Customers Archetype and Customer Personas
1. What are archetypes and why are they important to branding AND design?
Archetypes are characteristics that provide a deep structure for human motivation and meaning. They can imprinted in everything from art to literature to advertising and so on. Archetypes are used within companies to create a brand identity that is aligned with the strengths and values of the specific characteristic. There are said to be twelves archetypes, each one standing for a different human attribute: the innocent, the everyday man, the hero, the caregiver, the explorer, the outlaw, the lover, the creator, the ruler, the magician, the sage and the jester. By establishing one of these archetypes with a brand, consumers will be able to identify with values that they can connect with. It will then be important to focus all aspects of design with the archetype in mind, to create a sense of cohesion within the company.
2. What is the relationship between branding, personas, and archetypes?
In short, it is the archetype which creates the persona of a brand. A brand is made up of how the public view it, and the personality that it is perceived to have. An archetype can help focus a brand's identity and provide a persona that the public can identify with the company. As an example take Red Cross. As a charitable organization they have linked themselves with the caregiver archetype. Their personality can be said to be gentle, caring and considerate. Consumers then relate this personality to the brand.
3. How can archetype help deal with the “intangible” elements of a brand such as contextual values, emotions, aspirations, and projections?
Archetypes can help create an emotional connection with a brand. This emotional bond is then carried on to the products that a company sells. The consumer feels they have a connection with the brand and therefore a sense of loyalty is formed. This then leads to communities of brand loyalists such as avid Apple fans and loyal Nintendo gamers.
4. What is the relationship between brand core essence and brand archetype?
It is the brand archetype that defines the brand core essence. The essence of a brand is what the brand stands for and is the basis for all brand designs and how the brand wants to be perceives by the public. Attaching an archetype to a brand helps define what the essence of the brand is. For example Sharpie has adopted the creator archetype. This archetype gives them the persona of being fun, imaginative and creative. This in turn becomes the essence of the brand, and everything that the brand is about must revolve around that and reflect it in everything they do.
5. As you begin to develop Branding Project #5, how can archetypes and personas aid you in the development of your brand? What are some examples of how brand archetypes have been used to brand similar brands? Provide detailed examples for support.
Deciding on an archetype for our brand can help give us a personality that we can try and stick to throughout the design process. It is more useful to establish an archetype at the beginning of the process instead of coming up with designs and then trying to figure out what personality they fit best. If every member of the team has an understanding of the archetype that we want associated with our brand then it will be easier to create cohesive designs. To give an example of how another beer company uses an archetype to help establish their brand, I'd use Corona. Corona is a beer company that has adopted the explorer archetype. Through it's commercials and advertising it creates a feeling of travel, of distant places. It links the beer to the beaches of mexico, an idyllic scene where the consumer can envision themselves. By using the explorer archetype, Corona can suggest that they are bringing you a little adventure with each purchase.
6. What archetypes and personas do you feel are appropriate for the motion and interactive aspects of the brands you are developing for Project #5?
I feel that our brand is leaning towards the archetypes of the jester, the explorer, and the everyday man. Our company is focusing on the outdoors, the mountains of Colorado, so the explorer helps get that feeling across. I believe that our brand is actually focusing on a mix between the explorer and the every day man. We are aiming to sell our beer to the every day Coloradoan who adventures into the mountains and possibly sees themselves as an explorer. By combining these two together it is possible to create a lot of humor and that is where the jester archetype comes in. By putting the everyday man in an explorer's situation and showing how disaster can happen leaves a possibility for humor. We want our brand to be perceived as not being serious about surviving out in the wilderness but to be seen as making fun of the situations and laughing at the everyday man. It is this humor aspect that can set us apart from the other Colorado microbreweries that we would be competing against.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Case Study 2
Google Android
1. What does this product do for the companies’ brand?
This product allows Google to step out of it's familiar territory - the computer - and in to a whole new one - the smartphone. Google has firmly placed itself at the top, shining above any other internet brand. It provides a trusted search engine, an e-mail service, maps, and countless other services. Now it is branching out into another territory, one capitalized by the likes of Apple and Blackberry. The loyalty people already have with Google should transfer over to this new product, creating a sense of trust without having to fully experience it. However, if the product were to fail or leave a negative impression, then that would affect Google's brand image and they may lose a lot of the loyalty they have spent years building up.
2. What are the sources of Google’s’ brand equity?
The main source is Google's search engine. It is how everyone got to know Google and where their image was built up from. By creating a trusted search engine that is fair and equal it has found itself a fan base of loyal consumers.
