WEBVTT
00:00:00.160 --> 00:00:04.400
How many brands can you recognize without seeing their logo?
00:00:04.719 --> 00:00:05.679
Think about it.
00:00:05.839 --> 00:00:15.599
If I stripped every logo of every product in the supermarkets and you walked in right now, how many could you still identify just by their colour or their tone?
00:00:15.759 --> 00:00:18.480
It is more the way it speaks to you, right?
00:00:19.039 --> 00:00:26.800
The ones you can, if those are the real brands, and the ones that you can't, they are just logos with products behind them.
00:00:27.039 --> 00:00:29.359
Well, welcome to the making right here on Mark Conversations.
00:00:29.440 --> 00:00:35.439
And this is where I accept with the book, The Rules for the Marketing Communications Executive by Professor Henson and uh Joel Nete.
00:00:36.079 --> 00:00:41.359
I pick the rules that hit the hardest, and I tell you what the what they look like in real life.
00:00:41.520 --> 00:00:46.960
And if you're joining us today, I recommend that you start from episode one and then be playing with us since day one.
00:00:47.039 --> 00:00:48.159
And you haven't got the book yet.
00:00:48.240 --> 00:00:50.000
You know, I've been advocating for you to get it.
00:00:50.079 --> 00:00:50.719
So do get it.
00:00:50.880 --> 00:00:55.359
And like I say, it's so much more fun when we do it together, when we read along.
00:00:55.600 --> 00:00:58.320
So go get it after this episode.
00:00:58.560 --> 00:01:05.519
Today we are in part five, and we're talking branding, strategy, positioning, and identity systems.
00:01:05.680 --> 00:01:13.920
Uh, there are 12 rules in this part, and I'm covering four of them: rules 41, 43, 49, and 50.
00:01:14.159 --> 00:01:16.000
And these four build on each other.
00:01:16.239 --> 00:01:23.120
Rule 41 tells you what a brand actually is, and it's not what most of us think it is.
00:01:23.359 --> 00:01:30.239
Uh, 43 tells you something quite humbly that you don't own your brand, but the consumer does.
00:01:30.480 --> 00:01:35.439
And 49 says if your brand tries to mean everything, it means nothing.
00:01:35.599 --> 00:01:42.239
And rule 50 shows you the discipline that holds it all together, which is consistency.
00:01:42.879 --> 00:01:45.840
Definition, ownership focus, discipline.
00:01:46.319 --> 00:01:47.439
Let's get into it.
00:01:47.760 --> 00:01:51.680
A brand is not a logo, it is a system of meaning in the consumer's mind.
00:01:54.239 --> 00:02:00.560
The logo is the most visible element of the brand and therefore the most commonly mistaken for the brand itself.
00:02:00.879 --> 00:02:04.719
Organizations invest in logo redesigns and call it rebranding.
00:02:04.879 --> 00:02:08.639
They create new visual guidelines and announce a new brand identity.
00:02:08.960 --> 00:02:13.280
They change the color palette and expect the market to perceive something different.
00:02:13.599 --> 00:02:14.879
The logo has changed.
00:02:15.039 --> 00:02:18.000
The meaning the consumer holds in their mind has not.
00:02:18.560 --> 00:02:24.879
And it is the meaning in the consumer's mind, not the symbol on the packaging that constitutes the brand.
00:02:26.159 --> 00:02:52.800
The brand exists in the consumer's memory as an associative network, a web of connections between the brand, the brand symbols, and the meanings, feelings, memories, and expectations that have been built up through every interaction the consumer has had with the brand, every piece of communication they have encountered from it, every story they have heard from it, from others, and every experience they have had of what the brand promises and whether it delivered.
00:02:53.439 --> 00:02:56.479
This associative network is the brand.
00:02:56.960 --> 00:03:00.879
The logo is just the key that unlocks it.
00:03:01.599 --> 00:03:06.800
Then understanding this changes how the executive approaches every brand to decision.
00:03:07.120 --> 00:03:13.759
A campaign is not just a communication activity, it is an intervention in the consumer's associative network.
00:03:14.000 --> 00:03:17.840
Either reinforcing existing connections or attempting to build new ones.
00:03:18.319 --> 00:03:21.199
A service experience is not just an operational matter.
00:03:21.360 --> 00:03:26.240
It is a brand experience that either confirms or contradicts what's the communication promised.
00:03:26.639 --> 00:03:39.199
A distribution decision is not just a commercial consideration, it is a statement about the kind of brand this is embedded in the context and company the brand chooses to be found in.
00:03:39.840 --> 00:03:43.840
You know, I remember the very first time I heard the word brand.
00:03:44.000 --> 00:03:45.520
It was in my agriculture class.
00:03:45.599 --> 00:03:52.800
And for those of you who don't know, my first degree is actually in animal science from the best investing aquarium common investor science and technology.
00:03:52.960 --> 00:03:55.840
But I didn't first encounter the word in university.
00:03:56.080 --> 00:04:00.479
I encountered it in primary school when we're being taught livestock farming.
00:04:00.560 --> 00:04:10.879
The teacher explained that farmers used to brand their animals with burning a mark into their height so you can tell whose is whose, right?
00:04:11.120 --> 00:04:13.120
And that's where the word comes from, actually.
00:04:13.280 --> 00:04:17.040
So brand comes from the old Norse word, branda.
00:04:17.600 --> 00:04:23.839
And old Norse was the language of the Vikings in Scandinavia, and it literally means to burn.
00:04:24.160 --> 00:04:29.120
Brand was a burn mark, it identifies and it's differentiates.
00:04:29.279 --> 00:04:31.120
That's what I learned in primary school.
00:04:31.279 --> 00:04:38.319
And honestly, I believe that's still how most of us understand branding today.
00:04:38.560 --> 00:04:44.800
A name, a logo, and a visual mark that tells you whose product this is.
00:04:45.040 --> 00:04:46.879
And it's not entirely wrong.
00:04:47.199 --> 00:04:52.079
Even the definitions we've imported from the West actually reinforced this.
00:04:52.160 --> 00:05:03.759
So the American Marketing Association defines a brand as a distinctive feature, like a name, term, design, or symbol that identifies goods or services.
00:05:03.839 --> 00:05:06.000
And for a very long time that was enough.
00:05:06.319 --> 00:05:13.279
But we need to dig deeper because remember what we said about digging deeper in the previous episode.
00:05:13.519 --> 00:05:17.600
The book is saying a brand is deeper than just a mark.
00:05:17.759 --> 00:05:18.800
It is the meaning.
00:05:18.959 --> 00:05:26.560
And it's not what you quit from the animal, going back to the example, it is the reputation the animal carries.
00:05:26.720 --> 00:05:44.160
The mark tells you whose cattle these are, the whether those cattle are healthy, whether the farmer is trustworthy, whether you buy from them again, that meaning lives in the buyer's mind, not the height.
00:05:44.720 --> 00:05:48.079
The mark just triggers it, right?
00:05:48.319 --> 00:05:51.120
And that distinction changes everything.
00:05:51.360 --> 00:05:59.759
Because if a brand is just a mark, a logo, a name, a visual identity, then changing the mark should change the brand, right?
00:05:59.920 --> 00:06:02.319
A new logo, new perception, fresh start.
00:06:02.720 --> 00:06:04.639
But that's not what happens.
00:06:04.879 --> 00:06:08.480
And we've all watched it happen in this market, actually.
00:06:08.639 --> 00:06:11.279
Think about a telco in this market, for instance.
00:06:11.360 --> 00:06:19.519
It has huge reputation problems, service issues, network complaints, customer frustration, and the solution, a new name.
00:06:19.680 --> 00:06:21.439
A shorter, cleaner brand identity.
00:06:21.519 --> 00:06:22.720
I don't want to mention any names.
00:06:22.879 --> 00:06:25.839
You see a new logo, new color, fresh campaign.
00:06:26.000 --> 00:06:28.879
The mark has changed, but the experience didn't.
00:06:29.120 --> 00:06:31.199
The network didn't improve.
00:06:31.360 --> 00:06:33.920
The customer service is still trash.
00:06:34.160 --> 00:06:35.199
And what happened?
00:06:35.360 --> 00:06:38.800
People just transferred their old reputation to the new name.
00:06:38.879 --> 00:06:40.480
They didn't get a fresh start.
00:06:40.639 --> 00:06:43.360
They got a new label for the same experience.
00:06:43.600 --> 00:06:45.920
The rebrand didn't reset anything at all.
00:06:46.000 --> 00:06:49.680
It just gave people a new name to attach to their old frustrations.
00:06:49.839 --> 00:06:51.040
Forget the telco.
00:06:51.439 --> 00:06:52.800
Think about a legacy band.
00:06:53.040 --> 00:06:54.800
Again, I don't want to mention any name.
00:06:55.439 --> 00:06:56.480
Right here in Ghana.
00:06:56.560 --> 00:07:11.439
They modernized the name, updated the visual identity, signaled a new era, and today, if you walk into the branch, you can tell me the experience has not really changed the cues, the wait time, the attitude behind the counter.
00:07:11.680 --> 00:07:16.639
You still visit for a transaction and they still tell you the service is down.
00:07:17.600 --> 00:07:27.600
The book references this a bank that invested in a visual redesign without addressing the underlying customer experience.
00:07:28.079 --> 00:07:31.360
If you think about it quietly, I'm sure you'd hear the name of the bank.
00:07:31.680 --> 00:07:36.720
The consumer doesn't evaluate your logo as nice as it may be.
00:07:36.879 --> 00:07:40.639
They evaluate what happens after they walk through the door.
00:07:40.800 --> 00:07:48.399
And this is what the book means when it says that the brand lives in their minds or the heads as an associative network.
