According to a recent Advertising Age article, Anheuser-Busch hired brand strategy consultancy Cambridge Group to bring brand science to the marketing table, and Bud Light ends up with 2009 shipments dropping 2.5%, the first negative sales year for the No. 1 beer in the country. What happened? Yeah, yeah. After seeing the headline for this article (“Bud’s Big Blunder: Letting Consultants Steer Brand”), your instinct will be to blame the consultants. Until you read the whole article. Then watch a couple of the ads.

According to Ad Age, the core rational benefit of the Bud Light brand is “drinkability.” And it has been for some time:

“Drinkability had been in fine print on Budweiser’s label since the 1960s and often raised in creative briefings to communicate Bud Light’s appeal: You could drink a lot of it, and it was less watery than Coors Light and less bitter than Miller Lite. Cambridge’s process strongly endorsed it as the ideal rational benefit.”

In spite of the inflammatory headline, there’s really nothing here that supports the “sound bite of blame” indirectly slamming Cambridge Group. Yes, a great deal of research was done, the results of which were handed off to Anheuser-Busch and their agency. But by everyone’s admission, Cambridge didn’t have a finger in the creative process, and there doesn’t appear to have been a directive to take the rational benefit of “drinkability” and make it the core of the ad campaign. Nor did the research appear to say “throw out all emotion, and just focus on the rational benefit.”

The fact is that CMOs are under increasing pressure to bring a little science to the creative process – as they should be. Which aspects of the brand have the greatest traction? How can touchpoints be optimized to drive desired results? Where is our marketing investment driving the greatest return?

The answers to these questions, and many related issues, is in marketing and customer research. What drives customer experience, brand perception and desired customer behaviors can be assessed by talking to the source of your revenue: your customers. But the kinds of answers you get will be based on the questions you ask. And even more importantly, you – and your agency – need to know what to do with those answers.

Is “drinkability” dead? No. In the immortal words of Monty Python, “It’s not dead, it’s only resting.” But if your agency takes the rational benefit for the brand and forgets the core underlying principles of buyer behavior (that we all make emotional buying decisions, but these need to be supported by rational benefits) then there’s no huge surprise when the sales dial doesn’t spin.

It’s a little like love. No matter how much your brain tells you someone’s “right” for you, if your heart isn’t engaged there’s simply no spark. And if your ad agency appears to forget that emotion is how you sell and logic is how you justify, then no matter how funny or highly produced your ads, they probably won’t be moving the dials that equate to increased sales.

So just don’t tell me about “drinkability.” Tell me how it makes me feel, and why I should care. And to better understand the answer to that question, it probably makes sense to do a little more research (or read beyond the summary pages of research results).

The phrase ‘moment of truth’ (MOT) was first introduced by Richard Normann and popularized by Jan Carlzon in his 1987 book of that name. CEO of  Scandinavian Airlines (SAS) at the time, Carlzon was responsible for helping the airline become more customer-driven. He used the term to mean those moments in which there is an opportunity for an organization to make a difference when interacting with a customer.

Since that time, there has been an un-ending push to find more (and better) ways to connect with, and track, these customer interactions. In fact, the explosive growth of CRM has created a multi-billion dollar IT and consulting services business focused on just this issue. But these technology-based solutions often cause organizations to lose sight of the core issues which drive the customer relationship.

While adept at helping companies market to and track interactions with their customers, these solutions do nothing to help companies to understand (and improve) customer impressions of these interactions. This is where moments of truth, touchpoints and customer experience intersect. If a “moment of truth” is the opportunity for an organization to make an impression on a customer or other stakeholder, touchpoints are the static, human and interactive interactions that actually create these impressions. Working together, touchpoints create positive or negative impressions at any given moment of truth. The result? Customer experience – as perceived by the customer, which is the only perspective that counts.

When touchpoints (and relationships) go bad

For a telecommunications company, the installation of a business line is a moment of truth. The touchpoints associated with that (service technicians, email or print confirmations, call center or web-based appointment setting, etc.) will deliver a customer experience that in an ideal state is consistent, positive and drives positive impressions of the brand.

Of course, it only takes one negative touchpoint (for example, an apparently tipsy and belligerent service technician being an unforgettable negative touchpoint in one customer’s mind, or the cable installation man caught in the wife’s underwear drawer another) to create the experiences that drive negative lasting attitudes towards a brand.

At the same time, the elimination of the onerous “service contract” for cellular phones by Virgin Mobile, or Progressive Insurance introducing “Immediate Response” claims service – assessing damage and paying claims at the accident scene – are game changers, taking traditionally painful moments of truth and redefining them with touchpoints optimized to focus on customer’s needs – driving new standards of customer experience and expectations in their industries, resetting the “competitive bar” at the same time.

