Brand Aid for Haiti

I can’t imagine watching helplessly as my own daughter struggled for survival, pinned down by some steel bar, unable to escape the rubble of a major earthquake. I also can’t imagine hearing her cries, knowing I could do little to help. The very thought is unbearable.

I came across this story on CNN. And, sadly, the story ended tragically. Though freed from the wreckage, this poor girl didn’t make it. Doctors couldn’t save her, devastating her family and all those involved in the rescue effort.

So many heart wrenching, tragic stories are coming out of what was already one of the poorest countries in the world.

While devastating and horrific, these are the stories that inspire us to act, to do what we can to help.

Individuals act. Communities pull together. Organizations get into motion.

Businesses and brands also offer support in various forms.

Consider brand aid for Haiti. Here’s a rundown based on what I can find on the Web of how the world’s top brands are responding to the tragedy. This list is limited to the world’s top 10 brands, based on Interbrand’s Best Global Brands ranking of 2009.

1. Coca-Cola: The Coca-Cola Foundation has donated $1 million to the American Red Cross as well as water and other beverages for immediate on-the-ground relief efforts.

2. IBM: I have not come across any public announcement from Big Blue. However, the technology giant does provide support to the U.S. State Department’s Center for International Disaster Information, which plays a major role in disaster relief and recovery efforts.

3. Microsoft: Initial commitment of $1.25 million, including cash and in-kind contributions. The company is matching employee donations. Microsoft is helping to drive awareness and donations for relief efforts through MSN and Bing. In addition, the company is working through NetHope, a group made up of some of the world’s largest humanitarian relief organizations, which focuses on ensuring that these organizations are prepared to react quickly and effectively to work together during an emergency.

4. GE: Has pledged $2.5 million to support relief and recovery efforts and is running a corporate matching contribution program. GE says it’s working with its partners to assess response efforts and determine next steps to help restore infrastructure and services to the impacted areas.

5. Nokia: Unknown.

6. McDonald’s: Contributing $500,000 and matching donations from Arcos Dorados, the company that operates nearly 1,700 McDonald’s restaurants in Latin America. Total estimated contribution: about $1 million. Funds will go through the International Federation of the Red Cross. The team in Latin America is running a grassroots program that’s expected to generate an additional $500,000.

7. Google: $1 million to the relief and recovery efforts. Google also has a link on its homepage to information, resources and ways everyone can help.

8. Toyota: Has pledged $500,000 in donations to be divided equally among the American Red Cross, Save the Children, and Doctors Without Borders. The auto company is matching any employee contributions to those organizations.

9. Intel: The computer chip giant has made no public announcement as far as I know, but Wendy Hawkins, executive director of the Intel Foundation, notes on the company’s corporate social responsibility blog that over 700 employees made donations to relief efforts within the first 24 hours of the catastrophe. The Intel Foundation has committed to match employee donations and contribute an additional $250,000. Intel, like Microsoft, is also supporting relief and recovery efforts through NetHope.

10. Disney: $100,000 in humanitarian aid to earthquake victims through the Red Cross International Fund.

As I gathered this information, I couldn’t help but wonder about the motivations behind brand aid. I began to question whether these brands are acting out of concern for the larger social interest, or out of self-interest.

At the end of the day though, my feeling is that little value lies in casting aspersions on the intentions behind brand aid. Haitians need all the help the rest of the world can offer.

And even if brands are acting partially out of concern for how their response to a major human calamity is perceived by consumers and other stakeholders, isn’t that a good thing? Don’t we want to them to feel that they’re accountable for their response?

I think we want a world in which companies/brands put people truly at the center. We want a world in which companies/brands embrace new imperatives beyond profits.

We understand the need for businesses to make sense economically, but the price of entry includes social and environmental responsibility. The price of entry includes acting in ways that fit and reflect consumers’ values.

Consider what McDonald’s CEO Jim Skinner had to say when announcing support for Haiti: “While we don’t have McDonald’s restaurants in Haiti, our contribution reflects our commitment to people all over the world.”

Well said.

No Shock and Awe in Interbrand’s Top 100

I had hoped to go out with a preview of Interbrand’s top global brands ranking for 2009, but didn’t make it in time. That’s too bad as I would have been right on the money in many of my predictions and you would have bowed before me in true Wayne and Garth fashion: “We’re not worthy! We’re not worthy!”

But then again, maybe not. After all, who wouldn’t have been able to predict what we see in this year’s list? I didn’t see much in the way of surprises.

Coca-Cola Holds No. 1 Crown
Coca-Cola is still the king of the brand mountain. That’s ten years running for the behemoth brand. This isn’t by chance. Coca-Cola doesn’t rest on its laurels. In 2008, the company launched some 700 new products and continued to aggressively market and assert its relevance in the world.

Financials, Yawn, Fall
No mouths dropped to the floor with the tumbling taken by financial sector brands. As expected American International Group (AIG) dropped to… well… oblivion! That’s a big fall from No. 54 in last year’s list. Merrill Lynch, formerly No. 34, and ING, formerly No. 86, also dropped off the board.

Google in Next Year’s Top 5?
Google continued its upward trajectory. I felt Google would crack the top 10, which it did. The question in my mind is whether Google will be a top 5 brand in 2010. Chances are good. This is a company that’s in full growth mode with the innovation pedal pushed to the floor.

No Rot in Apple
You won’t find any rot in Apple, which jumped to No. 20 from No. 24. Though Mac sales have fallen, the brand asserted its relevance in record iPod sales and all-time high market share for Mac OS software. This is a brand with iconic status in its category and I expect to see Apple’s brand worth rise even higher, especially with the legendary Steve Jobs back full-time at the helm.

