I ran across Aviva, a global insurance company, through this ad at a U.S. airport. I was immediately intrigued by their customer-centered mission: YOU. While arguably not a formal mission statement (most aren't very good anyway), it makes manifestly clear where they want us to think their focus lies.

And Aviva is consistent with this message throughout their communications. For example, their brand promise explanation is all about a distinctive customer experience that recognizes the value of each one of us:

Aviva has committed to deliver one distinctive experience for our customers, wherever we are in the world - we want them each to feel that "no one recognises me like Aviva".

And they nicely tie this intention to their cause marketing efforts. In fact, their brand is the centerpiece of all their communications. Check it out here.

Aviva (which means "Spring" in Hebrew) gets that branding is a core and essential business discipline. They are a good example of a company in which marketing and customer research have seats at the decision-making table.

Now, having generated such high expectations, it's especially critical that they deliver on their promise.

When asked for help, the late great management guru Peter Drucker asked two basic questions. The first was "what business are you in?" In Good to Great, Jim Collins distinguishes between what a company needs to preserve - its core purpose and values, and what a company needs to change to stimulate progress. In our consulting work, we invite clients to complete this simple sentence: We are in business to ___________________ . These three approaches have in common the importance of identifying your core purpose, adhering to it, and distinguishing it from the strategies and practices you employ to achieve your core purpose.

The classic example of confusing purpose and practices goes choo-choo. Fifty years ago, railroad execs thought they were in the business of trains. Had they realized they were really in the transportation business, they would likely be leaders in the industry today. As Theodore Levitt tells the story in the timeless HBR article Marketing Myopia, railroad executives were product-oriented, not customer-oriented.

It is easy to sway from one's core purpose: I saw this laboratory's office sign on their building in Atlanta on a recent business trip. Lots of lab services. And bonus, passports too! 

Ready to stay true to your core purpose? Then answer these three questions:

1. What business are you in?
2. Why are you in this business?
3. What is your core purpose?

Next then is linking your answers to the two central marketing questions - the "dynamic duo" as it were.

1. Who are your customers?
2. Why should they choose you?

Let me know how it goes for you!

There's a new website business called Uplaya by Music Intelligence Solutions with "Hit Song Science" software that predicts what songs will be big hits, then helps with promotion and distribution. The company's CEO sees the algorythm that looks for common patterns of rhythm, harmony, chord progression, length and lyrics, as a way to democratize the music industry, a process he likens to an electronic American ldol (listen to today's NPR interview).

This reminds me of popular singer/songwriter named Michael Bolton who may be best known for singing well-known covers in the 1980s & 90s. Turns out most of his work is original and quite popular, but he was often criticized as a "formula" singer, without much originality. So too are some songwriters critical - or fearful - of an algorythm shaping artistry. It would eliminate innovation and narrow the range of creative possibilities they say. Should artists be driven by what their fans want? Or just sing, write, paint, or create what is in their hearts? My belief is there is a balance. By definition, significant innovation - whether for new products, services, or songs - is something that is hard to evaluate using existing mental templates.

I made the point this way in a Global Marketing seminar I taught last week: Imagine 30 years ago (for a few students, this would have been before they were born... hmm.), someone would have you shown you a small flat box that had a little TV screen and a typewriter built in. They explained to you that with no wires, this "thing" would let you write letters and use spreadsheets, instantly send notes to people anywhere in the world, and just as quickly tap into a worldwide encyclopedia, company directory and shopping network. Could you have even conceived of it? Sure, predictive software is great. And there will always be a place for unscripted creativity that breaks the bounds of what is now known and accepted as good.

Is Radio Shack really changing its 80 year old name to THE SHACK? Hard to tell from their press release: They say this in their headline: RadioShack Invites Consumers to Rediscover 'THE SHACK' Through New Brand Creative Platform. Followed with this subhead: Integrated Media Campaign to Contemporize the Brand and Reinforce RadioShack's Authority in Innovative Products, Leading Brands and Knowledgeable Associates. Their Chief Marketing Officer explains: People trust friends, not corporations. And when a brand becomes a friend, it often gets a nickname, like Fed-Ex and Coke.  So Radio Shack gets a nickname from its creative agency. I say, "Dude!"

Is there truth to this marketingspeak? Maybe. But I think this whole SHACK thing is really about a newfound fear of becoming obselete. Is radio suddenly no longer leading edge technology? I thought that happened when TV came on the scene over 50 years ago. They say they need consumers to "understand the role that we play in keeping people connected in this highly mobile world." If they really want a contemporary image that sells the wires and cables they are best known for, and the innovative new technologies that connect people that they want to be known for, why not "Contemporize the Brand" (see their subhead above) with this branding: "Hook Up at Radio Shack." That would get attention.

(What if AT&T got rid of the second T that stands for telegraph. Then they'd be AT. Or maybe just @. Hmm.) FYI - see Harry McCracken's anti-name change blog on THE SHACK for more examples.

Here's the thing: Branding Radio Shack as THE SHACK does not strengthen their positioning as a leading technology retailer. In my informal survey of people who know and like Radio Shack, THE SHACK conjures up these associations: 1) Shaquille O'Neal, 2) the song "Love Shack," 3) the pub down the street, 4) my first apartment in college, and 5) a second-hand store that sells used VCRs and... old radios! 6) Or a hip hangout like this: 

So Radio Shack, don't throw away years of familiarity and trust and millions of PR dollars on a brand platform that makes people think of bar nuts and outhouses. Saying you're hip doesn't make it so. If you need to do something, go back to your late 1980s positioning strategy: America's Technology Store. And stick with your old red and white colors. Lose the mustard yellow and whatever green in the your ad at the top of this blog that pronounces how it's all about me. Like, whatever!

The main thing about blogging is this: Making what you''re reading meaningful, thoughtful, and practical. That''s the bottom line. We promise you a blog that''s worth your time and energy and we welcome your participation.

 Underlying this idea is what I believe is the core principle of effective marketing: Putting your ""customer"" in the center.

 When I teach, I illustrate this by drawing a circle with the word ""us"" in the middle (us meaning the company). Then I make a big X through it and say very simply: ""This is bad."" Next to it, I draw another circle and write ""them"" in it , and say ""This is good."" Them is the customer, the reader, the partner - those that the "us" serve. That''s what it''s about, this blog –putting you the reader in the center.

 It's all about YOU.