00:07:48.480 --> 00:07:59.360
So every interaction, every feeling, every memory, every story they've heard from someone else, every story they've experienced themselves, that's what fires when they see your name.
00:07:59.519 --> 00:08:02.000
And a new logo doesn't rewrite any of that.
00:08:02.160 --> 00:08:04.959
It just gives the same network a new trigger.
00:08:05.120 --> 00:08:09.920
And every experience the consumer has had with you has been average or worse.
00:08:10.000 --> 00:08:17.839
Then redesigning the visual network is just giving them a nicer looking reason to remember why they stopped caring.
00:08:18.079 --> 00:08:20.959
You haven't changed the meaning, you have changed the surface.
00:08:21.120 --> 00:08:22.160
The surface is bleak.
00:08:22.240 --> 00:08:23.040
We spoke about it.
00:08:23.199 --> 00:08:24.800
And consumers are not stupid.
00:08:24.959 --> 00:08:25.920
They know the difference.
00:08:26.079 --> 00:08:30.240
The brands that actually shift perception don't start with design.
00:08:30.399 --> 00:08:37.600
They start with experience, they fix the product, they fix the service, they fix how people feel when they interact with the brand.
00:08:37.840 --> 00:08:41.919
And only then does a visual refresh make sense.
00:08:42.159 --> 00:08:49.440
Because now there's actually something they signal as new, and their logo is just the key.
00:08:49.600 --> 00:08:52.000
What really matters is what's behind the door.
00:08:52.159 --> 00:08:57.440
If you haven't changed the rule, don't really bother changing the key.
00:08:57.759 --> 00:09:01.120
So let's see what the next rule talks about.
00:09:01.440 --> 00:09:05.840
Before I get into 43, I need to let you understand something.
00:09:06.000 --> 00:09:10.080
Rule 43 might sound similar to what we just discussed in Rule 41, right?
00:09:10.240 --> 00:09:18.799
Rule 41 told us what a brand actually is, that it's not the logo, it's the meaning in the customer's mind.
00:09:18.960 --> 00:09:21.519
Rule 43 is asking a different question, right?
00:09:21.679 --> 00:09:25.440
That if the brand is the meaning, who decides what that meaning is?
00:09:25.679 --> 00:09:26.879
You or the consumer?
00:09:27.039 --> 00:09:41.279
I think we might have given a hint at that a few minutes ago, but when we read it, it will take us further, a bit deeper, for us to have a better understanding and why the consumer is the person who confirms it, right?
00:09:41.440 --> 00:09:43.039
So let's get into it.
00:09:43.519 --> 00:09:49.840
Rule 43 brand meaning is proposed by the organization but confirmed by the consumer.
00:09:50.159 --> 00:09:58.320
One of the most important and most humbling truths in branding is that organizations do not own their brand meaning.
00:09:58.559 --> 00:10:09.200
They propose it, they invest in shaping it through communication, through design, through product experience, and through every other touch point they control.
00:10:10.000 --> 00:10:26.639
But the meaning that actually resides in the consumer's mind, the meaning that governs their perception, shapes their preference, and drives their behavior, is the meaning that the consumer has constructed through their direct and indirect experience of the brand.
00:10:27.120 --> 00:10:30.639
It may align closely with what the organization intended.
00:10:30.960 --> 00:10:33.440
It may diverge from it significantly.
00:10:33.600 --> 00:10:38.240
In either case, the consumer's version is the one that matters.
00:10:38.559 --> 00:10:44.240
The practical implication is that the executive must manage both sides of the negotiation.
00:10:44.480 --> 00:10:52.080
The outbound signals that the organization controls and the inbound feedback that reveals how those signals are landed.
00:10:52.399 --> 00:10:55.600
Research into brand perception is not a nice to have.
00:10:55.919 --> 00:11:02.399
It is a governance mechanism for the most strategically significant assets the organization possesses.
00:11:02.639 --> 00:11:11.919
The brand that is not monitoring how its meaning is evolving in the consumer's mind is managing its most valuable assets blindly.
00:11:12.159 --> 00:11:24.799
Propose meaning with ambition, monitor how it is being received with rigor, and close the gap between proposal and confirmation through operational alignment, not just communication intensity.
00:11:24.879 --> 00:11:26.159
Now the declaration.
00:11:31.360 --> 00:11:36.639
Manage both sides of the negotiation, or the consumer will manage it for you.
00:11:36.879 --> 00:11:38.480
What are we learning here?
00:11:41.519 --> 00:11:49.840
There's something they say about negotiation, which is the person with the most power at the table is the one who can walk away.
00:11:50.080 --> 00:11:51.279
So keep that in mind.
00:11:51.519 --> 00:12:00.000
But because branding, according to this book, is a negotiation, and most managers uh don't realize they are in one.
00:12:00.559 --> 00:12:06.240
They spend months on brand strategy, define the positioning.
00:12:06.480 --> 00:12:13.440
In fact, they approve the visual identity, sign off on the campaign, and in their minds, the work is done.
00:12:14.080 --> 00:12:16.320
They've told the market who they are.
00:12:16.559 --> 00:12:17.840
Now the market knows.
00:12:18.000 --> 00:12:20.000
But the market didn't agree to anything.
00:12:20.159 --> 00:12:22.799
The market is there living its own life.
00:12:23.120 --> 00:12:31.120
And every time the market interacts with their brand, not the campaign, but the brand, it forms its own opinion.
00:12:31.279 --> 00:12:36.240
And that opinion is based on experiences, like we mentioned earlier, not on the messaging.
00:12:36.480 --> 00:12:37.919
Let me make this real.
00:12:38.159 --> 00:12:40.879
The campaign says we put customers first, right?
00:12:41.039 --> 00:12:43.679
Beautiful line, great creative, it runs everywhere.
00:12:43.840 --> 00:12:47.919
But a customer calls to a service line and has to wait 45 minutes.
00:12:48.159 --> 00:12:53.679
Another customer walks in your store, and your staff acts like they are doing them a favor.
00:12:54.000 --> 00:13:16.639
You know, in Ghana, you can walk into a store to buy something, and the the I was listening to um uh one guy speak, uh, I think Derek Abbaite was talking about how uh in Ghana you walk into a shop, the storekeeper is asleep, and you wake them up and it's like you've interrupted their sleep.
00:13:16.799 --> 00:13:22.879
You know, it's it's quite unfortunate, but that's what happens, right?
00:13:23.120 --> 00:13:30.000
You you walk in there, you wake them up, they act like they are doing you a favor by serving you.
00:13:30.159 --> 00:13:33.440
So someone buys your product and it doesn't work as promised.
00:13:33.519 --> 00:13:38.879
They walk into your store, they don't get the promise that your communication gave them.
00:13:39.039 --> 00:13:43.840
Each one of these moments is the consumer sitting across the table from you in that negotiation.
00:13:44.000 --> 00:13:51.120
And each time they are deciding, do I believe this brand, or do I believe what this brand is telling me, or do I believe what I just experienced?
00:13:51.440 --> 00:13:54.559
And every single time the experience wins.
00:13:55.120 --> 00:13:56.480
Every single time.
00:13:56.720 --> 00:14:02.960
That's what the book means by proposed by the organization, but confirmed by the consumer.
00:14:03.200 --> 00:14:15.039
You are proposing the meaning, you put it out there through your communication, your design, your campaigns, but the consumer is the one who is deciding whether to accept it or not.
00:14:15.360 --> 00:14:21.039
And they they decide based on what they've lived through with you.
00:14:21.279 --> 00:14:26.879
Imagine all that we've said, and not what they've really seen on your billboard.
00:14:28.000 --> 00:14:36.480
Again, think about a brand you've stopped using, not because the advertising got worse, but because something in the experience broke.
00:14:36.720 --> 00:14:38.080
It broke their promise.
00:14:38.240 --> 00:14:43.519
Maybe it was one big moment, maybe it was a hundred small ones.
00:14:43.600 --> 00:14:46.320
You know, some people actually give many chances.
00:14:46.399 --> 00:15:01.200
But at some point, you sat at that negotiation table and you walked away as a consumer, and no amount of advertising brought you back because the proposal and the confirmation stopped matching.
00:15:01.440 --> 00:15:03.120
I feel like I'm saying six, seven.
00:15:03.279 --> 00:15:06.399
Now think about a brand you trust deeply.
00:15:06.960 --> 00:15:12.080
One where every interaction confirms what they they told you they would be.
00:15:12.320 --> 00:15:16.639
The product works, the the service is consistent.
00:15:16.799 --> 00:15:20.720
Think about it, the experience matches the promise essentially.
00:15:20.960 --> 00:15:27.039
You didn't start trusting them because one of them, because of one great campaign.
00:15:27.360 --> 00:15:32.639
You started trusting them because every time you showed up, they showed up too.
00:15:32.960 --> 00:15:37.039
The proposal and the confirmation kept matching over and over and over.
00:15:37.279 --> 00:15:41.200
And that repetition built something no campaign alone can build.
00:15:41.440 --> 00:15:45.519
Most brand managers only build one side of this negotiation.
00:15:45.840 --> 00:16:00.000
They spend all their energy on the proposal, the campaigns, the messaging, the beautiful creative, and they spend almost no energy monitoring the confirmation.
00:16:00.320 --> 00:16:09.039
What the consumer is actually experiencing, what they are actually saying, what meaning they've actually constructed in their heads.
00:16:09.840 --> 00:16:13.279
So that's like negotiating with your eyes closed.
00:16:13.519 --> 00:16:16.159
You're talking but not listening.
00:16:16.399 --> 00:16:20.399
And eventually the other side stops showing up.
