The rise of a new world order. Consumers become co-creators.

A conversation with some Doha bankers the other day” “Oh, the global credit crunch hasn’t affected us in Qatar”. I bit my tongue. “My brain was screaming, “Are you for real”?
Apart from the fact that it’s people like you, sitting in ivory towers in London, New York Frankfurt and Beijing that caused this mess in the first place. Don’t you get it, finally, that the world is one BIG global village? Who was it who said that if a butterfly flutters its wings in Brazil, it causes a tornado in South Carolina? We’re all one! When you reduce everything to its smallest constituent element, whether it’s a rock or a human, it’s all vibration, tiny electric charges. That’s it, that’s what you and I are made of.

OK, I digress perhaps. Causative formation is a topic that interests me. My point simply is that this ‘credit crunch’ and the aftermath is a seismic reaction of a much deeper malaise. The fundamental changes that are taking place in society are signs of a macro trend that will affect everyone’s lives, everywhere. It’s the dawn of a new enlightenment where people power rules.

Many of us know someone who has lost his or her job. That person now is moving into his or her own one-man business. The days of staying in a job for life are gone. We don’t believe in corporations anymore, we don’t believe in BIG business. We don’t want to be sold to.
We don’t even believe in government anymore if you review the decline in voting numbers over the years. These are HUGE changes.

Many of us (bankers excluded) have cut back spending, trying to live within a budget and buying only what we have the cash to pay for. So we’re looking at utility and functionality rather than ostentatious “it looks great, but it doesn’t do anything”. This, combined with the other macro trend, “save our planet – think green” means that we re-visit design from the basis of how, when and where we dispose of a product, what it can be made of that’s reusable, recyclable or bio-degradable as a function and format of design, even before we start drawing, visualizing or creating. This is a sea change to our thinking. Gone is “bling-bling” of the nineties and noughties. Now we’re into retro chic, back to basics, chicken soup ‘cos it’s good for you’ careful living.

The new consumer is saying, “where’s the value?” and “why should I bother” when you try and sell your products. Financial services companies of all persuasions are sinking faster than Venice in the minds of the public. Their brands are no longer credible.
“Hello?” Are you trying to sell me something?” Do you know who I am? No?. Well find out and try and get to know me first. Financial institutions are shouting about safety and security. Really? And where were you when the bonuses were being handed out?
“Safety” and “Security”, the buzzwords of old are just not credible anymore. We, the public want innovation with real, tangible benefits for us, the consumer (yes it is OUR money!), based on an honest, transparent, authentic PARTNERSHIP in the financial services sector.

The worst recession since the Great Depression is now nearly over and people who survived this ordeal are now seeing the first green shoots of recovery. This will lead to a renewed focus on spending, after salting away any savings they had under the mattress. But it won’t be the big-ticket items that they will be spending on. It will be the necessaries: food, shelter, and clothing. And when we say shelter, we’re talking about doing up your home, rather than buying a new one. Clothing will be more about accessorizing for that jacket, rather than a new suit and food will be cooked at home rather than blitzing out in that new Gordon Ramsay restaurant. Having said that, people will be looking for new experiences to celebrate their survival and rebirth. So travel, probably in your country, rather than long haul, films and DVD rentals as well as sporting and cultural events should see a rise in numbers. We’ll need new cars to get there, but probably more hybrid models and smart cars than Hummers, for which the death-knell is already sounding.

Fundamentally this crisis has accentuated and positioned brands even more at the centre of communications. For brands, after all, are the greatest gift that commerce has ever given to culture and people will buy brands now even more based on what these brands say about them.
Does this brand reflect my values, as well as provide value? Does it communicate and resonate with who I am and who I want to be? Does the company that make them have a corporate social positioning that is authentic and that I believe in?
And finally the clarion call is going out to change the moniker given to us, we, the people. We are no longer “consumers”, buying products and services as an amoebic reaction to artificial stimulus (advertising) of perceived needs based on fear, must-have or peer pressure. This is so 20th century. We have moved on from that. In the main. Now the environment is one based on truth, authenticity, honesty, value and values.
We are co-creators. Talk to us as equals. Involve us in the process, whether through crowdsourcing, social media and networks or digital engagement. The balance of power has shifted. We are now in charge and demand to be heard. The genie of awareness and enlightenment is now truly out of the box.

