Strategy & Brand

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world… it’s the only thing that ever has.” Margaret Mead

It took me 30 minutes this morning to buy wheat pita bread at the grocery store. Not because the lines were long or the aisles congested, but because every brand of bread I selected from my grocer’s shelf contained High Fructose Corn Syrup. I scoured the bread section looking for any loaf sans this pesky addition. Oatmeal, Wheat, Whole Grain, Rye, White…There wasn’t a single bread brand or style that didn’t contain High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS). There was, however, HFCS-free wheat pita- so I bought it instead…

I’ll survive just fine on organic oatmeal instead of toast, but the question remains: why does the food industry still insist on using an ingredient that customers are consciously, actively trying to avoid for sound, healthy reasons?

It’s obvious the food industry has caught on to our growing concern for dietary health and nutritional value. Take a stroll down your local grocery’s cereal aisle and you’ll see an interesting new phenomena- nutrition labeling on the front of cereal packaging. This ‘front of packaging labeling’ isn’t regulated by the FDA, and it’s being used to make unhealthy cereals appear healthier than they really are- by showcasing only selective nutrition information on the front of the package (you’ll find more info on front of package labeling here, and here). This unregulated nutrition info has been shown to decrease the likelihood that people will read the actual ingredients list or peruse the FDA regulated nutrition facts panel.  Instead of making cereal healthier, they’re making cereal look healthier.  Instead of removing corn syrup from our food, the Corn Refiners Association began  working to make corn syrup look healthier by lobbying to changing the name of High Fructose Corn Syrup to the more natural sounding name: Corn Sugar. The Corn Refiners Association has spent more than 30 million dollars to air a series of new commercials attempting to convince the general public that our bodies can’t tell the difference between real cane sugar and corn syrup- as long as it’s eaten in moderation. Experts, including “Sugar Shock” author Connie Bennett have argued that eating corn syrup in moderation is nearly impossible since it’s the cheapest and therefore most heavily and widely used sweetener on the market (it’s found in 2 out of every 3 items available in your local grocery store). It’s in our cereal, our pasta sauce, our baby formula… Instead of helping us eat healthier, live healthier, the Corn Refiners Association dropped 30million dollars to make corn syrup look healthier than it is. (You’ll find an interview with Connie Bennett discussing the disturbing truth about these 30 million dollar corn syrup ads via AdAge’s youtube)

At BlackDog, we know: The better you are, the better you look. Brands don’t live in vacuums, they impact, influence, and shape the world around us.  Imagine what 30million dollars could do if it wasn’t being wasted on deception and manipulative spin?

We don’t brand bullshit, and we don’t buy bullshit brands (on or off the clock).  We know, whenever we buy anything, we’re buying more than just the tangible items we’re walking out of a store with. Our dollars, whether they’re spent on branded sneakers, a pint of beer, or a donation to a local not-for-profit, are actively contributing to that organization’s continued existence- for better or worse. It’s time for us to switch our brand loyalty to the brands that are positively contributing to the world we want to live in 10, 20, 50 years down the line.

I called your firm for an estimate for a brochure. I spoke with your communication strategist, forwarded marketing and communication materials, liked you on Facebook, and looked forward to a proposal. BlackDog declined the opportunity. I thought that you didn’t have time to write a proposal. I offered to forgo the protocols, agree on a budget, and proceed. BlackDog just flat out refused the work. Who refuses work?

First things first…I am sorry that you were disappointed by our response and that your efforts were likely delayed by our decision.

2.) Asking BlackDog to create a brochure is like asking BMW to make a little red wagon.

3.) BlackDog does and will thoughtfully decline project opportunities. We take our work personal and your business serious.

The official story (and long of it) is that BlackDog Strategy & Brand integrates the efforts of spirited brands that want to know how they can do what they do differently, simpler, and smarter. We align bold brands that challenge the boundaries, explore the limits, and harness their unique organizational competencies disrupting business as usual and creating new possibilities. We operationalize bold brands that are undaunted by the popular world view; brands that refuse to pay lip service to lofty missions or shallow pursuits.