00:16:21.440 --> 00:16:25.679
The brand is not a declaration, it is a negotiation.
00:16:26.080 --> 00:16:29.679
And the consumer has more power in it than you do.
00:16:30.240 --> 00:16:32.720
Because they are the ones who can walk away.
00:16:33.200 --> 00:16:35.600
You have to stay, you have to keep proving the point.
00:16:36.080 --> 00:16:40.879
So you need to manage both sides well, or the consumer will manage it for you.
00:16:41.200 --> 00:16:45.279
Rule number 49: a brand that means everything means nothing.
00:16:45.919 --> 00:16:54.080
Brand extension is among the most commercially tempting and strategically dangerous activities available to the marketing communications executive.
00:16:54.399 --> 00:17:01.759
The brand that has been successfully built around a specific and clearly owned meaning, generates the perception of permission.
00:17:02.480 --> 00:17:12.799
Consumers trust it, their organization has invested significantly in building its equity, and the argument for extending that equity into adjacent categories feels compelling.
00:17:13.119 --> 00:17:17.519
The brand is trusted, but why not leverage that trust more broadly?
00:17:18.000 --> 00:17:24.160
The reason is that brand meaning, like any form of meaning, derives its power from specificity.
00:17:24.799 --> 00:17:35.519
The brand that stands for one thing specifically, a precise emotional benefits, a defined quality position, and an ambiguous identity.
00:17:40.240 --> 00:18:01.359
Its meaning is stable because it is clear that brand that has been extended across multiple categories, multiple consumer segments, and multiple positioning territories in pursuit of revenue growth from accumulated equity has in many cases diluted the very specificity that made the equity worth extending.
00:18:01.759 --> 00:18:08.240
A brand that means one thing precisely is worth more than a brand that means many things vaguely.
00:18:08.640 --> 00:18:10.240
Protect the one thing.
00:18:10.400 --> 00:18:17.200
The declaration statement here says brand extension without strategic discipline is brand dilution.
00:18:17.440 --> 00:18:22.000
The more a brand tries to mean, the less it means to anyone.
00:18:22.240 --> 00:18:27.119
Protect the specificity, it is where the value lives.
00:18:27.599 --> 00:18:28.240
Wow.
00:18:32.240 --> 00:18:34.480
Let me paint a picture to you.
00:18:35.359 --> 00:18:38.000
And gentlemen, you you'll understand this one.
00:18:38.160 --> 00:18:46.240
You've you're somewhere at an event, a gathering, wherever, and you see a lady, and something about her catches your attention.
00:18:46.400 --> 00:18:53.680
You can't even explain it immediately, but it's it sounds like the way, it looks like the way she carries herself.
00:18:53.839 --> 00:19:02.079
Maybe it's her style, not loud, not trying too hard, but just distinctly her.
00:19:03.119 --> 00:19:10.319
Maybe it's one thing her confidence, her laugh, her composure, something very specific.
00:19:10.559 --> 00:19:14.400
And that specificity is what draws you in.
00:19:14.799 --> 00:19:19.519
You're not attracted to everything about every woman in the room.
00:19:19.680 --> 00:19:23.920
You are attracted to something particular about this one.
00:19:24.079 --> 00:19:30.480
Imagine she noticed you notice it, and instead of being herself, she starts trying to be everything.
00:19:30.640 --> 00:19:35.119
She changes how she talks depending on who she's around.
00:19:35.519 --> 00:19:39.279
She's loud with one group, quiet with another.
00:19:39.519 --> 00:19:43.279
She's corporate here, she's street there.
00:19:44.240 --> 00:19:47.119
She's trying to appeal to everyone in the room.
00:19:47.359 --> 00:19:48.799
And what happens?
00:19:49.119 --> 00:19:55.759
The one thing that made her attractive, that specificity, that distinctiveness disappears.
00:19:55.920 --> 00:19:58.000
She becomes forgettable.
00:19:58.240 --> 00:20:04.079
Not because she's less beautiful now, but because you can no longer tell what she actually is.
00:20:04.319 --> 00:20:07.519
The attraction dies when distinctiveness appears.
00:20:07.759 --> 00:20:09.359
Brands work the same way.
00:20:09.519 --> 00:20:11.119
We talked about this in episode two.
00:20:11.440 --> 00:20:14.400
If you're speaking to everyone, you're not speaking to anyone.
00:20:14.559 --> 00:20:15.759
That was about communication.
00:20:15.839 --> 00:20:19.920
This rule is saying the same thing about brand meaning.
00:20:20.160 --> 00:20:24.240
If your brand tries to mean everything, it means nothing.
00:20:24.480 --> 00:20:30.960
And this is one of the hardest disciplines in business because brand extension is tempting.
00:20:31.279 --> 00:20:34.079
It makes commercial sense on paper.
00:20:34.240 --> 00:20:36.480
You've built a brand that people trust.
00:20:36.799 --> 00:20:45.359
People know your name, you have equity, and then someone in the boardroom says, Hey, we should leverage this equity into a new category.
00:20:45.440 --> 00:20:48.079
And it sounds smart, it's it sounds like growth.
00:20:48.319 --> 00:20:57.039
But every time you extend into a new category, you are asking the consumer to update what your brand means in their mind.
00:20:57.599 --> 00:21:02.880
And every update dilutes the original meaning of your brand.
00:21:03.119 --> 00:21:09.920
You started with something specific, something people could uh point to and say that's what they are.
00:21:10.160 --> 00:21:13.039
Now, with every extension, clarity fades.
00:21:14.640 --> 00:21:22.000
Until one day you ask five people what your brand means, and you get five different answers.
00:21:22.240 --> 00:21:28.319
And when five people can't agree on what you stand for, you don't stand for anything.
00:21:28.559 --> 00:21:30.319
Now, let me be clear about something.
00:21:30.400 --> 00:21:32.720
I'm not talking about conglomerates.
00:21:32.960 --> 00:21:37.680
A conglomerate is like a parent company that owns multiple businesses, right?
00:21:37.839 --> 00:21:38.720
Think JOSPO.
00:21:39.680 --> 00:21:43.279
Each with their own brand, their own identity, their own meaning.
00:21:43.440 --> 00:21:46.319
That's portfolio management, that's strategy.
00:21:46.960 --> 00:21:59.759
What this rule is talking about is one brand, one name, one identity stretching itself across too many categories until the consumer can no longer.
00:22:00.640 --> 00:22:03.680
Tell you what it actually stands for.
00:22:03.839 --> 00:22:05.119
That's dilution.
00:22:05.599 --> 00:22:08.240
And those are two very different things.
00:22:08.640 --> 00:22:14.160
When I read this rule, a particular indigenous Ghanaian brand came to mind immediately.
00:22:14.240 --> 00:22:15.680
But I'll not name it.
00:22:16.319 --> 00:22:22.960
Because where I come from, you don't point to your father's house with your left hand, with your left finger.
00:22:23.119 --> 00:22:28.799
But if you are in this market, and for those of you who know me personally, you know the brand I'm talking about.
00:22:29.359 --> 00:22:31.119
I'm sure a name would come to mind.
00:22:31.200 --> 00:22:36.799
So hold on to it and ask yourself: can you describe what that brand means in one sentence?
00:22:37.200 --> 00:22:39.599
Not what it does, what it means.
00:22:39.759 --> 00:22:45.839
If you can't, then you understand why this rule, you understand exactly what this rule is saying.
00:22:46.079 --> 00:22:52.559
The book says a brand that means one thing precisely is worth more than a brand that means many things vaguely.
00:22:52.960 --> 00:22:53.839
Worth more.
00:22:54.000 --> 00:22:56.720
Not just strategically, but commercially.
00:22:57.119 --> 00:23:00.640
Because specificity is what drives preference, right?
00:23:00.880 --> 00:23:06.319
Specificity is what builds the kind of trust that makes someone choose you without thinking about it.
00:23:06.559 --> 00:23:11.759
Like the lady at the event, you didn't choose her because she was trying to be everything.
00:23:11.839 --> 00:23:14.799
You chose her because she was unapologetically something.
00:23:15.119 --> 00:23:24.240
The moment you dilute that, the moment you start meaning a little bit of everything, you start losing the thing that made you valuable in the first place.
00:23:24.880 --> 00:23:29.519
And this requires courage because the pressure to extend is constant.
00:23:29.680 --> 00:23:33.839
The revenue opportunity looks real, the boardroom wants growth.
00:23:33.920 --> 00:23:43.519
And saying no, we should protect what we mean rather than chasing what we could sell is one of the most difficult things a marketing executive can do.
00:23:43.680 --> 00:23:49.279
That discipline, the discipline of protecting specificity, is where the long-term value lives.
00:23:49.519 --> 00:23:55.440
So protect the specificity, it is where the value actually lives.
00:23:55.680 --> 00:24:00.240
Now, let's see what the last rule is saying, and then we can conclude the episode.
00:24:00.799 --> 00:24:06.640
Rule 50 consistency is not rigidity, it is a discipline that builds trust.
00:24:06.880 --> 00:24:24.079
There is a tension in brand management between consistency and freshness, between the discipline of expressing the same meaning across every touch point over time, and the creative and commercial instincts to evolve, adapt, and respond to the constantly changing context the brand operates in.
00:24:24.559 --> 00:24:35.839
The tension is real and it is managed badly in both directions by organizations that are so rigid in their identity application that they produce communication that is recognizable but stale.
00:24:36.799 --> 00:24:49.839
And by organizations that are so hungry for novelty that they change the brand's voice, visual conventions, and positioning signals so frequently that no coherent meaning ever accumulates.
