ThinkingSparks

Molblog

It has been quiet for the last month. I have been "auditioning" for Molblog (Dutch only) over the last month. Molblog is the Marketing On Line weblog of the Dutch journal on marketing. It is also the most popular blog in the Netherlands.

Molblog is different from ThinkingSparks as the latter will try to give food for thought of just present my questions on certain topics. Molblog has much more of a signaling function of what is going on in marketing at the moment. Interestingly enough my posts that come close to what I do on ThinkingSparks generate more comments then when I post current marketing happenings.

My auditioning was rewarded with a spot on the molblog team. :-) It means I have to divide my time between those two blogs. So after this month long break, I will be back.

Chance at a $ 25.000 MBA scholarship

Along with other people I am one of the sponsors of the "The Minority Talent Scholarship for the Americas" offering a chance to do an international MBA at Nyenrode Business University (founded 1946) in The Netherlands. For more information check out the link.

This year we could not give out the scholarship as no students applied for it. I am asking to the readers of this weblog to help us in finding eligible student for the coming year and please forward this information. The deadline is less than two months away.

Of course people could always chose to (not) attend NoBS, but then they would miss out on the experience of going to business school in a beautiful castle in The Netherlands.

Nip tuck marketing

I wrote about attending the launch of the Dutch magazine Vrouw the other day. The day after the lunch I checked on Telegraaf (the largest Dutch newspaper) what their journalists had to say about the launch.

Apart from my observations on networking, I observed the event and its goings on. There was a fair amount of people. I would estimate between 80 and 100. In next day’s newspaper (which is the same publisher as the magazine) they made it seem that the launch had been overrun by an enthusiastic crowd of female readers. They were bending the truth a little I would say. And of course it’s not the only organization that does it. Individuals do it too.

Some time ago I read an interview with an acquaintance of mine in a business magazine. I do not know him well enough to know all his inner secrets, but I know enough. Enough to know that he wasn’t completely truthful in the interview. I have seen other people do it too. And I have seen people believe them.

I understand why people and organizations do it. It makes for a better story. When I know the truth behind the story however, I wonder if misrepresenting the facts makes for a better story. I sure do not see the benefits in some cases. What about being found out? Is enhancing the truth understood? Is it ok and accepted just like fake boobs and botox filled faces?

Nip tuck marketing sure is at odds with the whole concept of authenticity. Can these two concepts exist together or are they mutually exclusive? Who offers an opinion?

Culture based brand or Brand based culture?

The other day I was reading an article in which the Dutch consultancy Business Openers was quoted. They call themselves the pioneers of Internal Branding in the Netherlands. I am not sure if they really are pioneers, but apparently they like to position themselves as such.

If I interpret them correctly, they use the brand as a basis for culture change. They call that ‘internal branding’. I agree with them that behavior has to match the promise, but I am not sure if I agree with their views on causality. I am also not sure if this is what internal branding is.

On their site (in Dutch) the working through this process with Albert Heijn (grocery retailer that is part of Ahold) is described. What struck me is that in the whole process the starting point is the external brand. From the external brand the brand values are inferred. These then are the basis for behavior. Hopefully resulting in a brand based culture.

I always wonder if that works. Everyone involved in change of (organizational) cultures knows that it may take some time to replace one set of values by another. An organizational culture already had a set of values driving behavior before the brand values where conceived. So unless an organization has a (soon to be) dysfunctional culture, why not do it the other way around: a culture based brand? Build on the good behavior that is already there. It has the same results of living up to the promise, it is authentic and you avoid the long period of the culture change process. And the pain and resistance that comes with change. Don't get me wrong. I am not against change. But if it ain’t broke why fix it?

I fear the incessant and continued internal branding process being fueled by external advertising or brand agencies, the changes in those, the changes in marketing or brand directors that each want to do it better, different than their predecessors. It is something that comes natural. And with every such change, the organization has to change along with it. It might keep ‘internal branding’ consultants busy but I am not convinced that it is the right way to align organizational behavior and brand promise.

Any insights anyone?

Vote against sheepwalking bureaucrats!

Yesterday I wanted to cast two votes in the provincial government elections; for me and my partner. I could vote for myself without an ID, but in order to vote for my partner I had to ID myself. The polling station can ask for an ID, but are not required to. I forgot my ID so they wouldn’t let me vote for my partner. I could cast my own vote without any ID.

I saw noo point in trying to convince the sheepwalking bureaucrats that this is an illogical rule and serves – in my opinion – no use at all, I just cast the one vote yesterday. So this post is my vote against sheepwalking bureaucrats!

Is Internal branding just a sexier term for internal communication?

Last Thursday I was having a conversation on Internal Branding and how it really doesn’t go beyond internal communication in most cases. Then yesterday I opened Communicatie (magazine) and out fell an insert.

The insert was a booklet on the Internal Branding campaign for two insurance companies (Achmea and Interpolis) that had merged. Interesting stuff I thought and read it. The booklet had a foreword by the CEO and an interview with renowned academic Cees van Riel. The booklet was very well executed. After reading I was very disappointed though. What had been described was an internal communication campaign. From what I read, very well thought out and executed (although the results will really tell how good it was), but to me no more than an internal communication campaign to help easy the merging of these different companies.

After the read, too be honest, I was a bit miffed. Is internal branding nothing more than internal communication? Just like a normal bottle of whisky customized with a special edition gift box into an exclusive present? Or is it the agency that has upgraded itself from an internal communication agency to an internal branding agency? Do they want to be sexier? Maybe everyone involved wants to be sexier. They all bought into their concept of what internal branding is. They even spend a lot of money to tell the world through an inserted booklet how great their internal branding efforts are.

I have my doubts on this internal communications approach to internal branding. I have doubts on the term internal branding. I guess I am writing my thesis about this topic for a reasonJ.

Great personalized viral marketing

For the upcoming elections the political party SP made a personalized viral movie.

The site is in Dutch but "Jouw voornaam" means "Your first name". "Jouw email" means "Your e-mail". Anyone can fill it out. After you have done so you can watch the movie right away (even if you fill out a fake e-mail adress). No understanding of Dutch is necessary to understand the movie.

The lead is played by the party leader Jan Marijnissen, about who I have posted before.