We don’t spin communications or create noise at BlackDog; we humanize relevant brands that keep it fresh and real; brands that connect their Big !dea to what truly matters. We don’t fabricate shallow myths and we’re not persuaded by the demand for contrived hype. We partner with authentic brands that have people centric priorities, a story to tell, and a genuine contribution to make.

We champion the efforts of those that view their work as a vocation and recognize their accountability to society.

The short of it is that the organization that you represented likely wanted to create awareness but A.) didn’t have anything to say or B.) wanted to say what everyone else already was or C.) wanted to concoct a perception not based on reality.

I can say for certain that we never just decline an opportunity without putting up a good fight and making a strong case for substance, relevance, and authenticity. Selling out, mimicry, and the good ‘ole “tired” and true method of doing things the way they’ve always been done just isn’t for us and mediocre should never be for you.

How can a business build brand equity around a charitable activity without appearing to be “doing it just for the publicity”?

Another thought on an otherwise answered question:

The Medinge Group recognizes “Brands with a Conscience” annually.  The self-described think tank nominates organizations that demonstrate a genuine “contribution to the betterment of society through sustainable, socially responsible and humanistic behaviour.”

Though we don’t agree with every company honored, we recognize, appreciate, and respect that The Medinge Group is proactively attempting to “drive change” and ultimately influence “positive transformation”. The Medinge Group loosely articulates the following criterion on their website:

What makes a brand humane?

• It has a visible conscience
• It apologizes when things go wrong
• It invests time and energy in relationship building
• It promotes the value of caring for one another
• It acknowledges that we are all fundamentally equal
• It’s visibly accountable for all its actions
• It takes risks in line with its values

Medinge 2011 Brands with a Conscience

We appreciate that you operate in a complicated cultural reality – economic uncertainty, political divide, scarcity mentalities, and fear have collided in the health-care sector. The insured, underinsured, and uninsured are feeling anxious, concerned, entitled, angry, and threatened. We find it frustrating and shortsighted that the health-care “hysteria” is largely avoided by the very industry that is positioned to address the uncertainties and acknowledge the prevailing social vulnerability that we all sense when sea change is required.

We suspect that the majority of advertising campaigns designed and launched by health insurers are well-intentioned. But the reality is that the messages communicated have less to do with the higher order needs, desires, sensitivities, and fears of people than they do with promoting what any one insurer has to offer as a “program” or a “perk” in the same-old, same-old approach. It seems to us that the messages conveyed and brand promises made seem to rely on consumption axioms that actually provoke cultural contradictions and rouse social anxieties. Meaningless programs and messaging dominate the awareness strategies of insurers distracted by their own positioning. Even the most thoughtful participants in the industry are minimizing their role and limiting their potential by skirting the blazing issues.

Not long ago McKinsey reported that people are less concerned with having to change than they are that no one is defining how in relation to health-care. People want to know that health insurers understand that more and more decision-making power and financial responsibility fall to people, not companies. People want to know that health insurers intuit the seriousness with which they fear illness- given that more than half of the working population reports being ‘unprepared’ for an injury or illness. People want to know that health insurers realize health-care is costly to them, regardless of the “value” offered.

Until health insurers recognize the relevant, deeply personal influences and the range of emotions that control decision making it is impossible to speak the same language, elevate cultural understanding, evolve behavior – or – attract, woo, and secure ideal subscribers.

The times and reality cry out  for a thought leader, a compassionate visionary that is willing to address head on what must be done. A thought leader driven by deep convictions, that appreciates that it is moral to be realistic and realistic to be moral. A thought leader that acknowledges the uncertainty with a perspective that communicates solutions in an open declaration of confidence to an insecure people, at such a time as this. Rather than advertising quips that gloss and avoid the cultural tensions and political divide – a thought leader that speaks directly to the collective psyche of society, one ad, one sponsorship, one promotion at a time. A thought leader that will keep it real; interacting authentically and sincerely. No visionary should ignore the well-being of people in conflict, especially in the wellness industry. An energized industry insider ready to make a promise that can be kept, and communicated, through a perspective that holistically and strategically connects with the needs of people. What is needed is “a utopian moment of healing built around” ¹ solutions and concepts that address the way forward.