What is a “brand gap”? Simply stated, it’s when – as a corporation – who you say you are doesn’t connect with the reality of who you actually are. Most commonly, these brand gaps exist between an organization’s “vision” or “brand values” as articulated and promulgated by the executive suite, and the staffers who should be delivering on them. But did anyone bother to let the staff know what those promises actually meant, or how to interpret them in their daily interactions? If not, the customer experience isn’t going to match up to expectations, and dissatisfaction (if you’re lucky) occurs.

Over the last year we’ve had a front-row seat to a textbook example that leapt from the business section to the front page, and is now being splashed across televisions sets around the globe. It’s pretty widely acknowledged that Wall Street’s “Masters of the Universe” screwed up royally – after all, their greedy myopia nearly brought the global economy to its knees.

At the first public hearings on the crisis just a few short weeks ago, a Reuter’s article noted that “Wall Street’s chiefs acknowledged taking on ‘too much risk’ and having ‘choked’ on their own cooking, but stopped short of an apology….”

Do we wonder why financial services firms are held in such low esteem? While it may be a particularly low point for the industry, this isn’t a new thing. Nearly six years ago, a Forrester 2004 report What Satisfies Financial Services Consumers noted that, “Less than half of US consumers believe that their firm would do what’s right for the consumer without government regulation.”

Funny, because the taglines and ads of these same financial services firms – and many like them – drip with sincerity and concern; for our financial wellbeing and security, as well as more emotional pleas like “peace of mind.” On the one hand, they want us to “trust them.” On the other, they have done – and seemingly continue to do – everything in their power to prove that we can’t possibly.

The funny thing is, most of these banking and financial services executives seem to be thinking all this negative sentiment will just go away. And maybe it will. But hoping your screw-ups will get swept under the rug when you neglect to acknowledge them isn’t the way to build an enduring brand.

It’s a classic brand gap. And you don’t need a brand audit or customer experience research to figure it out. No matter the size of the company or the industry you’re in, if there’s a disconnect between what you say and how you behave, your customers are going to know it. Of course, most disconnects aren’t so blatant, nor so well publicized.

How is your organization doing with its brand promises and gaps? just because you don’t see your mistakes on CSPAN doesn’t mean that all’s well, or that disgruntled customers will sit idly by. To butcher the late John Irving, sorrow floats – and loyalty sinks. Glub glub glub.

Organizations touch their audiences in many ways, with multiple interactions across multiple brand touchpoints. These touchpoints are all of the interactive, static and human interactions that your company’s customers experience over the life of their relationship with your company. In short, the heart of customer experience lies in the ways they experience your brand.

Here’s the thing that many organizations seem to have trouble grasping: every interaction between you and your customers (or those you’d like to be customers) is part of the brand experience. Every single one, every single time.

This means that your brand attributes are communicated clearly – both positively and negatively, whether you like it or not – every time you “touch” your customer. These interactions include obvious touchpoints like advertising, your website, call center and sales team. Then there are those touchpoints that aren’t usually at the forefront of brand experience planning, such as Google SERP’s, billing statements, online customer forums and more. At the end of the day, virtually every point of contact between you and your customers impacts the customer experience. The lesson to be learned? Everything matters.

So when it comes to planning customer experience, keep their point-of-view in mind. Look at the customer relationship through the lens of his or her “journey” as individual interactions string together to create experiences, driving brand perceptions and attitudes. You’ll be amazed by what shows up when you start mapping customer experience. It often isn’t pretty, but it sure can be illuminating.

It’s pretty straightforward, in theory. Know what customers want and need at each stage of their relationship, and give it to them. Be consistent in what you say, how you say it, how it looks, and how what you say and do supports your brand promises. And always keep your customers in mind.

Simple, right? Surprisingly, it often can be. If you take the step of auditing a typical customer journey, you’ll likely be ahead of 90% of the competition. We see it every day – simple steps often lead to big returns. After all, knowing what the issues are is the first step to fixing them.

The more similar competing organizations are, the more important any difference becomes. And when meaningful differences are difficult (or impossible) to find in a product or service, the market will find differences outside of them.

Your customers will define you, if you don’t define yourself.
That’s why, for most organizations, the key to success is differentiation. Even if nearly identical in many ways to other competitive offerings, your prospects and customers do perceive differences. And these differences influence purchase decisions, and relationships.

But how do you define these differences? You start by gathering information, understanding the brand experience as well as strengths and weaknesses as perceived by your key audiences. Internally, this includes executives, management and customer-facing employees. Externally, garner insights from your customers, investors, prospective customers and others.