00:24:50.160 --> 00:25:02.559
The test of genuine consistency is not whether the campaign looks like the last one, it is whether a consumer who has been following the brand for five years would recognize the new campaign as the brand's work.
00:25:02.880 --> 00:25:13.119
Not because it is visually identical, but because it sounds and feels like the same brand with the same values, the same character, and the same relationship with the audience.
00:25:13.519 --> 00:25:16.480
Trust is built through this kind of consistency.
00:25:17.039 --> 00:25:36.960
The brand that behaves predictably across time and context, that is recognizably itself, without whether it is speaking in a television commercial, a social media post, a customer service interaction, or a product packaging claim is a brand that consumers can form stable expectations about.
00:25:37.279 --> 00:25:43.759
And stable expectations are the foundations of the trust that makes brand equity commercially viable.
00:25:43.920 --> 00:25:53.519
So the declaration statement says consistency is not the enemy of freshness, it is a frame within which freshness is recognizable as yours.
00:25:53.759 --> 00:25:57.279
Discipline the meaning, liberate the expression.
00:25:57.599 --> 00:26:00.480
Do not confuse the two.
00:26:04.480 --> 00:26:06.079
Professor Henson and Joel.
00:26:07.279 --> 00:26:15.200
You know, I believe that the biggest barrier to adoption in this African market is trust.
00:26:15.359 --> 00:26:20.799
And I keep saying it in this episode, in this series, because the books keep proof proving it.
00:26:20.960 --> 00:26:30.559
And if you think about it, this rule shows up, it shows you how trust is actually built and how easily it's destroyed.
00:26:31.359 --> 00:26:35.599
The book describes a tension that every brand manager lives with.
00:26:35.839 --> 00:26:42.480
You need to be consistent because consistency is what would build recognition, familiarity, and trust over time.
00:26:42.799 --> 00:26:48.720
But you also need to be fresh because the market changes, culture evolves, culture moves.
00:26:48.960 --> 00:26:52.559
And a brand that never evolves starts to feel still.
00:26:52.640 --> 00:26:55.119
And most brands get this tension wrong.
00:26:55.359 --> 00:27:06.640
They either hold on so tight that everything feels rigid and outdated, or they change so often that a consumer can't keep track of who they are anymore.
00:27:06.880 --> 00:27:08.880
Let me make this practical.
00:27:14.799 --> 00:27:26.079
Leads are coming in, the brand is connecting, people are responding, and someone in the room says, We need to refresh the creative.
00:27:36.319 --> 00:27:38.880
Maybe you update the visual style.
00:27:39.039 --> 00:27:40.400
Nothing too dramatic.
00:27:40.559 --> 00:27:47.279
You didn't change the strategy, you didn't change the products, you didn't, you, you, you didn't change anything, you just refreshed the expression, right?
00:27:47.359 --> 00:27:48.720
And the numbers drop.
00:27:48.880 --> 00:27:50.960
Not dramatically, but noticeably.
00:27:51.119 --> 00:27:54.000
And everyone in the room can can explain why.
00:27:54.240 --> 00:27:58.319
The media plan is the same, the budget is the same, the audience is the same.
00:27:58.400 --> 00:27:59.680
So what changed?
00:27:59.920 --> 00:28:02.319
What changed is you broke the consistency.
00:28:02.880 --> 00:28:11.920
When you shifted, when you shifted your tone or the look, even slightly, something in their brain flagged it.
00:28:12.160 --> 00:28:13.519
Not so consciously.
00:28:13.599 --> 00:28:17.119
They didn't sit down and say this brand feels different today.
00:28:17.680 --> 00:28:23.839
But they the recognition weakened, their familiarity dropped, and with it, the trust.
00:28:24.319 --> 00:28:25.839
That's how fragile this is.
00:28:26.000 --> 00:28:31.839
You don't have to change your logo to break consistency, you just have to stop sounding like yourself.
00:28:32.079 --> 00:28:36.960
Now, let me show you what happens when brands break consistency at their biggest level.
00:28:37.200 --> 00:28:37.839
Twitter.
00:28:39.119 --> 00:28:44.319
One of the most recognizable names in the history of the internet, right?
00:28:44.480 --> 00:28:50.400
A brand so embedded in global culture that a tweet became a verb.
00:28:50.960 --> 00:28:53.599
I mean, tweet, the word tweet became a verb.
00:28:53.839 --> 00:28:56.000
Elon Musk rebranded it to X.
00:28:56.480 --> 00:29:00.160
New name, new logo, new identity, and then what happened?
00:29:00.480 --> 00:29:02.319
Confusion, resistance.
00:29:02.559 --> 00:29:05.680
In fact, market value questions started coming up.
00:29:05.839 --> 00:29:14.720
Not because X is a bad name per se, but because you cannot erase a decade of associative meaning overnight and expect the consumer to just follow you.
00:29:14.799 --> 00:29:28.160
The consistency that made Twitter what it was, the bluebird, the word tweet, the cultural shorthand was not rigidity, it was equity.
00:29:28.319 --> 00:29:32.799
And it was abandoned in pursuit of freshness that nobody asked for.
00:29:32.960 --> 00:29:37.519
Now, don't get me wrong, there were several other factors that contributed to their woes, right?
00:29:37.599 --> 00:29:40.000
But the kicker, I believe, was a rebrand.
00:29:40.480 --> 00:29:46.319
I'm sure you are thinking, but uh MTN had rebranded.
00:29:46.799 --> 00:29:49.680
MTN was not MTN 20 years ago.
00:29:50.000 --> 00:29:50.960
You're right.
00:29:51.519 --> 00:29:53.440
But it's always been yellow.
00:29:53.759 --> 00:29:58.960
The energy, the tone, campaign after campaign, year after year, you always know it's MTN.
00:29:59.119 --> 00:30:01.599
Not because every ad looks the same, they don't.
00:30:01.759 --> 00:30:04.240
The expression keeps evolving.
00:30:04.640 --> 00:30:06.720
The creative keeps moving.
00:30:07.519 --> 00:30:10.160
But the underlying character is consistency.
00:30:10.880 --> 00:30:12.480
The meaning stays.
00:30:12.799 --> 00:30:19.839
You could you could see a new MTN campaign you've never seen before and know immediately it's theirs.
00:30:20.319 --> 00:30:25.920
Not because of the logo that is sitting somewhere in the corner, because of how it feels.
00:30:26.079 --> 00:30:29.119
Same value, same energy, same relationship with you.
00:30:29.279 --> 00:30:31.519
That's the discipline the book is describing.
00:30:31.759 --> 00:30:33.359
Consistency is not repetition.
00:30:33.519 --> 00:30:36.400
Consistency is not doing the same thing over and over and over.
00:30:36.880 --> 00:30:41.200
Consistency is being recognizable even when you're doing something new.
00:30:41.519 --> 00:30:45.440
It's the container within which creative freedom is possible.
00:30:45.680 --> 00:30:51.119
The frame within which you within which your freshness is recognizable as yours.
00:30:51.279 --> 00:30:53.839
Discipline is the meaning.
00:30:54.160 --> 00:30:58.160
Liberate the expression and don't confuse the two.
00:30:58.720 --> 00:31:02.799
So, what is part fight really telling us in this episode?
00:31:03.440 --> 00:31:05.599
A brand is not a logo, that is established.
00:31:05.680 --> 00:31:09.839
It is a system of meaning built slowly into your consumer's mind.
00:31:10.400 --> 00:31:14.400
Through every interaction, every communication, every experience.
00:31:14.799 --> 00:31:20.960
You can propose what that meaning should be, but the consumer would confirm it for you, or they don't.
00:31:22.000 --> 00:31:29.039
And if you try to make your brand mean everything to everyone, you dilute the very thing that makes it valuable.
00:31:29.359 --> 00:31:40.079
The discipline that protects brand meaning over time is consistency, not rigidity, not repetition, consistency, which is being recognizable even when you're doing the same thing.
00:31:40.319 --> 00:31:44.400
And in our markets, trust means everything.
00:31:45.279 --> 00:31:47.599
So let me leave you with this.
00:31:49.039 --> 00:31:53.039
Think about your brand or the one that you you work on.
00:31:54.000 --> 00:31:58.960
And whilst we think about it, can you describe what it means in one sentence?
00:31:59.119 --> 00:32:01.839
Not what it does, what it means.
00:32:02.400 --> 00:32:10.079
If you can't, everything we've discussed in this part in this episode just showed you why that's a problem.
00:32:10.240 --> 00:32:14.960
And so ask yourself: is the consumer's version of your brand the same as yours?
00:32:15.119 --> 00:32:16.400
You can run an audit.
00:32:16.480 --> 00:32:21.519
If you don't know the answer, you are already behind in that negotiation.
00:32:21.839 --> 00:32:28.160
Anyway, get the book, Rules for the Marketing Communications Executive by Professor Henson and John Netty.
00:32:28.400 --> 00:32:29.759
The details are in the description.
00:32:29.920 --> 00:32:32.559
There are 12 chapters in this book, but I covered only four.
00:32:32.720 --> 00:32:34.400
The other with eight are waiting for you.
00:32:34.559 --> 00:32:36.799
Share this episode with someone who needs to hear it.
00:32:37.119 --> 00:32:40.559
Drop a comment, let me know which rule challenged you the most.
00:32:40.799 --> 00:32:45.519
And please subscribe so you don't miss the next one that is coming.
00:32:45.680 --> 00:32:46.880
This has been the making, right?
00:32:46.960 --> 00:32:48.240
Here on Mad Conversations.
00:32:48.319 --> 00:32:51.039
I have been your mad friend, Abirku.
00:32:51.599 --> 00:32:53.119
See you in the next one.
