Starbucks will change logo and “Starbucks coffee” will disappear from the brand’s visual identity.

It seems that this identity simplification intends at allowing the brand to diversify its offer: tea, ice-creams and other types of drinks will soon be part of the product range.

My take:

Isn’t this move made necessary by the pressure of competitors like McDonald’s and Häagen Dasz ?

Think about it for one moment. Three-hundred years ago, when you needed let’s say a tool, you just had to go to a craftsman who had specialized in manufacturing that very tool. At that time, such a craftsman was mastering all the facets of the job: he was able to work the metal, forge it, was carving the wood and eventually assembled the two pieces to make the desired tool.

How does it look like today? Tools have more or less kept their shapes. It’s still an assembly of a piece of wood and a piece of metal, more or less of the same shape, but the way those two pieces are made has changed dramatically. Assuming that the tool is made in China, I bet that the piece of wood is sent from one plant to another where the piece of metal is made to finally be assembled. The piece of metal is probably preformed and also shipped from another plant which has specialized in manufacturing pre-formed shapes of metal for different usages. Once it has been delivered to the assembly plant the pre-formed piece of metal is finalized. One worker performs an operation and passes on the result to a next worker who also does something on it, and so forth and so on.

Everyone is getting micro specialized and performs only a fraction of a task and gets paid for his performing of a micro-task.

What’s the link with customer centricity? Well, it goes like this.

Three-hundreds years ago our tool maker was mastering the whole process. Not only was he in charge of the manufacturing but also of the commercial part of the job and of the after-sales part. He was recommending a tool to a client, was perhaps adjusting (today we would say “customizing”) it to his very needs, manufactured it and finally repaired it after a while. That way he was constantly in touch with his customer and knew who he was serving.

The industrial revolution and the Taylor’s theories changed all this. With the division of all tasks into sub-tasks and the subsequent micro-specialization of each individual, the firm as a whole lost the link with the customer. We have no longer customers. We have internal customers. And we’re loosing the link with the customer-payer.

This situation has given birth to new theories on how to make the customer more central in an organization. Consultants are selling methods, tools, principles which firms buy in the hope of getting back in touch with the customers. After all, as Peter Drucker said, the purpose of a firm is “to acquire and keep customers”. How do you want to keep them if you don’t know them? Beyond the mere value of the object we’re looking for something else and the relationship with the vendor may be a piece of the answer.

My take:

No matter how hard you try, no matter how much money you pay for consultants advices, fact is that smaller organizations are better at keeping the link with the customer. This is why large corporations are constantly trying to mimic SME’s behaviors. I’m actually wondering, while writing this, whether losing customer focus isn’t a growth pain after all.

I remember to have read once that strategists in the army have found out that the maximum number of individuals in an organization should be less than 150 if you want to keep control and be able to know everyone. It may sound silly but what about re-clustering your organization into smaller groups in an attempt to be more autonomous and behave like a SME? That may be a good step toward re-centering around your customers.

At the heart of any success story is a great product … and a great marketing.

Forget about being successful if you have a less-than-average product. I keep reminding this to my clients. You won’t make a successful brand if you focus all your efforts on marketing and stop looking at the weaknesses of your product.

This lesson was perfectly understood by the late Nicolas Hayek when he acquired the watch brand Breguet in 1999 for 200m Swiss Francs. He perfectly knew at that time that the products were great and were only lacking a “little bit” of marketing magic. Despite resistance the executive committee approved the offer and Breguet became eventually a brand of the Swatch group.

The first thing Hayek did was to revamp the marketing. At the time of the previous owner (Investcorp), Breguet was positioned as a sport brand (!) andall communications and marketing efforts were dedicated to the type XX watch, a stainless steel and sport watch. Because of the very name “Breguet” and the history attached to it, Nicolas Hayek refused this positioning and wanted to focus all efforts on the cultural contribution of Breguet.

The decision was therefore taken to set up a two-stage communication strategy. In the first stage, a series of adverstisements was prepared on the most famous clients of the brand, Churchill and Napoleon for instance. In the second stage ads would depict the atmosphere of books by famous authors where Breguet watches were part of the story. At the bottom of the ads quotes of books by Balzac,  Dumas were echoing the poetry of superb photographs.

So far for the advertisements … on the product side too Breguet underwent a marketing revolution. It is indeed not sufficient to make marketing promises. You have to keep them. Hayek stopped the production of the Type XX and instructed to focus all efforts on the Tourbillon, which remains the  heritage of Breguet.

The rest of the story has little to do with marketing, more with technique.

My take :

My intention was to briefly explain you and illustrate how a brand can be revamped and can get a totally new identity in a few years. Think about it : 10 years ago Breguet was a sport brand, today it is perceived as a highly elegant brand. Breguet had history and authenticity rooted in its DNA but it was not used. Do you see me coming? Yes … want we let commodities aside, customers all want things which have a meaning. Hayek perfectly understood this. He “just” injected ready-to-use authenticity to the brand and aligned operations on marketing. You too can do it. If you have a brand and do not sell commodities (which is in my opinion one of the few ways to be different) you must inspire people. People will love you if your products bring them inspiration.

I had a professor once who told me that I should sell intangibles if I wanted to make money. Do the same … put a lot of intangibles in your tangible and let your customers feel it.