Editor’s note: David Rauch is senior vice president of RTI market Research and Brand Strategy, Norwalk, Conn.
The rules of brand strategy have not changed. Neither have the fundamental principles that shape and drive a brand’s potential extendibility, that is, it’s “permission to play” in other realms.
In my opinion, what may be changing is the nature and intensity of the pursuit of breakthrough innovation. This pursuit seems to be accelerating, which may be overshadowing the relevance of brand and its core importance as the jumping-off point in the innovation process. Regardless of these trends, there is ample evidence that branding still matters. Brands are very much alive and an integral part of our daily lives.
Each day we are surrounded by, aware of and influenced by branding and we chose to buy or reject offerings of a multitude of both mega and small brands. Some are growing at astounding rates, bringing innovations to market that many look forward to with great eagerness – brand love personified.
To be sure, there are also some brands that have difficulty keeping pace. With sea changes in values and needs, some brands are unable to align with emergent needs as Millennials and other generational cohorts populate the demand-side landscapes. It may be that this dynamic gives some the erroneous impression that the brand concept is dead. But like Newton’s law of gravity, I believe the laws of branding are certain and lasting.
With that said, we can move on to considering the notion of brand strategy as the foundation for brand planning and related market research initiatives. The key is to ensure that brand planning and the research that is conducted connects back to the elements of brand strategy.
When developing a growth-oriented brand strategy, we recommend informing, focusing and building upon a model that consists of four key components:
- Competitive market structure
- What category/market do you compete in?
- What is the current state of the market? What are recent year category and brand growth rate trends?
- Which brands are the players?
- Source of business
- What brands currently have a large market share that you will be able to take business from?
- Primary market target
- Who are the heavy users of the expected source of business brands?
- Who most needs what your brand is offering?
- Who will be the target for marketing efforts?
- Brand equity/unique benefits offered
- What benefits (rational and emotional/psychological) are offered by your brand?
- What benefits are offered by source-of-business brands?
- What are the consumer-perceived advantages and disadvantages of each brand?
- What is the single most important user benefit the brand can uniquely deliver to the target market?
For research initiatives, the above components of brand strategy are essential checkpoints for insuring study relevancy. The components can help direct and shape tactical and strategic research in terms of: study objectives; sample design and composition; survey design and key metrics; and analytics and insights.
Individual elements of brand strategy can also be illuminating. For example, the brand equity component can be particularly intriguing from the standpoint of brand growth and innovation opportunities. Uncovering and understanding brand equity – what a brand stands for – is a vital element in building brand strategy and identifying pathways for innovation.
There is a fundamental truth that supports every breakthrough innovation: know what the brand stands for in the mind of the end-consumer. That may not always be immediately apparent. It often takes imaginative research initiatives and specialized insight capabilities to surface and understand the underlying equity drivers.
Here’s an example from the world of snacking that I think will help to illustrate the strategic power of underlying equities in shaping where a brand has permission-to-play:
Please think for a moment about two iconic snack brands. Both are known for consistently delivering great taste and high quality. But from that point on, consumer perceptions of the brands differ: one is thought of as a providing a fun snacking experience while the other is seen as a wholesome and nutritious snack.
Clearly the two iconic snack brand’s equities are different, which channels each brand’s permission-to-play to different sectors of the snacking landscape. It follows that to achieve each brand’s potential stretch opportunities within the current and adjacent landscapes would necessitate somewhat different brand strategies.
Knowing your brand’s underlying emotional equity elements, as well as its rational drivers, provides one of the essential ingredients in successful brand planning and innovation.