In defense of logos

Yesterday, a jury sided with the University of Kansas in its lawsuit against Joe College for selling t-shirts that infringed upon KU's trademarks. This should have been an open and shut case. Still, there are a lot of people out there who just didn't get it and viewed the case as an example of a big, bad university out for profits. How can you own the word "Kansas?" they wondered. How can you own the color blue? Simple. You can. You can within a given context. Put Kansas on a blue t-shirt and sell it in Lawrence, Kansas, then yes, common sense tells you that's a KU t-shirt.

What about letters- can you own a letter? If so, who owns the letter A? Sesame Street? Well, if you're in Oakland, selling green hats with As on them, I'm guessing Major League Baseball will have a problem with that. If you're in Tuscon, Arizona selling navy blue hats with a red letter A on them, the University of Arizona might believe they have the right to do that. In Big 10 country, how important is the letter M to Michigan? Or the word "Wisconsin" printed in white on a red shirt? Now, put Wisconsin on a green shirt and sell it in Florida- not only will no one think it's a Wisconsin University t-shirt, no one will buy it. Why? Context.

Context matters. Now I'm no attorney, but I know that sometimes the letter of the law is what matters. Other times, it's the spirit of the law. Larry Sinks, owner of Joe College sold shirts that clearly were intended to capitalize on a local affinity for the University of Kansas. He would admit as much, so the context here is obvious. But rather than obtain an official license granting him the right to sell KU merchandise, he willfully tried to skirt the system by selling shirts KU would never approve under a licensing agreement. Sure, there's a market for tasteless, inappropriate t-shirts, but this isn't a "free speech" issue. It's commercial.

It's not free speech for me to sell a basketball jersey that says "Jordan" with the number 23 on it. I'm pretty sure Michael Jordan, Chicago Bulls and maybe even Nike would have something to say about that. Sinks knew what he was doing, and he foolishly believed he had every right to do it. It reminded me of the man who ran across the street when the light was red and the sign said "Don't Walk." The man argued, "well the sign didn't say anything about running!"

Context is important. The law is important. Certainly there are more important things than logos to defend in the world, but I believe there are two kinds of people. There are those who endeavor to understand and do the right thing, and there are those who will try to get away with things, using whatever justification they can. I believe yesterday's ruling was more than just a legal victory for KU. It was a victory for common sense.

The Girl Effect

Last month, the Nike Foundation and Peter and Jennifer Buffett announced a $100 million investment in, well, girls. They call it “the girl effect”: the ability of adolescent girls in developing countries to bring unprecedented social and economic change to their families, communities and countries.

As the father of 2 girls, I can assure you there's no more powerful force in the world than the potential of a girl when given a chance. There are a lot of causes out there, approaching the world's challenges from many different angles. This one that makes a heck of a lot of sense to me. Check it out.

Stretching the Brand

This week, the Lance Armstrong Foundation (LAF) and Demand Media announced the launch of LIVESTRONG.com, an online community dedicated to healthy living, built on the brand essence of LIVESTRONG (e.g. health, fitness, nutrition, balance), a brand Nike created and nurtured for the LAF in 2003.

Containing more than 600,000 pages of content, LIVESTRONG.com includes more than 15,000 videos and articles, 50,000 questions and answers, plus personal profiles, photo galleries, discussion groups, personal action plans, recipes, interactive tools and calculators... (whew) let's face it, it's a behemoth. More to the point, it's a stretch.

I get the strategy- it's an evolution of the brand, leveraging it's key attributes. I'm just not sure I buy it. Where does it leave the foundation? I'm looking at my little yellow LIVESTRONG wrist band today, and I'm not sure what to make of it. Yesterday it said I was united in the fight against cancer. Today, however, I think it says a lot more ...and means a lot less. Let's watch- I could always be wrong.

Faster. Cheaper. Better?

Faster? Yes, please.
Cheaper? Thank you.
Better? Are you kidding?
Apple's announcement yesterday that the revolutionary iPhone would be getting an upgrade surprised few people. Rumors abounded that the new versions would take advantage of the faster 3G (third generation) network with speeds approaching broadband. And while most early iPhone adopters were willing to sacrifice speed for mobility, those days are dwindling. Meanwhile, the biggest obstacle to iPhone purchases, not surprisingly, was price. So Apple announced significant cuts, dropping the 8GB iPhone from $399 to $199. Meaning, you'll start seeing a lot more of them.

