by admin | Jan 11, 2012 | Blog, Strategy
First of all, we should acknowledge that marketing in general, and branding strategy in particular, for any professional service organisation has its own unique challenges. The offering is intangible, so you can’t pick it up and compare it feature for feature with a competing offering. The service also relies on humans to deliver it each and every time; it is subject to a lot more variability in quality than a physical product. This means that the quality of a service offering is based mainly on perceptions and external artifacts such as expensive offices, tailored suits and a difficult to complete degrees. The business is also based heavily on personal relationships and the collective intellectual property/knowledge base that a firm can build.
“…branding, a word misunderstood and misused more than any other in business”
Acknowledging these challenges, however, does not change the fact that the major role of branding strategy is still fundamentally about articulating a clear point of difference, one that is valuable to a clearly defined audience. Now let’s examine branding, a word misunderstood and misused more than any other in business. The goal of branding is to become the name people think of immediately when they want what you sell. The purpose of a Brand is to differentiate between products and services and meet aspirational needs as well functional requirements. Brands are the source of a promise to the consumer.
Exhibit A.
The following is a quote from the 2nd of March 2007 Australian Financial Review article, titled “Skills before Thrills” and worse still made by a principal of a marketing firm that conducted research into the marketing of law firms in Australia:
“Over the last 5 years law firms invested significantly into building their brand….While buyers of legal services are more aware of the number of firms they can choose from, they don’t know what these firms stand for, what differentiates them.”
Do we need to shout it out loud? – BRANDING IS DIFFERENTIATION! Maybe the author shouldn’t have skipped Lecture 2, Marketing 101!!! Maybe what they meant to say was that these firms ‘misdirected a lot of their marketing investment’ or ‘have spent a lot of money making prospects aware of their brands’ which is not the same as ‘building their brand’, in fact in fairness, the author alludes to this by calling it “empty awareness”. Building a brand means that your prospects know the difference between you and your competitor so well that they can clearly articulate it!
Why is it not surprising that the so called ‘branding efforts’ by the aforementioned law firms yielded poor results? Could it be that the advertising agencies and marketing consultants involved also missed a few lectures in Marketing 101? Or is it that they do not have the professional fortitude to stand up to their clients and insist that all drab, boring, chest beating ‘corporate speak’ communication must go?
It seems that Australian commercial law firms have either confused branding with visual image which is only a very small sub-set of the branding discipline (but hell who can blame them, marketing fraternity from practitioners to journalists don’t seem to understand the difference!) or they are collectively too conservative (scared) to really take a stand that makes them different and superior.
Exhibit B.
An article from Lawyers’ Weekly May 2008 cites a number of “rebranding case studies”, one of which is:
“We were keen to come up with an understanding a meaning of the brand that related to everyone. It really came down to two things that were really important to the firm. One was the quality of the work that we do and the second was how we do that work and how we relate to the people we’re doing that work with,” he said. “So for us [the issues were] excellence in terms quality of work we’re doing and building real rapport with our clients, with each other, and with other professionals involved with our work.” Blake Dawson worked on the project with brand consultants, Principals, for the best part of 18 months and it was officially unveiled on November 5 year. The effort paid off, and the rebranding was recognized as one of top five of the year in the 2008 Rebrand 100 Winning Brands awards.”
Is this another case of “Emperor’s New Clothes”? We tried to find evidence of the 2 key messages – quality of work and rapport with clients – that supposedly make Blake Dawson unique, communicated on the company website but with no success. Furthermore, the firm’s Positioning Statement “Would you like to grow a little faster?” unfortunately in no way reflects these 2 key messages. But at least the firm has a Positioning Statement and maybe this will focus the efforts of the company to deliver on their promise and assist clients in growing their bottom line. Additionally, Blake Dawson – www.blakedawson.com is one of the few firms to have at least tried to establish some kind of differentiation by incorporating cartoons in the firm’s marketing communications; however this great idea seems not to have been given enough oxygen. There are only 2 pages of the company’s website graced with this simple, humanizing and differentiating concept – unfortunately allowing a great opportunity go untapped.
The trouble is, all the big commercial law firms seem to be working from the same play book and to have taken the road more traveled – and have ended up being both boring and unfocused in their message.
Little wonder market research suggests that clients don’t know what differentiates one firm from another. Now, at the risk of offending people who know how to sue us for defamation… go to the web sites of the major players and look for a clear positioning statement, or anything that is “benefit focused.” If a first year copywriting cadet from AdSchool submitted any of these web sites for an assignment, they would fail because its “all about me” copy doesn’t give any clear differentiation from the competition.
What’s more, they generally try to be all things to all people. They all say, in effect, “we have a bunch of smart people and lots of offices and know the law and care about excellence…” yawn.
by admin | Jan 10, 2012 | Blog, Strategy
A joke or reality?
A young lawyer, starting up his private practice, was very anxious to impress potential clients. When he saw the first visitor to his office come through the door, he immediately picked up his phone and spoke into it,” I’m sorry, but my caseload is so tremendous that I’m not going to be able to look into your problem for at least a month. I’ll have to get back to you then.” He then turned to the man who had just walked in, and said, “Now, what can I do for you?” “Nothing,” replied the man. “I’m here to hook up your phone.”
Q: What’s wrong with Lawyer jokes?
A: Lawyers don’t think they’re funny, and nobody else thinks they’re jokes.
