“We make brands imperative.”

July 20, 2010 by comments 0

Work on our new Web site about to begin in earnest, centered on bringing the approach that’s come into focus over the last few months to the Web.

Starts with a clear statement of what we do, thought I’d bounce a draft off you folks and get some feedback. Here’s what we have so far:

Holland-Mark is a marketing services firm focused on making brands “imperative.”

We believe that consumer and business-to-business buying habits have changed permanently in the aftermath of the Great Recession. Where people once bought what was “interesting,” today they buy only what is “imperative;” what they truly feel they need or expect a return on investment from.

While advertising can make products “interesting,” marketing communications alone cannot make a brand “imperative.” Imperative brands have four attributes in common:

  • Relevance of Offering – A product aligned with the evolving true needs of its target audience.
  • Clarity of Message – A truthful, relevant, motivating and distinct statement of its core value proposition.
  • Consistency of Communication – Reinforcement of the above at every point of contact with the brand.
  • Driving of Engagement – An ongoing, mutually beneficial relationship between the brand and its primary external constituencies.

These requirements correspond with Holland-Mark’s four core offerings:

Sync™ – A management consulting offering which shapes a product or service experience to align more closely with the right market opportunity

One Simple Thing (OST)™ – A brand strategy offering which distills messaging down to a singular thought which is true, relevant, motivating and distinct

Every Point of Content (EPOC)™ – An audit of the 360° experience of a brand to ensure consistent alignment with OST™

Content Hub – A social marketing program which enables client organizations to engage effectively across social media channels.

So what do you think? Do you get that? Would you pay for it?

  • http://www.stopabusecampaign.com Andrew Willis

    Mike,

    I think this is OK. I just don't see how it sets you apart from the rest of the pack. Rationally I get the urgency of 'Imperative' but as a counterpoint to 'Interesting'? Apple is an interesting brand – they become imperative when they have a new toy for us!

    If the mission is to make brands imperative, as opposed to interesting, relevant, etc. I question the supporting points. Aside from content hub what's different to when we worked together?

    Net, net, would I pay for it? Well aside from the fact I am a cheap Scot, maybe, but not from this description.

    But then again what do I know?

    • http://scalableintimacy.com Mike Troiano

      Thanks for the feedback, Andrew. Need some work to communicate these ideas more effectively, top men on the job right now…

  • http://www.mollynelson100.com Molly Nelson

    Hello Mike,
    Are you saying if a product is not aligned with the evolving true needs of its target audience, the management consultancy of HM will make recommendations on how it can be truly relevant? The wording “align more closely with the right market opportunity” almost brings to mind trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. If a product or service was designed without thinking about the needs/wants of the intended audience perhaps it shouldn't be brought to market. It is hard to tell a parent their baby is not beautiful.
    The rest of the manifesto is very clear and easy to understand.
    I believe your track will be successful it fits the minds and hearts of people today.
    Molly Nelson

    • http://scalableintimacy.com Mike Troiano

      Yes, I am. Lots of products are misaligned to their market needs, many just because the latter is a moving target. You're right that it can be a tricky conversation, but it tends to leave you with clients who want the truth. Those are the ones you want anyway.

  • http://www.goby.com Mark W

    I don't like the word “imperative” – my mind goes to “imperious”, not “necessary” – but maybe it's just me.

    Is brand marketing the same in B2B as it is in consumer? I'm not so sure the same pillars, and the same ordering, apply.

    for B2B, #1 problem is identification with a problem or pain point (or conversely an opportunity)
    for B2C, #1 problem is alignment with a consumer identity or passion

    Your positioning suggests that brand flows primarily from communication – but I wonder if that's true. For me, brand flows from consistency of experience, not consistency of communication, although the communications must be consistent and in service of the experience.

    For me – consistency of experience is a key element of many brands I love:
    JetBlue planes are the same everywhere, high quality, good seats, TV.
    Oakley – consistently provides high performance products, and they're always “cool”
    even McDonalds is all about consistency.

    as a ceo, i want my brand to be:

    emotionally accessible
    attachable to some clear problem or passion people have in their lives
    relevant & helpful
    differentiated

    I want people to feel like being associated with my brand says something about them, in addition them feeling like it provides them a differentiated service.

    I like your pillars, but the overall messaging makes it feel like brand is mostly a function of communication. Perhaps playing up the aspects of your offering that speaks to the brand's product and positioning more is worthwhile.

    • http://scalableintimacy.com Mike Troiano

      Thanks for this, Mark. As we discussed, busting out of the marketing communications silo is at the core of how we're different, so that needs some work. Also see your point on “Imperative” as a vessel for this set of ideas. It does have some baggage, need to reflect on that. Thanks for taking the time to capture these thoughts, it's a big help.