00:00:00.160 --> 00:00:04.400
How many brands can you recognize without seeing their logo?
00:00:04.719 --> 00:00:05.679
Think about it.
00:00:05.839 --> 00:00:15.599
If I stripped every logo of every product in the supermarkets and you walked in right now, how many could you still identify just by their colour or their tone?
00:00:15.759 --> 00:00:18.480
It is more the way it speaks to you, right?
00:00:19.039 --> 00:00:26.800
The ones you can, if those are the real brands, and the ones that you can't, they are just logos with products behind them.
00:00:27.039 --> 00:00:29.359
Well, welcome to the making right here on Mark Conversations.
00:00:29.440 --> 00:00:35.439
And this is where I accept with the book, The Rules for the Marketing Communications Executive by Professor Henson and uh Joel Nete.
00:00:36.079 --> 00:00:41.359
I pick the rules that hit the hardest, and I tell you what the what they look like in real life.
00:00:41.520 --> 00:00:46.960
And if you're joining us today, I recommend that you start from episode one and then be playing with us since day one.
00:00:47.039 --> 00:00:48.159
And you haven't got the book yet.
00:00:48.240 --> 00:00:50.000
You know, I've been advocating for you to get it.
00:00:50.079 --> 00:00:50.719
So do get it.
00:00:50.880 --> 00:00:55.359
And like I say, it's so much more fun when we do it together, when we read along.
00:00:55.600 --> 00:00:58.320
So go get it after this episode.
00:00:58.560 --> 00:01:05.519
Today we are in part five, and we're talking branding, strategy, positioning, and identity systems.
00:01:05.680 --> 00:01:13.920
Uh, there are 12 rules in this part, and I'm covering four of them: rules 41, 43, 49, and 50.
00:01:14.159 --> 00:01:16.000
And these four build on each other.
00:01:16.239 --> 00:01:23.120
Rule 41 tells you what a brand actually is, and it's not what most of us think it is.
00:01:23.359 --> 00:01:30.239
Uh, 43 tells you something quite humbly that you don't own your brand, but the consumer does.
00:01:30.480 --> 00:01:35.439
And 49 says if your brand tries to mean everything, it means nothing.
00:01:35.599 --> 00:01:42.239
And rule 50 shows you the discipline that holds it all together, which is consistency.
00:01:42.879 --> 00:01:45.840
Definition, ownership focus, discipline.
00:01:46.319 --> 00:01:47.439
Let's get into it.
00:01:47.760 --> 00:01:51.680
A brand is not a logo, it is a system of meaning in the consumer's mind.
00:01:54.239 --> 00:02:00.560
The logo is the most visible element of the brand and therefore the most commonly mistaken for the brand itself.
00:02:00.879 --> 00:02:04.719
Organizations invest in logo redesigns and call it rebranding.
00:02:04.879 --> 00:02:08.639
They create new visual guidelines and announce a new brand identity.
00:02:08.960 --> 00:02:13.280
They change the color palette and expect the market to perceive something different.
00:02:13.599 --> 00:02:14.879
The logo has changed.
00:02:15.039 --> 00:02:18.000
The meaning the consumer holds in their mind has not.
00:02:18.560 --> 00:02:24.879
And it is the meaning in the consumer's mind, not the symbol on the packaging that constitutes the brand.
00:02:26.159 --> 00:02:52.800
The brand exists in the consumer's memory as an associative network, a web of connections between the brand, the brand symbols, and the meanings, feelings, memories, and expectations that have been built up through every interaction the consumer has had with the brand, every piece of communication they have encountered from it, every story they have heard from it, from others, and every experience they have had of what the brand promises and whether it delivered.
00:02:53.439 --> 00:02:56.479
This associative network is the brand.
00:02:56.960 --> 00:03:00.879
The logo is just the key that unlocks it.
00:03:01.599 --> 00:03:06.800
Then understanding this changes how the executive approaches every brand to decision.
00:03:07.120 --> 00:03:13.759
A campaign is not just a communication activity, it is an intervention in the consumer's associative network.
00:03:14.000 --> 00:03:17.840
Either reinforcing existing connections or attempting to build new ones.
00:03:18.319 --> 00:03:21.199
A service experience is not just an operational matter.
00:03:21.360 --> 00:03:26.240
It is a brand experience that either confirms or contradicts what's the communication promised.
00:03:26.639 --> 00:03:39.199
A distribution decision is not just a commercial consideration, it is a statement about the kind of brand this is embedded in the context and company the brand chooses to be found in.
00:03:39.840 --> 00:03:43.840
You know, I remember the very first time I heard the word brand.
00:03:44.000 --> 00:03:45.520
It was in my agriculture class.
00:03:45.599 --> 00:03:52.800
And for those of you who don't know, my first degree is actually in animal science from the best investing aquarium common investor science and technology.
00:03:52.960 --> 00:03:55.840
But I didn't first encounter the word in university.
00:03:56.080 --> 00:04:00.479
I encountered it in primary school when we're being taught livestock farming.
00:04:00.560 --> 00:04:10.879
The teacher explained that farmers used to brand their animals with burning a mark into their height so you can tell whose is whose, right?
00:04:11.120 --> 00:04:13.120
And that's where the word comes from, actually.
00:04:13.280 --> 00:04:17.040
So brand comes from the old Norse word, branda.
00:04:17.600 --> 00:04:23.839
And old Norse was the language of the Vikings in Scandinavia, and it literally means to burn.
00:04:24.160 --> 00:04:29.120
Brand was a burn mark, it identifies and it's differentiates.
00:04:29.279 --> 00:04:31.120
That's what I learned in primary school.
00:04:31.279 --> 00:04:38.319
And honestly, I believe that's still how most of us understand branding today.
00:04:38.560 --> 00:04:44.800
A name, a logo, and a visual mark that tells you whose product this is.
00:04:45.040 --> 00:04:46.879
And it's not entirely wrong.
00:04:47.199 --> 00:04:52.079
Even the definitions we've imported from the West actually reinforced this.
00:04:52.160 --> 00:05:03.759
So the American Marketing Association defines a brand as a distinctive feature, like a name, term, design, or symbol that identifies goods or services.
00:05:03.839 --> 00:05:06.000
And for a very long time that was enough.
00:05:06.319 --> 00:05:13.279
But we need to dig deeper because remember what we said about digging deeper in the previous episode.
00:05:13.519 --> 00:05:17.600
The book is saying a brand is deeper than just a mark.
00:05:17.759 --> 00:05:18.800
It is the meaning.
00:05:18.959 --> 00:05:26.560
And it's not what you quit from the animal, going back to the example, it is the reputation the animal carries.
00:05:26.720 --> 00:05:44.160
The mark tells you whose cattle these are, the whether those cattle are healthy, whether the farmer is trustworthy, whether you buy from them again, that meaning lives in the buyer's mind, not the height.
00:05:44.720 --> 00:05:48.079
The mark just triggers it, right?
00:05:48.319 --> 00:05:51.120
And that distinction changes everything.
00:05:51.360 --> 00:05:59.759
Because if a brand is just a mark, a logo, a name, a visual identity, then changing the mark should change the brand, right?
00:05:59.920 --> 00:06:02.319
A new logo, new perception, fresh start.
00:06:02.720 --> 00:06:04.639
But that's not what happens.
00:06:04.879 --> 00:06:08.480
And we've all watched it happen in this market, actually.
00:06:08.639 --> 00:06:11.279
Think about a telco in this market, for instance.
00:06:11.360 --> 00:06:19.519
It has huge reputation problems, service issues, network complaints, customer frustration, and the solution, a new name.
00:06:19.680 --> 00:06:21.439
A shorter, cleaner brand identity.
00:06:21.519 --> 00:06:22.720
I don't want to mention any names.
00:06:22.879 --> 00:06:25.839
You see a new logo, new color, fresh campaign.
00:06:26.000 --> 00:06:28.879
The mark has changed, but the experience didn't.
00:06:29.120 --> 00:06:31.199
The network didn't improve.
00:06:31.360 --> 00:06:33.920
The customer service is still trash.
00:06:34.160 --> 00:06:35.199
And what happened?
00:06:35.360 --> 00:06:38.800
People just transferred their old reputation to the new name.
00:06:38.879 --> 00:06:40.480
They didn't get a fresh start.
00:06:40.639 --> 00:06:43.360
They got a new label for the same experience.
00:06:43.600 --> 00:06:45.920
The rebrand didn't reset anything at all.
00:06:46.000 --> 00:06:49.680
It just gave people a new name to attach to their old frustrations.
00:06:49.839 --> 00:06:51.040
Forget the telco.
00:06:51.439 --> 00:06:52.800
Think about a legacy band.
00:06:53.040 --> 00:06:54.800
Again, I don't want to mention any name.
00:06:55.439 --> 00:06:56.480
Right here in Ghana.
00:06:56.560 --> 00:07:11.439
They modernized the name, updated the visual identity, signaled a new era, and today, if you walk into the branch, you can tell me the experience has not really changed the cues, the wait time, the attitude behind the counter.
00:07:11.680 --> 00:07:16.639
You still visit for a transaction and they still tell you the service is down.
00:07:17.600 --> 00:07:27.600
The book references this a bank that invested in a visual redesign without addressing the underlying customer experience.
00:07:28.079 --> 00:07:31.360
If you think about it quietly, I'm sure you'd hear the name of the bank.
00:07:31.680 --> 00:07:36.720
The consumer doesn't evaluate your logo as nice as it may be.
00:07:36.879 --> 00:07:40.639
They evaluate what happens after they walk through the door.
00:07:40.800 --> 00:07:48.399
And this is what the book means when it says that the brand lives in their minds or the heads as an associative network.
