The Monroe Doctrine of Branding

The issue is no trivial debate. Depending on how you address it, you may or may not view consumer research as the necessary preliminary step for building a brand strategy. Knowing where to look for information on which to build a brand strategy will save money, time and brain resources. Looking in the wrong place not only wastes precious resources but also could lead to irrelevant or, worse, to erroneous information that can be detrimental to a brand.

I recall being surprised several years ago when I was told that Motorola was conducting consumer research around the world to help with the development of its new brand strategy. The company had previously found that its image was unfocused in the consumer's mind and it was looking for consumer input to determine what its new image should be.

There are several reasons why, in our view of branding, the approach is fundamentally flawed.

To begin with, we define a brand as a covenant with the consumer. The covenant is what results from the brand's past behavior: it allows the consumer to anticipate what the brand's future behavior might be. The more consistent the past behavior, the faster the brand can generate the conviction that we, as consumers, "understand" what it is about, can anticipate what it will or will not do. That understanding of the brand adds a measure of comfort to the merely familiar. The depth of the consumer's comfort with the brand is at the root of a brand's strength.

The purpose of a brand strategy is thus to first determine which parts of the brand's behavior should be consistent so that they become associated with the brand. At JP Group we choose to call them "brand values" and we call "brand character" the set of values that a brand chooses to abide by. This set of values is consigned in a "Brand Character Statement" which serves as the core of the brand's strategy.

The objective of conducting research to assist with the development of a brand strategy is, therefore, uncovering brand values - what it should consistently reflect at all times.

Where can you find a basis for brand values? With the consumer? That is unlikely. Consumers are interested in their own needs and aspirations, and in the products and services that can help them, not in the behavior of your brand. Besides, the only way that the consumer can possess brand information is because it has been imparted to them in the first place.

Whenever possible, it is better to obtain the information directly at its source, i.e., from the individuals who have nurtured the brand to life - I mean its top managers - and from the brand's historical records. Uncovering brand values is primarily an introspective process. That is where the bulk of your brand research investment should go.

Consumer research should be used primarily for a) product development and positioning issues (i.e., to ensure that the product addresses needs and has a clear reason-for-being relative to its competitors), and b) to ensure that communication indeed gets across the product's message, features and positioning to the consumer in a way that is memorable and appealing.

There are exceptions, as there always are.

One of them is when consumer research has to be used by default because an introspective analysis cannot be done, such as when the entire management team has changed, the advertising agency is new, and historical records not available or irrelevant. We name the process "Brand Archaeology." If, for instance, we had to develop a strategy for reviving the PanAm brand, chances are that we would supplement an analysis of the airline's historical records with consumer research. But, even in this case, the brand values as seen by its new management should also be researched, reconciled with consumer perceptions of the brand, and incorporated in the strategy.

In most cases there are enough players in management to interview to develop a comprehensive list of brand values. After the Pillsbury Company acquired the Häagen-Dazs company and decided, five years ago, to move its management from balmy New Jersey to the Pillsbury Headquarters in frigid Minneapolis, only one member of the old marketing management team followed. Yet we found enough knowledge and understanding of the brand among the brand's other US and overseas management to develop a comprehensive Brand Character Statement that the entire team could agree with.

Asking top managers what values they ascribe to a brand is easier said than done. Many managers have never thought of the brand in those terms and have difficulty verbalizing their conceptions. To overcome this problem, we use a special analytical tool (the HBCQ or Heptadimensional Brand Character Questionnaire) which borrows from personality theory. The questions are similar to those in the oft-used MMPI to evaluate the traits and appropriateness of job applicants. The HBCQ, combined with open-ended, less formal interviews and with an analysis of the brand's historical activities, allows us to develop enduring brand strategies. The Häagen-Dazs Brand Character Statement , for instance, has survived many management upheavals and remains unchanged since it was articulated five years ago.

By Jacques Chevron

JP Group
2016 West 55th Place
La Grange, IL 60525
Ph.: (708) 784-0730
Fax: (708) 784-0559
© 2001 Jacques Chevron