There are numerous published definitions of what constitutes ‘a brand’, and the reader will undoubtedly have their own personal view too. Therein lies the fundamental and universal truism of brands as a concept – they are uniquely personal and individual entities. As Jeremy Bullmore points out: “… a brand is a subjective thing. No two people, however similar, hold precisely the same view of the same brand”.
Brands originally developed to fulfil a rather prosaic function: to provide identification, and a guarantee of authenticity and consistency. Brands are, Paul Feldwick argues, “fundamentally a promise”. In the mire of pre-trademark consumerism, there was little to guarantee what was actually in the product being purchased, or how the experience would differ from one purchase to the next. The advent of branding revolutionised this: suddenly you could be assured that if you bought a branded product on more than one occasion, the quality would be consistent. This, of course, was highly valued by consumers, and manufacturers soon realised that a promise equalled a premium. The first age of branding formed many of the core virtues that we still associate with branded products; including consistency, quality and trust, which endure as prerequisites for any successful brand.
We find ourselves today in a society saturated by products, brands and commercial messages, and as such there is increasing resistance to commercial messages (“people are tiring of ads in every form”), compounded by the unprecedented power consumers now have to edit paid-for communications out of their lives. As Naomi Klein states in her polemic No Logo: “logos, by the force of ubiquity, have become the closest thing that we have to an international language”. It is no longer enough for brands to simply guarantee quality; consumers are acutely aware that own-label products are manufactured by the same factories that supply branded goods, and it is unusual to find a genuinely substandard consumer product. To continue to justify their existence (and their price premium), brands have to work harder than ever to engage and excite the public.
But just how can brands work harder? Obviously they have to deliver against all of the promises that they made during the ‘trademark’ age of branding, but in isolation increasingly this isn’t enough. In the face of anti-consumerism, mass consumer choice, and cheaper, unbranded rivals brands have to offer more than functional and one-dimensional emotional benefits. So what is the key?
I believe that it’s about transcending the physical product, and adding genuine, life-affirming value to people. It’s about helping address the issues that modern life throws at you, and about navigating the world in which we live. It’s about making a statement, and showing others who you are. It’s about being part of the community, conversing with others who share your outlook. It’s about being indispensable to a consumer. But just how is this achievable?
