Have you seen news today that National Public Radio says it wants to be known as simply NPR? The reasons…. they say it’s more modern and it’s more than radio these days. The CEO points to other ” re-brandings” by media such as Cable News Network to CNN. Since when wasn’t it NPR and CNN? Name phrases always need to be nick- named or abbreviated for normal use. This is why we never recommend a phrase as a brand name. You end up with two names and usually , if successful, change it later to the nick name. Why not start with one word brand name you don’t need to change? And why is all this referred to as re-branding? It’s simply a realization that their nick-name is really their brand name.

If you need to experience the value of good  brand signals and effective packaging design, treat yourself to a visit to Whole Foods and try and find anything on your list in the normal time it usually takes. If it’s your first visit … even your fifth… bet you take three times your usually time . I mean it’s terrific. It’s like experiencing grocery shopping all over on a different planet. A bit refreshing and a whole  lot more disturbing , especially if you don’t care much for passing time trying to understand what everything is in 6 point type on generic packages. No wonder when you ask for the location of something from someone stocking shelves they answer with “I think….”  And then no wonder the check out people ask “have you found everything “. No, I could not find anything I have counted on finding  for the past 20 years in other stores where brand signals and packaging save you time and money . Thank you for a whole new brand experience.

Boy, if we ever see a situation where brands are going into a major flux, it’s in  health care . The question level is over the top with plenty of room for spin and din. The old and new will be doing a precarious dance….. or after all the noise, will it be just a few of the big brands that made the deals in DC still bigger than ever and no better?

Strategies for building brands are predominately situational . They vary on the business model and mission , altitude of overview, type of brand, status of the inherent brand builders, scale, and maturity. We’ve had some interesting start-up experiences where seasoned marketers having worked with mature brands applied strategies dependent on higher levels of brand equity and budget levels that just never got off the ground. We have also experienced the reverse where healthy mature brands with great potential languished from a locked in start-up point of view. As situational as it is, the question still remains if there are any higher level universal BB strategies that can service any situation. Maybe these four could be considered…

1 Identify and strengthen the inherent BB’s

2 Develop the best brand definition as possible and get it operational

3 Establish an effective brand exposure program

4 Create a functioning brand board that focuses on building brand equity

What do you think?

How do we explain the value of brand equity ? Brand equity value is the aquired additional value a person brings to a brand performance  given a certain positive brand impression based on awareness, esteem and loyalty with the brand.  Here’s a list for any business brand to consider.

1. Benefits from a person’s brand equity value satisfaction

a. better price elasticity … they will pay more based on their greater value impressions

b. demonstrate stronger brand loyalty

c. increase ambassadorship behavior

d. forgiveness factor increase

e. recall increases – extending potential brand life

2. Efficiency and effectiveness of marketing increases

3. Trade leverage increases

4. Growth can be faster with lower risks through leveraging the equity position

5. Easier to attract and keep employee talent

6. Easier to attract investors

7. Garner greater revenues through licensing and endorcements

8. Evolve better brand definitions

9. Provides a bases to unify employees

10. Provides a bases to unify constituents

11. Builds higher financial worth into the brand asset itself

Did we miss anything here?

We identify and pursue brand equity building as a distinct discipline within business building. We believe  strong brand equity is the bedrock of a strong business. A business solely focused on building financial equity will naturally be building brand equity. But we have found that a business which can manage to focus on financial equity and brand equity will ultimately be stronger and more successful at a quicker rate.

We believe in order to provide the best results within this framework requires an interdisciplinary team of creative problem solvers coming from communication design and marketing backgrounds that can effectively team with the more business and operational management components. A mutual respect for business and brand distinction in the marketplace is required by all.

Been thinking more and more about this. Business inherently involves itself with brand building principles to help build financial equity. But brand building doesn’t inherently involve business principles to help build brand equity.

After reading news developing daily about how Toyota is facing even deeper consequences from their customers having problems with their ‘fixed cars’, their brand equity will now be truly tested. At some point, new management may be contacting us for a new brand name. Since so many people are affected, and the economy being the way it is, we’re pulling for a terrific case study that shows the undeniable power of Toyota brand equity.

Reading on the Toyota brand hit. One side says the it has great brand equity and if they get aggressive on  safety and communicate it effectively, the equity factor will carry them through. Another side puts it this way…the cleaner the image the greater the damage. From everything we know and have experienced, strong brand equity will assist Toyota’s rebound, not cause greater damage. A better way to qualify the image statement might be… the cleaner the image the greater the surprise. But surprise is quickly over.

A simple discussion with a trademark attorney can easily get confused over the seemingly slightest thing as terms for logos and logo parts. Even as I note this, the word logo in the public domain is a common general name for any form of a brand identification signature. In the design world you hear things like bug, ID mark, brand, corp- mark , sig, signature, brand identity , sign, brand icon, logotype, monotype, monogram , name mark , tag and trademark. And unless you see it, you do not know what is specifically being referred to. Not so in the legal world . I think most every trademark attorney would know exactly what kind of trademark visual to think about when they hear the words ’standard character word’, ’stylized mark’, composite mark’ and ‘design device’. We refer to the ’standard character word’ as ‘generic type’. The ’stylized mark’ as a ‘logotype’. We call the ‘composite mark’ as a ‘mark logotype jointure ‘ and the ‘design device’ a ’solo mark’. No matter here. What does matter is understanding which form is best used in certain circumstances….later.

’standard character word, stylized mark, compost mark and design device.