Keep in mind that online brand audit is quite a methodical task. You may want to print webpages and create a big collage. Or maybe you use Evernote. The key is to keep a record of everything because we are going to accumulate a lot of information. For every brand, we will check three fundamental things: the brand’s websites, its online footprint and its visuals. This will be fun. Let’s see what we find out!

I always start my audit with the brand’s website. At this point we are trying to understand what the brand currently claims about itself. Highlight the key messages on its landing page. Pay particular attention to the “About Us” section. Most often this page contains facts, meaningless numbers and a soulless narrative. However, this is where your brand should communicate its story to the world! Check if there is a compelling narrative on the About Us section. Your personality, your values, what you stand for should all be reflected. That said, we like it better when those messages are subtle. You want the reader to feel that s/he’s personally addressed. As Chris Grams suggests, print out those pages and highlight key words and themes. If your brand does not have a compelling story here, then it won’t be compelling elsewhere.

Winner: Mont Sutton by a landslide. Here is how the brand describes itself. Doesn’t it make you want to go there? Wow!

Our second stop is Google. Type the name of the brand and see what the first official entry says. Mind you! Most often your brand is not what you say it is. It is what Google says it is! Do you convey a clear message on Google? Be succinct and compelling. Try to capture your core with that short message.

Winner: According to Google, Ski Bromont has the clearest and most complete message.

Next, we will check the brands’ online presence. Look at their Twitter accounts. Go to their Facebook pages. Read the Wikipedia entries about them. Here are a couple of things to pay attention to on Twitter:

1. How does the brand describe itself on Twitter? Is it consistent with your existing findings?
2. Does it use a colloquial language? Or does it treat Twitter as a channel to push news or sales?
3. Is it visually consistent with its website?

Winner: Owl’s Head. The brand is very approachable on Twitter. It responds to messages in an informal way. Feels like it is a member of a close-knit community. Also it does not overuse its Twitter account to promote its offers. As a rule of thumb, 1 in 4 messages should be about your promotions and the rest should be just conversation. Finally, is it possible to dislike that funny Owl?

Next, look at the brand’s Facebook page. Here is what you should pay attention to:

1. How does the brand describe itself on Facebook? Is it consistent with your existing findings?
2. Does the brand focus on engagement or sales? Does it respond to messages from its fans?
3. Does it reward its fans exclusively?
4. Is it integrated among all channels?
5. Does it offer customer support/service?

Winner: We have two winners: Ski Bromont has the largest community and it responds to its fans punctually. Mont Sutton too, deserves credit because of its Facebook Tree Planting campaign. That said, all of the mountains can learn more from studying the Facebook page of MAC Cosmetics.

Last, check the Wikipedia entry about the brand. Wikipedia is an entirely open, transparent platform and your brand is fairly naked there. That does not mean that you can’t participate though. People check your Wikipedia entry to get detailed information about you. Here is where you should list all the facts that you usually post on your About Us page. Spoil the readers with information. Aim to satisfy the knowledge thrust of your biggest brand advocates. Pay attention to these:

1. Is there a Wikipedia page about the brand? How extensive is it?
2. Is the content one sided? (Positive or negative) Or is it neutral?
3. Can you find absolutely all the information you are looking for?

Winner: None. Although Ski Bromont has the most complete entry, it is far from tapping into its great potential. This is where all four mountains should study Whistler Blackbcomb.

Finally, analyze brand elements such as name, logo, tagline and overall look and feel. Here are our winners:

• Name: We don’t have a winner here, as all ski resorts are understandably named after the respective mountains they are located at. That said, we realize that Ski Bromont has a brand architecture problem: The brand’s name is “Ski Bromont”. That said, the resort is open 4 seasons and even the Aquatic Parc or biking sections are under “Ski Bromont.” That creates confusion.
• Logo: Seems like Owl’s Head really nailed this one. Their iconic owl is ageless. It makes the brand approachable and its simplistic design makes it cool… Actually, very cool. Sutton is the runner up.

• Tagline: Mont Orford and Ski Bromont communicate the size of skiable area. I prefer Mont Orford as “3 mountains” clearly communicates grandeur. Either way, I think these two are better practices compared to Owl’s Head, which lists its services. Sutton does not use a tagline.
• Overall look and feel: Sutton has by far the best website. It is a treat for your eyes. The natural wood concept is consistently applied everywhere. Actually, Sutton has one of the best websites of ALL mountain resorts – not just among the ones in Eastern Townships.

Of course, this is just the online part of our brand audit. Nonetheless, if you follow the above-four steps, you will be able to find many insights about your brand. What do you think? Fire your comments!

Happy holidays to all!

2012 Global consumer trends by Euromonitor

2012 Consumer trends by Trendwatching

2012 Consumer trends by Trend-Strategy

2012 Retail trends by Retail is Detail

2012 Branding trends by Landor

2012 Colour trends by bvcolorstrategy

Michael Jordan is arguably the greatest basketball player of all times. But his skills and will are not enough to explain how he became the magnetic person that he is. During his Hall of Fame induction speech, Michael Jordan said: “There won’t be a new Michael Jordan.” This is a false statement, because who we knew and adored as “Michael Jordan” was actually not an individual. The magnet was the “Warrior/Hero archetype.”

