Tom Fishburne: Marketoonist

managing the brand

In the last two weeks, there’s been a lot of chatter about the role of the "brand manager" and marketing organizations generally, after Jack Neff at Ad Age previewed a Forrester research report in an article called "Why it’s time to do away with the brand manager."

"Managing a brand has always been a slightly odd concept, given that consumers are the real arbiters of brand meaning, and it's become increasingly outmoded in today's two-way world. That's why a new report is going to recommend changing the name "brand manager" to "brand advocate," and fundamentally changing marketer organizations in response to the onset of the digital age."

Denise Lee Yohn picked up this thread in a fascinating post on the CMO’s Dream team and advocated for the role of “brand operator”. David Kiley at BusinessWeek argued for the role of “brand editor” with an interesting story of the McDonalds CMO thinking of its brand as editorial. 

These musings on the role of brand manager inspired this cartoon. The role of "brand manager" implies a certain level of power and control. From inside the marketing ivory tower, it’s easy to see yourself as a puppeteer for the brand. Ultimately, though, it’s the consumers who determine what your brand means. 

Think about Stella Artois. For years, the beer carried an advertising slogan of "Reassuringly Expensive". Yet, in the UK, the common slang nickname for the beer is "wife beater" (because of its high alcohol content). Patrons are even known to order a "wife beater" for short in the pub. Years of marketing position statements and heavy advertising couldn’t shake the nickname that consumers gave the beer. Stella finally dropped the "Reassuringly Expensive" slogan in 2007 and are the in the midst of repositioning themselves, including the launch of a lower strength beer to try to counter the meaning attributed by consumers. 

It’s important to remember that most consumers have probably never even heard the term “brand manager” yet alone think about the brand in the same way that marketers do. 

Rather than draft brand positioning statements in language that has meaning for other marketers, how inspiring it would be to talk in terms than real consumers can understand. Better still, to turn it into a actual two-way conversation with consumers.

At the DO Lectures last month, Duke Stump gave a remarkable talk about creating something he called "bonfire brands." In his first day as CMO at Seventh Generation, he addressed the office and said: 

“I don’t know anything about marketing or branding. Here’s what I do believe. The purpose of what we’re here for is to optimize the resonance and relevance for those we serve. That’s how I hold this whole term of marketing. What’s really going to make us great is if we create a bonfire brand. A brand that people are actually drawn to. Where there’s a conversation. And they’re partaking in your conversation. They’re evangelists for your brand. They’ll defend your brand. They’re also your most ardent critics. It’s a beautiful thing when you can sit around a campfire with those you serve and they can tell you everything that’s great and everything that’s not so great. Instead of holding it as a brand, hold it as a bonfire.”

view from marketing

I've always loved that classic Saul Steinberg painting "View of the World from 9th Avenue", which The New Yorker ran as its cover in 1976. I love the detail of the first few streets, and then Los Angeles as a tiny speck in the distance.

This image popped to mind recently when I was thinking about the marketing ivory tower.  It's really easy for a marketer (particularly in a large company) to start wearing blinders and only see the immediate stimulus of the office around them.  There's such a steady diet of research reports, agency reviews, focus group results, and internal meetings that it's sometimes difficult to actually see the wider world.  You start breathing your own exhaust.

Some of the wider activities of the company (the factory, the sales team, the call center) can appear as specks in the distance.  Even further away appears the world outside the company, the retail shelves and actual consumers.

Mark Addicks, the CMO of General Mills, used to say the smartest member of the brand team is the one who has just joined.  Their eyes are still open, and they aren't filtering their own observations and insights through the deeply rooted company understanding of how the brand works.  They're willing to actually question the dogma of the brand.

Mark used to encourage everyone to write down all of their thinking and insights about a brand before they actually join a brand team.  Before they start drinking the Kool-Aid and parroting the same stock consumer archetype definitions and brand promise statements.  That notebook of virgin observations becomes a handy reminder to refer to later when you're fully embedded.

