What's the difference between branding and marketing?

How do marketing and branding differ? Is it just semantics?

I began thinking about this when I wrote about differentiation being a major component of the branding process. Then I read an article by Duct Tape Marketing maven, John Jantsch, (he who began this mega-blogging project), in his May 10 newsletter called "Differentiate and Dominate". I recommend the article to all. Find it at http://www.ducttapemarketing.com/newsletters/differentiate-and-dominate.htm

Now I may be a bit biased, but I've believed for some time that branding should preceed marketing; that branding sets the strategic base upon which innovative marketing techniques and tactics can be launched. Whether you agree with me or not (and I encourage you to comment on my contention by clicking "comment" and writing a comment), differentiation has a place in both activities.

It applies equally to branding (the strategic process) and marketing (the implementation of the strategy).

John's set of differentiators is some different from the list Jack Trout published in "Differentiate or Die" (Note the positive name of John's article as opposed to the book-selling title Jack created). I wrote about Jack's list in the last Buzzworthy Branding blog.

Use either or both, or find your own criteria for differentiating based on your core values, your product category and your marketplace. But do differentiate your business, product and/or service in a compelling and significant way from the inside out.

Whether it starts as a branding process or a marketing activity, discover and use the differentiator that can become the very keel of your business boat. And continue using that same differentiator in all your marketing communications and in the way you conduct your business. It's your foundation and your path to a powerful brand.

Martin Jelsema

Signature Strategies

Helping smaller businesses profit from the power of branding

www.signaturestrategies.biz

Three criteria for successful differentiation

I mentioned earlier I'd address how you might evaluate your offering (i.e., your company, product, service or event) to enable you to brand it effectively.

Remember the three related factors I suggested were basic to formulating a brand strategy: market, competition and offering. Once you're clear about the markets you wish to serve, and you understand the strengths and weaknesses of the competitive forces, you can fashion an offering that's really of value to the market and well differentiated from the competition.

Occasionally, the offering comes first. It's a new idea! There is no market as yet! There are no competitors! Well, that's subject for future blogs, or if you can't wait, I suggest you find two of the remarkable books written in the 1990's by Geoffry A. Moore - Crossing the Chasm and Inside the Tornado. They offer a blueprint for introducing high-tech products.

But more often you will be attempting to penetrate existing markets where competitors already lurk. Your offering may be an improvement, or it may even be different enough to be classified in a new product category, but it is recognized as a solution to a problem, or a gratification of a desire, that others claim to be fulfilling. Here is where differentiation is key.

I believe differentiation should be the basis of your brand. At the core, differentiation should be inherent in the company, product, service or event being branded. The differentiation needs to be perceived as valuable as well as unique. And it must be clear - easily understand and easily communicated by gatekeepers to others. (More about branding for referrals in future blogs.)

And most important, it needs to be believable.

Doug Hall in his very wise and very readable book, Jump Start Your Business Brain, provides the three ingredients to a successful brand, although he didn't mention "brand" per se. He just calls them the "three laws of Marketing Physics". Those ingredients are:

•     An Overt Benefit (what's in it for the consumer?)

•     A Real Reason to Believe (why should the consumer believe what you have to say?)

•     A Dramatic Difference (how novel is your delivery of the first two factors?)

Mr. Hall has isolated and documented these three factors through extensive research, and claims that if they are present at sufficient levels, there is an 84% overall probability of success.

I've advised clients to utilize those three "laws" as a sound and simple approach to differentiation. They provide a solid bed from which compelling brands can grow.

Martin Jelsema

martin@signaturestrategies.biz

Designing logos for longevity.

Last week, an entrepreneur was telling me about a West Coast Design Studio who was promising her that the logos they designed would have a life of at least 15-years before they would begin to show signs of age.

That got me to wondering - how the hell will they know? Or anyone for that matter. Today's big deal design trend will probably become old and tired more quickly than a tried and true design that's already stood the test of time. Fads boil up and then get discarded in cycles lots shorter than 15-years.

But here's the kicker. The design this West Coast hot-shot was touting as a long-lived design was a variation of a fad that's quickly dying in logo design (at least it should be dead by now). It's the arch or arc emanating from one "i" in the name to another "i" a couple of syllables to the right.

An awful lot of graphic designers are lemmings. They copy cool stuff.

I'd say following the latest trend won't produce a long-lasting logo. The logo, like all elements of branding, needs to eminate from the core of the company, product, service, event or project being branded.

"Be true to thine self."

Defining "Brand": It's like defining "Elephant"

When I do a branding workshop, the first question I ask is, "What's your definition of a brand?". Seems everyone has an impression about brands, so after a few moments of daze, the answers start to flow...

"Branding is a good name."

"Branding is an eye-arresting logo."

"Branding has to do with what your facility looks like."

"Branding is a memorable slogan."

"Branding is your company's personality."

"Branding is your corporate image."

“Branding is buying ad specialties with your name on them.”

Once someone said, "Branding is renting a blimp."

I tell them they are all right, but that they are like the six or seven blind people trying to describe an elephant by just feeling the part they are presently touching. I then suggest branding can be all those things - and much more.

Looking at the bigger picture, branding is first a strategic process. Whether you are branding a company (and that should probably be the first thing you brand) or a product, service or event, it begins with an assessment of the environment. Three critical factors converge here: the markets you serve, your competitors (current and future) and your offering(s).

Knowing your markets and competitors prepares you to develop an offering that's valued and unique. Once the offering meets those criteria, it's then your job to crystallize the value/uniqueness message.

At the same time, that message must be creditable and reflect the true personality and core values of your organization. Without this last consideration, the message becomes just more advertising puffery.

The process is a complex and introspective undertaking.

But I believe that establishing this foundation based on honesty and substance is vital to the brand and to the success of the business itself. Upon that foundation, considerations of name, package, logo, color, type face, slogan and, yes, selection of ad media should flow.

So the big question is what do you have to communicate about your offerings that are unique and valuable? I have a couple of ideas, and I'll be sharing them over the next week or two.