Little Aston

From the few articles I have read it seems that the Aston Martin hatch back is not going down very well.  I wonder if there is any genuine problem with the idea on a practical level or whether everyone is either directly (if you do it for a living,) or indirectly (because we live in a marketing society,) just applying some kind of brand extension logic that is a learned set of rules rather than a fundamental anthropological response.  

Yes it does seem strange that Aston Martin would make a hatchback because they trade on selling the unattainable dream.  But this is just a marketing idea.  If we were to place this into a more human context it would probably be like someone we know that has a really aspirational ability i.e. a top chef, deciding to go and work in a chain pub.  Maybe it was because they fell on hard times and needed the cash? Perhaps it would make us doubt the quality of the best they had to offer i.e. if they are willing to lower themselves then why should we expect greatness from them in anything anymore?  But having said this if you put the initial expectations on one side for a minute and think about the realities then it makes you wonder... wouldn't Aston Martin be pretty good at making a hatch back if they put their mind to it.  And wouldn't it be good if more people could experience the Aston craft and expertese without having the money to buy a super car.  And more to the point where I am coming at this from... wouldn't it be better if they found a way to make money out of a product with a lower environmental impact.  

My view is that every brand at some time in the future is going to have to play with the idea of a brand extension that they might at one time have never imagined.  Anyhow to cut a long story short I like the little Aston and would be happy to see more experimental designs from companies that show that they know how to loosen up.

Food Inc 'Information wants to be free'

Expose on the food industry... Generally in advertising we work on the principle of above and below the line.  A new idea that I have been thinking about is in front of and behind the line.  The vertical line being the inside world and the outside world of the company.  At the moment many companies seem to think its ok to have very different behaviour on the two sides which results in this kind of damaging revelations.  What used to be the exception is now the rule in this area i.e if there is something to be exposed then the chances are that it will - seems like this needs a law to explain it.  I could call it 'Davidslaw'... but then I'd have to spend some time on the maths to actually prove it.  Until then perhaps the 'information wants to be free,' principle will suffice if you use it in the liberty sense rather than the economic one.  Step-up an agency that works in front of and behind the line! 

Employees on the loose…

If you believe the Clue Train Manifesto (which I do) then you could start to think that the established brand marketing methods are a stop-gap.  A space opened up when the actors of the small intimate market places of history were dissipated into different places and even time zones by mass culture.  Advertising filled the void and created a semblance of contact even though it was not the kind of personal interaction that typified the old market place. In the mean time we forgot that market places are always just conversations between people. But now we have the internet to help us remember and recently it seems to be bubbling over a little bit. This spirit is probably most alive through the staff in technology companies where a culture of open hyperlinked conversations based on home made intranets and wikis is the norm. But just recently since twitter has been around and since facebook started being used in a bit more of a blog-like way than a myspace way, I have noticed that quite a few people from the big agency group I work in are connected and exchanging interesting stuff in a new way. Many are even posting stuff about the clients they are working on becoming a bit of a media channel in their own right. Whether companies see this as a scary prospect or an untapped opportunity it’s not going to go away. The employees are on the loose! 

Green Land-grab

Some people think that there is only a short window of opportunity when sustainability will present a point of different for brands.  In this way of thinking it becomes a space race to claim as much of the available ground as possible before sustainability claims are no longer differentiating.  I think there is a first mover advantage argument to be made but that also the journey will be endless.  In the fast food business their is a fundamental assumption that the entire model depends on scale meaning a small number of large production sites distributing to a high number of outlets.  The 'eat local' movement seems incompatible with their whole way of doing business and would be pretty far down the list of measures that most would consider.  Mcdonalds has actually made big gains in being the first mover in being a better kind of company than peoples expectations of them but at the same time there is already a fast food company with an 'eat local' business model that could blow much of this out the water.  Read more on Springwise.  Lets here it for Burgerville.

MP's expenses and the end of 'behind the scenes' thinking

On BBC1's question time the sense of public contempt for politicians in light of the expenses scandal was pretty clear with derision even for public favourites like Ming Campbell.
 
It struck me that this whole business is a good metaphor for the relationship between companies and sustainability. A perfect example of the notion that there are negative consequences when there is a discrepancy between what you do and what you say. In this instance we all know that people have become disconnected from the political system. There is a general sense that the public face of the politician is not the whole story – that we are being sold some kind of façade or pretence created specifically to meet our expectations but somehow plastic and unreal.  
 
For most of the time this seems to be simply just the way things are and time passes without any great events or drama; just a background disquiet . Then out of the blue a crisis hits where it is revealed that behind the scenes everything is not as it was communicated. In this case we found out that the same politicians who talk to us on a daily basis about moral issues and the way that people should behave are caught taking advantage of their position and acting selfishly without due thought to the broader interests of the people who they represent  or the hard earned cash that they have to give up for the public purse. If only they had thought to ensure that everything that they stand for in front of the camera and on stage was perfectly aligned to the way they conduct themselves behind the scenes! The only rational argument for doing this is a belief that nobody is looking.
 
Corporations can fall foul of the same problem. People already have a general sense that they are selling us one view of themselves while concealing the reality behind closed doors or in far away places. This status-quo can only go on for so long. Every now and again a new issue will reveal practices that are out of sync with public expectations or company promises. When this happens the cost is large and lasting. 
 
The thing that should keep companies on their toes even more than politicians is that public expectations of corporate behaviour are far more changeable than the idea of what is morally acceptable for the political class. Today it might be ok to use certain materials or techniques to bring a product to market that tomorrow will not suffice to convince people that your leadership position is justified.  
 
This expenses scandal could have happened at any time in recent years and the response would have been the same. Keeping ahead of expectations on sustainability proportionately across an entire enterprise  and being open and transparent about this at every stage is a never ending journey. 

Some of the biggest global marketers see the need for brand substance...

This from the Unilever CMO...

"brands are now becoming conversation factors where academics, celebrities, experts and key opinion formers discuss functional, emotional and, more interestingly, social concerns," and "of course, the conversation is no longer one way or 30 seconds. ... You may want to talk about sport and just doing it, and the consumer raises the uncomfortable question of sweatshops."

Not just FUNCTIONAL or even EMOTIONAL but also SOCIAL concerns are important.  Maybe there was some sense in the post below...

Read the full article here...

12 trends... a million opportunities

Capitalism is taking a bit of a hammering at the moment - its almost hard wired in our culture to polarise and go from one extreme to another and make everything black or white.  People forget that capitalism can make good things grow faster than anything else.  Its the extremes that cause the problems.  For example to this point business can learn from charities and they in turn can learn from business.  This is one of the new Presidents key themes - that actually we are more alike and have more shared interests than the media or traditional politics allows.  Capitalism is not wrong but it can do lots better.  Anyhow 12 trends from trendwatching that could stir the green marketing entrepreneur.