I’ve owned a Flip Video camera since July. I enjoy the product, so when I heard about the Cisco-owned product’s consumer ad campaign, I was especially interested. But when the ads started showing up on TV, I was immediately disappointed. The campaign is built around what Cisco is calling “flipable moments,” which apparently include a dog almost barking “I love you,” two young children having a screaming contest, or a woman doing a handstand on the beach.
For starters, it meant asking Facebook fans to contribute “flipable moments,” which Lipe defines as everyday spontaneous events shot on a Flip Video camera.
“We believe the effort of this campaign will help the brand become one of those devices you can’t leave your home without,” Lipe says. “If people leave home with their phone, email device and Flip, it’s a great day.”
So what is a flipable moment? The through-line for most of these is that they appear to have been captured on impulse. The people depicted in these 15-second ads have fun—they enjoy the little things in life, and now they’re able to capture them on video and share with friends and family. What a great concept for a brand to own! …a brand other than Flip Video.
Differentiate. Decommoditize. Zag. Conventional brand strategy wisdom dictates that in order to succeed, a brand must set itself apart from the competition. Examples of differentiation-driven success abound, and in fact most of the support for differentiation seems to be delivered through case study or anecdote.
But what do we mean when we say “be different?” Telling stories about brands that have succeeded by standing apart from their competition may support the point that differentiation works, but it leaves something to be desired when consulting with a client on how they can differentiate their organization. Instead of listing examples, I wonder if it’s possible to think more systematically about the dimensions along which a brand can differentiate.
I use the word “dimensions” because brand consultants (including me) are often guilty of simplifying everything down to a two-dimensional graph, plotting the competition on the axes, and pointing out where a client has room to stand apart. To illustrate, here’s one of my favorite two-axis graphs from xkcd.com, poetically entitled “Fuck Grapefruit.”
I’ve had the pleasure of representing the firm I work for at a couple of conferences and networking events lately, and explaining who we are and what we do. Because I’ve been one of the few branding/marketing/communications people at these events, that’s often meant explaining what brand strategy is. As much as the average professional claims to have a grasp of brand strategy concepts, there’s still a tendency to assume all we do is come up with pretty logos and snappy taglines.
There’ll never be a lack of ways to explain branding and brand strategy (as evidenced by all the books on the topic, for example), but I do think it’s a good exercise to think about the best way to communicate its value and relevance to different audiences in different circumstances. So here’s more or less the story I’ve been telling over the past few days. I like that it’s pretty succinct (at least compared to my typical verbosity), avoids branding jargon, and gets away from specific tactics. Curious what you think about it.
Bill Marsh’s article in The New York Times a few days ago pointed out that a number of companies have recently redesigned their corporate logos, replacing “emblems of distant behemoths” with updates that are “non-threatening, reassuring, playful, even child-like.” The article includes a nice Flash click-through showing before and after logos. Marsh’s assessment is that these redesigns are aimed at addressing “the economy, environment, image repair,” and that while logos are meant to be differentiating, “there are striking similarities among recent redesigns.”
He’s right to point out the similarities, but the trend he’s seeing—which includes lowercase lettering, “softer” fonts, and lightened colors—began well before the recession. I first noticed it in 2005, while at Interbrand during the design of the new AT&T logo. Shortly after it launched, it seemed, Chevron and Allstate made very similar changes to their logos, incorporating lighter colors, rounder type, and highlights and shading that give the logos a 3D feel.
So while not all of these changes are reactions to the current economy, they do raise some awkward questions about logo design. I turned to Michael Dula, RiechesBaird’s resident logo guru, for some answers.
Should companies change their logos as a reaction to current events—changes in the economy, an increase in popular environmentalism, or even their own PR blunders?
We have been working on a project for a while now that we are very excited about. It is called OpenIDEO and it is launching today. We are hoping that we can create a platform for you to work with us on some i...
Dave Hakkens has created Breaksoap, a new soap concept that removes hand pumps from the equation.
Dave explains, “Most of the hand soap is replaced by soap pumps. However a lot of the soap pumps contain a l...
