind to the role of careful typography in corporate presentations. For instance, I reviewed a presentation the other day for one young colleague. I confess - it was a Powerpoint presentation (50 lashes stretched over a template!). I've almost given up trying to police the use of the 'brand guidelines' font in the headings. But I did have to remark on 'inconsistent' font usage.
When challenged as to what I meant, I pointed out that it was nothing to do with using the 'proper' font, but about at least using the same font on every screen! 'I never noticed,' was the response. I rest my case.
Corporate visual guidelines are fighting a rear guard action against the overwhelming force of convenience (i.e. corporate fonts being loaded and available on on every Microsoft-compromised machine in the office) and the search engine gods. Optimal speed, delivery and effectiveness is triumphing over optimal presentation.
The hair on graphic designers is noticeably shorter and more geek-like these days. But they still swear a lot. These days it's about having to work with HTML and bloody clients wanting to be on Google's first page. They rant against a world that believes it is far more effective to be ugly and out there than pretty and invisible.
So I'm going to strike a compromise in my next brand phase - I'll let you employ any Microsoft font as long as it's not Times Roman. After all, I am a man of principle! Furthermore, I hereby authorise an invasion of Microsoft's R&D facilitites to search for hidden WVDs - Weapons of Visual Destruction - that have yet to be unleashed.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
White House writers from a unique PR club
I never knew this PR company existed - but then again, I am as far removed from the White House as BP's PR right now! From what I can see, the White House Writers Group is a PR half way house for those released from Presidential detention with a pass to offer advice on corporate affairs.
I have no idea how many White House writers there are - a substantial number I should imagine given the scope of issues coverage from Washington's most prestigious home. WHWG is certainly maintaining the tradition of broad scope with an article currently on its website home page entitled "Analyzing Campaign Speech Writing on Norwegian Television".
White House Writers Group is certainly not a brand name that rolls off the tongue, but I have to say, it's a name that needs no tagline or mission statement to spell out its value proposition, experience or service offer. And their website offers free advice and insights - much better than most PR websites that are no more than online brochures that do the profession no justice.
If you're running a PR company, take a look and learn. The sprinkling of original free insights and advice would encourage me to hire this company ahead of many others.
I have no idea how many White House writers there are - a substantial number I should imagine given the scope of issues coverage from Washington's most prestigious home. WHWG is certainly maintaining the tradition of broad scope with an article currently on its website home page entitled "Analyzing Campaign Speech Writing on Norwegian Television".
White House Writers Group is certainly not a brand name that rolls off the tongue, but I have to say, it's a name that needs no tagline or mission statement to spell out its value proposition, experience or service offer. And their website offers free advice and insights - much better than most PR websites that are no more than online brochures that do the profession no justice.
If you're running a PR company, take a look and learn. The sprinkling of original free insights and advice would encourage me to hire this company ahead of many others.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
BP - Trouble in the Gulf between fact and message?
BP is certainly experiencing what it's really like when events stack up beyond petroleum. The company's brand is at risk of drowning in the Gulf of Mexico, with any number of reports like this one sprouting up everywhere about whether the oil disaster is much worse than the company is admitting. The only thing flowing as fast as the oil are the stories and commentary across the internet.
Naturally, whenever these cataclysmic events occur, the first instinct of a company is damage limitation, but in what order of priority? This is the question many residents along the Gulf coast will be asking, as oil seeps twelve miles into wetland areas. Government agencies - from local government all the way to the White House - are starting to question whether BP is doing enough and is what it is doing effective?
For BP, damage limitation extends beyond saving the environment to brand, legal and financial. And the messages the company sends out on its efforts to stem the flow of oil shapes world perceptions about which area of damage it is most concerned about. This is regardless of what its true priorities might be.
There is no doubt that this is an enormously challenging technical problem, which extends into explaining the issues to stakeholders, from local fishermen to the US Government. In the past few days, there have been reports that BP was forewarned about problems associated with this rig. No doubt, when the litigation inevitably starts, the veracity of these claims will be appropriately tested.
Nonetheless, rig integrity or otherwise, the fundamental question is what risk assessment took place before exploration and drilling began and either:
However, I would argue that the measure of damage to BP's brand and reputation ultimately lies in the answer to the questions I posed, because reputation is built on conducting business with integrity at every level and stage of operation.
Naturally, whenever these cataclysmic events occur, the first instinct of a company is damage limitation, but in what order of priority? This is the question many residents along the Gulf coast will be asking, as oil seeps twelve miles into wetland areas. Government agencies - from local government all the way to the White House - are starting to question whether BP is doing enough and is what it is doing effective?
For BP, damage limitation extends beyond saving the environment to brand, legal and financial. And the messages the company sends out on its efforts to stem the flow of oil shapes world perceptions about which area of damage it is most concerned about. This is regardless of what its true priorities might be.
There is no doubt that this is an enormously challenging technical problem, which extends into explaining the issues to stakeholders, from local fishermen to the US Government. In the past few days, there have been reports that BP was forewarned about problems associated with this rig. No doubt, when the litigation inevitably starts, the veracity of these claims will be appropriately tested.
Nonetheless, rig integrity or otherwise, the fundamental question is what risk assessment took place before exploration and drilling began and either:
- Why did it not identify the potential for this problem; or
- If it did, why did BP not have an adequate disaster management plan and facilities in place?
However, I would argue that the measure of damage to BP's brand and reputation ultimately lies in the answer to the questions I posed, because reputation is built on conducting business with integrity at every level and stage of operation.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Tough times shape the thinking of Gen Z
I arose every morning this week to discover that Wall Street had been crunched again overnight with a similar outcome expected for the Australian bourse in the day ahead. It got me thinking about the implications for branding as the punters lose faith in institutions and corporate and economic management.