Sony: Free Fallin’?
Sony, by contrast, may be poised for a free fall in the years ahead. Though still ranked in the top 30 at No. 29, Sony is starting to lag behind its competitors in all of the categories where it once dominated. That kind of erosion is significant. Sony was once a speck on the horizon for wannabe competitors. Now, competitors actually have Sony in their rear view mirror. Sony needs to step it up on the innovation front to retake a commanding lead.

Bounce Back for Harley?
Another brand on the decline is Harley-Davidson, which dropped to No. 73 from No. 50. The economy isn’t on the company’s side and poor sales in the U.S. have hurt badly. However, we’re still talking about an iconic brand here… and I believe we’ll see the hog bounce back when turbulent economic waters calm.

$55.5 Billion: Poof, Gone Just like That!
We saw the overall value of Interbrand’s top 100 global brands fall for the first time, by $55.5 billion. That’s a four percent drop. With the world’s economic engine sputtering, that’s no shocker. I don’t know if we’ll see this value recaptured by 2010, do you? I hope so though!

Be sure to stop by Interbrand’s best global brands page where you can download the full report and see the rankings and analysis for yourself.

I’d appreciate hearing your take on Interbrand’s top brands list. Did any of the rankings surprise you? What trends are we seeing? What lessons can we learn from any of the brands increasing or decreasing in value?

Brand Champ or Chump: Can Microsoft’s Opening Ads Help Bing Become King?

This week’s Brand Champ or Chump considers Microsoft’s ad campaign for its new search engine, Bing.

In these spots, Microsoft suggests we’re all suffering from a serious affliction, Search Overload Syndrome… and get this: we don’t even know it.

Our problem, says Microsoft: overload from irrelevant Web search results. We’re simply too overwhelmed with data from useless search results.

The ads strive to drive the point home by personifying search as if it were a person. When looking for something as simple as a new place to do breakfast, search (the person) almost robotically starts issuing senseless factoids that one might typically run into on a search results page.

After highlighting the syndrome, the spots close with the following: “Find the cure at Bing.com. It’s not just a search engine; it’s the first-ever decision engine, from Microsoft.”

Put differently, Bing will help you cut through the clutter and get the information you need to make smarter, more informed decisions.

I have to admit. I didn’t realize I was suffering from any search engine affliction. Google is just a part of my life. It’s a daily habit. But, I found myself asking, what if I my searches could in fact be easier, faster and better?

And with that in mind, I’m going to run against the grain of criticism that I’ve seen on the Bing ads and call them a Brand Champ.

When you’re going up against the category leader, the undisputed leader with almost 65 percent market share, the one that’s part of people’s daily habits, you’ve got to get people thinking. You’ve got to get them questioning.

The Bing ads, at least this first wave, do not dig into the new search engine’s features. And that’s by design, I think. Microsoft just wants to plant a simple idea: that a better way to search just might be out there.

The spots aren’t blow-your-mind sensational, but they do just enough to plant a seed of curiosity. And that’s what Microsoft is going for at this stage. The spots do the job.

The tough part will be translating the curiosity and consideration into converts. Promising to make Web searches better… well, that’s a big promise. If Bing can’t deliver… if it can’t differentiate, habits will stay the same.

I don’t think Bing is going to erode Google’s market share overnight. Habits are hard to break and Google simply is search right now.

That said, Microsoft appears ready to make a fight out of it and put their money where their mouth is… and they just might make a meaningful dent as time goes on.

You can see the Bing ads here.

Take a look and then let me know if you think these spots for the new Bing search engine are:

1. A brand champ?
2. A brand chump?
3. Somewhere in between?

You decide.

Oh, and I have to mention Microsoft’s use of the word Bing as a verb: Bing & decide. 

Brandverbing at its finest, isn’t it? (see my post on brandverbing). Of course, with Google part of our daily lexicon, you can be sure Microsoft weighed name candidates with similar potential.

Brandverbing Brands

With McDonald’s foray into espressos and lattes, we now have a new brand verb: McCafé.

Or do we?

Of course not.

McDonald’s promotional language does have some fun with the brand as a verb: McCafé your day…. But this isn’t what McDonald’s is ultimately going for.

As I thought of McDonald’s McCafé ads, images of Clint Eastwood popped into my head with the line: “Go ahead. McCafé my day.”

“I McCaféd my morning.”

“Let’s go McCafé our day.”

Uh… no. It just doesn’t work. And, as I said, this isn’t what McDonald’s is going for, I believe. They’re just playing with words.

In any case, all of this has me thinking about brands as verbs.

I have to say: I love brands as verbs. They’re alive. They convey a sense of action and motion. They’re all about getting things done. They suggest a unique experience.

Marketing guru Seth Godin has noted the difference between nouns and verbs.

He says:

“People care much more about verbs than nouns. They care about things that move, that are happening, that change. They care about experiences and events and the way things make us feel.

“Nouns just sit there, inanimate lumps. Verbs are about wants and desires and wishes.”

Wouldn’t you rather have your brand in the latter category?

Makes me wonder if Microsoft gave any consideration to this when exploring name candidates for their new search engine to rival google. Will we ever add “bing” to our vocabulary, just as we’ve done with google? Hard to imagine.

Brands as verbs (e.g. FedEx, Xerox, Twitter) can be powerful. We’re talking about tremendous brand recognition and distinction.

But is it good or bad? When should you choose to “brandverb” your brand? When does it make sense? When doesn’t it?

I’m sure the lawyers would strongly caution against “brandverbs”… (By the way, I saw the term “brandverb” used somewhere. If I could remember where, I’d include an attribution.)

Please weigh in on brandverbing. Not a new topic, but I’d like to hear your thoughts on this practice.