 |
| Rebranding is rarely done for aesthetic reasons and almost always done to strengthen the business to compete better with rivals or to signal a change in the direction of the company |
What people usually mean when
they start talking rebrand is putting a new spin on things. Changing perceptions
without changing the business. Sometimes, just changing a logo is thought of as
a rebrand. Other times, a name change is all that’s required. But really that’s
the equivalent of putting some extravagant graffiti and big car stereo on the
same ramshackle of a car. Everyone knows the same car is under that new paint
job and blazing music, and they won’t believe it’s a new car.
Let’s give Steve Blue audience at
the onset “No matter your reason for embarking upon a business rebranding
effort of a company or product name, logo, phrase, design scheme or other such
asset, which can be mixed and many, one thing is certain: execute poorly and
suffer extreme consequences. There is simply no rebranding effort where the
stakes are not extraordinarily high and the margin for error is slim at best.”
So what is Rebranding?
Nigel Hollis in his book The Global Brand (2008) did define a
brand as “a set of enduring and shared perceptions in the minds of consumers.
The stronger, more coherent and motivating those perceptions are, the more
likely they will to influence purchase decisions and add value to a business’”.
For the remainder of this article I will use Nigel Hollis definition of a
brand.
Therefore any attempt to change
these perceptions can be termed as a rebrand?
Quite a far-reaching process,
isn’t it?
True, rebranding rarely happens
all at once, it’s an evolutionary process that may take several years. A
company slowly changes and eventually realizes they’re not the same company any
more. So they make it official by changing the logo and shifting their
marketing; but more importantly they shift their set of enduring and shared
perceptions in the minds of consumers. That’s what happened to AOL, now Aol,
and I would say they have a true rebrand, albeit one that has been forced on
them over the years since their disastrous merger with Time Warner. Aol used to
be an internet service provider, now they are an internet content provider.
Right Actions, Powerful Results
Companies have been rebranding
for decades in hopes of perking up their sales. But for many, it’s done the
opposite. So what makes or breaks a rebrand? Redesign must happen for the right
reasons and symbolize a transition in the company – not just the packaging.
 |
| Redesign must happen for the right reasons and symbolize a transition in the company – not just the packaging |
Eric Thoelke, president and
executive creative director of TOKY, gives valuable advice when it comes to
redesigns. He asserts that rebranding is very rarely done for aesthetic reasons and almost always done
to strengthen the business to compete better with rivals or to signal a change
in the direction of the company, like a merger, acquisition or spin off.
Companies may also choose to redesign their brand if they’re expanding their
product offering or target audience. However, if a business is rebranding for
the sake of a fresh look, it’s usually a sign there’s not enough investment in
the project to make it successful.
Nation FM has “rebranded” how
many times? Have all these moves from Nation FM to easyfm then back to
Nation FM been a success stories? Question is did they satisfy the factors
needed to necessitate a rebrand? I do not know if your guess is as good as
mine; after all it’s a guess.
 |
| Radio Africa takes a jab at NationFM |
Let us look at the Britam rebrand
from Britak. They did maintain their legal name of British American Investments
Company (Kenya). Britam Group Managing Director Benson Wairegi “We have
decided to adopt what you’d call a monolithic brand; meaning a single brand
which embraces one culture and one set of values”. It is clear that Britam had
strong rebranding factors, goals and processes. Something that is always
lacking in most companies even in simple matters as redesigns. Britam has
clearly satisfied the Muzellec and Lambkin (2006) rebranding model. Their
growth is evident in firm’s financial performance.
 |
| Muzellec and Lambkin (2006) rebranding model |
Keep walking the walk: You have to live the brand
Once the launch party fades, the
hard work begins. Hopefully, by now, your entire company agrees that your brand
consists of everything that has anything to do with your company, and that your
brand goes everywhere. Your stated values must become reality. Anyone who
interacts with your people or your products, receives an invoice, or sees your
logo—really anyone in any circumstance—expects an experience that aligns with
your brand attributes. That's not to say you shouldn't test, test and retest to
see what's working. Constant learning helps your make slight course corrections
as you build out your messages, stories, website, image library, and other
business resources.
This draws me to the rebrand of The
Kenya Power & Lighting Company (KPLC) to Kenya Power. The press release
after the rebrand did state they had embarked on a corporate culture change and
rebranding exercise in 2009 with the aim of transforming the distribution
network in order to render more reliable and responsive services to customers
and to sustain its good financial performance. The project entailed creation of
a new organizational culture, a new logo, and a corporate brand which supports
the company’s long term objectives and meets the increasing expectations of its
customers. They did this so well in some aspects:
i.
Social media interaction
ii.
Multiple and easy bill payment systems
iii.
Self-care platforms for customers
iv.
Faster installations
v.
Their Ads are super cool
However, some items still remain
and it is imperative they keep walking the walk; and live the brand.
i.
Not all their vehicles bear their new corporate
colors
ii.
Some of their internal documents for a long time
had their old logo
iii.
Customer service at their centers still remains
appalling
Failure to do this then you are
quickly heading the Kodak way. Where no amount of rebranding can set you free.
Steve Blue put’s it quite well when he states “Your logo, tagline, typography and design should tell a
single-minded story”. That story must drive towards the ultimate
benefit your brand provides to its customers. Kodak had satisfied 3 out 4 of
this but in design (of their business) they failed. They never lived their
brand promise of “Share Moments; Share
Life”.
BRAVE Leadership
George Bradt advises that a brave approach to rebranding can
make all the difference – like it did when Blue Ribbon Sports rebranded as
Nike. Work from the outside in and think through your environment, values,
attitude, relationships and behaviors.
Environment: Begin with the
context for your rebranding. What changed?
Values: Anchor everything
in what matters and why – to your brand’s customers.
Attitude: Close the gap
created by changes in the context: strategy, posture, culture.
Relationships: First do no harm
to your brand’s relationships with customers. Then build.
Behaviors: Maintain control
of the rebranding process. How matters as much as what.
Rebranding means re-promising. It
means fundamentally changing what you offer, because the foundation of any
brand is what it promises to deliver. Want a new brand? Deliver a new promise.
No comments:
Post a Comment