Occasionally we invite friends of Pendry White to contribute guest articles to Whiteboard, highlighting a best practice innovation in our own world of reputation marketing. We invited Gideon Wilkinson, Founding Partner of Endpoint, to share his thoughts on an innovative new approach to the complex issue of brand management and implementation
Anyone who has had anything to do with managing a brand knows it is expensive and complex when it is done right, and very expensive when done badly. Fortunately, a new discipline is making a consistent brand image across the whole business a much greater probability, with the added benefit of controlling costs and improving quality. Brand Implementation Advisers are beginning to play a critical part in the smooth rollout of new and revitalised brands, working alongside senior brand managers, creative consultants, and internal resources to deliver a brand that works, on budget and on time.
All too often we see senior management focus enthusiastically on the front end creative aspects of a new brand identity, a rebrand or even a simple brand refresh. But, when the glamorous bit is done, the truly critical phase, the physical implementation, becomes a ‘simple’ operational matter left to others.
So many organisations fail to recognise that this part of the process will in reality cost many times what you spent on the expensive creative thinking – some estimates put this at 10-20 times the front end design spend. Put that in numbers to get a measure of what it means – if you pay £1million to develop a new brand and visual identity, expect to pay up to £20million to make it work as the creative consultants told you it would – and that will be your problem, not theirs!
It doesn’t matter what industry you are in, your brand is critical to your business. Yet when it comes to major changes to your brand so many organisations allow the all-important implementation programme to become fragmented, with control over costs and quality moving away from the brand guardian to other “operational” areas, such as property, facilities, IT and many other distant parts of the business.
We recently conducted a small survey among a panel of senior marketing professionals, who between them had managed a significant number of brand change programmes. We asked them what typically happens when there is any kind of brand change. Their answers were consistently ‘inconsistent’ i.e. it seemed to happen in a different way every time. And that is not surprising, you don’t rebrand every year and the level of past experience within most organisations in reality is limited – so it tends to “get made up as we go along” as one of our interviewees said.
Again not surprisingly, it is pretty much common practice to bring in a brand consultant to help to shape the brand messages, the corporate visual identity, to develop the brand guidelines, and so on. Our panel all said this was the norm and, while expensive, it was worth it to get the visual brand and the brand communications in alignment.
But when we asked what happened next in making the new or reenergised brand work at a physical level, in all locations and all functions, there was almost universal agreement that, at that point, the “Brand Director” lost control and became reliant on others to make it happen across the organisation. Indeed, there is often no central idea what the total real cost of that implementation might be as it gets lost in departmental budgets, already planned replacement spend, and other ongoing initiatives. And that meant parochial politics, local priorities, in-house people with their own preferred suppliers, “not invented here” syndromes, and a myriad of other factors which influenced the speed, efficiency, and cost effectiveness of the brand implementation.
Major brand change programmes can be driven by a number of factors – merger (usually a total new brand – like the recent Towers Perrin/Watson Wyatt merger to form Towers Watson) or acquisition (often imposing one on another (e.g. Santander with Abbey and Bradford & Bingley), a brand re-launch or brand refresh (such as Ernst & Young did quite recently).
Let’s take a current example and just speculate for a minute to illustrate a point. Nobody knows as yet what Orange and T-Mobile will do with their new merged business entity, assuming it gets the necessary clearances in London and Brussels. However, here we have two very strong brands, with two equally strongly branded parents, neither of whom will want to see their brand devalued – somewhere along the line one or more brands will become redundant. Whatever happens, there will almost certainly need to be some changes to the brands of both of these High Street operators, even if it is only to reposition them as sister organisations. Or it could result in a complete rebrand. The probable scale of those changes will necessitate careful planning and implementation from their brand managers.
The marketing people will be looking at the front end on the consumer brands – but is anyone taking a view across all aspects of the combined businesses where brand change is going to be necessary? For example, on buildings and other property sites, in internal systems and processes, at corporate presentations and events, and a multitude of other areas where change could and should happen.
Has anyone added up the potential cost of those changes in real terms? How do you build brand engagement on both sides of the new entity? Does the Orange brand culture absorb and take over the old T-Mobile brand culture, or vice versa? And who is taking both the big picture view and looking in detail at the actions needed? For both, cost reduction must be critical to pay for the deal, so they will need to be very cost conscious when deciding how they intend to manage the new brand going forward.
It is in situations like this, making the brand strategy a reality, where the newly emerging role of the Brand Implementation Adviser offers a major step change for organisations going through brand changes. Let me declare my self–interest: Endpoint is one of consultancies leading the development of this new approach to brand implementation but today I am simply explaining the approach and the benefits – if you want the sales pitch just call me!
