WSJ Offers Examples of Overly Complicated Corporate Descriptions

One of the challenges for startups is to devise an interesting name, one that's not already taken, one with a URL and a Twitter feed still available.

One they pick a name, the next challenge is to make sure everyone on their management team pronounces it the same way. (We've seen a number of companies recently where that hasn't been the case.)

One they've done that, startups need to develop compelling and understandable branding and descriptions.

This isn't a problem only faced by startups.

In a article, "Dad, What Do You Do at Work? I'm a Leader in Active Safety; Communication Breaks Down as Businesses Craft Grandiloquent Self-Descriptions," the Wall St. Journal points out some examples that may not be 100-percent effective, such as:

• Parker Hannifin Corp., a diversified industrial company whose products include pumps and valves, styles itself "the global leader in motion and control technologies."
• TRW Automotive Holdings Corp. wishes to be known as "the global leader in active and passive safety"—or what the rest of us might call brakes and safety belts.

The problem? According to the Journal, "it's getting harder to tell what some companies actually do."

As further evidence, check out the interactive Brand Translation grid, which asks you to mix-and-match the company with the corporate description. It's not easy!

The Journal makes a good point, even if one corporate spokesperson says that its customers know who they are.

Seems like business still needs to focus on making what they do easier to understand.

GM Shifts into Reverse on Chevy

Turns out that GM realized it made a mistake in telling dealers and others to stop using Chevy instead of Chevrolet.

After all, GM uses Chevy on its website.

Check out "Backtracking, G.M. Says Please, Call It a Chevy" for more details.

Meanwhile, in another case of corporate reputation management, BP has asked the Twitter feed BPGlobalPR to "clarify that it was not an official outlet for BP news," according to a PC World article, "BP Tries to Distance Itself From Twitter Parody."

BPGlobalPR complied with BP's request.

But in so doing, demonstrated the reason PR functions must be careful in how they handle parodists and others. Here's BPGlobalPR's new description of itself: "We are not associated with Beyond Petroleum, the company that has been destroying the Gulf of Mexico for 51 days."

Branding & Nicknames

Corporate reputations are important to establish and maintain. And it can be a real challenge in the age of social media, when people can support or undermine your brand very easily.

Case in point: the Twitter feeds BPCares and BPGlobalPR, which have a combined 155,000 followers. Neither is connected to BP, as most of those following realize.

Usually, when a company changes its name -- like AIG (now Chartis) or Philip Morris (Altria Group) -- it's to get past an embarrassing incident.

But the New York Times reported that Chevrolet is asking dealers and others who work or partner with the brand to stop calling it "Chevy." The reason: lack of consistency hurts branding, according to Chevrolet executives.

Like that's the real problem with the auto business.

The memo even cites Coke -- um, Coca-Cola -- as an example of consistency (forgetting that Coke is a nickname).

I think they're mistaken. Check out the Times article: "Saving Chevrolet Means Sending ‘Chevy’ to Dump," and let me know if you agree or disagree.

Does Social Media Help with Branding?

The answer, of course, depends on the organization, its culture and skill sets.

BtoBOnline asked the question, "Does my brand campaign need a social community component?"

And I think if clients or management asks the question, the answer should be: In 1995, it was big news when Fidelity launched its website -- it was a large, mainstream company and it signaled that the Internet was ready for business. (Before that, Internet users complained when companies used the Internet and email for advertising/marketing.)

Now every company has a website. You can't think of launching a business without one.

The same is true for social media. In a short time, companies won't consider not having a social media presence. I've even seen TV commercials now that point viewers to the brand's Twitter feed.

Yes, I know, some organizations are not ready yet. But they will need to be soon. There are conversations going on without them.

Of course, it is important to figure out where your customers and partners are so that you can develop a strategic campaign. That's why the discussion about metrics and case studies is so important.

Twittering Interns: How do you build awareness on social media and protect your brand?

According to the current issue of Fortune, a number of high profile companies have hired interns whose job is to be brand ambassadors on Twitter.

Part of that makes sense. Although I've seen demographic data that shows that the largest percentage of people using Twitter are in their 3os and 40s, but clearly college kids "get" social media easier than the rest of us.

But it's a bit concerning, I'd think, to put control of your brand in the hands of someone who understands the technology but might not understand the brand's heritage.

