In this Q&A, Intel CMO Steve Fund shares his thoughts on a new branding campaign designed to showcase the products and services Intel technology enables.

Every business and brand is unique. They all have their own processes, efficiencies, culture and values. The origins of many brands is traced back to providing a solution that didn’t exist to a problem or unlocking a mystery for people. The next phase of development takes place when they move from solving mysteries to a position where they are part of an ongoing mission. Here emotional connection between people and brand is built based on what mission and solutions the brand provides. Brands achieve this through scale and algorithmic precision. They use mass or targeted awareness to help drive word of mouth.

It’s this type of habitual behavior by brands that helps define who and what they are to customers. But it also gets brands into habits that become hard to break. It is this very type of behavior that leads to a fertile environment for disruption.

So how do brands recognize disruption? And why does disruption take place? Well, if a brand moves to solve mysteries through a heuristic phase to run an algorithm, the issue is they don’t check the landscape that is parallel to them to see what new mysteries they can solve. Brands get what we know as inattentional or perceptual blindness. They are so focused on what they are currently doing, they cannot see what they need to do or where they need to go based on the evolution of behavior. As a result, they simply get left behind and left behind quickly in relevance because another player replaces what they at one time provided. In other words, brand disruption happens because customers have new wants and needs that the dominant or legacy brand fails to address or create. This is usually because algorithmic business models lead to profits rather than innovation.

We have seen this countless times and maybe the best way to explain this is through a real tale in popular culture around the shapeshifts in technological hardware and our listening habits. It is important to note however that a number of factors are involved that cause change. These include but are not limited to:

• Customer Sentiment
• An evolving marketplace – what people need in 2017 is different from what they needed in 2012 but could be similar to what they needed in 1917 (past is always prologue in disruption)
• The inability to inspire new customers or retain current customers (a common tale when you are running an algorithm, any straying from the path is seen by the brand as an unnecessary diversion)
• Cheaper Solutions
• Entirely new lines of business
• New technology which changes how we live and work (Amazon didn’t rise to power because retail is dying, it rose to power because of how we live and work and the need for delivery within timeframes and convenience factors in a long tail economy)

All of these factors are why we’ve gone from quick service restaurants dominating the landscape to fast casual now being the norm. Why we’ve gone from a world where apps like Uber have superseded taxis and limousines and a world where unbranded mix and match Uniqlo has outrun The Gap and Abercrombie & Fitch in a world of fast fashion and declining income among younger people.

So, what tools do we use spot these disruptions? Here are a few questions you should always be asking.

• What is the social sentiment of your brand?
• What are people searching for on Google or Bing that is bubbling on the fringe?
• What things are you observing in the world around you in terms of how people live, communicate, dress and conduct themselves?

Many times, companies spot these shifts but are either too early or too late to solve that new mystery. The first smartphone wasn’t created by Apple but by Microsoft. The first search engine not by Google but Archie. The first solar cells were created by Bell Labs not Kyocera.

A True Tale Of Perpetual Brand Disruption

Hi-Fi stereos were all the rage in the 1930s due to vinyl records and a market dominated by the brand RCA Victor. Then in the 1960s the transistor portable radio was created and Sony, Sanyo and Texas Instruments were the main brands in this space pushed by the popularity of AM radio stations. Did that obliterate hi-fi stereos? No, but the brands that manufactured transistors were different from the brands that manufactured hi-fi stereos. Recognizing disruption many times is understanding brand disruption isn’t a winner take all scenario. So, while you may still be thriving as a brand, you may not be thriving within a specific timeframe. This is what catches many brands off guard and is key in the recognition process. People may still be purchasing their products but those purchase habits are changing and the legacy brand isn’t adapting to where things are headed next. The disrupting brand is solving those new mysteries. This is why relevance is a quality signal in identifying disruption more than revenue.

So, did transistors eclipse hi-fi stereo brands and become the dominant audio device in the 1960s and 1970s? Yes, but ultimately portable headphones and players eclipsed the transistor in the 1980s changing the market once again. This new player was known as the Sony Walkman. Thus at this point Sony had eclipsed RCA as the dominant audio brand. From this point portable and personal players were the crux of the market. Sony had solid profitability. Then in the late 1990s things pivoted again due to a change in audio formats. The MP3 eclipsed the CD and cassette tape and several companies rushed to issue a player. There were several created by upstart brands like SIS, Diamond Multimedia and Eiger Labs.

