Jim Lentz, president of U.S. Toyota sales, acknowledges that the situation is embarrassing, “but it doesn’t mean we (have) lost our edge on quality.”
Maybe not. But here’s the problem. First we learned of the accelerator problem. And now we’re hearing about braking problems with the Lexus and Prius. If we just had the accelerator issue, consumers might be willing to give Toyota the benefit of the doubt. But with other problems coming to light, consumers may now question who Toyota really is.
Is Toyota the auto company who can be counted on to build reliable, high-performing vehicles? Or is Toyota a brand that’s no more trustworthy than any of the other big brands?
Toyota has always ranked exceptionally well in the perception of value category. The current crisis now threatens to undermine that precious asset.
What’s the lesson?
Well, for starters, you can never let up on guarding your reputation.
As I’ve said many times before, brand building is a marathon event (probably more like an ultra-marathon). It’s tough, takes a long, long time and there’s no shortcuts. You build your brand mile by mile by mile.
But if you let up for a moment, if you slip, if you fail to do what you need to do, if you let your customers down, brand value that’s taken decades to build can be destroyed in an instant.
Guarding your brand’s reputation must be an obsession. It’s a total commitment.
Through all of the media reports on Toyota’s troubles, one of the ideas put forth is that the Japanese auto manufacturer had gotten complacent and overly focused on growth.
In fact, you can go back as early as 2005 and 2006, Toyota was talking then about the need to fight complacency and re-focus on quality even as it pursued growth across the globe.
Wasn’t it the Japanese who taught us that the relentless pursuit of quality and continuous improvement is key to growth?
For Toyota, the worst may not be over. We’re hearing reports that Toyota knew about the accelerator problem for over two years. And according to a U.S. House of Representatives committee, the sudden acceleration problem has been linked to 19 deaths in the last decade.
I think this is the most troublesome part of this story… that Toyota may have hid from its own problems. All of the sudden, it’s not just reliability and quality issues, it’s a question of integrity.
My view: Toyota will need to work hard, very hard, to bounce back from this crisis. They need to earn back the trust they’ve lost, and they need to rebuild the perception of high value.
Part of the value of having a strong brand is the ability to weather a storm when things go against you. Toyota will benefit from the brand equity it’s built with consumers, especially Toyota loyalists. But rebuilding the brand equity lost won’t happen overnight. It’s going to take years.
For more on Toyota’s troubles, see Toyota’s Chief Steps Forward to Apologize.






Put yourself in Adidas’ shoes for a moment.
I was reading from Kenneth Gronbach’s The Age Curve: How to Profit from the Coming Demographic Storm, a work in which he argues that changes in marketing and business today are based on the size of the generations we are selling to.


October 27, 2009
Social Media: Where Negatives Are Positives?
If you read my previous post (What is Socialnomics?), then you know I had the chance to review the book Socialnomics, in which author Erik Qualman offers a number of insights and observations on social media.
One of those insights I’d like to share is his counsel for individuals and businesses to accept negative comments originating from social media and, in fact, to “relish the critical feedback.”
Qualman feels the way he does for various reasons, which he articulates in both the book and on his blog. See Negative Feedback Is Not So Bad. In sum, he says we have much more to gain from embracing the negatives.
But in full view of everyone? Try convincing most business leaders that they should embrace negative comments on the corporate blog or Web site. Most of them have only ever followed the rule of accentuating the positive as much as possible and avoiding any reinforcement of the negative. After all, why upset customers and create perception issues by displaying negative and potentially damaging comments? It just doesn’t make sense, or does it?
I do appreciate Qualman’s argument that embracing the negatives gives your brand a chance to shine in a public forum. By putting everything out there for all to see, you have the opportunity to show your mettle. You have the chance to demonstrate what you’re made of, to demonstrate how well you listen and respond.
You messed up on an order and you’re going to make it right? Prove it. Show just how good you are at resolving problems.
You believe in two-way dialogue. Prove it. Show just how willing you are to listen and accept input.
This all comes down to authenticity and transparency, key attributes in a socialnomic world. As Qualman says, it’s okay to be seen as less than perfect because consumers and buyers already know that’s the case! Nobody’s perfect. You don’t need to pretend. All you need to do is strive to excel in staying true to your brand promise and values. When you fall short, admit it and take action to get back on track. The people you care about will respect you for it.
If you’re looking for an additional read on this subject, look no further than Jeremiah Owyang’s Web Strategy blog where he tackles the question: What if they leave negative comments on my site/blog/forum?
In his view, negative comments come with the social media territory. If you want to be seen as open, you must fully open up… to the good, the bad and the ugly. And if you want to be seen as confident, with nothing to hide, you’ll embrace the negatives with the positives.
I’m sure some of you have addressed this topic before. Could you please share your views and perspectives or point us to similar discussions in the blogosphere? I’d love to dig deeper on this one.
4 Comments
Filed under Social Media
Tags: brand, branding, brands, Erik Qualman, Jeremiah Owyang, negative comments, public relations, Social Media, socialnomics, web strategy