According to the Fortune article, "Summer Twittering," HP's CTO will let two interns live in his house next summer -- for the third year. HP says this lets it understand its younger consumers." Um, ever hear of focus groups, HP? This sounds more like the premise for an MTV reality program, "The Nerds Next Door."

The three other companies cited in the Fortune article -- Butterfinger, Pizza Hut and Papa Johns -- are consumer brands much more than HP is. And their "funterns" (Butterfiner), "twintern" (Pizza Hut) and, um, intern (apparently Papa Johns doesn't give its internship program a cutsey, possibly demeaning term) actually can post some success.

• The Pizza Hut twintern "started tweeting about pizza rolls in June and quadrupled the company's followers to more than 14,000," Fortune reported.
  
• Meanwhile, interns at Papa Johns ("Pinterns"?) blogged, tweeted, and shot video all summer. The company now has more than 300,000 Facebook fans."

Yet, what happens when those PaJinterns go back to school in the fall? Who will maintain the brand's presence in social media from Sept. trhough June?

More than that, I wonder since the interns at Papa Johns ("PaJinterns"?) spent real money shooting video, what kind of quality controls Papa Johns put in place to protect the brand's image.

Look, using interns on social media can make sense, but social media is a channel thought which to engage with customers. But a brand is a major asset for a company. Instead, I think, companies should train their brand management teams on social media so that they can make sure the social media activities present a consistent, accurate brand experience.

That consistency is one of the reasons ESPN, which has been involved with social networking for "a long time" (could mean more than 12 months) issued new guidelines for its staff regarding what they can or can't do on social media.

According to the New York Times, "ESPN Limits Social Networking," these guidelines say "that on-air talent, reporters and writers are prohibited from having sports-related blogs or Web sites and that they will need a supervisor’s approval to discuss sports on any social networking sites. They will also be restricted from discussing internal policies or detailing how stories are “reported, written, edited or produced.”

Why implement these guidelines? According to the Times article, “The first and only priority is to serve ESPN-sanctioned efforts, including sports news, information and content.”

Presumably, on-air talent, reporters and writers are familiar with the ESPN brand -- and even they're not allowed to use social media without a supervisor's permission.

So the question remains: who should companies put in charge of their social media presence? How can they ensure they balance that with protecting the brand attributes?

Companies will have to figure that out.

Will the YouTube Video Destroy Domino's Brand?

Larry Green, Corporate Web Director at Landor, wrote an interesting blog article, "You got three minutes...to destroy your brand" about the recent YouTube video posted by disgruntled Domino's Pizza employees.

He identifies some good points that companies should consider.

But I think he overstates things when he says about destroying your brand in three minutes.

I agree with the concept that it takes a long time to build a reputation, but it can take a short time to destroy it.

However, I think in this incident, customers will blame the employees, not the company. But that doesn't mean that some people now will think twice before ordering from Domino's. Look, people went back to Jack in the Box after the E. coli outbreak -- some reports claim the company turned the scandal into an advantage.

Domino's has that opportunity now. But one lesson is for companies that choose to ignore social media because they don't understand it or don't like the lack of established metrics: You've got to monitor social media and participate in social media to give you the tools and context to address a potential online crisis.

"Blue Book of Advertising" Has Some Good Ideas for PR

While the media & PR worlds are changing, The Little Blue Book of Advertising: 52 Small Ideas That Can Make a Big Difference provides some useful insight and tips -- whether you work in PR or advertising.

Written by agency veterans by Steve Lance & Jeff Woll, some of the ideas are not new for those who have been in the agency business for a while, but too often people forget them, like:

• Be expert on the benefits of your client's product or service.
• Know who your customers are.
• Read what your customers reads, watch what they watch.
• Quality is the absence of non/quality signals )like misspellings."
• Attention spans will get shorter. Need to make the point/message shorter.
  

There are some good points on branding:

• Know where you want to take the brand.
• Map a clear route of how you'll take your brand to the destination.
  = make sure to communicate that map.
  = establish benchmarks against which progress will be made.
  =establish measures w/client/agency.
  = agree how to resolve issues.
  = establish criteria w/client.

The book is a quick read, and worth picking up as a refresher.