But digital rights management switched things up again opening the door for what ultimately disrupted the entire market in the form of Apple’s iPod and iTunes. But were we done yet? Ultimately while many of us may point to the iPod innovating into the iPhone, the way we listen to music has changed again and is now dominated by things beyond the hardware including Spotify, Pandora and iHeart Radio apps. If we actually look at data, streaming services have eclipsed mp3s. But what will eclipse streaming? If fringe data is any indication, we are headed back to our past (again, past is prologue). What do I mean by this?

Vinyl is making a comeback. That is if it ever really left us in the first place.

All of this happened in the last 90 years. That’s a lot of change in that period of time. A lot of juggling back and forth between dominant brands and disrupted brands that no longer exist.

The question to answer now isn’t will you be disrupted (you will) but will you survive to see another day?

Learn how to keep your brand relevant in the 21^st Century in my new book Disruptive Marketing.

Don’t let the future leave you behind. Join us in Hollywood, California for Brand Leadership in the Age of Disruption, our 5th annual competitive-learning event designed around brand strategy.

The Blake Project Can Help: Accelerate Brand Growth Through Powerful Emotional Connections

Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Licensing and Brand Education

FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers

For the release of Assassin’s Creed, Wilkinson has partnered with Youtube and give the opportunity for the first time ever to kill its own ad online.

À l’occasion de son partenariat avec Assassin’s Creed le film, Wikinson vous donne pour la première fois l’opportunité de supprimer sa propre pub sur YouTube.

CREATIVE CREDITS:
Ad Agency: J. Walter Thompson, Paris

Learn about new research from the Association of National Advertisers (ANA) on how the overall ANA member community is conducting e-commerce initiatives.

Productivity, discipline and focus: The perfect formula for success in business–and in life. As you know, those 3 traits are deeply intertwined. I believe that focus and discipline naturally lead to productivity. But the first step is to gain focus. Early in my business, I wanted to do it all. I…

Sonic Union mix engineer Brian Goodheart and sound designer Owen Shearer unite with director Robert Broadhurst to bring the futuristic aesthetic of the Adidas Y-3 Spring/Summer 2017 collection to life in a surreal new campaign film from Blackrose NYC. Written and directed by Broadhurst, the story unfolds in a sleek, dystopian universe as two protagonists face off against an oppressive surveillance regime. The artist Son Lux provides an eerie, dreamlike score that amplifies the artful mosaic of stylized, impressionistic scenes that showcase the brand’s futuristic sportswear, footwear and signature color palette.

“The SS17 collection had a specific cinematic feeling that all I wanted to do was build a beautiful world around it and let it emanate this strange and hopefully entertaining story,” Noted director Robert Broadhurst. “I was incredibly lucky that Blackrose and Y-3 loved the concept and gave it so much support – that’s the greatest part of working with a forward-looking brand, especially as a new director. It was exciting to explore some of the contemporary anxieties that I find really enrich Yohji Yamamoto’s famous notion of ‘clothing as armor.’ And, as with all things sci-fi, the sound design and mix were particularly vital to the film. Brian worked his magic to elevate it beyond the high standard we had achieved the last time around and once again helped refine story through sound.”

This is a recurring collaboration between Goodheart and Broadhurst, having previously collaborated on the recent Y-3 Autumn/Winter 2016 campaign film.

CREATIVE CREDITS:
Agency: Blackrose NYC
Director: Robert Broadhurst
Producer: Kori Shadrick
Director of Photography: Aaron Platt
Lighting Design: John Torres
Music: Son Lux
Color: Paul Harrison at Freefolk
Talent: Louie
Talent: Zlata
VFX Lead: John Shafto
UI Design: Toros Köse
Sound: Sonic Union
Mix Engineer: Brian Goodheart
Sound Designer: Owen Shearer
Studio Director: Justine Cortale
Scheduling Producer: Pat Sullivan
Set Design: Anthony Asaro

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); –ADVERTISEMENT–

What marketers need to know this week: BuzzFeed’s coup over Trump, institutional trust is failing, magic unicorns, and more.

One of the more interesting developments that emerged during these past few months is the phenomena of brands facing direct criticism from then President-elect Donald Trump.

The frequency and unpredictability of these criticisms has put brands on notice. From questioning the decision to move manufacturing to Mexico, as in the case of Carrier or Ford, or of the estimated cost of Air Force One, as with Boeing. Any brand facing criticism from the new president, along with enduring the accompanying media coverage subjects brands to deep and potentially threatening scrutiny. Like many things associated with the recent election, this is totally new in the political/marketing universe. For the first time, a soon to be sitting president is using his position to publicly chastise a company and brand by name.