I also think it's useful to spend as much time in the field as you can.  But I don't mean the luxe Soho offices of the ad agency.  The real observations of the brand can be found by stocking shelves alongside a field sales rep, or talking to the store manager of a small Midwestern grocery chain, or spending a few hours answering calls in the call center, or putting on a hair net and hard hat and talking to a production line engineer as the 4am shift starts.  All of those activities can teach you a thing or two.  And all of them could become marketing tactics.

A few years ago, I interviewed someone for a supply chain role and asked what he would do personally to increase consumer advocacy.  Rather than shunt this question off as "not my job," he came up with an idea to print jokes on the sides of the brown corrugate cases that hold the products on the way to the store.  He thought that if your gave the stock room guys a rare chuckle, they would take particular care in stocking your product on the shelf.  This would lead to better merchandising in store.  And because you have to print on the cases anyway, it doesn't cost any more. 

The best brands are made up of a "1000 nice little touches" like these.  But you have to keep your eyes open to find them.

brand drought

   

December is often a time of year when things quiet down for marketers (except for the spike in agency parties).  But this year it feels dominated by a whole lot of scenario brainstorming and re-planning.  The common theme is how to do "more with less". 

I started kicking around cartoon ideas around "more with less" and the metaphor of a drought came to mind.  While some brands with deep pockets will use this time to maintain spending and grow faster than less-funded competitors, most brands are facing budget cuts like they've never seen before.

In a drought, it's a good time to re-evaluate entirely what you're doing.  The answer isn't to just use less water on the same old thing, it's to try things that don't take a lot of water.

David Taylor and David Nichols published some handy tips on recession-proof branding recently.  Also, Adam Morgan just re-released his classic book, Eating the Big Fish, which shows there's a lot you can learn from challenger brands in a recession.

budget cut barbecue

I spent a lot of time at the budget table this week, talking through cuts to 2009 spending.  As we all debated the merits (and drawbacks) of every possible place to trim costs in our P&L, the image of a pork barbecue diagram suddenly popped into my head, and I scribbled this cartoon on the back of the P&L.  All while nodding attentively to our supply chain goals for next year.  Sorry, Andy.

I suspect there are quite a few "budget cut barbecues" cooking at the moment.  And with even more than the usual pressure to trim marketing investments in favor of trade promotions. There's also plenty of short-term pressure for tactics that could hurt the brand long-term.

We're all going to feel pressure to cut, cut, cut but I think it's even more important than ever to be thoughtful about what needs to be trimmed (and remember not to spoil what needs to grow).  The best barbecue is cooked slow.

traditional marketing mix

Jackie Huba and Ben McConnell asked me to share the "marketing mix" for method in my recent interview with them.  And I've been in the throws of 2009 marketing planning lately.  So, I've had "marketing mix" on the mind, which always makes me think of a mixing bowl for some reason.

I've worked with large traditional brands and small challenger brands, and I started thinking about marketing planning for each.  I played around with cooking as a metaphor, and this cartoon idea popped out.

In traditional marketing planning, I think far too often there's a product that isn't that differentiated but that you try to save with heavy media spending.  With so much advertising clutter, media spending is becoming less and less effective.  So, it's harder and harder to save a mediocre product and lackluster ideas just with media spending alone.

The answer isn't too add more dough, of course.  It's to start with something worth sharing and not to skimp on the yeast.  I think that brands that have a remarkable product and a remarkable message get shared no matter what they're spending.

evolution of marketing

This cartoon was inspired by a question from Jackie Huba and Ben McConnell.  Jackie and Ben are interviewing me as part of the Post2Post blogging book tour I'm doing this week.  They asked: " Is branding dead and if so, where do we bury the body?"

I definitely don't think branding is extinct, but I do think it's evolved.  So, I decided to use the evolution metaphor to play with a couple stereotypes in the noble profession of marketing.

Doctors have Hippocrates.  Even lawyers have Atticus Finch.  But, ask most consumers what archetypes they think of for marketers and the snakeoil salesman comes to mind.

I think that's because much of the history of marketing and branding has been about concocting a story consumers wanted to hear, even if the story was a wee bit phony. Charles Revson, founder of Revlon, famously quipped: "In our factories, we make cosmetics. In the store, we sell hope."

