t’s common for businesses to prioritize solving the easy problems while delaying the greater efforts needed to solve the hard problems. It’s usually a low-risk (at least short-term), low-effort and low-cost approach that can return incremental advantages within a single budget cycle. The collective and cumulative effects of that habit are that we usually witness the emergence of parity stop-gap solutions across an industry. Eventually parity leads to price comparisons and margin reduction until some entity finally takes on the risk of investing enough time and treasure to take on the hard problem.
Branding isn’t anything new. It’s been a cornerstone of a company since the first one was created. However, while branding as an act doesn’t necessarily change, what consumers value in a brand does. And maybe now, more than ever due to the COVID-19 pandemic, what consumers need, want and demand has changed significantly, and brands have to adapt to these changing behaviors quickly, or they will be left behind.
In the three blog posts prior to this one, we explored the macro trends emerging from our collective experiences with COVID-19. It appears they might affect the way we all conduct business for the foreseeable future, if not permanently.
Welcome to part three of our three-article series on how brands must evolve and reimagine themselves in this new era of post-pandemic business. Recall, from part one of our series, that since 2000, we’ve experienced three major business disruptions—the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, the financial crisis of 2008 and now the COVID-19 global pandemic. Part one of our analysis addressed brand opportunities for a contactless society in response to social distancing safety measures.
In part one of our series, we noted that since the year 2000, we’ve experienced three major business disruptions—the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, the financial crisis of 2008 and now the COVID-19 global pandemic. And while our first installment focused on brand opportunities in the resulting, contactless society, in part two of our series, we examine how organizations must rethink their product and service offerings to meet the new needs of consumers in the midst of this new business era.
Since 2000, we’ve experienced three major business disruptions—the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, the financial crisis of 2008 and now the COVID-19 global pandemic. As we look to the future, brands will once again have to reimagine their role and relevance in an altered marketplace if they hope to continue to grow and evolve.
Just like you and everybody else, Magnani is figuring out our “new normal” as we play our part in social distancing while COVID-19 continues to spread. Our team members are at home with their husbands, wives, partners, children, dogs, cats, hamsters, etc.
A few weeks back, I was listening to an episode of the podcast “The Skeptics Guide to the Universe,” and the host, Steven Novella, was discussing the asymmetrical time frames of destruction and restoration when considering the fate of the polar ice caps. If we do nothing about climate change, the models show a significant decline in the ice caps over the next 100 years and a total disappearance within a thousand years. The next point, however, was the one that struck me as most serious. Even if we reverse all of our carbon dioxide levels and cool the climate to pre-industrial levels, once those ice caps are gone, it would take millions of years for them to build back up.
You’ve undoubtedly been in brainstorming sessions. Some of these sessions have likely been fruitful, others disappointing. We often get asked how ideation is different from brainstorming on “Brilliant.”— a podcast hosted by Magnani’s president. One guest distinguished the two types of sessions by asserting most brainstorms are simply “meetings… with better food.” But beyond that perhaps undeserved jab at brainstorming, there are several aspects that separate brainstorms from formal ideation.