In a nutshell, what the Brand Implementation Adviser does is sit alongside the brand guardian/owner within the client organisation (usually an over worked Marketing Director who is also trying to make sure the brand is implanted across all his or her own highly visible marketing activities) and provides the day to day linkages to all other parts of the business.
It doesn’t replace local accountabilities, doesn’t interfere with existing preferred supplier arrangements or step on in-house toes. But what it does do is make sure that the brand is being implemented as it should be; that schedules are being met; that costs are being controlled and monitored; that quality is being maintained; that wheels are not being invented twice.
At one level it is about a massive check list of actions that makes sure nothing falls between the cracks. At another level, it is an independent eye offering experienced advice and guidance when and where it is needed. And at a third level it is a point of arbitration, even head banging when needed, to ensure the programme is not derailed by issues of “my patch” or different perceptions of priorities.
For example, with the Santander re-branding of Abbey, the master check-list had an action to replace branding on all ATM machines. Simple statement, complex to implement! There are huge variations in the type, location and size of all the ATMs and this complexity had to be managed along side the bigger branch rebranding programme, the changes to literature and other corporate materials, the IT changes necessary to implement the new brand and so on.
Just as the brand creative consultant sits at the front end of the process, the Brand Implementation Adviser should also sit at the front of the process because he will be the ongoing link that makes the creative consultants’ award winning ideas actually appear wherever it should, when it should and in a format that actually works! We can all think of examples where an expensive new corporate identity just hasn’t worked in real life as it was envisaged by the designers. Could these have been avoided with better planning and programme management? Almost certainly!
So today, when there has to be a real, measurable bottom line cost to any branding exercise, Brand Owners really should be putting someone in place to ensure best value and best practice is delivered. They should work with the creatives at the front end of the branding process. And then with the management team and all the people around the organisation, with an interest in or responsibility for making it happen, at the back end of the process. In this way, you will greatly improve the chances that the corporate goals that drove the rebranding in the first place are actually achieved, on time, on budget, at the right quality …. and definitely ON BRAND!
Gideon Wilkinson is one of the founding partners and is a director of Endpoint Limited. He can be contacted on +44 (0)20 7089 2670 or by email at gideon.wilkinson@endpoint.co.uk. You can learn more about Endpoint at www.endpoint.co.uk
rebranding is bad idea for me
Some interesting insights but typically one eyed I’m afraid. There’s no mention of the fact that all the advertsiing spend in the world can’t turn employees into ambassadors. They keep the promises made by the brand. Re-brand without an employee engagement strategy and you’ll actaully damage the brand. Take a look at Brand Engagement – How EMployees Make or Break Brands for further details.
First, let me declare my commercial interest – as the “White” part of Pendry White we do have a relationship with Endpoint. However, we invited Gideon’s guest contribution because we believe this is a fascinating issue for everyone with an interest in branding.
Now, on a personal level, I have sat on the client side of three global branding excercises, one completely new and two upgrading an existing brand and rolling both out to new territories. I have also worked with a number of clients on their branding programmes. So I think I can comment with some degree of competence!
I can honestly say that I wish I had known about the role of the Brand Implementation Advisor when I was sitting client side of the fence. In my own experience, and that of several friends who have been in the same position, once the fluffy creative stuff has been done by the brand agency, the in-house team is pretty much left to deliver the brand on their own. Certainly in some key areas, like advertising, the Marketing Director can be fairly confident that the brand will be implemented properly but once you move outside his/her domain then things become much harder to control. And usually there is so much pressure on everyone to simply deliver the new brand on schedule that there is very little appetite for worrying about costs – the MD who committed to the change is not going to thank anyone for saving a few grand and coming in a month late!
It seems to me that anything that can help you deliver the brand on time, ensure a consistent quality level, and save money at the same time has to be worth exploring. Many Marketing Directors and their teams (not to mention the people in non marketing roles who will have to implement your new brand)will not have been through a major branding exercise before (you need a lot of grey hair to have been through as many as me)so getting help from people who have must be a better idea than learning by your own inevitable mistakes. I might not be quite so grey if I had known Gideon and his team a few years ago!
I am not in the marketing profession so I make no pretense about being an expert in that area. However, I have worked for global firms serving clients that also have a global presence and where branding is a big issue. I have also been part of a number of M&As and privatisation exercises from both a first hand participant and adviser perspective. The points raised above are all valid and I have learnt a lot. Having said that, I have a few questions and impressions I would like to explore. Please feel free to correct my impressions if they are wrong.
1. It seems there is a general consensus that branding is very expensive business. If this is correct, is there no way to brand effectively without a huge financial outlay?
2. It also appears that the issues raised are geared more towards businesses that are already established and have the financial muscle to absorb the ‘expensive costs’. What advise can you then offer to new SMEs that would like to ‘get branding issues right’ from the outset?