Though there is no direct precedent it should be noted that presidents have never been totally silent in matters that effect marketing and commerce. For example in 1952, Harry Truman attempted a seizure of the steel industry in the face of a strike. Ten years later, President Kennedy was at odds publicly with the steel industry over pricing. In 1981, Ronald Reagan fired 11,000 striking air traffic controllers for refusing to return to work. In 2009, President Obama attempted to re-invent the healthcare industry with the Affordable Care Act and jump-start the entire green industry in the U.S. In each of these cases, the power of the presidency was brought to bear to settle an issue in the marketplace, or in the case of Obama, rebuild or reinvigorate a marketplace. But in these examples and others, brands weren’t singled out as they are now. Had Twitter been around in 1962, would Kennedy have called out U.S. Steel directly for price gouging? We’ll never know.

What we do know is the power of social media (in this case Twitter) wielded directly and personally by a President on a mission to “make America great again.” So far, it has been quite effective. United Technologies (Carrier), Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Ford, GM, Fiat Chrysler and Toyota, have all had their turn. The news media amplifies the message beyond the President’s 20.3 million followers and CEOs squirm. In every case a negative tweet from @realDonaldTrump has delivered a blow to the brand in stock valuation loss. Stanley is one company that seems to be getting the message. This from their CEO John Lundgren: “It’s going to be advisable to have more manufacturing in the U.S.” Our observation: If your brand is on the Fortune 500, rightly or wrongly your brand could be next.

That is why, in assessing your brand’s potential threats as part of a SWOT analysis or other situation analysis, you consider heightened public scrutiny for your business plans and policies as part of that matrix. A Wall Street Journal op-ed recently complained that the new president should allow CEO’s to chart the destiny of the businesses that they know better. While that may be true, the new reality may very well become the new normal for high-profile brands. It is, in fact, a new crisis management scenario that these brands must prepare for.

While the combination of presidential administration scrutiny, public criticism and direct threats are a unique development for high-profile brands, threats in the marketplace are not. Essentially, the tweets from @realDonaldTrump can call into question the trustworthiness of the brand to have the country’s best interests at heart. This is much like a consumer group questioning product safety claims or a company’s environmental policy being deemed “green wash.” The difference is, of course, it’s coming from the “highest office in the land” and by virtue of that, it’s news that is capable of threatening the trust consumers have with your brand.

The trust issue at the top of this list of brand threats and how to counter them where Mark DiSomma points out: “… the range of behaviors that consumers find unacceptable has broadened to include not just misleading messaging but also the gamut of wider business and ethical issues.” I would add it is the “wider business issues” (relocating manufacturing outside the U.S. or bids that are perceived to be high) and “ethical issues” (the resulting job loss among the brand’s own consumers or unreasonable profits) that a targeted Trump-tweet raises on the basis of trust—or lack there of. Damage control from crisis management techniques aside, how do brands counter this potential threat without necessarily acquiescing, as in the case of Stanley or others?

Our advice? If things are happening that you wouldn’t want people to know about, beyond commercial sensitivity, that’s a trust issue waiting to happen. Address it, before buyers address you about it and certainly before the President tweets about it.

That’s because when the brand’s trust is impugned by raising “business and ethical issues,” the brand’s reputation can suffer long lasting damage as real as its temporary stock value drop. A study by the Wirthlin Group concludes just how important your brand reputation is:

• “Companies with good reputations are 7 times more likely to command premium prices for their products and services,
• 5 times more likely to have their stock recommended,
• 4 times more likely to be recommended as a good place to work,
• 3 times more likely to be recommended as a joint venture partner, and
• 1.5 times more likely to receive the benefit of the doubt.”

Threats to your brand will emerge. It’s inevitable. Some you can anticipate and some you can’t. The best way to handle being the target of a disparaging tweet, presidential or otherwise, is to have a plan on how you will take a stand, be transparent, and trustworthy.

Don’t let the future leave you behind. Join us in Hollywood, California for Brand Leadership in the Age of Disruption, our 5th annual competitive-learning event designed around brand strategy.

The Blake Project Can Help: Accelerate Brand Growth Through Powerful Emotional Connections

Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Licensing and Brand Education

FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers

While many Americans are focused on what a Trump administration will mean for such issues as healthcare, immigration, and gender diversity, those in the governance community are also concerned about the fate of the many Dodd-Frank Act rules enacted during the Obama administration and the possibility of mandatory use of universal proxy cards in contested […]

You and I have unique ways to see the world, and a unique approach to buying. I make my buying decisions only after weighing the benefits and future implications of my purchase. You won’t see me grabbing a pack of mints at the checkout counter of the grocery store. Others…