Jordan was the ultimate ” Warrior/Hero” – an archetype that resonates extremely well with Americans. MJ followed the archetypal storyline: He was an ordinary guy from North Carolina, who stepped into an extraordinary world when he hit the game winner at the NCAA finals. Then, he encountered a new and superior enemy (first Bad Boys then Pat Riley’s Knicks), made new friends along the way (Pippen became the textbook description of the word sidekick), almost failed yet managed to overcome the challenge against all odds (won multiple championships) and finally saved the damsel in distress (City of Chicago and then the NBA basketball.) This is a typical storyline of a hero. Try to replace Michael Jordan with Luke Skywalker, or Rocky, or Harry Potter. What you will see is that the storylines are exactly the same, which proves that we witnessed the embodiment of the Warrior/Hero archetype by Michael Jordan.

What makes a Warrior/Hero so successful is his fierce competitiveness. Jordan’s obsession to win resurfaced during the lockout. Back in 1998 he advocated that NBA players should earn more. Now as an owner, he advocates that owners should earn more. That is perfectly fine and inline with the archetype. I don’t see why or how it will cause a backlash against Brand Jordan. Allow me to explain.

NBA players, who are paid to wear Brand Jordan are carefully handpicked: Wade, Paul, Anthony. I believe Jordan selects players not only according to their skill set but also according to their will (personality). They are highly “competitive” individuals. I don’t think any great AND competitive player would turn down an offer from Brand Jordan in the foreseeable future. Because, deep down those competitive players know that they’d do the same thing had they were in MJ’s shoes. That is the nature of a competitor. That said, Brand Jordan faces a bigger problem.
Michael Jordan’s behaviours over the last couple of years have been… uncharacteristic. As a player, he was extremely careful about his image and legacy. Marketers and PR people did a great job in promoting the positive aspects of his obsession to win. Yet, during the lockout and -actually, more obviously- his Hall of Fame speech the shadow side of the Warrior/Hero became obvious. According to Carol Pearson, the shadow attributes of a Warrior/Hero are: “Arrogance, developing a need for there always to be an enemy, not fighting for what really matters, ruthlessness and unprincipled, obsessive need to win, use power for conquest, a view of all difference as a threat.” A wise Warrior/Hero perceives his inner demons as his greatest enemy, and tries to beat his shadow before fighting others. Jordan is having tough time containing the shadow of his archetype. That is the real problem. Somehow PR people have to make sure that MJ’s competitiveness is under control and he is perceived to serve the greater good.

A brand is not a logo. It is a promise. Maui Jim’s promise is to enable me to see the world at its best, to bring the brilliant colours to my life. Its polarized sunglasses literally do that. They are engineered to overcome intense glare and harmful UV. But the brand does more than offering top-quality sunglasses to enable me to see the world at its best. To begin with, Maui Jim is not a pretentious brand, it is not for prestige-seeking ruler types. Actually, it is quite the opposite: Maui Jim embodies the easy-going, Hawaiian spirit. They name their products after places in Hawaii. On their website, they use Hawaiian words such as “Send a Lei” instead of saying “Like us on Facebook”, which puts a smile on your face in a world full of negativity. They share the Hawaiian optimism and peacefulness with the world. That is exactly the raison d’être of the brand and they do it very well. Recently, Maui Jim managed to improve the quality of our relationship by making me smile again. Let me explain how.

One of the temples of my sunglass was broken. I sent my sunglass –with a brief explanation of the problem- to the Maui Jim. I basically asked them to replace of the temples. A couple of weeks later, my sunglass came back. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that BOTH of the temples were replaced. The brand exceeded my expectation, which is usually enough to create goodwill. But, Maui Jim took one more step and sent me the above invoice. The otherwise boring invoice had stickers and a handwritten note on it. Clearly, Maui Jim achieved its goal of enabling me to see the good things in life. The quality of our relationship and my loyalty to the brand went up. Maui Jim’s products, promise, purpose and touchpoints are perfectly aligned. This is branding at its best.

Today’s actionable tip: Ask yourself why your brand exists. This is your purpose. Then ask yourself what you enable people to do. This is your promise. And finally, try to instill your purpose and promise into all touchpoint, even to the boring ones like an invoice!

This is actually a decade-old theory. Professor Fournier conducted in-depth interviews with female consumers to understand the relationships they form with the brands they know and use. At the end she identified 13 unique relationship forms, ranging from best friendships to flings. Later on, same study was replicated with male consumers and 15 unique relationship forms were identified. This is a breakthrough finding because it clearly explains why and how brands establish different emotional bonds with consumer. According to Professor Fournier, relationships are purposive: they add and build meanings in a person’s life. Brands help us create, maintain or transition to our key roles in life. For instance, when you become an adolescent, or a parent your role in life changes. To cope with such transition, you surround yourself with brands that help you build the right personality.