If the programs, products, and partnerships of health-care providers are in-sync with an honorable philosophy, a robust purpose and a motivating vision then the organization should NOT be dumbed-down with trite messaging and out-of-touch promotions. Health insurers have a responsibility to make explicitly plain how the industry and providers intend to participate and interact in the colliding worlds of health, wellness, and fear.

When the needs are great, the issues sensitive, and the future uncertain, it is necessary for organizations in competitive and personal arenas to reveal more of ‘who they are’ rather than what programs they sell. The insured and uninsured want to know the motives of health insurers; key to understanding and deciding who can and should be trusted in the new and uncertain world order. The contrast between health insurer’s campaigns and their organizational way of being were less important once upon a time then they are now. In the new health insurance world order who you are, what you stand for, and why anyone wants your version of health-care genuinely matters. Your purpose and philosophy, as it relates to health, disease, trust, and people are intensely relevant.

The debate on health-care seems to hover and stall at cost. To not integrate or speak to the emotional aspect of health insurance is to ignore a fundamental aspect of the very real human experience. What people are concerned about is security, which is related to freedom. Freedom certainly has a cost but it’s far more complex than premium rates. Freedom, and control, are foundational to our national health and wellness mindsets. It will take a confident thought leader with a genuine interest in the wellness of people to motivate a nation to healthier behavioral choices, key to securing their freedom and health in the new world order. To sincerely address the real issues, thoughtfully, in a relevant voice is to alleviate the fears that will ultimately distract people’s ability to make sound decisions. Once a sense of direction hits tipping point a sense of acceptance, responsibility, certainty, and progress will infuse the human spirit and collective willpower transcending powerlessness, confusion, fear, anger, resentment, entitlement…

We challenge the health insurance industry to reconsider and re-imagine their influence, relevance, and role moving forward. Visionary, purpose-driven, people-centric providers are in a position to offer more than benefits within a category. What is needed now is a compassionate visionary who has the potential to innovate, negotiate, and champion change within the industry and society. Competitive forces and the anxiety of the masses demand that insurers develop wider brand strategies that develop and broadcast differences that truly make a difference. To our way of thinking, an authentic brand is driven by a humanizing philosophy and a captivating purpose, fueled by relentless conviction intent on guiding people-centric, spot-on decision making that doesn’t disappoint. Anything less is just malarkey. Relevance, credibility, and awareness are not an accidental consequence of advertising campaigns nor are they fringe activities unrelated to the greater purposes and objectives that providers sincerely intend to achieve, short and long term.

In times of trouble we listen for the confident; we are willing to follow the confident. Are you confident? Are you different? Are you relevant? Credible? Compelling? Do you care?

There will be plenty of those that simply wait and watch to see what the future holds. Insurers that ignore the realities that keep us up at night and chewing our nails during the day, do so at our collective peril. We implore relevant providers to rise to the occasion as champions of the health-care revolution, provoking conversations, deepening their relevance and proving that the exceptional is possible. Genuine leadership finds the courage to address the conflicts of society, culture, and people…not merely customers, consumers, and programming.

The best prospects for a meaningful future demand that we all do our part, giving the best of what we have, generously.

View the 2010 Threats to Girlhood Report

Threats to Girlhood include all of the issues, mindsets, factors, trends, and circumstances that impact girls’ lifelong health, wellness, happiness, and ability to succeed. Identifying current Threats to Girlhood is an important step towards advancing the well being of girls, the possibilities for women, and the strength of communities.  The 2010 Threats to Girlhood report issued by BlackDog’s foundation Serious Play for Serious Girls provides a collective view detailing the breadth and depth of the challenges that girls face.  Good brands will use this report to guard against inflicting these challenges developed as an outcome of their actions.
Emerging research on the state of girlhood highlights the interconnection of girlhood threats. Education and poverty, body image issues and advertising, sexual abuse and self-harm, conformism and commercialism; the issues threatening our girls aren’t isolated and unrelated.  Radically reducing Threats to Girlhood will require that we, collectively, work to improve all the interconnected causes along the way, not just the side effects.