Would appreciate your thoughts on this.
Thanks.
A company will on average only go through the rebranding process every 5-10years or more, meaning most organisations don’t have ‘experts’ in-house that have the experience and knowledge of the most cost-efficient routes. More often than not they turn to brand designers and strategists to develop the reasoning, story, new identity etc, however it is the implementation of the brand that costs the most (often 5-20 times the cost of design). Therefore in answer to your question, yes there is a way to brand more cost-effectively. Involving a brand implementation expert from the outset can help to avoid any nasty surprises or hidden costs and help to develop an identity that is not just represents the company values and visually striking but one that can be easily implemented.
There are many principles to branding that apply to SMEs as well as large global companies. It is very important to get the brand story and the visual identity right. It is equally important to consider how this will be implemented. How will the identity be consistently applied to different physical touchpoints at minimal cost? What processes need to be put in place to manage consistency across your printed collateral and marketing material? Each function of an organisation contributes towards the brand. What processes will you adopt capable of cohesively managing the brand across marketing, property, HR, sales and finance?
Although branding is a creative process you need to consider the practical aspects throughout the process to keep control of costs and consistency.
I hope this helps in some way.
Mr. Malloy has raised a topic which has to do with M&A. So few M&A projects take all the branding and communications necessities into consideration. Having done about 40 of them, as much as I’d tell these people what needs to be done, they’d pretty much universally ignore these costs. Then after the transaction we’d get into the weird zone; complete with flying logos, websites that made no sense, and business cards that were all over the map. The dumb thing is that these costs, which are relatively minor, can be bundled into the transaction.
While I have worked for companies that have been relatively determined to integrate their acquisitions under their brands, I recently worked for a company whose M&A strategy (unbeknownst to me) was to acquire companies that it could dissolve itself into, then tank its brand. A bizarre twist on M&A and branding.
So I’ve seen it all. But anyway, adequately executed branding will involve investment in time and some cost. But be warned!
Mr. White’s post is quite good, as far as we branding people go. First, it costs a lot. And that is not just paid marketing, it cuts across the organization and all the communications. And I do agree that there is an internal “uptake” process which has to occur.
Having re-branded a company or two, and many acquisitions, my own shared-experience is that it is useful to provide some really good tools and guidance as you go through this. In M&A, there is this ghastly process which exists but which can be used to fund some branding, and there you have to go to “good will” within which some reasonable branding and communications can be accomplished.
Gideon, I agree with what you say in principal; this is indeed a crucial part of a successful rebrand exercise. In my experience of implementing a number of large organisational brands/rebrands, the implementational issues are an upfront consideration as part of the initial brief and addressed as part of a properly scoped and phased project framework.
The best and most successful implementations are when a clear set of visual brand guidelines forms part of the earlier phases of deliverables, and when prior to planning the implementation, adequate human resources are allocated to a brand implementation manager/team within the client organisation, working in partnership with the implementation agency/agencies. For a period of time after the initial roll-out, a cohesive internal team (usually those who were part of the implementation team) can continue acting as brand ambassadors, perhaps if necessary ironing out any new implementational considerations as they go. Personally I would question whether the whole matter really does need the appointment of separate Brand Implementation Advisers at the outset, or whether instead a brand design agency truly worth its salt – and a client team who take the time to properly scope out and project manage the process – should be able to address these issues as part of a properly strategic approach But certainly you raise practical points which will be food for thought for some and, I hope, help other client organisations properly consider the management and planning of any rebrand.
Morag,
I think you raise a valid point, after all so many companies have been through this process successfully without such an advisor. However, it would be interesting to know if these companies actually know how much their rebrand really cost them, or whether many costs were lost within various departments. Particularly large rebrands involving 10,000+ employees in multiple countries for example, that not only have to consider it’s marketing communications, advertising and packaging but it’s entire printed collateral, signage, vehicle liveries, digital assets, clothing and branded environments – not forgetting local interpretations, suppliers and shipping costs.
In order to set realistic budgets and timescales from the outset that cover the entire implementation programme – including everything from the total cost of global print productions to a local planning application for a sign in Brazil – implementation experience is essential. And an implementation specialist’s skill is not only providing hard costs but putting together the most cost efficient route.
Having an implementation adviser from the outset can ensure that the proposed creative is achievable within the allocated budget and timeframe. More often than not, the brand design is compromised because it cannot be physically manifested within budget and the supply chain cannot deliver to the required standard within the timeframe.
Really important issues raised here. Implementation costs are almost never considered (even by smaller clients), and yet this is where most of the cost and effort has to be spent. A new brand design is just the start.
Interesting. Will take some of these thoughts with me. The ideas work for smaller clients, too.