Bipartisan Brand Management

Posted Jan 22 in Uncategorized tagged , , ,

The most significant and magnificent story of the week has been the inauguration of Barak Obama as the President of the USA (Sheppard Fairy for the image).
One of the elements that makes him remarkable is his bipartisan approach to politics. He has loudly embraced his traditional foe, and also announced a cabinet with (heaven forbid) Republicans on it. This thinking is similar to Nelson Mandela who was insistent that his enemy (in his case F.W. DeClerk) should never be spoken about negatively and always respected, insisting that the stronger his enemy the stronger he became.

What if brand owners took the bipartisan model of politics on board and developed bipartisan brand management. That is, never talking their enemy down, embracing them and growing not only their market share, but the category as well. Duopolies would start to behave very differently towards one another.

If anyone knows of examples of a brand that has embraced its closest rival I would love to hear about it.

Share this post

Comments

  1. Anonymous

    Jan 22nd, 2009

    Tell me more?

    No examples – but rich thought.

  2. Bod

    Jan 22nd, 2009

    I work with a car dealership network who buy their rivals’ latest models and offer people the chance to test drive the competitor brand alongside their own. They position the offer as ‘yes, that is a really good car and all you’ve heard about it is correct. But compare it to our equivalent model and tell us what you think.’ More often than not they get a sale.

  3. Granleese

    Jan 23rd, 2009

    This is already commonplace in some industries where competitors can add value to each other’s business by presenting a combined front.

    i.e. OneWorld, Star Alliance in aviation
    i.e. Group of Eight Universities in Australia
    i.e. Terria broadband coalition

    One of the main challenges in the next few years will be rebuilding marketplaces, and many consumer brands that have shrunken from the drop in discretionary spending will need to cast small-gain competitive-swipes aside to stimulate and grow their respective markets.

    I don’t agree with you in-full that Obama has taken a bipartisan approach to politics.

    Take a step back from the emotion and remember that The President is the chief of the Executive arm, not of Congress/The Senate (who make laws, The President can only veto or make minor amendments to these when they are tabled) and is held by a hostile Democrat majority in both houses. During the recent GFC House speaker Nancy Pelosi was particularly partisan when it came to screwing up the $700b bailout plan (http://tinyurl.com/3kcbk7).

    The Socratic Obama is still a figurehead and shouldn’t, even in the current climate, stifle democracy.

    Regardless of this lead-in, bi-partisan branding/strategic alliances is always very interesting area for discussion and debate.

    Cheers,

    Sam

  4. Fritz Bachen

    Jan 23rd, 2009

    Bod, I’ve seen advertising recently on TV that advertises car yard areas on TV mentioning the names of multiple makes (and companies). So that could also be an example.

    Sam, thanks for your post. However, the examples you’ve given feel more like the work of a professional body representing the interests of all parties, rather than a particular brand taking a more inclusive approach with their direct competitors (ie QANTAS doesnt compete with Oneworld more accurately it is a member of it).

    Also, as for a ‘Socratic’ Obama I assume you mean he is inclusive, rather than just being a talker. In two days he’s banned the use of tourture and closed Gitmo. It’s exciting times for the world (yep my emotion is spilling over).

    That said, I found your post interesting, like your site too.

  5. Matt Moore

    Jan 23rd, 2009

    Interesting idea. Some comments:

    - We don’t actually like our brands to get too cosy. Doesn’t that behaviour look suspiciously like cartelling- i.e. bad for the consumer? Likewise we actually want our opposition parties to, well, oppose – weaving between impotence on one hand and obstruction on the other.

    - When I worked at IBM, the organisation’s range of offerings were so broad that its competitors in one market (e.g. Accenture in IT consulting) would be a major channel partner in another (e.g. software). This is a B2B situation tho.

    - I suspect you’re more likely to get these symbiotic relationships in markets with complicated products (e.g. cars, consumer electronics) where no one company has everyone else by the balls.

    - The other area where firms might take an altruistic approach is a new, emerging market – where customers require a lot of education around the category. Any form of product education helps everyone trying to enter the market.

    - Finally I wonder to what extent aggressive marketing varies across cultures. You’d expect it in the US (where cultural norms value competition as an inherent good). Do things differ in Japan or Scandanavia?

  6. mikej

    Jan 26th, 2009

    I think a bipartisan relationship in any area of life comes down to one thing. You know what you stand for… and where your competitors stand. If a brand knows what they are about and are clear then they have no trouble showing it. Obama stood for something very clear and in order to deliver it he needed to be bipartisan.

    Maybe we should help I clients be very very clear what they stand for

  7. Matt Moore

    Jan 27th, 2009

    Mike – You could say that Dubya knew exactly what he stood for. His vision was inherently divisive (& it worked for him for about 6 years) but he was actually pretty clear on it.

    It's the "and in order to deliver it he needed to be bipartisan" bit that's really key isn't it? If you're ambitious enough to want to open up something big & new and yet humble enough to admit that you can't do it by yourself – then the bipartisan thing might work.

  8. Fritz Bachen

    Jan 29th, 2009

    Thanks all for contributing to the debate / thoughts. There is enough here to continue with it.

    I went out for dinner last night to a pizza restaurant – and the chappy said ‘sorry we are full, however try teh new indian place next door – it’s excellent’. (I checked – he didnt own it).

    The meal was lovely, and this is close to where I was coming from. I feel good about the competitor (Indian place), but even better about the original (Pizza place).

  9. jemster

    Feb 3rd, 2009

    Hi Fritz,
    I know that Toyota, or rather Fujiho Cho, gave the comeptiotion open access to Toyota Hybrid technology beleiving that the development of hybrid technology was critical for the survival of the auto industry and so too important for one manufacturer to own, regardles of how big an advantage that might offer them. Honda (Toyota’s biggest rival), for example launched hybrid on the back of Toyota Technology. I always thought it slightly underhand that they should try to make marketing headway with what was esentially a gift from their rival.

    I heard that BMW and Mercedes Benz are developing their own variations based on technological advances by Toyota (and that the original A-Class was that shape to take hybrid technology).

    Toyota also tried to help out GM in the states, but I’m not sure about the detail.

    Not precisely what you’re talking about but bi-partisan none the less.

  10. Brand Management

    Jul 28th, 2009

    I am very much impressed with the post. Every brand has its own importance. For promotion of any brand/product Brand Management is required. Brand Management companies can help you promotion of your products, to make them a brand in market.

    http://www.funfilms.in

  11. Fritz Bachen

    Jul 28th, 2009

    Thanks Ms Brand Management!

Trackbacks and Pingbacks

    Leave a Comment