00:07:48.480 --> 00:07:59.360
So every interaction, every feeling, every memory, every story they've heard from someone else, every story they've experienced themselves, that's what fires when they see your name.
00:07:59.519 --> 00:08:02.000
And a new logo doesn't rewrite any of that.
00:08:02.160 --> 00:08:04.959
It just gives the same network a new trigger.
00:08:05.120 --> 00:08:09.920
And every experience the consumer has had with you has been average or worse.
00:08:10.000 --> 00:08:17.839
Then redesigning the visual network is just giving them a nicer looking reason to remember why they stopped caring.
00:08:18.079 --> 00:08:20.959
You haven't changed the meaning, you have changed the surface.
00:08:21.120 --> 00:08:22.160
The surface is bleak.
00:08:22.240 --> 00:08:23.040
We spoke about it.
00:08:23.199 --> 00:08:24.800
And consumers are not stupid.
00:08:24.959 --> 00:08:25.920
They know the difference.
00:08:26.079 --> 00:08:30.240
The brands that actually shift perception don't start with design.
00:08:30.399 --> 00:08:37.600
They start with experience, they fix the product, they fix the service, they fix how people feel when they interact with the brand.
00:08:37.840 --> 00:08:41.919
And only then does a visual refresh make sense.
00:08:42.159 --> 00:08:49.440
Because now there's actually something they signal as new, and their logo is just the key.
00:08:49.600 --> 00:08:52.000
What really matters is what's behind the door.
00:08:52.159 --> 00:08:57.440
If you haven't changed the rule, don't really bother changing the key.
00:08:57.759 --> 00:09:01.120
So let's see what the next rule talks about.
00:09:01.440 --> 00:09:05.840
Before I get into 43, I need to let you understand something.
00:09:06.000 --> 00:09:10.080
Rule 43 might sound similar to what we just discussed in Rule 41, right?
00:09:10.240 --> 00:09:18.799
Rule 41 told us what a brand actually is, that it's not the logo, it's the meaning in the customer's mind.
00:09:18.960 --> 00:09:21.519
Rule 43 is asking a different question, right?
00:09:21.679 --> 00:09:25.440
That if the brand is the meaning, who decides what that meaning is?
00:09:25.679 --> 00:09:26.879
You or the consumer?
00:09:27.039 --> 00:09:41.279
I think we might have given a hint at that a few minutes ago, but when we read it, it will take us further, a bit deeper, for us to have a better understanding and why the consumer is the person who confirms it, right?
00:09:41.440 --> 00:09:43.039
So let's get into it.
00:09:43.519 --> 00:09:49.840
Rule 43 brand meaning is proposed by the organization but confirmed by the consumer.
00:09:50.159 --> 00:09:58.320
One of the most important and most humbling truths in branding is that organizations do not own their brand meaning.
00:09:58.559 --> 00:10:09.200
They propose it, they invest in shaping it through communication, through design, through product experience, and through every other touch point they control.
00:10:10.000 --> 00:10:26.639
But the meaning that actually resides in the consumer's mind, the meaning that governs their perception, shapes their preference, and drives their behavior, is the meaning that the consumer has constructed through their direct and indirect experience of the brand.
00:10:27.120 --> 00:10:30.639
It may align closely with what the organization intended.
00:10:30.960 --> 00:10:33.440
It may diverge from it significantly.
00:10:33.600 --> 00:10:38.240
In either case, the consumer's version is the one that matters.
00:10:38.559 --> 00:10:44.240
The practical implication is that the executive must manage both sides of the negotiation.
00:10:44.480 --> 00:10:52.080
The outbound signals that the organization controls and the inbound feedback that reveals how those signals are landed.
00:10:52.399 --> 00:10:55.600
Research into brand perception is not a nice to have.
00:10:55.919 --> 00:11:02.399
It is a governance mechanism for the most strategically significant assets the organization possesses.
00:11:02.639 --> 00:11:11.919
The brand that is not monitoring how its meaning is evolving in the consumer's mind is managing its most valuable assets blindly.
00:11:12.159 --> 00:11:24.799
Propose meaning with ambition, monitor how it is being received with rigor, and close the gap between proposal and confirmation through operational alignment, not just communication intensity.
00:11:24.879 --> 00:11:26.159
Now the declaration.
00:11:31.360 --> 00:11:36.639
Manage both sides of the negotiation, or the consumer will manage it for you.
00:11:36.879 --> 00:11:38.480
What are we learning here?
00:11:41.519 --> 00:11:49.840
There's something they say about negotiation, which is the person with the most power at the table is the one who can walk away.
00:11:50.080 --> 00:11:51.279
So keep that in mind.
00:11:51.519 --> 00:12:00.000
But because branding, according to this book, is a negotiation, and most managers uh don't realize they are in one.
00:12:00.559 --> 00:12:06.240
They spend months on brand strategy, define the positioning.
00:12:06.480 --> 00:12:13.440
In fact, they approve the visual identity, sign off on the campaign, and in their minds, the work is done.
00:12:14.080 --> 00:12:16.320
They've told the market who they are.
00:12:16.559 --> 00:12:17.840
Now the market knows.
00:12:18.000 --> 00:12:20.000
But the market didn't agree to anything.
00:12:20.159 --> 00:12:22.799
The market is there living its own life.
00:12:23.120 --> 00:12:31.120
And every time the market interacts with their brand, not the campaign, but the brand, it forms its own opinion.
00:12:31.279 --> 00:12:36.240
And that opinion is based on experiences, like we mentioned earlier, not on the messaging.
00:12:36.480 --> 00:12:37.919
Let me make this real.
00:12:38.159 --> 00:12:40.879
The campaign says we put customers first, right?
00:12:41.039 --> 00:12:43.679
Beautiful line, great creative, it runs everywhere.
00:12:43.840 --> 00:12:47.919
But a customer calls to a service line and has to wait 45 minutes.
00:12:48.159 --> 00:12:53.679
Another customer walks in your store, and your staff acts like they are doing them a favor.
00:12:54.000 --> 00:13:16.639
You know, in Ghana, you can walk into a store to buy something, and the the I was listening to um uh one guy speak, uh, I think Derek Abbaite was talking about how uh in Ghana you walk into a shop, the storekeeper is asleep, and you wake them up and it's like you've interrupted their sleep.
00:13:16.799 --> 00:13:22.879
You know, it's it's quite unfortunate, but that's what happens, right?
00:13:23.120 --> 00:13:30.000
You you walk in there, you wake them up, they act like they are doing you a favor by serving you.
00:13:30.159 --> 00:13:33.440
So someone buys your product and it doesn't work as promised.
00:13:33.519 --> 00:13:38.879
They walk into your store, they don't get the promise that your communication gave them.
00:13:39.039 --> 00:13:43.840
Each one of these moments is the consumer sitting across the table from you in that negotiation.
00:13:44.000 --> 00:13:51.120
And each time they are deciding, do I believe this brand, or do I believe what this brand is telling me, or do I believe what I just experienced?
00:13:51.440 --> 00:13:54.559
And every single time the experience wins.
00:13:55.120 --> 00:13:56.480
Every single time.
00:13:56.720 --> 00:14:02.960
That's what the book means by proposed by the organization, but confirmed by the consumer.
00:14:03.200 --> 00:14:15.039
You are proposing the meaning, you put it out there through your communication, your design, your campaigns, but the consumer is the one who is deciding whether to accept it or not.
00:14:15.360 --> 00:14:21.039
And they they decide based on what they've lived through with you.
00:14:21.279 --> 00:14:26.879
Imagine all that we've said, and not what they've really seen on your billboard.
00:14:28.000 --> 00:14:36.480
Again, think about a brand you've stopped using, not because the advertising got worse, but because something in the experience broke.
00:14:36.720 --> 00:14:38.080
It broke their promise.
00:14:38.240 --> 00:14:43.519
Maybe it was one big moment, maybe it was a hundred small ones.
00:14:43.600 --> 00:14:46.320
You know, some people actually give many chances.
00:14:46.399 --> 00:15:01.200
But at some point, you sat at that negotiation table and you walked away as a consumer, and no amount of advertising brought you back because the proposal and the confirmation stopped matching.
00:15:01.440 --> 00:15:03.120
I feel like I'm saying six, seven.
00:15:03.279 --> 00:15:06.399
Now think about a brand you trust deeply.
00:15:06.960 --> 00:15:12.080
One where every interaction confirms what they they told you they would be.
00:15:12.320 --> 00:15:16.639
The product works, the the service is consistent.
00:15:16.799 --> 00:15:20.720
Think about it, the experience matches the promise essentially.
00:15:20.960 --> 00:15:27.039
You didn't start trusting them because one of them, because of one great campaign.
00:15:27.360 --> 00:15:32.639
You started trusting them because every time you showed up, they showed up too.
00:15:32.960 --> 00:15:37.039
The proposal and the confirmation kept matching over and over and over.
00:15:37.279 --> 00:15:41.200
And that repetition built something no campaign alone can build.
00:15:41.440 --> 00:15:45.519
Most brand managers only build one side of this negotiation.
00:15:45.840 --> 00:16:00.000
They spend all their energy on the proposal, the campaigns, the messaging, the beautiful creative, and they spend almost no energy monitoring the confirmation.
00:16:00.320 --> 00:16:09.039
What the consumer is actually experiencing, what they are actually saying, what meaning they've actually constructed in their heads.
00:16:09.840 --> 00:16:13.279
So that's like negotiating with your eyes closed.
00:16:13.519 --> 00:16:16.159
You're talking but not listening.
00:16:16.399 --> 00:16:20.399
And eventually the other side stops showing up.