Most brands make the common mistake of trying to build more passionate, intimate and committed relationships with consumers. Relationship is a two-way street. As Professor Fournier stated, “for a relationship to truly exist, interdependence between partners must be evident.” You cannot force a relationship. It has to happen naturally. Simply laddering up the benefit does not suffice. The key here is to name your role in their lives. We all have relationships with hundreds of people in our livese. Not all of those relationships are built on high engagement. And that’s OK… For instance, I go to the same coffee shop everyday. I say “Hi” to people there, and occasionally we talk about daily stuff. But it would be silly of me to try to make more of what we have than is really there by let’s say inviting them to lunch. Had I done that, I would be harassing them. Every relationship is different in its nature. If you try to build a more emotional connection with your customers without knowing the exact role you play in their lives, you risk being labeled as a “harasser.’ Unfortunately, that’s what most brands do.

Today’s actionable tip:  Try to see things through the eyes of the consumer. You DON’T have to be his/her “best friend” unless you are granted that status. There is so much more you can do with a less intimate relationship, if you understand your role as a partner and act accordingly.

I am not an expert in B2B market research. But, I have great respect for a company that specializes on this topic: B2B International has a lot experience working with business-to-business brands and they found out that a typical business-to-business market has 4 segments:

1. A price-focused segment, which has a transactional outlook to doing business and does not seek any ‘extras’. Companies in this segment are often small, working to low margins and regard the product/service in question as of low strategic importance to their business.
2. A quality and brand-focused segment, which wants the best possible product and is prepared to pay for it. Companies in this segment often work to high margins, are medium-sized or large, and regard the product/service as of high strategic importance.
3. A service-focused segment, which has high requirements in terms of product quality and range, but also in terms of aftersales, delivery, etc. These companies tend to work in time-critical industries and can be small, medium or large. They are usually purchasing relatively high volumes.
4. A partnership-focused segment, usually consisting of key accounts, which seeks trust and reliability and regards the supplier as a strategic partner. Such companies tend to be large, operate on relatively high margins, and regard the product or service in question as strategically important.

This is a great start. Now, go over your customer database and see which client falls under which segment. You will quickly realize that all clients demand price, quality, service and partnership. That is not the point. The point is to find “the” pain point of every client. If you have difficulty deciding, you can always use this decision-making tool.

Today’s actionable tip: Don’t forget the 80/20 rule: 20% of your customers account for 80% of your turnover. Such key and large accounts should always be a segment on their own.

Iyengar and Agrawal talk about the scary proliferation of choice in modern era. They say that the average grocery store stocked 3,700 products in 1949. Now, an average supermarket has 45,000 products. Starbucks offers you 87,000 drink combinations. Cold Stone Creamery claims that it offers more than 11.5 million ice-cream combos. You have 15 million date possibilities on Match.com! I think I can stop beating a dead horse as you get the point. We have more options than we need in life.

In its most fundamental definition, a choice allows you to choose the option that satisfies your need. When presented with a choice, your expected behaviour is to choose an option that surpasses your expectation, “to satisfice”.  However, your real behaviour is completely different. You subconsciously switch from satisfice mode into “maximize” mode, starting to look for “the best option” even though you are perfectly fine with a mediocre one.

Don’t get me wrong. We like the idea of “choice.” That makes us feel like a ruler: It brings the control and power-seeker in us. But as described above, there is a limit to that before we forego our buying decision altogether.

Today’s actionable tip: The authors of the article argue that this problem can be overcome by doing four things.

1. The first one is obvious. Eliminate the alternatives that don’t sell well. Not only they don’t sell well, they confuse your customers and probably negatively affect your sales.
2. Then, be helpful and share with them your expert opinion. Empower them through knowledge.
3. Also consider categorizing their options. Instead of seeing al the options once, if you can create categories you can reduce the anxiety of your customers.
4. Finally, don’t bombard them with too many options at the beginning. Instead, increase the number of options as they go along. Turns out that people build self-confidence by making decisions. So start with less options and when the customer has more self-esteem, increase the options.

You may ask why storytelling is so important? The authors claim that by sharing our stories, we define “who we are” and “what we stand for”. This has been the case since tribal ages. As we live in a complex and ever changing world, now “brand stories” gradually become synonymous with how we define ourselves as individuals, and brands become the symbols that we use to tell our stories. By preferring certain brands, we associate ourselves with certain values. Brand stories become handy by building a bridge between the company and the consumer.

From company point of view, stories reflect the values of the company and communicate consistently what the company stands for – both internally and externally. This is particularly important, because for many companies, values are merely fancy words. They look good and sound catchy on corporate websites, presentations and annual reports. But they are JUST words. You hear them and 5 minutes later you forget them. That’s why many companies create words that represent their values by using acronyms. On the other hand, when you tell a genuine story about a time when the company actually walked the talk, you inject real content into those “words.”

So how do you gather these stories? The easiest way is to interview key employees who have been with the company for a long time. But the book gives you some nice examples of how large corporations have built-in systems to find and unlock stories. It is an easy and fun read. Go grab a copy!