Consumers love brands because they offer an extra value—that is, one in addition to the core product or service. That value becomes the major motivation for consumers to buy or use the product.

From there, the concept of brand becomes foggy. First of all, what is this value exactly?

We know, for instance, of the ability of a brand to signal belonging to a certain group or status. But there are some who say brands are the objects of love (Saatchi & Saatchi CEO Kevin Roberts) or even religion (Young & Rubicam).

Furthermore, how precisely is this value being added and incorporated into the brand? Advertising professionals say it is advertising. Consumers love the ad—so they'll love the brand. Other marketing experts are suggesting that a consistent and total brand experience is the key.

So what's the secret to a successful brand?

Before I answer that question, let's review three common approaches to brand development used by many marketers—with help from their advertising agencies, consultants, branding companies and design firms.

Although widespread, those approaches are not well founded theoretically; and, in my view, they have not yet yielded truly strong brands. The three approaches are the "decoration" approach, the "gluing" approach, and the "Golem" approach (of Prague, London or New York).

The decoration approach sees differentiation as a matter of appearance. "We branded ourselves," say the practitioners, meaning that a special name, logo and look have been created in a seemingly sophisticated development process. "Since they look different from our competitors', consumers conceive of us as different."

This approach is naive. For more credibility, it is usually spliced with elements from the other two approaches.

The "gluing" approach attaches so-called brand values and other desirable associations to the name, the logo and the look from the previous approach. The rationale goes like this: the consumer sees the values she or he holds dear portrayed in our messages and immediately feels that this is a brand that suits him or her. Enthusiasts of the "emotional branding" approach claim that they attach emotions to the brand in virtually the same manner (e.g., stir or model these target emotions in advertising).

In the third approach, the "Golem" approach, marketers seek to create a human-like entity with personality (even charisma) that is capable of having a relationship with the consumers.

These three approaches lead companies astray and cause them to miss the true potential that lies in brands.

But there is another approach. I find it to be much more fruitful and far better substantiated by current psychological and sociological theory and research.

The basic logic for developing a brand with an added value is amazingly similar to the logic of product development. In both cases, we create for a consumer a tool or means to do something that he or she wants to do.

It's important to understand what "wants to do" is. From my perspective, if the consumer wants to uplift/relax/excite/entertain, strengthen a self-image, fantasize about an alternate reality, or any other psychological usage—that is something he or she "wants to do."

Consumers are purposeful when trying to achieve experiential, emotional, psychological, interpersonal and social goals/benefits, just as they are when trying to achieve more tangible goals. Brands with added value are usually means for consumers to achieve such goals. They are instrumental, although this is a psychological or a social instrumentality.

A brand without a convincing usage scenario is actually not a brand. It may appear to be a brand. It might have widely recognized name, logo, visual identity and advertising style, but consumers will not desire it because it is useless.

All the rules of successful innovation in the field of products and services also apply to brands. The precondition for success is providing the consumer with something that he or she desires but cannot have today… because it is just too difficult, too complicated, uncomfortable, boring, too expansive and so on.

According to this approach, brands are not human-like and they do not have a life of their own outside the consumer's mind. They are instruments, simply means to achieve ends.

Emotions cannot be glued to them. They arouse emotions when they are perceived as a source of something beneficial. The positive emotions are direct outcomes of these anticipations. Their various symbolizations (name, logo, font, emblem and so on) have little impact on their own; their importance is mainly as identifiers of sources of already attributed and anticipated benefits.

The act of branding has 10 different meanings, which translate into 10 different ways to create instrumentality or usefulness beyond the tangible benefits of a product/service:

1. Creating a Conceived Linkage to a Tangible Benefit

Subscribe today...it's free!

MarketingProfs provides thousands of marketing resources, entirely free!

Simply subscribe to our newsletter and get instant access to how-to articles, guides, webinars and more for nada, nothing, zip, zilch, on the house...delivered right to your inbox! MarketingProfs is the largest marketing community in the world, and we are here to help you be a better marketer.

Already a member? Sign in now.

Sign in with your preferred account, below.

Did you like this article?
Know someone who would enjoy it too? Share with your friends, free of charge, no sign up required! Simply share this link, and they will get instant access…
  • Copy Link

  • Email

  • Twitter

  • Facebook

  • Pinterest

  • Linkedin


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dan Herman, PhD, CEO of Competitive Advantages, is a strategy consultant, keynote lecturer, workshop/seminar leader, and author of Outsmart the MBA Clones: The Alternative Guide to Competitive Strategy, Marketing, and Branding (www.outsmart-mba-clones.com).