At the risk of pissing off the very people who can test our Professional Indemnity insurance cover limits, we decided to examine the web sites of the top Australian law firms as well as look at their public relations communication in the business press. What became blatantly obvious was that there is a serious misunderstanding of what branding is and how to do it well, especially amongst the Tier 1 law firms.
Perception is Reality! And the reality is that:
The following quote is from Minister for Health and Ageing, Nicola Roxon’s incredibly passionate speech to Australian Women Lawyers’ Conference – 29th September 2006, titled – The People Vs Lawyers: The Case For An Ethical (and Influential) Profession. Ms. Roxon was an industrial lawyer and senior associate with the law firm Maurice Blackburn and a judge’s associate to High Court. She is now Australia’s Attorney-General
“…public do not have a warm and loving feeling about lawyers. To say, in political spin, you have a “PR issue” is an understatement. So who are the non-lawyers or the good lawyers these days? Reflecting back through the centuries, lawyers seem to have always been disliked – for their fees, their ability to argue their client’s case (and therefore be seen to believe in nothing) and their skill in employing technicalities to wriggle around truth or responsibility. On the other hand, if ever in trouble, everyone wants one in their corner.”
If you take a look at the web sites of the “leading” commercial law firms in Australia, you would be forgiven for thinking that the Law Institute had issued “good website guidelines” and all the major firms followed along like lemmings.
In terms of their branding – that is a defined point of difference – it is almost impossible to tell what benefits one firm offers over another.
All firms have lots of smart people, do some pro-bono work and have won awards. But what makes you tick? Who are you? How can you help me sue someone’s pants off or protect myself from same? Why would I use you instead of the other 8 glass-tower, high priced legal eagle guns for hire in town? At least when watching Boston Legal, one knew that Crane Pool & Schmidt represent only the most weird and wonderful.
Interestingly, the personal injury “fight for the battler” type firms seem to have a better grasp on their branding (differentiation) and speak to an audience (as opposed to an enterprise) than the “corporate” firms do. Almost without exception, the commercial firms have dull messages that are all about them, and provide no compelling reason why a client should choose them over their competitors.
by admin | Jan 9, 2012 | Blog, Promotion, Strategy
Why is it that some of our society’s brightest minds have no idea how to translate their “no holds barred” skills from the courtroom to the public domain of marketing communication in a battle to win more clients?
Maybe they just don’t need the extra business, maybe they don’t know how, or maybe the truth is a combination of arrogance and ignorance steeped in tradition! If you want to know the historical reasons why the legal profession is the way it is when it comes to brand positioning in marketing and advertising, then you’ll see an excellent exposé here:
http://www.law.com/jsp/llf/PubArticleLLF.jsp?id=1181207138051 by the (American) National Law Journal.
by admin | Jan 8, 2012 | Blog, Strategy
Here’s an example from the Real Estate category for one of our clients.
Using the ‘Pepsi strategy against Coke’, we have used the principal of taking a leading competitor’s strength “Hardest working Real Estate Agent” by Hocking Stuart and developing a brand positioning statement that capitalizes on their weakness:
- Everyone knows that it’s not about working harder but SMARTER
- We all have the perception of Real Estate agents being ‘sharks’ who only care about their bottom line and have hence made the Bayview positioning statement all about the buyer – YOU!
The result was “Working Smarter – For You”
It is interesting to note that Hocking Stuart, the very firm that became the marketing thought leader in their field has since changed their brand positioning twice since I first wrote this and now has no slogan or positioning statement at all! Do they now think that they are all grown up and don’t need one? I wonder how this will effect them…only time will tell and unless something drastic happens only they will know! What I am confident about is that they would have been much better off by sticking to and reinforcing their original slogan “Hardest Working Real Estate Agent”. Their size in the market (number of franchises / outlets) together with their marketing budget would have ensured their prominence and top of mind awareness in the minds of their customers and prospects.
For in depth exploration of the laws and principles of Brand Positioning in the marketplace, you can’t go past Al Ries – http://www.ries.com/.
by admin | Dec 25, 2011 | Blog, Strategy
Selling the brand first
What is a brand? Sounds like a fairly basic question to ask, but you’d be surprised how many people don’t really know the answer.
A brand:
– Stands for something
– Has an emotional connection with it’s customers
– Has some need that it fulfils for it’s customer
– Is often hard to substitute
– Is unique
– Is associated with a logo and should have a tagline
How do you build a brand?
A brand is not something that naturally evolves; it is a based on a strategy to target it towards a specific group of people, and makes it relevant and appealing to them. A brand has a meaning, a benefit and an objective. The rule of thumb is to lead with an emotional benefit and support this with a rational benefit. An emotional benefit is what draws your customers to your brand and builds loyalty. For example, Nappies – the emotional benefit is that by using Brand X you will feel like you are the best mother that you can be. Whilst, the rational benefit is about performance and has to do with the practical functionality of the brand, for example, having side panels on the nappies to avoid leakage and the 100% hypoallergenic cotton fabric.
Why build a brand?
Brands are not easily substituted and this important is from a commercial perspective. If you have built a strong brand, your customers will feel loyal to your brand and this makes it difficult for competitors to take your market share. By raising the “barriers to entry” for new competitors, you are effectively making the market seem unattractive to new entrants – this keeps your customers coming back to you.
At qubePartners, a marketing agency an advertising agency, all in one, we help design, plan and execute branding strategies to ensure that your brand is as strong as it can be. Download Brand Design Questionnaire
We also recommend brand health audits on existing brands to ensure that they are relevant and building the emotional connection that is needed to create loyal customers. Download Marketing Check Fax
Recent Comments