00:16:21.440 --> 00:16:25.679
The brand is not a declaration, it is a negotiation.
00:16:26.080 --> 00:16:29.679
And the consumer has more power in it than you do.
00:16:30.240 --> 00:16:32.720
Because they are the ones who can walk away.
00:16:33.200 --> 00:16:35.600
You have to stay, you have to keep proving the point.
00:16:36.080 --> 00:16:40.879
So you need to manage both sides well, or the consumer will manage it for you.
00:16:41.200 --> 00:16:45.279
Rule number 49: a brand that means everything means nothing.
00:16:45.919 --> 00:16:54.080
Brand extension is among the most commercially tempting and strategically dangerous activities available to the marketing communications executive.
00:16:54.399 --> 00:17:01.759
The brand that has been successfully built around a specific and clearly owned meaning, generates the perception of permission.
00:17:02.480 --> 00:17:12.799
Consumers trust it, their organization has invested significantly in building its equity, and the argument for extending that equity into adjacent categories feels compelling.
00:17:13.119 --> 00:17:17.519
The brand is trusted, but why not leverage that trust more broadly?
00:17:18.000 --> 00:17:24.160
The reason is that brand meaning, like any form of meaning, derives its power from specificity.
00:17:24.799 --> 00:17:35.519
The brand that stands for one thing specifically, a precise emotional benefits, a defined quality position, and an ambiguous identity.
00:17:40.240 --> 00:18:01.359
Its meaning is stable because it is clear that brand that has been extended across multiple categories, multiple consumer segments, and multiple positioning territories in pursuit of revenue growth from accumulated equity has in many cases diluted the very specificity that made the equity worth extending.
00:18:01.759 --> 00:18:08.240
A brand that means one thing precisely is worth more than a brand that means many things vaguely.
00:18:08.640 --> 00:18:10.240
Protect the one thing.
00:18:10.400 --> 00:18:17.200
The declaration statement here says brand extension without strategic discipline is brand dilution.
00:18:17.440 --> 00:18:22.000
The more a brand tries to mean, the less it means to anyone.
00:18:22.240 --> 00:18:27.119
Protect the specificity, it is where the value lives.
00:18:27.599 --> 00:18:28.240
Wow.
00:18:32.240 --> 00:18:34.480
Let me paint a picture to you.
00:18:35.359 --> 00:18:38.000
And gentlemen, you you'll understand this one.
00:18:38.160 --> 00:18:46.240
You've you're somewhere at an event, a gathering, wherever, and you see a lady, and something about her catches your attention.
00:18:46.400 --> 00:18:53.680
You can't even explain it immediately, but it's it sounds like the way, it looks like the way she carries herself.
00:18:53.839 --> 00:19:02.079
Maybe it's her style, not loud, not trying too hard, but just distinctly her.
00:19:03.119 --> 00:19:10.319
Maybe it's one thing her confidence, her laugh, her composure, something very specific.
00:19:10.559 --> 00:19:14.400
And that specificity is what draws you in.
00:19:14.799 --> 00:19:19.519
You're not attracted to everything about every woman in the room.
00:19:19.680 --> 00:19:23.920
You are attracted to something particular about this one.
00:19:24.079 --> 00:19:30.480
Imagine she noticed you notice it, and instead of being herself, she starts trying to be everything.
00:19:30.640 --> 00:19:35.119
She changes how she talks depending on who she's around.
00:19:35.519 --> 00:19:39.279
She's loud with one group, quiet with another.
00:19:39.519 --> 00:19:43.279
She's corporate here, she's street there.
00:19:44.240 --> 00:19:47.119
She's trying to appeal to everyone in the room.
00:19:47.359 --> 00:19:48.799
And what happens?
00:19:49.119 --> 00:19:55.759
The one thing that made her attractive, that specificity, that distinctiveness disappears.
00:19:55.920 --> 00:19:58.000
She becomes forgettable.
00:19:58.240 --> 00:20:04.079
Not because she's less beautiful now, but because you can no longer tell what she actually is.
00:20:04.319 --> 00:20:07.519
The attraction dies when distinctiveness appears.
00:20:07.759 --> 00:20:09.359
Brands work the same way.
00:20:09.519 --> 00:20:11.119
We talked about this in episode two.
00:20:11.440 --> 00:20:14.400
If you're speaking to everyone, you're not speaking to anyone.
00:20:14.559 --> 00:20:15.759
That was about communication.
00:20:15.839 --> 00:20:19.920
This rule is saying the same thing about brand meaning.
00:20:20.160 --> 00:20:24.240
If your brand tries to mean everything, it means nothing.
00:20:24.480 --> 00:20:30.960
And this is one of the hardest disciplines in business because brand extension is tempting.
00:20:31.279 --> 00:20:34.079
It makes commercial sense on paper.
00:20:34.240 --> 00:20:36.480
You've built a brand that people trust.
00:20:36.799 --> 00:20:45.359
People know your name, you have equity, and then someone in the boardroom says, Hey, we should leverage this equity into a new category.
00:20:45.440 --> 00:20:48.079
And it sounds smart, it's it sounds like growth.
00:20:48.319 --> 00:20:57.039
But every time you extend into a new category, you are asking the consumer to update what your brand means in their mind.
00:20:57.599 --> 00:21:02.880
And every update dilutes the original meaning of your brand.
00:21:03.119 --> 00:21:09.920
You started with something specific, something people could uh point to and say that's what they are.
00:21:10.160 --> 00:21:13.039
Now, with every extension, clarity fades.
00:21:14.640 --> 00:21:22.000
Until one day you ask five people what your brand means, and you get five different answers.
00:21:22.240 --> 00:21:28.319
And when five people can't agree on what you stand for, you don't stand for anything.
00:21:28.559 --> 00:21:30.319
Now, let me be clear about something.
00:21:30.400 --> 00:21:32.720
I'm not talking about conglomerates.
00:21:32.960 --> 00:21:37.680
A conglomerate is like a parent company that owns multiple businesses, right?
00:21:37.839 --> 00:21:38.720
Think JOSPO.
00:21:39.680 --> 00:21:43.279
Each with their own brand, their own identity, their own meaning.
00:21:43.440 --> 00:21:46.319
That's portfolio management, that's strategy.
00:21:46.960 --> 00:21:59.759
What this rule is talking about is one brand, one name, one identity stretching itself across too many categories until the consumer can no longer.
00:22:00.640 --> 00:22:03.680
Tell you what it actually stands for.
00:22:03.839 --> 00:22:05.119
That's dilution.
00:22:05.599 --> 00:22:08.240
And those are two very different things.
00:22:08.640 --> 00:22:14.160
When I read this rule, a particular indigenous Ghanaian brand came to mind immediately.
00:22:14.240 --> 00:22:15.680
But I'll not name it.
00:22:16.319 --> 00:22:22.960
Because where I come from, you don't point to your father's house with your left hand, with your left finger.
00:22:23.119 --> 00:22:28.799
But if you are in this market, and for those of you who know me personally, you know the brand I'm talking about.
00:22:29.359 --> 00:22:31.119
I'm sure a name would come to mind.
00:22:31.200 --> 00:22:36.799
So hold on to it and ask yourself: can you describe what that brand means in one sentence?
00:22:37.200 --> 00:22:39.599
Not what it does, what it means.
00:22:39.759 --> 00:22:45.839
If you can't, then you understand why this rule, you understand exactly what this rule is saying.
00:22:46.079 --> 00:22:52.559
The book says a brand that means one thing precisely is worth more than a brand that means many things vaguely.
00:22:52.960 --> 00:22:53.839
Worth more.
00:22:54.000 --> 00:22:56.720
Not just strategically, but commercially.
00:22:57.119 --> 00:23:00.640
Because specificity is what drives preference, right?
00:23:00.880 --> 00:23:06.319
Specificity is what builds the kind of trust that makes someone choose you without thinking about it.
00:23:06.559 --> 00:23:11.759
Like the lady at the event, you didn't choose her because she was trying to be everything.
00:23:11.839 --> 00:23:14.799
You chose her because she was unapologetically something.
00:23:15.119 --> 00:23:24.240
The moment you dilute that, the moment you start meaning a little bit of everything, you start losing the thing that made you valuable in the first place.
00:23:24.880 --> 00:23:29.519
And this requires courage because the pressure to extend is constant.
00:23:29.680 --> 00:23:33.839
The revenue opportunity looks real, the boardroom wants growth.
00:23:33.920 --> 00:23:43.519
And saying no, we should protect what we mean rather than chasing what we could sell is one of the most difficult things a marketing executive can do.
00:23:43.680 --> 00:23:49.279
That discipline, the discipline of protecting specificity, is where the long-term value lives.
00:23:49.519 --> 00:23:55.440
So protect the specificity, it is where the value actually lives.
00:23:55.680 --> 00:24:00.240
Now, let's see what the last rule is saying, and then we can conclude the episode.
00:24:00.799 --> 00:24:06.640
Rule 50 consistency is not rigidity, it is a discipline that builds trust.
00:24:06.880 --> 00:24:24.079
There is a tension in brand management between consistency and freshness, between the discipline of expressing the same meaning across every touch point over time, and the creative and commercial instincts to evolve, adapt, and respond to the constantly changing context the brand operates in.
00:24:24.559 --> 00:24:35.839
The tension is real and it is managed badly in both directions by organizations that are so rigid in their identity application that they produce communication that is recognizable but stale.
00:24:36.799 --> 00:24:49.839
And by organizations that are so hungry for novelty that they change the brand's voice, visual conventions, and positioning signals so frequently that no coherent meaning ever accumulates.
