Heroes for hire

The brand debate picks up steam. Business Evolutionist posted a newer iteration of his brand definition, after getting a few tweaks in comments:

A brand has to form a "whole" around a set of meanings and/or attributes. This "whole" provides an interface that a consumer can use to emotionally associate that "whole" with their life - their needs/desires.

Any definition of Brand that doesn't include (and focus on) the consumer as part of the definition, I think, is wrong.

What do you think?

Ahh, you should never ask me that question. Here's my response over at his blog:

"What do you think?"

I think you're right, it must include the consumer.

I do notice that a lot that I'm reading all maintains a bent of advocating for the company, while speaking sweetly of the consumer. There is STILL a noticable absence of unity when it comes to the thoughts I see about what constitutes a brand. To follow an archetypal theme, I see thoughtful people (Heroes, Seekers) trying to run interference between consumers (Innocents, Orphans) and amoral, unfeeling companies (Rulers, Warriors). [amoral, not immoral.]

As a parting mythical observation, that's Sisyphean Heroism at best. Not a lot of ROI in that one for those doing the boulder pushing.

Since we're in no danger of offending here--it's an academic discussion, right?--I sense that John Moore is pleased with his "Remarkable" construct. Naturally, I like what I think about brand too. There are a few nice thoughts in the idea of remarkable, but ii GOES nowhere.

I prefer to think in terms of "motion toward?", not a pretty cocoon. To me, that's what his heart, soul, essence statement says--a nice place, but no ambition other than "Wholeness." That's fine if you're approaching the seventh level or nearing nirvana--heaven awaits, your work is almost done--but who among us can claim that? Or wants to? We're all still growing and travelling, 5 rungs down the ladder. I think brand needs mucho latent energy to be attractive. It must be a subconscious ally one goes to for Confidence, Support, Affirmation or Truth.

Big words those. Brands are far more spiritual than Feature>Advantage>Benefit, and they are far more about the consumers than they are the product. Brands are enablers to bigger and better things, not ends in themselves. If they meet that requirement, they then matter. And how will a company know this? The same way we know we matter:

We succced, we are called upon for help, we are admired, and yes, we are envied sometimes.

But you don't become--motion, remember?--any of these things without claiming them beforehand as ideals and getting off your ass.

In business, that's called growth. It has rewards. In our personal character-driven lives, we call that "Courage". It has rewards too.

Put simply, Brands are Heroes for hire, whether as Ophelias or Han Solos. They help us fake it till we make it ourselves. But beware: We as individuals are allowed to pretend to be that which we aren't already. Heroes, Teachers, Brands aren't. They don't need to be perfect, they just need to be accurate, certain--consistent--in their framing of their particular Ideal of Perfection. This simplicity and lack of fudging or wiggle-room is the key to Authenticity.

[update: Sunday 4-11-04. Well, well. It seems Price Watehouse has a new campaign breaking today--see post above if you haven't already. Topic of the campaign and initiative? A C-Level use of the C-word. Hey, if you're interested, I/we come a lot cheaper than Price Waterhouse (GRIN).]