But the real surprise (to me anyway) was the announcement of iPhone 2.0. Apple had already revolutionized "smart" phones with a new touch interface and multiple applications that take advantage of OS X's advanced graphical user interface, as well as features like multi-touch, built-in GPS and accelerometer. Developers–like kids in a candy store–are already producing amazing apps, soon to be available at the new "App Store." Apple also threw in support for Microsoft Exchange, catering to enterprise users demanding push email, calendar and contacts, enabling the iPhone to take on (and overtake) the industry leader, Blackberry.

Apple didn't have to make it better. Faster? Yes, please. Cheaper? Thank you. But better? Once again, Apple sets the standard for innovation, while their competitors can barely keep up. Not only will the iPhone become a new standard, much like iPod became the brand standard mp3 player, iPhone 2.0–in my opinion–will become the third major computing platform. Effectively there is now Mac OS X, Windows, and iPhone. And pretty soon, your Blackberry with QWERTY keyboard will be as outdated as a rotary-dial phone.

A long time ago...

Last week marked the 30th anniversary of Star Wars, the movie that became a cultural phenomenon and is still relevant today. I'm proud to say that my first movie theater experience was Star Wars, at the age of 6. It was everything you can imagine- the music and sound, the special effects, the characters- and of course, the story. I can think of no better movie for a first movie experience, save perhaps the Wizard of Oz or Harry Potter.

There is much about Star Wars that makes it relevant; George Lucas singlehandedly changed the movie-making business. But the thing I find most relavant was Lucas's decision to get into merchandising. The licensing of Star Wars merchandise created a multi-billion dollar brand and set the stage for ancilary activies that continue to be the norm for movie studios today. I'll confess, my birthday wish every year was that I'd open one of my presents and it would contain the entire Star Wars collection of toys. No such luck.

Blockbusters today become instant franchises. Studios anticipate multi-movie deals before the first installment starts shooting. Product tie-ins are negotiated well-ahead of opening weekend, with toys, video games and apparel only the tip of the iceberg.

I never did receive the entire Star Wars collection (if that's even possible), but have grown to see beyond the hype. The relevance of all that merchandise was driven by the substance of the movie itself. For Disney's "Pirates of the Caribbean" franchise, it's driven by concept and one classic character. Let's face it, a Spiderman nightlight or Shrek toothbrush is no match for a compelling story with great characters and dazzling effects set to a memorable score.

30 years later, I can share the thrill of my first movie experience with my little girls- at home on DVD- and they love it. After all, there's a princess in it!

Guiding Principles

I admire organizations that have a strong corporate culture, which usually begins with a clear sense of purpose. In some cases, it's a "mission statement." In other cases, it's a statement of values or guiding principles. You might even call it a conscience. Regardless of how it is defined, it is critical. It's certainly no coincidence that the most successful companies infuse these principles into everything they do.

It's hard to believe you can boil a company like Nike down to 2 words, but they can: Nike claims to Bring Inspiration and Innovation to Every Athlete in the World. Meanwhile, the BBC asks potential employees to test their personal values against the company's to determine whether the candidate would fit in (Take the test here). In Kansas City, Sprint promotes its value internally as a "single, ownable idea," while other companies, like Disney, go so far as to implement "service standards," defining not only what they do, but how they do it.

It all starts with a clear understanding of WHAT the organization does- and better yet, WHY it matters. This is where the company finds its value. I'm always suprised by how many organizations get by without a clear sense of purpose. Instead of empowering employees to be creative and collaborative, purpose-less organizations breed employees who are often risk-averse, siloed and territorial. Yet, for those with a clear and well-articulated purpose, the best organizations go a step further by not only defining the WHAT and the WHY, they also articulate HOW their mission will be manifested. This permeates all levels from the chief executive to the entry-level hourly.