Nowadays, consumers are often in the marketer's seat.  Consumers have always been the best source for what your brand means (not what's on a brand architecture tacked up in the office).  But, the power used to be with the marketer to sculpt and shape that message.  The question to ask now is no longer how your consumers play back the message you told them.  It's what message are they spreading to others.

With rise of social media, consumers are quick and empowered to share brands they like.  But, they are also quick and empowered to point out hypocritical stuff they they don't like. (Jackie and Ben wrote about this phenomenon in their book, Citizen Marketers).

I think the key is to tell an authentic brand story (but careful that you don't overdo that like the authenticity hawker in the cartoon).

And then find ways to enable your consumers to advocate on your behalf. 

I love how the gDiapers brand has found a way to recruit consumers to even do in-store demos and go to local events on behalf of the brand.  Now that's powerful.  If you want to know what the gDiapers brand means, just ask these moms.  You can be sure they're not snakeoil salesmen.

If you'd like the full interview, Jackie and Ben are posting it on Tuesday on their Church of the Customer blog.

silo farming

I've been reading a book on Steve Jobs called "Inside Steve's Brain" by Leander Kahney.  Really interesting distillation of some of the Apple magic. 

I was struck by the product development process, which is cross-functional in the extreme, with designers, engineers, marketers, and programmers all involved early and in a very connected way.

The book contrasted this with a typical step-by-step design process, where products are passed from one team to the next, and there's little back and forth between the departments.

It all got me thinking of the problems caused by rifts between deep functional silos, and prompted this cartoon idea.  I started thinking of the farm analogy after seeing this clever agency video on the source of creative juice.

It's always cracked me up to hear the creative team referred to as "the creatives", as if they're a different species.  In many companies, there's such a lack of understanding of different functional groups that it does feel like different species at times.  Which then makes it oh-too-easy to point the finger at another group when something goes wrong.

At method, we've tried to disband the functional silos by seating everyone at long inter-mixed tables, so you'll sit next to a packaging engineer, a supply chain planner, and a structural designer.  It helps, because you get the good chemistry from interacting all the time, and you often spark more ideas in an impromptu five minute chat than a scheduled cross-functional meeting.  But, it takes work to break the functional silo shackles.

And even more work to go "free range".

the five stages of missing plan

To everyone at work, I promise I'm not signalling anything with this cartoon (I'm confident we'll make it all up by Q4).

I was thinking of the funny dance we all do in "meeting plan" (hitting your volume targets). Whenever you're off, the easiest thing to do is blame the plan itself and whoever committed to it in the first place (which is particularly funny when it was you). 

There's a lot of nuance around timing and when and how to communicate that you're off plan.  The process reminded me of Kübler-Ross' "Five Stages of Grief". 

I first riffed on the "Five Stages" in 2001 in this cartoon as part of my Sky Deck series, when I was interviewing for jobs in b-school.

brand resolutions

'Tis the season to make resolutions.  Including many that fall quickly by the wayside.  It's only human of course.  That's why gym memberships try to lock you into a long contract.

Something about the idea of brands/products making resolutions just like the rest of us cracks me up.  Particularly, since marketing is full of same foibles that we all share.

I like anthropomorphizing products.  My first started doing this about 5 years ago with this next cartoon.  This is still one of my favorites.

Speaking of talking brands, I recently reread Tom Peter's classic "The Brand Called You" piece from a 1997 Fast Company.  Wow, really inspiring and worth a look. 

Now, I'm off to make a few resolutions.

natural evolution of products

I took my four year old daughter to the Natural History Museum recently and we had an entertaining chat about evolution.  As you can imagine, she had some very funny questions.  And she's convinced her little sister might be a little more closely related to a monkey than she.

Anyway, it got me thinking about branded products, and how most product evolutions have to do with margin improvement rather than better performance.  Consumers may not notice one round of cost-cuts, but over time, the reduced product quality can get really obvious. Why is it that cereal boxes never close properly after you open them once?  My guess is that that little "advance" caused a 0.4 point margin gain at some point in the 90's. But, oh how irritating to consumers.

Of course, continuous margin improvement taken to an extreme gets hit by Darwinism too.  Not from a pack of hyena.  From a pack of private label - which actually seems to be getting better over time.