Letter from Qatar: Qatar is slowly moving to the winds of change

THE URGE TO MERGE

Merger mania seems to have engulfed Qatar. QTIC and Woqod, Mawashi and Meera, Gulf Warehousing and Agility and Al Aqaria and Barwa have led the way and a perhaps a few more are expected to jump on this bandwagon. Is it a good or bad thing? Only time will tell.

Companies often merge with their competition in order to create economies of scale. But not all mergers are successful. Why not?

First of all, blending the cultures of companies are fraught with challenges. A company with a relaxed atmosphere and casual dress code might conflict with a company who wear formal suits. Cultural styles can vary from patterns of speech, value systems, lifestyle, city attitudes, headquarter locations and so on. Merges also fail because the business model of one company is archaic or outdated. If you were a farmer and had a diseased sheep would you mate it with another healthy sheep? Definitely not. Surely you would opt to “put it down”.

Companies who grow through acquisition have long histories of laying off personnel as part of their restructuring and losing customers. This breeds complacency, de-motivation and a loss of hard-earned experience. Most companies who grow by the sword, die by the sword. If only these types of mergers could buy the assets (the people and customers) without buying the diseased thinking or systems of the company then it might be worth considering. If you can justify your economies of scale without justifying away 20% of your ‘new companies’ employees, then you’re creating good business karma.

Another challenge with merging is the distraction a merger causes for employees customers and managers. The distraction opens the doors to competitors to move more swiftly and capture significant business from BOTH companies who are attempting the merger.

“So which mergers actually succeed?” you might ask. From experience, mergers should exhibit the following 5 characteristics in order to be considered potentially viable candidates for a successful merger:

1.Cultural synergy.
If one company’s culture is jeans, pinball machines, cut-throat hiring/firing and impulsive decision-making and your company values clear processes and systems for most activities, good communication and values employees (no layoff policy) then you may have a big challenge on their hands.

2. Compatibility between mission statements and direction.
What are you trying to do? What are they trying to do? If they relate closely, you have the first element of success. Is it a merger or a takeover in disguise?

3. Beneficial economies of scale.
Larger does not always mean better. Some larger companies cannot respond as quickly to market changes due to their size and the challenge coordinating new directions to employees. Economies of scale are not always beneficial so make sure you can quantify that having more of one direction is what you want.

4. Headquarters in same city/region.
If your company is headquartered in neurotically fast-paced, job-focused New York and the other country is based in a slower-paced southern state, you might have a big problem. Two companies should be headquartered near each other to maximize the return on the investment and maximize the economies of scale. It is harder to communicate halfway across the country than it is to communicate someplace 10 miles away.

5. Demonstrable positive growth.
If buying a company with more advanced technology that would take far longer for you to create then it makes sense to buy. Or, if their success in a market has consistently eroded your ability to be successful in multiple business segments, it might be beneficial to learn from them. There are two ways to do that: hire their people, or buy their company.

If you cannot see the positive effects from a merger, clearly, concisely, and where at least 90% of your employees will embrace the merger, then it is not recommended.
Far too many companies announced mergers in the past, proudly beating their chest saying they would become the No. 1 in their market by combining the No. 2 and No. 4 companies only to end up No. 3 or No. 4 (or worse) when the dust settled.

The best way to grow a company is to hire smart people, build a consensus for growth based upon integrity and honesty, and enable people to create and innovate to the best of their power. Rushing into mergers can do more harm than good.

Stockholders – stand up and be counted.
Knowing how a merger will affect your investment in a certain stock requires that you first understand the circumstances and the conditions of the buyout. Ask yourself three important questions:

1. What is the current financial condition of each company? If both companies are financial healthy then joining them together is likely to make each entity stronger. If one company is in trouble then the other will be saddled with the problems of the other.

2. How many shares will you have after the merger takes place?
In some cases, if one company is eliminated after the alliance takes place the shareholders of the eliminated company might receive only 1 share in the new company for every 4 shares you had in the old company depending on the current market price. You might want to sell before the merger takes place.

3. How much is the acquiring company paying for the smaller company?
If the acquirer is paying less than or equal to what the smaller business is worth, this might not be a good sign.

Shareholders will be given the right to vote on a merger before it takes place.
The management of the company usually holds most of the shares, so their votes count for the majority. Make sure you exercise your right to vote.
Your decision should be based on what will be the best for the future value of your shares. Examine the income statement and balance sheet of the other company to make sure whether the merger is beneficial or detrimental.

The purpose of this article is to throw open the pro’s and con’s of a merger. Study the facts and you should be able to ascertain what the consequences will be. Use your common sense and you should be fine. Better still seek professional advice just to make sure.