Fortune Magazine annually lists the 100 Best Companies to Work For, including Google (this year's no. 1) and Kansas City's very own American Century Investments (no. 15). A common thread? Every company on the list provides its employees with a clear purpose, and they are rewarded with loyalty and productivity- which is just as good for morale as it is for the bottom line.

LIVESTRONG DAY 2007

Today was LIVESTRONG DAY, when the Lance Armstrong Foundation (LAF) mobilizes thousands of cancer survivorship advocates throughout the country. Delegates from every state met with elected officials in Washington D.C., while hundreds of local events took place across the country- all organized by volunteers.

A quick glance on the LAF web site showed there were no events organized in my community, so I immediately thought of what I could do. Surely I could do something. Anything. At the very least, I could hand out LIVESTRONG wrist bands and tell local school children about Lance Armstrong's amazing story.

Sure, cancer is a weighty subject for kids, yet it affects 3 out of every 4 families in America. How do you talk about cancer with kids? At least Armstrong's story provides an optimistic- even inspiring- way to look at the disease, so I attempted- after reading one too many Dr. Seuss books- to tell it in verse. Here's an excerpt:

Lance finally got better, but it took awhile
When he was all better he just had to smile

The doctor said "Wait, I want you to know
Your cancer could always come back tomorrow."

Lance said, "Okay, there’s just one thing to do:
We’ll have to fight cancer, but I’ll need your help too."

(Read entire story here)

After reading to my daughter's class of 4 and 5-year-olds, I showed them a video sent by the LAF, then collected penny donations from the class to help fight cancer. Everyone who donated will receive a yellow LIVESTRONG wrist band from the LAF. It's not much, but it's something. And who knows, maybe one of these kids will cure cancer one day.

Starbucks: A best Brand

I'm currently reading Joseph Michelli's book "The Starbucks Experience" to gain insights on how such a well-branded company carefully crafted its image. Michelli wondered too, and when he approached Starbucks about his idea, he was surprised to receive full support and unfettered access at all levels. Such openness may be suprising at first glance, but that alone tells you everything you need to know about Starbucks' success; Everyone from the CEO to the baristas behind the counter embody the brand with clarity, consistency and passion.

Wait a minute here, I thought we were just talking about coffee? Exactly. Passion is critical, whether you're curing cancer or just making a cup of coffee. Communicating passion, however, is easier said than done. That's why I am enjoying this book. Filled with nuggets on employee empowerment strategies, complete with great anecdotes, one statistic jumped off the page. Long considered one of the nation's best employers, with an employee (Starbucks calls them "partners") satisfaction rate at an unheard of 82%, Michelli writes:

"But the treatment that partners receive at Starbucks goes well beyond stock options and health insurance. For example, partners are given extensive training in product knowledge, guiding principles for success, personal empowerment, and the importance of creating warm customer experiences. In stunning contrast to most Fortune 500 companies, Starbucks consistently spends more on training than it does advertising" (page 8).

Makes sense. The most effective marketing is a positive customer experience, which in this case goes beyond just premium coffee. That is why Starbucks remains a dominant market leader despite new competition from unlikely sources like McDonald's and Dunkin' Donuts. While taste tests may induce trial, it's the "Starbucks Experience" that has solidified their market position and makes Starbucks a Best Brand.

Patagonia: a Best Brand

Every now and then, I will try to feature what I refer to as a "Best Brand", companies or organizations that have built indelible relationships with their customers or even the public at large. Inevitably, they do this over time by placing their values at the forefront.

Last week's Fortune magazine (April 2, 2007) featured an article on Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard and his Ventura, California-based outdoor clothing and equipment business. An accomplished climber and outdoor enthusiast, Chouinard had always hoped to combine work and play in his career, and to that end he has succeeded more than most.

He focuses the company's efforts on environmental stewardship more than profits, constantly assessing product materials to find more recyclable fibers. Etched in glass on the front door of their headquarters is the timeless quote of legendary Sierra Club executive director David Brower; "There is no business to be done on a dead planet."

But its hardly doom and gloom- this is a fun company. When surf's up, many of the 350 employees head out the door for 3 or 4 hours, knowing the work will be there when they get back. Patagonia's current brand awareness campaign (advertising typically accounts just 1% of their operating budget) is focused on donating your underwear to be recycled- and people are doing it!

