For the last few months I have been detecting a small, but real, increase in the instances where people seem to be rejecting the faux side of marketing. The appeal of automated telephone answering services that tell us our call is very important have long been a joke, but now we seem to be getting more substance.
Relationships are 1:1, and those between our companies, products and customers no different. If we treat them as a homogenous mass, they will treat us as a commodity. When production costs for most items have got as low as they seem likely to get, these intangible items become critical. Those brands that have lowered production costs by outsourcing, but kept prices high through marketing hype seem likely to get catch a cold. They have exported IP and "know how" at the very point where east is overtaking west on consumption. The real "magic" - the history, provenance, people and personality of the brand have been reduced to profit centres and marketing spends, and the brand becomes a zombie.
I did think I was in a minority thinking this, but articles like this may mean I'm (happily) not as isolated as I thought.
In the end, at a time where we are all truly visbile and connected, and accountable due to al the communication we have, we better be real. it's our only real asset.
Many years ago, Barry Staw at Berkeley coined the term threat rigidity effect. In essence, his thesis was that under pressure, busineses stick with what they know and are good at, reject what they are uncomfortable with, and man the barricades. I suspect this is the case with many leading brands, as they struggle to maintain indefensible margins bloated by undeclared outsourcing. Trouble is, they can man the barriers all they like, but they are on a road to certain failure. If they are not what they say they are, they will be found out.
Relationships are 1:1, and those between our companies, products and customers no different. If we treat them as a homogenous mass, they will treat us as a commodity. When production costs for most items have got as low as they seem likely to get, these intangible items become critical. Those brands that have lowered production costs by outsourcing, but kept prices high through marketing hype seem likely to get catch a cold. They have exported IP and "know how" at the very point where east is overtaking west on consumption. The real "magic" - the history, provenance, people and personality of the brand have been reduced to profit centres and marketing spends, and the brand becomes a zombie.
I did think I was in a minority thinking this, but articles like this may mean I'm (happily) not as isolated as I thought.
In the end, at a time where we are all truly visbile and connected, and accountable due to al the communication we have, we better be real. it's our only real asset.
Many years ago, Barry Staw at Berkeley coined the term threat rigidity effect. In essence, his thesis was that under pressure, busineses stick with what they know and are good at, reject what they are uncomfortable with, and man the barricades. I suspect this is the case with many leading brands, as they struggle to maintain indefensible margins bloated by undeclared outsourcing. Trouble is, they can man the barriers all they like, but they are on a road to certain failure. If they are not what they say they are, they will be found out.