Remember that throughout the process of merging, communication, both internal and external has to be frank, honest, transparent and motivational. Not only are people going to be scared internally about the safety of their jobs, but they are going to need reassuring as to where the company is going and what their role is in this new venture.
The process is one of enrollment into the new vision so that people can become advocates and brand ambassadors.
Most companies spend their time ensconced with the management consultants, accountants and lawyers and then hand out bland statements of vision, mission and values once the internal systems have been restructured and reorganized.


Then staff are expected to lift up the baton and run with it, without a real sense of purpose or direction and usually without any dynamism or commitment. The sense of pride is lost as is the sense of belonging. In essence the brand equity is diluted at best and non-existent at worst. This is where the real capital of a company lies, in its brand value. And this is best expressed by the employees living (and loving) the brand, how it is expressed and activated at all customer touch points. This is a self-perpetuating cycle. As Oliver Cromwell said: “my army won because they knew what they were fighting for and they loved what they knew.”

Once the systems and processed have been worked out in the new merger, CEO’s need to get the brand consultants in to fire up the brand, identify the new DNA or brand story and how this is going to be manifested, communicated and lived by the employees. Thus begins the process of brand engagement with key employees so that the essence of who you are, what you do and how you do what you do (values), i.e. what you value, is shared and allowed to be experienced.

The earlier that this can happen on the journey to a new beginning, the better.

The best brands are the ones where time and energy have been taken to not instill the vision, mission and values in a way which can be absorbed and lived by employees, but also to then roll this out into the customer experience, seamlessly and effortlessly, the experience transmitted by the employee and transferred to the customer.

This is how ordinary brands become great brands.

Brands, communications and the new paradigm

Brand strategy and communications sometimes seem like an "add-on". After all how many marketing/communication directors make it to the Board? And how many are CEO's? Furthermore, the political/economic/social environment one finds oneself in often dictate what one can or cannot achieve by way of brand/communications strategy.

In less developed countries, the power of brand is HUGE as individuals encircle themselves with the trappings of power and success to validate/justify their success and show the world they made it!. This is less true in more developed countries, as people become more disillusioned by the shackles of capitalism and long for a return to a more simple, authentic life. Hence the move towards "no brand", "no frills", "slow food" and more focus on life/work/play balance. This is important. Because people are changing their view of what's important in their lives. Companies and their brands that don't recognise this new paradigm are going to be overtaken with more enlightened brands that get it!

“The main thing is the main thing”. Back to basics - a formula for growth.

The CEO of restaurant chain Wagamama tells us: "The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing."


He should know. He has built Wagamama into a global empire. Today the company has 86 restaurants in 11 countries, and is worth US$1bn.

The essence of brand is about what you value. Values represent the key differentiator and rallying cry for effective positioning in a crowded market place. Not only does this value (or set of values) inspire your workforce, it also resonates with people’s desire for self-expression, validation and justification. “This is who I am, or who I want to be” – your brand or product is part of a multi-layered shorthand for people to express their personality, attributes, sense of place and belonging. The greatest gift that commerce has ever given culture and the fundamental DNA, or essence, is the brand; stripped of all permutations and adornments and representing a story, a brand story that is believable, campaignable and above all compelling in its authenticity.

The individual seeks identity and a sense of belonging; hence families, tribes, nations and regions instill an enormous sense of pride and self-belief. Just watch the winning football team’s fans as they leave the stadium or when their player scores that winning goal.

The Olympics, now the rallying cry for many nations’ athletes remains an exemplary opportunity for companies to link their values with those of the premier sporting events this planet produces.

On a more realistic note, routes to market, price, distribution, quality control and all the elements that form the engine of a company’s offer, pale into insignificance if they don’t stand for something which resonates with people, naturally. The brand represents your real route to market, everything else is process. Mass production has succeeded. We are over-serviced with 120,000 product lines on the shelves in our supermarkets when 30 years ago there were only 30,000.

Rising to the new consciousness

Fast forward to 2010. We’re looking at a world moving faster at every turn. The convergence of technologies, internet as the great leveller, fragmentation of media, podcasts, social networking - where an amateur songwriter can hold a rock concert from her living room and over 200,000 people tune in - where anyone can be an instant star for 15 minutes and where you are “always on”, everywhere, the traditional rules of ‘pile ‘em high and sell it cheap’ are not valid anymore. There is a new consciousness and awareness permeating the nether regions of society.