The underlying economic problem right now is the risk of collapsing national economies - of countries defaulting on their debts. Widely referred to as sovereign risk, this is potentially a far bigger problem than the collapse Lehmann Brothers. I must say that, as they face the bailout of whole nations, I am amazed at the resiliance of the humble taxpayers who - whether they're underwriting sovereign or corporate debt - end up footing the bill somewhere along the line. I wonder what happens when taxpayers default - or revolt?
The fortunate thing for politicians is that we have institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) who appear to magically produce money to bail out cot case economies. Most taxpayers don't realise that the IMF magic pudding actually rises on the back of contributions from member states who, in turn, raise the necessary taxes to cover their contributions. How's that for adroit sleight of hand?
But I digress. As nations grapple to stay afloat, what are the implications for brands? There is a lot of research around that says, for Gen Y, brand loyalty has gone out the window. According to many, this fickle, demanding generation is almost impossible to pin down. But if you think Gen Y's tough, wait until you see the next mob. My daughter is Gen Z. She's gifted with xray vision and bullshit detection capabilities that us boomers can only dream about.
As current events unfold, they are defining the development years of her generation, which must inevitably grow up to question the integrity of institutions, brands and people behind them. While we in the branding community talk about authenticity, the aftermath of our series of financial crises will surely test our capacity to 'walk our talk'.
So if you're company's only paying lip service to authenticity, you'd better lift your game as the Gen Z shoppers are starting to hit the streets now!
The underlying economic problem right now is the risk of collapsing national economies - of countries defaulting on their debts. Widely referred to as sovereign risk, this is potentially a far bigger problem than the collapse Lehmann Brothers. I must say that, as they face the bailout of whole nations, I am amazed at the resiliance of the humble taxpayers who - whether they're underwriting sovereign or corporate debt - end up footing the bill somewhere along the line. I wonder what happens when taxpayers default - or revolt?
The fortunate thing for politicians is that we have institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) who appear to magically produce money to bail out cot case economies. Most taxpayers don't realise that the IMF magic pudding actually rises on the back of contributions from member states who, in turn, raise the necessary taxes to cover their contributions. How's that for adroit sleight of hand?
But I digress. As nations grapple to stay afloat, what are the implications for brands? There is a lot of research around that says, for Gen Y, brand loyalty has gone out the window. According to many, this fickle, demanding generation is almost impossible to pin down. But if you think Gen Y's tough, wait until you see the next mob. My daughter is Gen Z. She's gifted with xray vision and bullshit detection capabilities that us boomers can only dream about.
As current events unfold, they are defining the development years of her generation, which must inevitably grow up to question the integrity of institutions, brands and people behind them. While we in the branding community talk about authenticity, the aftermath of our series of financial crises will surely test our capacity to 'walk our talk'.
So if you're company's only paying lip service to authenticity, you'd better lift your game as the Gen Z shoppers are starting to hit the streets now!
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Gazman and Toyotas
My wife rang me at work yesterday from that bloody Gazman clothing store. It was about a jacket... oh, and by the way... there's also a pair of pants on sale... and a SKIVVY!! sort of thing.
This rang serious alarm bells. A 'Sale' sticker is like the lure on a greyhound track to my wife. She'll chase it all the way to the cash register. Nevertheless, I felt I had to make a stand.
'Unless Gazman agrees to use me in its next male catalogue, I won't be buying any more,' I resolutely responded down the phone, knowing full well there were plenty of more likely candidates. "I'm just about entirely attired in their stuff and I don't want any more!'
It was the return of serve to this comment that really floored me though - especially as I have some respect for brands. "I don't know what's wrong with you. Gazman is one of the best-selling brands in Australia. Everyone buys it."
I couldn't help myself: "Toyota is the best-selling brand in Australia too, but I wouldn't buy a Toyota." The silence was deafening, then: "A Lexus is a Toyota." This would seem a feeble response and would normally prove my point but, instead, it send shock waves through the domestic millpond. My wife has just signed up for a new Lexus IS250 - her new pride and joy - and I had just thumped my volley into the net.
How did I step back from the brink? I agreed to buy the Gazman jacket. If only all purchase decisions were so simple! At least I held ground on the skivvy thing, even though it would look good behind the steering wheel of the Lexus!
This rang serious alarm bells. A 'Sale' sticker is like the lure on a greyhound track to my wife. She'll chase it all the way to the cash register. Nevertheless, I felt I had to make a stand.
'Unless Gazman agrees to use me in its next male catalogue, I won't be buying any more,' I resolutely responded down the phone, knowing full well there were plenty of more likely candidates. "I'm just about entirely attired in their stuff and I don't want any more!'
It was the return of serve to this comment that really floored me though - especially as I have some respect for brands. "I don't know what's wrong with you. Gazman is one of the best-selling brands in Australia. Everyone buys it."
I couldn't help myself: "Toyota is the best-selling brand in Australia too, but I wouldn't buy a Toyota." The silence was deafening, then: "A Lexus is a Toyota." This would seem a feeble response and would normally prove my point but, instead, it send shock waves through the domestic millpond. My wife has just signed up for a new Lexus IS250 - her new pride and joy - and I had just thumped my volley into the net.
How did I step back from the brink? I agreed to buy the Gazman jacket. If only all purchase decisions were so simple! At least I held ground on the skivvy thing, even though it would look good behind the steering wheel of the Lexus!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)