RSS

Trust in the Future

By: Alan M. WebberWed Dec 19, 2007 at 12:20 AM
When it comes to brand management, Kevin Roberts says that only two things are wrong: brands and management.

Everyone knows everything. Here's another thing that's different about brands today. It used to be that if you went to the store as a consumer, and you bought a box of detergent or a tube of toothpaste or any other product, chances were that you had no clue about the company that was behind the product. You didn't know -- and, to be completely honest, you probably didn't even care.

Today, you want to know everything -- and you can know anything. Information is accessible to everyone. We didn't know all of that stuff in the past because nobody told us. But now -- guess what? You can't hide anything. I know where your factory is; I know how much you pay your workers in Indonesia -- and I have a point of view on those issues. They influence how I think about your company and about your brand. And today, I also have an incredible array of choices, all of which perform up to my level of expectation.

It used to be that you would build a brand on performance, not on information. In today's world, there's no such thing as sustainable competitive advantage. Everybody knows what everybody else is doing, and if you've got a lead, your competitors will be right there with you three months later. Today, the fast beat the slow -- and tomorrow, the fast will beat the big.

Trademarks play defense. Trustmarks play offense. All of that is why we're moving from trademarks to trustmarks. We all know what a trademark is: It's what differentiates. It's a distinctive name, symbol, model, or design that legally identifies a company or its products. But what's a trustmark? A trustmark is a distinctive name or symbol that emotionally binds a company with the desires and aspirations of its customers. It's an emotional connection -- and it's much bigger and more powerful than the uses that we traditionally associate with a trademark.

Think of it this way: A trademark plays defense. It's the way that you protect what you've already built up. It's your copyright, your patents, your table stakes. But a trustmark plays offense. It's the emotional connection that lets you go out and conquer the world!

You don't own your trustmark -- I do. Trustmarks don't belong to companies. Trustmarks belong to the people. I own Fast Company magazine. I want it every month. I want to read it, to take it apart, and to spread it around to my friends. The editors of Wallpaper don't own that magazine. I own Wallpaper. It's not theirs, it's mine -- and they'd better not fuck with me.

Take the iMac: the most sensual product since the dildo. It absolutely does not belong to Steve Jobs. It belongs to me. I want to hold the iMac. I want to choose the flavor of it. I want to love it. The iMac belongs to me -- and I get to choose the flavor.

Richard Branson, head of the Virgin Group, absolutely understands this principle. Virgin belongs to the people. The whole epitome of Virgin is people power. If you had to do the trustmark shorthand, you'd say, "British Airways: big, horrible, monopolistic carrier. Virgin: little scrappy guy, on the side of the people, totally fantastic." Virgin enters the telephone market. Straightaway, you know what that move means: lower rates for the people. I will buy anything that has "Virgin" on it, because I trust that name. It's not a brand. It's not a corporation. It's not even Richard Branson. It's me.

What happens when a company mistakenly believes that it owns its trustmark? Look at what happened with Roberto Goizueta while he was running Coca-Cola. He created more shareholder value for Coke than Jack Welch did for General Electric, but Goizueta was obsessed by one thing: taste tests. Pepsi beat Coke in taste tests, which drove Goizueta absolutely crazy -- and, by the way, Pepsi knew that. The taste tests had no effect on the emotional connection that consumers had with Coke, but they drove Goizueta crazy. So he put his chemists to work, and they came up with a product that would win the taste tests. Goizueta was ecstatic. The company launched it as New Coke. And what happened? The people said, "You cannot do this. Coke is ours! We don't care if the new one tastes better than Pepsi; this is our brand. It belongs to us! What are you idiots thinking? Coke is an American mystery. You cannot make it better." And Goizueta and Coke were forced to back right off.

Performance is table stakes. Sensuality wins. Another key dimension of trustmarks: They cry out to be touched. Trustmarks are built on design. Think about products that are physically attractive. The Zippo lighter. You want to hold it, open and shut its lid, handle it. The original Coke bottle. It's sensual. Just the shape of that bottle makes it an object that you want to have in your hand. A Montblanc pen is also sensual. It's black, it's smooth, it's great to touch and to look at. Design is more than just about how a product looks: It's also about how a product feels. You want people to touch it, to experience its sensuality.

From Issue 38 | August 2000

Sign in or register to comment.
or

Recent Comments | 1 Total

June 30, 2009 at 5:55pm by Eli Shapiro

Usually when I read pieces like this, I'm underwhelmed by the attempt to describe a business model in terms of innovation and the new world order, but there really is some great substance here. Specifically, talking about trademarks as being an old way of thinking, which is very company-centric, really does seem like a dated practice. More and more consumers are interested in organizations that have a customer-centric or at least a product-centric mentality, since it shows that the main concern is the product being brought out and the person who ends up buying it. Under older schools of thought, it was made very clear that the company itself is the priority party... That attitude simply doesn't cut it anymore.