I’ve had many conversations over the years in which people have said that branding is important, but that we shouldn’t call it that so as not to scare people off. Even when I was a brand consultant we weren’t always sure whether to use the word.
On the one hand I see the wisdom in that – as long as the end result is good, what’s the difference?
On the other I am starting to see a problem – the original concept of branding still seems fairly misunderstood, because no one has ever really championed it.
So here is my question – should we push for branding to be understood in its rightful way (as an organizational alignment system that ultimately results in communication internally and externally)? Or should we not worry what happens to the term “branding” and just get things done whether or not we use the word?
I think the short answer to your question is “yes.” I’m amazed at how many government agencies (especially cities) seem to believe that “branding” themselves is accomplished by commissioning a firm to do a logo and new tagline. These steps are in fact two of the final steps in a long process – with neither of them actually necessary in order to establish a “brand” for a community or agency.
My short answer is “no”.
However, I do think that “branding” needs clearer, more systematized explanations as to precisely what it is and why what it is matters not only to government agencies but to all of us…
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.