00:24:50.160 --> 00:25:02.559
The test of genuine consistency is not whether the campaign looks like the last one, it is whether a consumer who has been following the brand for five years would recognize the new campaign as the brand's work.
00:25:02.880 --> 00:25:13.119
Not because it is visually identical, but because it sounds and feels like the same brand with the same values, the same character, and the same relationship with the audience.
00:25:13.519 --> 00:25:16.480
Trust is built through this kind of consistency.
00:25:17.039 --> 00:25:36.960
The brand that behaves predictably across time and context, that is recognizably itself, without whether it is speaking in a television commercial, a social media post, a customer service interaction, or a product packaging claim is a brand that consumers can form stable expectations about.
00:25:37.279 --> 00:25:43.759
And stable expectations are the foundations of the trust that makes brand equity commercially viable.
00:25:43.920 --> 00:25:53.519
So the declaration statement says consistency is not the enemy of freshness, it is a frame within which freshness is recognizable as yours.
00:25:53.759 --> 00:25:57.279
Discipline the meaning, liberate the expression.
00:25:57.599 --> 00:26:00.480
Do not confuse the two.
00:26:04.480 --> 00:26:06.079
Professor Henson and Joel.
00:26:07.279 --> 00:26:15.200
You know, I believe that the biggest barrier to adoption in this African market is trust.
00:26:15.359 --> 00:26:20.799
And I keep saying it in this episode, in this series, because the books keep proof proving it.
00:26:20.960 --> 00:26:30.559
And if you think about it, this rule shows up, it shows you how trust is actually built and how easily it's destroyed.
00:26:31.359 --> 00:26:35.599
The book describes a tension that every brand manager lives with.
00:26:35.839 --> 00:26:42.480
You need to be consistent because consistency is what would build recognition, familiarity, and trust over time.
00:26:42.799 --> 00:26:48.720
But you also need to be fresh because the market changes, culture evolves, culture moves.
00:26:48.960 --> 00:26:52.559
And a brand that never evolves starts to feel still.
00:26:52.640 --> 00:26:55.119
And most brands get this tension wrong.
00:26:55.359 --> 00:27:06.640
They either hold on so tight that everything feels rigid and outdated, or they change so often that a consumer can't keep track of who they are anymore.
00:27:06.880 --> 00:27:08.880
Let me make this practical.
00:27:14.799 --> 00:27:26.079
Leads are coming in, the brand is connecting, people are responding, and someone in the room says, We need to refresh the creative.
00:27:36.319 --> 00:27:38.880
Maybe you update the visual style.
00:27:39.039 --> 00:27:40.400
Nothing too dramatic.
00:27:40.559 --> 00:27:47.279
You didn't change the strategy, you didn't change the products, you didn't, you, you, you didn't change anything, you just refreshed the expression, right?
00:27:47.359 --> 00:27:48.720
And the numbers drop.
00:27:48.880 --> 00:27:50.960
Not dramatically, but noticeably.
00:27:51.119 --> 00:27:54.000
And everyone in the room can can explain why.
00:27:54.240 --> 00:27:58.319
The media plan is the same, the budget is the same, the audience is the same.
00:27:58.400 --> 00:27:59.680
So what changed?
00:27:59.920 --> 00:28:02.319
What changed is you broke the consistency.
00:28:02.880 --> 00:28:11.920
When you shifted, when you shifted your tone or the look, even slightly, something in their brain flagged it.
00:28:12.160 --> 00:28:13.519
Not so consciously.
00:28:13.599 --> 00:28:17.119
They didn't sit down and say this brand feels different today.
00:28:17.680 --> 00:28:23.839
But they the recognition weakened, their familiarity dropped, and with it, the trust.
00:28:24.319 --> 00:28:25.839
That's how fragile this is.
00:28:26.000 --> 00:28:31.839
You don't have to change your logo to break consistency, you just have to stop sounding like yourself.
00:28:32.079 --> 00:28:36.960
Now, let me show you what happens when brands break consistency at their biggest level.
00:28:37.200 --> 00:28:37.839
Twitter.
00:28:39.119 --> 00:28:44.319
One of the most recognizable names in the history of the internet, right?
00:28:44.480 --> 00:28:50.400
A brand so embedded in global culture that a tweet became a verb.
00:28:50.960 --> 00:28:53.599
I mean, tweet, the word tweet became a verb.
00:28:53.839 --> 00:28:56.000
Elon Musk rebranded it to X.
00:28:56.480 --> 00:29:00.160
New name, new logo, new identity, and then what happened?
00:29:00.480 --> 00:29:02.319
Confusion, resistance.
00:29:02.559 --> 00:29:05.680
In fact, market value questions started coming up.
00:29:05.839 --> 00:29:14.720
Not because X is a bad name per se, but because you cannot erase a decade of associative meaning overnight and expect the consumer to just follow you.
00:29:14.799 --> 00:29:28.160
The consistency that made Twitter what it was, the bluebird, the word tweet, the cultural shorthand was not rigidity, it was equity.
00:29:28.319 --> 00:29:32.799
And it was abandoned in pursuit of freshness that nobody asked for.
00:29:32.960 --> 00:29:37.519
Now, don't get me wrong, there were several other factors that contributed to their woes, right?
00:29:37.599 --> 00:29:40.000
But the kicker, I believe, was a rebrand.
00:29:40.480 --> 00:29:46.319
I'm sure you are thinking, but uh MTN had rebranded.
00:29:46.799 --> 00:29:49.680
MTN was not MTN 20 years ago.
00:29:50.000 --> 00:29:50.960
You're right.
00:29:51.519 --> 00:29:53.440
But it's always been yellow.
00:29:53.759 --> 00:29:58.960
The energy, the tone, campaign after campaign, year after year, you always know it's MTN.
00:29:59.119 --> 00:30:01.599
Not because every ad looks the same, they don't.
00:30:01.759 --> 00:30:04.240
The expression keeps evolving.
00:30:04.640 --> 00:30:06.720
The creative keeps moving.
00:30:07.519 --> 00:30:10.160
But the underlying character is consistency.
00:30:10.880 --> 00:30:12.480
The meaning stays.
00:30:12.799 --> 00:30:19.839
You could you could see a new MTN campaign you've never seen before and know immediately it's theirs.
00:30:20.319 --> 00:30:25.920
Not because of the logo that is sitting somewhere in the corner, because of how it feels.
00:30:26.079 --> 00:30:29.119
Same value, same energy, same relationship with you.
00:30:29.279 --> 00:30:31.519
That's the discipline the book is describing.
00:30:31.759 --> 00:30:33.359
Consistency is not repetition.
00:30:33.519 --> 00:30:36.400
Consistency is not doing the same thing over and over and over.
00:30:36.880 --> 00:30:41.200
Consistency is being recognizable even when you're doing something new.
00:30:41.519 --> 00:30:45.440
It's the container within which creative freedom is possible.
00:30:45.680 --> 00:30:51.119
The frame within which you within which your freshness is recognizable as yours.
00:30:51.279 --> 00:30:53.839
Discipline is the meaning.
00:30:54.160 --> 00:30:58.160
Liberate the expression and don't confuse the two.
00:30:58.720 --> 00:31:02.799
So, what is part fight really telling us in this episode?
00:31:03.440 --> 00:31:05.599
A brand is not a logo, that is established.
00:31:05.680 --> 00:31:09.839
It is a system of meaning built slowly into your consumer's mind.
00:31:10.400 --> 00:31:14.400
Through every interaction, every communication, every experience.
00:31:14.799 --> 00:31:20.960
You can propose what that meaning should be, but the consumer would confirm it for you, or they don't.
00:31:22.000 --> 00:31:29.039
And if you try to make your brand mean everything to everyone, you dilute the very thing that makes it valuable.
00:31:29.359 --> 00:31:40.079
The discipline that protects brand meaning over time is consistency, not rigidity, not repetition, consistency, which is being recognizable even when you're doing the same thing.
00:31:40.319 --> 00:31:44.400
And in our markets, trust means everything.
00:31:45.279 --> 00:31:47.599
So let me leave you with this.
00:31:49.039 --> 00:31:53.039
Think about your brand or the one that you you work on.
00:31:54.000 --> 00:31:58.960
And whilst we think about it, can you describe what it means in one sentence?
00:31:59.119 --> 00:32:01.839
Not what it does, what it means.
00:32:02.400 --> 00:32:10.079
If you can't, everything we've discussed in this part in this episode just showed you why that's a problem.
00:32:10.240 --> 00:32:14.960
And so ask yourself: is the consumer's version of your brand the same as yours?
00:32:15.119 --> 00:32:16.400
You can run an audit.
00:32:16.480 --> 00:32:21.519
If you don't know the answer, you are already behind in that negotiation.
00:32:21.839 --> 00:32:28.160
Anyway, get the book, Rules for the Marketing Communications Executive by Professor Henson and John Netty.
00:32:28.400 --> 00:32:29.759
The details are in the description.
00:32:29.920 --> 00:32:32.559
There are 12 chapters in this book, but I covered only four.
00:32:32.720 --> 00:32:34.400
The other with eight are waiting for you.
00:32:34.559 --> 00:32:36.799
Share this episode with someone who needs to hear it.
00:32:37.119 --> 00:32:40.559
Drop a comment, let me know which rule challenged you the most.
00:32:40.799 --> 00:32:45.519
And please subscribe so you don't miss the next one that is coming.
00:32:45.680 --> 00:32:46.880
This has been the making, right?
00:32:46.960 --> 00:32:48.240
Here on Mad Conversations.
00:32:48.319 --> 00:32:51.039
I have been your mad friend, Abirku.
00:32:51.599 --> 00:32:53.119
See you in the next one.