The effects of climate change, increasing middle classes, clamouring for more – more meat, oil and steel, more luxury products, more consumption - from India to China and from the Middle East to Russia, we are at the precipice of a quantum leap in consciousness and behaviour. The planet can’t go on like this and the combination of more is less and less is more will meet at noon at the OK corral of life for a showdown for the future of mankind as we know it.

These emerging nations that happen to be centres of some of the largest population groupings in the world are striving harder and working longer to achieve the sense of ‘satisfaction’ and ‘success’ that the promise of mass consumerism can offer.

The extent of their longing is now limited only by the day of reckoning, when the planet, sick of all this abuse of resources and environment, reacts violently and decimates a large swathe of our population, or forces us to re-adjust radically as we face the heating up of our environment, to the point where the very basics of food, water and clean air become scarce.

The death knell is sounding and many companies are rallying behind the flag that saving the environment is more productive (and profitable) than abusing it.

The West looks East – Middle East!

I don’t profess to be an expert, but it occurs to me that the preponderance of sun in this region lends massively to the notion that the Middle East could become the centre of solar energy production.

We are moving forward with education as one of the key pillars of diversification away from an oil economy. It is important that entrepreneurship linked to the well-being of our planet should provide a rallying cry for the development of complete industries from business incubators, knowledge parks, greenhouses, hydroponic agriculture and water production – in effect safeguarding the future for our children and theirs and fostering the entrepreneurs and scientists that this region has lost as the pendulum of history swung West and East.

‘Back to basics’ is a philosophy based on simplicity, a value that is rare in this over-complicated world as brand after brand seeks to take centre stage by adding more bells and whistles. But don’t mistake naivety for simplicity. There are many brands in Qatar and throughout the GCC verging on the naïve. Why, pray, would you not learn from the basic error that a price-led philosophy loses out over a value-led philosophy not often, but always.

Why do tenders invariably go to the cheapest bidder and not to the one who offers the most value? The Chinese are very clever at this – they insist on knowledge and information transfer, effectively providing the breeding ground for an employment strategy based on a skills-based economy.

Why do local organisations enact this strange dance of change-step programme: wait, hold, go, quick-quick, slow? Why do companies not invest in people? Instead relying on constant cheap sources of labour against the experience of tried and trusted employees whose knowledge go with them when their NOC is refused and they head home.

To pitch or not to pitch

I am really not one for criticism, nor do I have the solutions, at least not all of them, but sometimes a little common sense goes a long way. In my business of branding, design and advertising, it is clear to me that the constant round of free pitches doesn’t do anyone any good. It only adds to the cost of doing business and doesn’t allow us to build strong relationships and yes, partnerships, with clients to build effective brands and communication programmes. Note that some of the world’s most famous campaigns and strongest brands were built on a long-term relationship between client and agency. Going out to pitch every single time is not only a waste of time and resources for all concerned but is not expedient, nor does it deliver the best campaign as the agency will not have discovered the DNA, the soul, the essence or brand story that should permeate every communication, both internal and external. And so a brand is not built; rather a temporary flag-waving exercise is undertaken that may be pretty and may do the job, but only that job. And the client can prove that they have not wasted the company’s money – well, sort of.

Organic branding. Back to basics – the new way to grow

‘Back to basics’ is the key to build sustainable, powerful brands based on your values. And if you value what we value, then we can build you a powerful brand based on trust, authenticity, partnership and a lot of creativity. Creativity is like grass growing; effectively perceived as effortless in the right surroundings, i.e. fresh air, lots of sun, water and good earth, but there’s a lot of work going on under the surface. An agency is a living organism of people, and hey, so is your company! We all want to be safe, to belong. We all want to work hard, contribute and succeed (well, some do!). And what better way to build a powerful partnership to champion the growth and sustainability of a powerful brand? Simple really. ‘Back to basics’. A formula for growth and development of global brands. And who knows? We might work on something that is actually good for the planet, from reduction of packaging, to streamlining work processes, to energy-efficiency, to instilling worthy values into our community and the list goes on and on.

A strong brand galvanises your workforce. It informs your clients, partners and suppliers. It reduces your customer acquisition costs, thereby increasing your profits and your market share, allowing you to extend the brand into new areas and new territories. It’s business and it’s basic. So seek partnerships not suppliers, seek collaborators who reflect and can communicate your values, who see the bigger picture and not just a short-term fix.

Like an orchestra coming together to create an opera, your agency and you can build a brand that is powerful and valuable.

You hum it, we’ll play it.