No one single parent, politician, celebrity role model, company, organization, product, publication, or advertisement is solely responsible for the development of girlhood threats. We are all, however, responsible for the ways in which we contribute to these threats or fail to contribute to their solution. Radically reducing Threats to Girlhood requires a holistic solution: an out-of-the-box and into-the-hands-of decision-makers solution that takes the whole girl, the world she lives in, and the interconnection of the threats facing her, all into account.

This report is certainly not exhaustive, but we hope it will help show the scope of the problem and the urgent need for a new perspective. Because Threats to Girlhood are continually changing, shifting, and evolving, this is an ongoing project intended to continue addressing threats and working towards solutions.

We believe that research shouldn’t be remanded to vaults and scholarly journals, so if your research helps identify a Threat to Girlhood or a solution to a girlhood threat, we hope you’ll pass it along for possible inclusion in the report. Please send your stats, facts, and insights on girlhood threats, along with a copy of the published research or report in which the insights appear, to us for review.

I can’t tell if what I am seeing is a gross over simplification or just a lackluster attempt to ‘spin’ a brand, get on with the show or turn a buck.

What I do know is that the inherent power of brand to tell a vibrant story, capture the essence of a working people and articulate a higher purpose is being reduced to cryptic taglines, vague images, and meaningless stories.

 Authentic brand relevance isn’t cheap or easy; it can’t be bought, prescribed or faked. Authentic brand relevance is an earned honor of distinction bestowed upon companies that are grounded in a philosophy of being, know their purpose, make connections, and relate a perspective that speaks to and engages people.
 
Authentic brands advance thought-leadership, part from the herd, take the high road, keep it fresh, and offer meaningful solutions in the marketplace and to the world.
 
Authentic brands are a holistic, matchless advantage, enlivened by people with the power to restore a lost sense of humanity and balance to business.
 
This is about the time that I find myself in the awkward position of assuming the role of brands overprotective and perturbed Jewish mother.When resources are tight and competition real why are organizations announcing re-branding efforts that amount to nothing more than an altered juxtaposition of their logo in a fresh splash of color with a quippy tag-line chaser? A risky practice in that it seems to attract considerable word of mouth only when the effort is considered a dismal flop, otherwise it appears to go unnoticed. A logo cannot possibly capture the story or accurately represent the collective ambitions, effort, ethics, synergy and attitudes of any people working to solve problems and achieve goals in fierce times. I’m riled when brand is repeatedly diminished to a visual interpretation when there is real work to be done. I’m incensed that any working community of people would be reduced to a meaningless or superficial level of perception. Genuine influence will cost more than cheap tricks and idle dribble.

All children’s brands should be guided by an internalized dictum to “first, do no harm” that aligns organizational purpose, business strategy, brand management, and the optimal development of children. This sworn commitment requires a guiding philosophy that holds collective ability and judgment accountable, demands respect for scientific discovery, and vows to regard the holistic well being of children and childhood above all other competing concerns. It also requires an adopted practice of responsibility and professionalism dedicated to promoting the highest standards and respect for each developmental stage and phase, guarding the season of childhood.

Children need inspired playthings to help them tackle real world issues. Brands are either meeting the demand with constructive tools, placating children with shallow entertainment, or are selling out by buying into the notion that what they produce, promote, and contribute is inconsequential to the cultural realities of our day. If companies don’t begin adopting actionable, responsible standards rooted in high ideals, transparency, health, and holistic wellbeing, the industry will become subject to restrictive legislation.

There is no shortage of threats to childhood: cultural challenges to combat, stigmas and stereotypes to overcome, and chaos to decode. What is sparse, are companies that guard the season of childhood, regard their contribution as a vocation, and that champion the role and opportunity to proactively influence the healthy real life needs of impressionable young people.