Chouinard knows what others are learning- that having a conscience is good for business, and good for branding. It matters less what you believe in than THAT you believe in something. For Nike, it's innovation and attitude. At Starbucks, it's not coffee, it's the coffee experience. And this is articulated throughout these organizations so that every employee is empowered to deliver the brand promise. After all, brands are all about relationships, and people like to know where you stand.

Newsweek features LIVESTRONG

The ubiquitous yellow LIVESTRONG wristband- a symbol of the fight against cancer- made its way onto the cover of Newsweek last week for the magazine’s coverage of Elizabeth Edwards and Tony Snow’s recent recurrence. More than 10 million cancer survivors nationwide were instantly reminded of the courage it took to overcome the dreaded diagnosis, and the fear of recurrence they live with everyday.

Of course it shouldn’t take a Newsweek article to remind us that cancer is an ever-present threat (1 in 3 people will be diagnosed with cancer in their lifetime), but I want to focus on the power of symbols and storytelling in driving public awareness and interest. In higher education particularly, we focus on the value of the scientific research being done in the laboratory- which is essential- but the human story can get lost. Perhaps more importantly, the relevance is not understood.

Stories that resonate deal with real people and real life- those are the most compelling. So are the ones that hit close to home (3 out of 4 families will care for a family member with cancer). Lance Armstrong has become a powerful poster boy for survivorship by not merely surviving, but by living life to the fullest, and staying dedicated to the fight that affects so many Americans. People naturally draw inspiration from his story. I also draw inspiration from the way he’s managed to leverage that attention. After all, it wasn't Lance's picture that appeared on the cover of Newsweek.

The Lance Armstrong Foundation (LAF) celebrates its 10-year anniversary this year, but the yellow wristband is just 3 years old. Not since Lou Gehrig has a major athlete or celebrity been so linked to a cause. Still, Armstrong’s foundation has benefited even more by nurturing and leveraging the LIVESTRONG brand. Following Armstrong's retirement from cycling in 2005, the foundation is stronger than ever, thanks to its successful branding. The Newsweek cover just underscores the relevance of the LIVESTRONG brand today. It is at once a message, a cause, a color and a symbol- seamlessly tied to Lance’s story of survival and triumph- bringing hope and raising awareness millions of times a day. This powerful combination gives the LAF what I consider to be a “Best Brand.”

Thoughts on branding

For centuries, man has relied on symbols to tell stories, represent ownership and invoke emotion. In the modern business world, this concept has become known as branding, taken from the common practice of ranchers who branded their livestock to denote ownership.

Over time, businesses learned to develop brands as a means to differentiate themselves from one another. This practice has become so ubiquitous, it can now conjure an entire experience, sensation or story from a simple color (What can brown do for you?), letterform (the golden arches) or graphic element (the swoosh). As a result, a brand is not merely a symbol or logo, but a complete set of perceptions held by consumers that define their expectations of the brand, and in the best cases, their relationship with it.

Though brands were embraced by the corporate world, higher education viewed itself as a public service, practically immune to the pressures of commerce and public scrutiny. That all changed in the last 20 years, as competition for the best and brightest students intensified, funding sources tightened and calls for accountability soared. The colleges and universities that thrived were the ones that had compelling stories to tell, and could make a singular, lasting impression with their audiences.

Unfortunately, the natural decentralization within institutions of higher education has led to a dizzying array of disparate logos and messages as departments have succeeded in differentiating themselves from one another instead of uniting behind the institution’s mission. In many cases, the success of a unit’s brand identity has come at the expense of the institution’s image and reputation.

For this reason, the most progressive institutions- including the University of Kansas- have sought to unify their identities by strategically positioning themselves and defining their brands. Although this requires discipline from all participants and the support of institutional leadership, the result will enhance the university’s long-term image and reputation, while improving the bottom line.

Ultimately, an institution and all of its departments will function more cohesively given the proper communication tools and the context within which they can tell their compelling stories. When audiences can make an immediate and lasting association with a brand, it is the first step toward building a long-term relationship that is based on trust and the shared values a brand communicates.