Audi carefully honed its brand to sheer perfection over the past two decades. From an also ran with little aspiration it is has become the benchmark for top-quality interiors and modern consistent design. A few years ago however it noticed that its reputation was slipping in the polls. The Brand got more and more associated with arrogant and agressive drivers, with similar road manners, an image that belonged more to BMW and some Mercedez Benz drivers. Audi's board then issued the task to its branding and marketing people to turn this around.
The board simply issued a simple brief: Audi should delight customers as a Brand. That's a clear call for more emotion. Through a host of changes in the Corporate Image guidelines, changes in sponsoring programmes and in marketing, the brand transformed itself to the more solid, cool and somewhat understated brand it is today. The excitement was clearly achieved via the R8 and the victories at the 24 Hours of LeMans. In the product marketing, even the faster and more agressive models, such as the RS series, come with descriptions that are not referring to its extreme speed and acceleration capabilities. Instead the focus its on the design details that set the RS5 apart from the standard A5 model.
The interesting aspect of the branding repositioning exercise is not that the fact that every now and then a Brand has to go through such an exercise. These days, a shit-storm in the internet can create more damage in a few days than a branding department can handle and correct in a few months.
"Vorsprung durch Identity"
What makes Audi an interesting case is the fact that their branding is fairly monolithic. The often called 'Marushka' dolls design principle leads to cars that look alike between series. You need a trained eye to spot the difference between an A4 and an A6, specifically from the back. Audi only does one type of design for a series of cars that sell extremely well, specifically in Asia. The brand has become extremely recognizable but also more one-dimensional and it has also gained substantial global presence.
The associated brand identity works well because with brand promise, 'Vorsprung durch Technik'. The advantage is reflected in the design and in the specifications of the actual cars.
Audi has what I would call substantial Brand Mass. Whether you like it or not, as soon as you get in touch with any Audi product or touchpoint you will meet the same 'Audiness' everywhere. Its comparable to an oil tanker. Once pointed in a certain direction it is hard to change its course and even harder to reverse.
Brand Mass in itself is not bad. Its come with efficiencies that consumer product giants like Nestlé and P&G can only dream of. Yet it also comes with a certain risk. If consumers keep seeing Audi as an arrogant brand for drivers of the single-male-macho kind it could loose its appeal as a whole to a group of consumers that suddenly associate the monolithic brand experience as one big affront.
In other words, increased Brand Mass means increased Brand Risk, specifically in the reputational area.
Is there a way to mitigate this risk? The obvious answer would be, yes through diversification, i.e. the creation of Sub Brands. Toyota and Nissan have done this through the creation of the Infinity and Lexus luxury brands. Although it requires the creation of new Brands it does help spreading reputational risk, specifically if the sub-brand are still subtly but firmly attached to the 'Master' Brand. The Best in Class example here is BMW with their superbly integrated MINI and Rolls Royce Brands.
Audi seems to have taken one step in that direction by acquiring Lamborghini and recently Ducati. But for now this connection is hardly ever highlighted. Its mostly the Automotive Media that refer to this connection.
Audi remains though a class-act when it comes to the total integration of Corporate, Brand and Product Strategy with a superbly consistent Design and Experience based on the Brand's values.
For further reading:
Audi's Corporate Strategy
A very good Audi SWOT by marketingteacher.com
It is easy
to criticize companies in trouble. My gripe with Sony as much as with
Nokia is that they should have seen the changes in their markets coming 5
years ago. They should have launched new products, services or even
businesses by today or should have acquired promising start-ups by now.
None
of that happened and we could contemplate forever about why not. So
while it is easy to see this in hindsight, the question remains of
course; what should they have done different? Upon seeing yet another
I'm Watch ad or an E-Paper Watch ad, the latest über-succes story at Kickstarter, I realized THIS is what Sony could or should have done. And in fact [update!] they just did announce one.
Sony Smartwatch - the one to watch?
Most
consumers age 30 and over will remember Sony for their Walkman. I also
remember them from back in the days as makers of super cool video and
recording studio hardware. But some time after 2000 Sony started to
loose its cool. And recently it all went from bad to worse.
For
too long Sony went on producing hardware but they forgot to develop a
meaningful ecosystem. It also forgot to develop products that are cool.
Where before Sony sold ultra-expensive halo hardware, much like Audi has
the A8 or R8, today they have little to brag about.
When
they did start to develop content for their hardware, like the Sony
Entertainment Network, the rest of the market was already a step ahead.
Its fine to build television or to sell hifi equipment but what if the
content is not more and more integrated with a larger digital
infrastructure? Where is the Bluetooth connection on a Sony TV e.g. How
can I easily integrate that huge screen into my owned & acquired
content collection? How can I get access to searchable content on the
web. Where can I access my content in the cloud? Can I stream my music
over Wifi or Bluetooth using other equipment, preferably from Sony if
that is my preferred supplier?
Today
it is absolutely important to not only sell hardware but to sell an
infrastructure where the hardware is first and foremost the start of a
customer relationship. But the hardware should also be a tool that
derives its relevance from what it does NOT do, i.e. it is not a
collection of features but a logical unit that gains its meaning in my
life through integration. It should have a clearly reduced but relevant
set of features that enable this integration, nothing more and nothing
less.
And
then there is I'm Watch. In fact in itself I'm Watch is nothing more
than a different way of using existing content, transmitted over
Bluetooth. Apart from a clock it can't do much, yet it comes alive as
soon as its hooked up to a smartphone or computer. Now imagine I'm Watch
with a Sony logo on it. Imagine what they can develop to bring that
watch to live, using their own available content.
So
there it is Sony; I'm Watch could have been your next Walkman. This is
what consumer ask from electronics today. Cross device content streams,
cloud based content solutions. It is actually not so important whether
it is the cloud, a smartphone, or computer based, it doesn't really
matter. It is again more about how the end-user has seamless access to
owned, acquired or searchable content at any given time. For Sony this
should go from integration of television use with home computers and
tablets, with the home based printer, with a cloud based storage.
UPDATE
Just
days after this article was published here first Sony did release a
Bluetooth watch under the completely un-inspiring and 'missed a major
opportunity to define a category' name Sony Smartwatch. According to the
reviews there is not so much that is very Smart about it. In fact from
the reviews you get the feeling that some haphazardly put together team
rushed the thing to market, forgetting in the process what it takes to
build a great experience.
The
I'm Watch offers, at least on ehrm 'paper' the right kind of
integration and serves as an agile extension of your smartphone or
computer. I just hope it will serve as a wake-up call for big corporates
and their workforce. We'll wait and see but if the Smartwatch is Sony's
future then it I'd challenge them to get smarter still.
Sony Smartwatch review @pocket-lint
I'm watch home page
Update:
Sony filing a Patent for wireless charging. Curious to see what they will do with it in a few months from now.