Brands don’t exist in vacuums- they impact, influence, and shape our global ecology.

Brand is more than just “looking good”.  An authentic brand requires doing good.

Just putting a pink ribbon on your product doesn’t make you socially responsible. “Certified Organic,” “Carbon Neutral,” and “No Trans Fats” claims on your packaging won’t achieve it either. A brand isn’t socially responsible unless they are consciously and meticulously concerned with their impact on society. While the vast majority of companies think of social responsibility in terms of green initiatives and charitable donations, true social responsibility is a guiding philosophy that runs far deeper than individual programs, outreaches, or financial sponsorship.

Before a company adds a social responsibility page to their website or boasts about their community and environmental initiatives, they should ask themselves several questions: what is society? Why does it matter? On what does society depend? How is our company, as a whole, contributing to society? How are our products, strategic partners, affiliates, retailers, and third party service providers contributing to society? How are we detracting from it?  And, in which areas are we likely to effect societal trends and evolutions, for better and for worse, intended and not? Neglecting to understand, predict, consider, and moderate your social impact is socially irresponsible, even if you help fund a great cause.

If companies don’t abide by voluntary and mannerly rules of conduct and responsibility, stricter legislation will be required to uphold societal values. In her book “Why Manners Matter: The Case for Civilized Behavior in a Barbarous World,” Australian speechwriter turned noteworthy social philosopher, Lucinda Holdforth, suggests that the stability of modern society may actually depend more on manners than it does on legislation, transportation, or the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Every working element of society depends on manners. “Manners,” she explains, “are both evidence of a functioning society and an important means of upholding that society. Manners provide a form of social self-limitation, a means by which citizens signal their willingness to live together and abide by common standards…. Destroy manners- sweep aside all of a society’s habits, conventions and patterns of behavior- and you may well find that you have nothing left but chaos. And because human beings cannot live for long in a state of anarchy, sooner or later some form of oppressive authority will step in to restore order on a new, more punitive premises” (1).  

1.Lucinda Holdforth. Why Manners Matter: The Case for Civilized behavior in a Barbarous World. Amy Einhorn Books, 2009. P. 25-6.

Emotions- we don’t believe that “emotion” can or should be woven into every brand story in the hopes of “snagging” more customers.

We don’t believe that “emotions” should be, nor do we believe that they can be exploited at brand will. We don’t believe that an emotional connection to a brand will prove to be so compelling that it bypasses reason and suspends logic.

We do believe that a well-developed brand narrative should represent a dimensional, authentic, relevant and meaningful story that positions the brand to be noticed, understood and wanted.

We do believe that people and markets want products, services and brands that they identify with, relate to and see themselves as… accurate or not.

We do believe that if you are successful in creating meaningful connections, you won’t have to “manipulate” customers using evocative methods or messages.

We do believe there are causes, cohorts, events and a few, rare and exceptional organizations that have such a powerful brand story as to evoke a connection; call us to action; or put us in touch with a remembrance, a feeling, a sense of duty, a dream.

Powerful responses are enlivened when the authentic story is excavated to reveal a compelling brand that connects to a place deep, visceral and real within us.

WOW…  When the world experiences big changes, there are two camps that emerge – those that see and use the change for good and those that take advantage.  Those that take advantage damage their brand irretrievably, maybe not in the short term, but in due course, every dog has its day.

A story published today by Mobile Crunch (http://www.mobilecrunch.com/) unearths some questionable practices by a PR firm that represents game developers.  As part of their support program, the PR firm uses interns to crawl iTunes and community forums and post positive reviews (i.e. 5 out of 5 stars) for their clients s/w.  Trouble is the reviews appear to be pre-written by the PR firm.  Read the story here: http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2009/08/22/cheating-the-app-store-pr-firm-has-interns-post-positive-reviews-for-clients/

In a competitive world, it is your job to promote your brand as competitively and aggressively as possible. Fair enough.  But breaking moral and ethical codes taints your brand, drives away customers, partners and employees lessening the brands chances for survival.

We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but we rather have those because we have acted rightly. Aristotle