Taken together, this provides the data you need to create a perceptual map of your brand.  This “brand map” will help you understand where you stand with your customers, and the market overall, today.

Where do you want to go… tomorrow?
Brand research, and analysis of the data that must both drive and validate your approach, doesn’t tell the whole story. It’s relatively easy to capture both “present state” and “aspirational” brand attributes, values, and differentiators if you are smart, are a research expert (or have a team at your disposal) and understand both your business, and the underpinnings of high-performing brands.

But what isn’t easy is to create true differentiation by relying totally on what exists today. Yes, building a brand based on “present state” values and attributes takes both strategic acumen and research skill. But defining a brand that truly says “We’re Different; We’re Better; We’re Special” takes something more. Simply interpreting the numbers won’t drive the type of category-defining brand that many high-performing organizations wish to become. Supported by defensible (and illuminating) market and brand research, it also takes creativity.

Mind you, we’re not talking about “blue-sky let’s see what sticks” creativity, but creativity rooted in a deep understanding of your vision, your culture and your customer experience. To build a truly differentiated brand, you need to define where you want to go, where the “ideal” customer experience intersects with business, strategic and market realities, and set a stake – a defensible, differentiated stake – in the ground.

As Harry Beckwith points out in the book Selling the Invisible, “Create the possible service; don’t just create what the market needs or wants. Create what it would love.”

To understand the kinds of stories that are being told about your brand, start by examining the experiences your customers have each time they come into contact with you. What is it like to do business with you? How do the touchpoints your customers encounter make them feel?

One bank we worked with was astounded that their customers took umbrage at the prominent eye-level signage on all branch doors: “Remove your hat and glasses before entering.” A practical step to reduce robberies, as the bank thought? Or an unintentional message that says to customers “You are not trusted” or “You are not good enough to do business with us,” as more than a few customers said?

Another bank had a teller that gave dog biscuits to pooch-loving customers when Fido and friends showed up at the drive-through teller. When the teller left the bank (and took the doggie treats with her), brand loyalty scores at the branch turned stale, as well. In fact, they plummeted. It took some time to discover the reason, but now fresh doggie biscuits are a staple at every branch, and the bank is creating powerful connections with dog lovers (and their friends and families!) throughout the area.

This is where the power of stories comes into play. Consumers tell themselves stories. They also tell their friends (also known as “word of mouth marketing”). And the power of brand stories to influence actions and beliefs is as old as the spoken word. And as much as consumers distrust financial services providers, they trust their friends and business associates. This is why delivering a consistent, differentiated and branded customer experience is so important.

It really comes down to better managing and improving the experience, earning loyalty by proving your commitment to your customers, delivering a consistent brand experience one interaction or touchpoint at a time, over time.

Has the Internet finally saturated America? Based on data gathered from the Pew Internet and American Life Project, the answer may well be yes. It looks like the proportion of America adults who aren’t connected to the Internet has stabilized at around one-fifth of the population. And the vast majority of those enjoy broadband access at home. No surprises here, right?

Yet in addition to the “common knowledge” of the ‘net as a multi-purpose customer touchpoint for marketing, sales and service, this data indicates something else of interest to brand marketers and customer experience experts as well.

There is still a significant portion of the population that many marketers cannot ignore. Though skewing older, less educated and less affluent as a group, their buying power is still substantial.  And the marketing touchpoints that will get them to sit up and take notice don’t reside on a CRT hooked up to the World Wide Web.

Though we’re not huge proponents of broadcast brand building, the direct marketing ability of TV is proven, as is print direct.  As with any brand strategy or marketing effort, knowing who your customers are and how to best reach each segment is the key to drawing them through your customer relationship lifecycle; from awareness and acquisition to satisfaction, loyalty and advocacy.

Still, with 93% of the under 30 crowd online and connected, I’d think twice before positioning any new products to an audience that’s literally dying off…

“The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.” – Verbal, The Usual Suspects

In public relations, there is a little-known segment of experts whose jobs are essentially to keep their clients names (and deeds) out of the light of public scrutiny. These men and women are almost never quoted or noted, yet they are powerful enough to pull feats worthy of David Blain by causing major negative events to literally disappear in plain sight.

Every so often in the branding world, a similar feat occurs. What do you do when your brand strategy is to be invisible, or you need to remove traces or connections of a brand to negative events? Changing your name is one way to do it; simply turn to your brand strategist of choice for guidance. But it only works if you keep your mouth shut.

Take for instance Altria Group, formerly known as Philip Morris.

