Brands and brand strategies can be viewed as conceptual frameworks that demand consistency of execution. It follows then that brands promote continuity. Competition disrupts continuity. So if you are not acting disruptively, odds are that a disruption will be visited upon you by someone you might not have even realized was a competitor.
The point is that you must do everything possible to be disruptive. Strategically disruptive. Disruptive at the product or service level. Disruptive at the marketing communication level. If you want my attention, you need to disrupt whatever else is holding my attention. If you want my business, you need to disrupt whatever is causing me to do business with someone else.
Remember, attention has become the most precious commodity in the marketplace. Also recall how difficult it is to create real change.
There’s a problem with staying in the center of the strategic “box.” This kind of behavior gets an A+ for consistency but a D- for attention-getting. Tactically, your job as a marketer is to bang the hell out of the walls of that box, all while still staying inside. In other words, get creative. Make noise. Promote change. Always keep moving. Always keep building. Always stay “in-strategy.” But first and foremost, always make noise.
Generally, the only way to ensure a discontinuity is to create it yourself. Whatever that discontinuity is, it must work to your advantage, and therefore must play into your brand strategy.
Napster disrupted the music market, but in a way that could never make money. Apple disrupted the music market in a way that did make money- generally a better approach.
Yahoo! disrupted the way we find information, but then acted as if it had no idea what it had done. Google knew.
In fact, when you look at the big four- Apple, Amazon, Google and Facebook- they are in the process of disrupting about a hundred different markets. You may not think Â you compete with these guys, but the odds are that sooner or later you will. Don’t wast energy figuring out if this is true or not, just figure out the how of the disruption- then beat them to it and make it work to your advantage.
Amazon sold books, but created a disruption through the Kindle. In some ways the company even attacked its own business in order to build that business. If Amazon hadn’t developed Kindle, the book business would’ve been disrupted by- you guessed it- Apple. This disruption would have been terrific- as long as you work in Cupertino and not Seattle.
Today, Google owns the idea of search. Now it’s up to some aggressive new player to create a new discontinuity, one that works to the advantage of its brand strategy. Search is now ubiquitous- it is indeed the Internet’s killer app- but therein lies both Google’s opportunity and its vulnerability. Search has begun to splinter into several specialized segments. Who will own music search? Who will own television search? Who will own local search?
If strong specialists don’t disrupt the flow, Google will own all of the segments because it now has continuity working for it. Bing proved to be insufficiently disruptive, attacking Google head-on instead of doing something different- something truly disruptive.
Unless someone creates a true disruption, Google will continue to control the agenda. But the reality is that the brand most likely to disrupt the search market in some way is Google itself. Why? Because Google is really good at it. Disruption is hardwired into its DNA.
Check back next week when Austin challenges tackles the ‘M’ word–Marketing, Â and learn more now by reading Brand Is a Four Letter Word