Save the Brand – Kill the Brand Manager!

Image from: wallpaperflare.com

As I mentioned in my last piece, in this one we will explore the relationship between the Brand and the Brand Manager. Despite the heading, I am no Marketing Tarantino out to kill Brand Managers, nor do I have anything personal against them. Disclaimers done, let’s dive in…  

Brands – the third person

Let’s start with some common phrases we must have all heard, or used ourselves when working on brands or dealing with Brand Managers (or other marketing ranks) –

- “Where can we take the Brand?”

- “The Brand needs to do this”

- “This is not the direction I want the Brand to go”

- “Where is the opportunity for the Brand”… the list is endless.

Nothing out of the ordinary in referring to a brand like that. However, what I always found odd was how the brand was ‘person-ified’ or referred to as a ‘third person’, and treated like an inanimate entity basis convenience. While the importance of getting into the consumers mind and mining insights has been discussed even after the world was forced to sit at home, there have been few crusaders calling for Brand and Brand Manager ‘unification’.  

Brand – the ‘third person’

This duality struck me afresh as I revisited Kabir’s poetry. In this one he uses an analogy from the Upanishads, that of twin birds sitting on an upside down tree. The bird on the lower branches (Bird 2) is busy tasting various berries, while the Bird 1 observes silently. Bird 2’s quest for sweet berries amidst the sours ones keeps taking it higher on the tree till it reaches Bird 1, which has been sitting still and calm. This is when Bird 2 merges with the Bird 1, losing desire for berries altogether.  

In the context of Kabir’s analogy, the Brands Managers are like Bird 2. Restless and in search for the next big opportunity to leverage the brand, gain share, exceed targets. This quest naturally yields mixed results as they did for Bird 2. All this time, like Bird 1, the Brand observes the Brand Manager patiently…

Brands and Brand Managers

As per Low & Fullerton’s book, the birth of Brand Managers (and their berry hunt) can be traced to 1931 when P&G decided to have dedicated Brand Managers to handle the marketing and related activities for each brand. The model hasn’t changed much since.

The Brand Managers continue to be called by many names; guardian, gate-keeper, owner, stakeholder, custodian… all signalling ‘ownership’ of the brand. This automatically creates a separate ‘other’.  

The brands in turn are treated like possessions. Vocabulary revolves around ‘exploiting’ marketing opportunities, ‘milking’ the Brand or its communication, ‘building’ Brands and Brand Equity… all signal towards asset owners seeking to maximise their gains.

The Brand Managers are under constant pressure to maximise brand performance given increasing competition, higher targets, shortening planning cycles. As a reward, they live to see another month or quarter and perhaps get that increment and promotion.

Result of duality

This pursuit of personal-professional gain often yields mixed results. Sometimes, even at the risk of alienating customers. Let’s look at a recent example of a ‘classist’ ad for a dough maker which had to be retracted. This ad was one amongst many other Brands trying to exploit the Covid-19 opportunity.

It had a clear rationale to push purchase, that of personal hygiene while hand-kneading the dough. A perfectly reasonable proposition given our blind war against a crafty virus.

The missed aim

The “approved” communication misfired with its clearly elitist point of view which questioned the hygiene of middle class India’s domestic staff. The offensive ad was subsequently retracted though it may continue to haunt the Brand in its internet afterlife. One only hopes the person concerned lived and learnt.

This is a classic case of the duality. Now, had the Brand Manager thought ‘as’ the Brand, they would have realised that Indian homemakers share a complex bond with their domestic staff. Within social hierarchies, lie mutual empathy and protective camaraderie.  

What could have been done?

One possible solution could have been for the Brand to question the very method of kneading dough and replacing it with an ‘untouched by hand’ alternative.

This marketing blooper happened at a time when 71% percent urban Indians don’t want brands to exploit the pandemic and 79% feel brands must show how they can be useful in such times. This Kantar research clearly shows consumers expect ‘humane authenticity’ from brands in these times.  

How to end the duality?

We need to fundamentally change the way we think, speak and act in this relationship. Here are some suggestions –

- Stop dating and ‘move in’ – idea is to not to think only of personal benefits like promotions or increments, but also about the Brand. The thinking needs to change from ‘what’s in it for me’ to ‘let’s do this together’. When the two work as a team, the results are always better.

- Change the vocabulary - the language needs to move from ‘possessive’ terms like manager, owner, custodian to relationship oriented terms like, partner, spouse, buddy, team… only when we use these terms will we ‘feel’ and ‘live’ them.  

- Change of command – realise that in this chicken and egg situation, the Brand came first and Brand Managers later (around1931). Therefore, keeping the interests of the Brand before the gains of the Brand Manager is akin to nurturing the goose that lays the golden egg.

- Think AS the Brand - one could start by asking questions like, “what would ____ (Brand) do if it was a person?” instead of trying to leverage or exploit every given opportunity. Getting ‘under the skin’ of the brand will intuitively lead to the correct answers.

To conclude, I feel marketers, brands and consumers have evolved over time. Marketing has moved from glamorous aspiration to desirable authenticity. Biggest live example is the social media posturing by brands in the United States as they throw their lots behind race and sexuality issues amidst protests and pride in the same month (2020 really messed up their marketing calendars). The ‘authentic’ ones get new consumers and loyalty, while the ‘posers’ get flak. The brands that will succeed in the future will be those where the Brand and the Brand Manager stand united, on a single stage vs. a Brand Manager propping up a ventriloquist’s puppet.