This company’s innocuous logo and unassuming name tells you nothing about who they are or what they do. There’s a reason for this: the once-respected Philip Morris brand (the biggest member of the Big Tobacco club) needed to duck under cover from a constant barrage of media scrutiny and legal attacks. Unlike their competitor Lorillard Corp. which has always tried to keep a low profile, Philip Morris spent years building its brand around cigarettes and beer (“the companies of your pleasures”).

Reinventing its brand as a brand representing “nothing” was a Seinfeld-esque stroke of genius. As Altria, the company is now able to fully express its altruistic side, because non-profit organizations that had previously distanced themselves from Philip Morris were (and are) only too happy to accept grants from Altria. And best of all, the Philip Morris name wasn’t gone entirely; it could be trotted out to take the blame for corporate sins and then retired to the closet.

An unfortunate (though extremely impressive) example of marketing smarts trumping morals, as the biggest name in tobacco literally disappeared in a puff of smoke.

Corporate Culture Rules: Why Xe will likely forever remain “the company formerly known as Blackwater.”

Then you have Xe. Founded as Blackwater Group, Xe is a multi-billion dollar corporation built by CEO Eric Prince into one of the largest military contractors in the world over 6 short but tumultuous years. But the last few years have been hard on their image. As five former Blackwater employees prepared to defend themselves on charges of killing 17 Iraqi civilians in 2007, civil suits and negative press abounded. What to do? Change your name. Company spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell said Blackwater was changing its name because “the idea is to define the company as what it is today and not what it used to be.”

Better tell that to the CEO. Not the kind of man to hide quietly and wait anything out, former navy SEAL and billionaire auto parts heir Eric Prince took up several pages in this month’s Vanity Fair pointing out how unfairly he and his firm have been treated. That’s all well and good – but if the point of your name change is to lower your profile, well, you need to lower your profile.

Lesson learned?

Two of the three “legs” of the brand experience triangle are related to the corporation. The vision comes from the top, and ideally closely aligns with employees to drive a consistent corporate culture. We suspect that Xe has these two nailed down nice and tight. But the other leg – customer experience – is the one that drives how the world sees you. In Xe’s case, their direct customers – primarily the U.S. Government – still seem to be happy with what they’re getting. But their indirect customers – the taxpayers who ultimately pay Xe’s bills – are getting another perception entirely.

Brands succeed most powerfully when they align with the passion of their people, and tap into the passion of their customers. Just look at Apple or Pixar. But sometimes, it’s best to keep your passion, and your point of view, under wraps.

As the importance and power of brands – and the customer experiences they drive – continues to creep up the scale of corporate awareness and priority, brand consultants are scrambling to find ever more evocative (scratch that: make it “provocative”) ways to describe the relationships that the buyers of products and services have with brands.

I grant you, we brand strategist and consulting types are doing a great job confusing corporate marketers. Now they can’t focus on driving sales through the door until they figure out how to make a “Lovemark.” Customer intimacy is more important than customer relationships, and those are pretty important too. Now there’s the “Love Triangle Model.” Throw emotional contagion into the mix, and we’re going to have brand-based STD’s next… (are phishing and pharming the equivalent?)

Maybe it’s a little too much to ask, but do I really want “love” from (or with) a brand? Maybe I’m just a little uncomfortable with these new levels of brand intimacy. Call me old fashioned, but these are all just new ways to describe the same old thing: Create a product or deliver a service that solves a real need. Support it with honesty, integrity and quality, and make sure you respond quickly to customer needs, delivering a consistent, differentiated brand experience across all your customer touchpoints.

Make sure your market knows that you do this, and encourage them to tell others. Conduct loyalty and brand research to make sure you know what your customers think and how they feel about you vs. your competition, and act on the results.

No offense, but can’t we save these “sweet nothings” for our wives, husbands and significant others? After all, if you want this kind of involvement, where would you rather turn for fulfillment? I know where I’d rather go. I’ll give you hint: it’s not Amazon. And if this trend towards unwanted intimacy keeps up, we can always create new meaning for “brand therapy.” We’ll need it.

Your brand is an experience, ideally resulting from a successfully planned and delivered combination of messages and interactions across multiple Touchpoints.

To keep these experiences (and brand perceptions) positive and appropriate, companies must consistently touch customers and prospects in ways that build satisfaction, trust and loyalty, at each stage of their Customer Relationship Lifecycle. This systematic process creates expectations that must be regularly met, resulting in customer confidence and an emotional connection–the foundation for all successful brands.

The downside, of course, is when good Touchpoints go bad. How many customers can you lose due to dissatisfaction to a call center employee with an attitude, or an accent they cannot understand?

You get it. It’s pretty simple, really: Managing the brand experience across all Touchpoints matters.