The concept of failing fast is one we associate readily with start-ups. But if successful brands need to constantly evolve to stay successful, and presumably not every evolutionary move will be a success, how should top companies plan for when things don’t go to plan?
There’s an interesting polarisation going on right now in terms of brand size. Companies that have expanded are now consolidating their brand models in the hope of getting closer to consumers and achieving greater brand growth.
There are certainly good times to consider diversifying your brand, but equally there are times when such a strategy should be avoided. Here are three situations when your brand shouldn’t go there.
Co-written with Pete Canalichio The entertainment sector is currently evolving the art of building out brand success in exciting ways. And there are lessons in how they are doing that for entrepreneurs and companies with a brand that people want more of.
Franchising can be a very powerful way to grow your brand, but it is a way of branding a business that has very specific characteristics and challenges.
One for my States-side friends. (It’s a little early for most in my part of the world.) Please join Pete Canalichio, Managing Partner at Licensing Brands Inc, and me for a LIMA webinar on May 5 (EST) as we use several case studies to show how top licensors are utilising brand expansion through licensing to help maximize shareholder value and meet their long-term business objectives. Find out more at: http://www.licensing.org/news/new-webinar-420-risk-assessment-management/#sthash.ivAfOiYj.dpuf
An observation from the Havas CES 2016 report that we will increasingly see more companies working together across widely different marketplaces is a reminder of the new bridges that brands must be looking to build going forward. Inevitably these invite new approaches.
When Al Ries took aim at McDonald’s decision to broaden their menu, saying that introducing more items had not worked as a strategy and would not so do into the future, his piece raised questions for me on the differences between diversification and adjacency.
Whilst the measures for evaluating what a brand is worth are well established, those for quantifying a brand’s potential seem less so. In general, brands are valued on their residual equity (what they are associated with and the depth and competitiveness of that association), their competitive performance and how much they are assessed to be worth.
Great piece in AdWeek on the failure of single-item brands is a reminder of a question that comes up a lot: whether to dive deep or go wide. Speciality vs diversity.
