 |
A Better Role for Brands in the New New Economy
San Francisco Chronicle, Monday, May 21, 2001
I had been a brand strategist for 20 years when my father, a cattle
farmer in upstate New York, turned to me and said "Isn’t brand
dead?"
Dad knew that best known brands like Nike, Exxon, and Starbucks
had become stigmatized, accused of everything from promoting rampant
consumerism to enslaving Indonesian children. But he knew nothing
about the Silicon Valley world I worked in – building brands for
high-tech companies in Silicon Valley. Dad thought the idea of
my consulting company having a web site was so wacky that he put
the announcement I sent him up on the fridge, right between the
photos of family and top performing cows.
And at first, I passed off his statement about brand being dead
to his being cranky. He was, after all, dying of cancer, and he
was alone.
But later, when I looked at the incomparable beauty of my father’s
farm, I knew that what I did, what I believed in, what I’d done
for 20 years, would be responsible for its destruction. Already,
the newly discovered fad of fly-fishing had brought unwanted visitors
to his small section of the Neversink River. Deer hunters had
turned to newer technologies and now snowmobilers destroyed the
quiet in a much harsher way than the sound of gun shots ever had.
When I’d walk up Blue Hill, the mini mountain behind Dad’s farm,
I’d pick up countless beer cans. It seemed that everywhere, consumerism
was edging out nature.
Dad had read articles in the newspaper or The New Yorker about
the anti-brand movement. He embraced its message of simplicity
and sustainability. He had grandchildren. He didn’t want to leave
them a world with the ethic of more more more, an endless acquisition
of the new replacing an appreciation for the timeless. The endless
encroachment of things on his 14 acres of heaven was undeniable,
and I mourned with him.
How could I continue to promote the idea of branding in an era
when branding is associated with consumerism gone mad? If business
is this era’s most powerful institution, far more trusted than
nation states or organized religion, doesn’t business have an
obligation to use that voice for good? Shouldn’t brands be the
platform to lead our world out of its intractable problems, global
problems like poverty and environmental destruction and provides
visionary global solutions, to help shape a future that is sustainable?
I’m not talking about businesses becoming tree-huggers. Every
business, however, has a small piece of the solution that it can
address – often that it must address to ensure a constant stream
of profits in the future. And what better way to do that than
to use its brand as a platform for change?
Simply by describing a positive change, by using its brand as
the voice of support for that change, companies can make that
change happen.
A lot of companies partner with philanthropies to support ongoing
change. Companies align themselves with a nonprofit whose agenda
fits nicely with the corporation’s. American Express and Avon
are examples, raising awareness for hunger and breast cancer,
respectively. Fashion designers are particularly adept at raising
provocative issues, making their brands synonymous with controversial
causes – witness Bennetton with race relations and Liz Claiborne
with domestic violence.
But only a handful of companies have managed to make their advocacy
truly authentic, melding their brand voice with business interests
and a vision for a better world. One of the best examples of this
is a former client, Cisco Systems. Cisco has run commercials that
describe the power of the Internet to provide education and information
to everyone. In so doing, it is openly promoting its own products,
which makes the message believable. But it also promotes the possibility
of a better world, if one believes that education leads to better
standards of living, less violence, and awareness of global community
issues. The Cisco brand is transformed from just an agent of promotion
to an agent of change.
Furthermore, Cisco’s philanthropic efforts make universal access
to education a reality. Working with government officials involved
in education in third world countries, Cisco has extended its
network training curriculum to secondary schools throughout Africa,
Asia, and Latin America. This is the company’s "give-back to get,"
giving away free curriculum to get trained network professionals
in emerging markets. Cisco’s business, brand, and change efforts
all strengthen each other.
British Petroleum is another example. Its new branding campaign
is aimed at changing the company from an oil company to an energy
company, clearly self-serving in this post-modern era where fossil
fuels are going away. But BP’s campaign promotes solar energy,
which is clearly one way to save our world from extinction. And
it describes very practical ways that consumers can replace oil
with solar energy, by buying BP solar panels, which in turn gives
the company revenues. Using its brand to deliver a message worldwide,
BP is actually creating a world where the company will be saved
by saving the world. Its brand is transformed, and in that transformation,
it becomes a much stronger and more credible voice.
My father brands his cattle, the bulls and cows he keeps on his
land beside the Neversink River, where he fishes for trout. He
doesn’t even think about doing good to do well – it’s all about
keeping the cattle healthy and the river clear. As president of
the local fishing association, he sponsored a study of that water’s
health, and found that his cow dung was creating an imbalance
in the river’s chemicals. So he moved half his cattle away from
the river. There’s no split between his vision, his brand, and
his community – it’s all seamlessly blended. I’d call Dad a hero,
and he’ll like that.
back to top
other
articles |
|