3. What are the strengths associated with Googles’ brand?
The ability to give the consumer what they want. Most often for free. When I think Google I think reliability and speed. I am confident that I will be provided with everything I need to find what I'm looking for.
4. Describe some of the design challenges Googles’ Android faces in terms of its publicity, phone design, and marketing?
One challenge Google faces is actually getting some attention out in the smartphone world. Trying to stand out amongst all of the iPhones and Blackberrys is tough, especially when many of the users of the phones that Android runs on aren't even aware that it is a Google product that they are using.
With regards to phone design, it is important to stand out amongst the competition here too. You don't want to have a phone that looks too similar to something that already exists, but you still want the user to feel comfortable with the design and feel like they know where everything is already.
As far as marketing, it will be difficult to market themselves as a brand when people are not necessarily looking at the OS but the phone itself. It will be hard to give the same impression that it is able to give with it's search engine.
5. How does the role of branding differ for consumer services vs. consumer products?
The difference here is that when branding a service such as a search engine, a name can be tied directly to it. You think "I'm going to search for this, I'm going to use Google." However when branding a product that is enclosed within another product, such as Google Android within the HTC Dream, it is hard to keep your name tied to it. You are more likely to say "I'm going to buy the HTC Dream" than "I'm going to buy the HTC Dream which contains Google Android."
6. Evaluate Android in terms of its competitors. How well is it positioned? What are its points-of-parity and points-of difference?
Android is positioned pretty well amongst the smartphones, with it's main competitor being Apple and the iPhone. It managed to climb quite high because it offers many of the things that consumers have come to expect from a phone, such as a touch screen and multitude of applications. What sets it apart is the fact that it is open source. This allows for many possibilities of customization, something that Apple cannot say it offers.
7. What recommendations would you make in order to maximize Android in relation to all of the other software and services Google provides?
I think the first step is to release their own phone that uses Android so that they have a product that people can relate to, instead of being the secondary name to another company's phone. From here they should ensure that all of their other services work on Android, from the search engine to maps to google docs to gmail. It will then be possible to have Android be the number one Google product and have everything else be a subsidiary of it.
8. Who is Google’s consumer base? Does extending its brand bode well for the brand?
I'd say Google's consumer base is anyone between the ages of 8 and 80… old enough to know how to use a computer, and also young enough to know how to use a computer. I do not feel that they have been targeting a specific demographic. However recently with the release of Android it seems like maybe they are trying to target a more hip demographic. By extending the brand they are narrowing their consumer base, whether it is accidental or not. This may lead to a loss of many of their consumers, but for now they are still a company for everyone.
1. What does this product do for the companies’ brand?
This product allows Google to step out of it's familiar territory - the computer - and in to a whole new one - the smartphone. Google has firmly placed itself at the top, shining above any other internet brand. It provides a trusted search engine, an e-mail service, maps, and countless other services. Now it is branching out into another territory, one capitalized by the likes of Apple and Blackberry. The loyalty people already have with Google should transfer over to this new product, creating a sense of trust without having to fully experience it. However, if the product were to fail or leave a negative impression, then that would affect Google's brand image and they may lose a lot of the loyalty they have spent years building up.
2. What are the sources of Google’s’ brand equity?
The main source is Google's search engine. It is how everyone got to know Google and where their image was built up from. By creating a trusted search engine that is fair and equal it has found itself a fan base of loyal consumers.
3. What are the strengths associated with Googles’ brand?
The ability to give the consumer what they want. Most often for free. When I think Google I think reliability and speed. I am confident that I will be provided with everything I need to find what I'm looking for.
4. Describe some of the design challenges Googles’ Android faces in terms of its publicity, phone design, and marketing?
One challenge Google faces is actually getting some attention out in the smartphone world. Trying to stand out amongst all of the iPhones and Blackberrys is tough, especially when many of the users of the phones that Android runs on aren't even aware that it is a Google product that they are using.
With regards to phone design, it is important to stand out amongst the competition here too. You don't want to have a phone that looks too similar to something that already exists, but you still want the user to feel comfortable with the design and feel like they know where everything is already.
As far as marketing, it will be difficult to market themselves as a brand when people are not necessarily looking at the OS but the phone itself. It will be hard to give the same impression that it is able to give with it's search engine.
5. How does the role of branding differ for consumer services vs. consumer products?
The difference here is that when branding a service such as a search engine, a name can be tied directly to it. You think "I'm going to search for this, I'm going to use Google." However when branding a product that is enclosed within another product, such as Google Android within the HTC Dream, it is hard to keep your name tied to it. You are more likely to say "I'm going to buy the HTC Dream" than "I'm going to buy the HTC Dream which contains Google Android."
6. Evaluate Android in terms of its competitors. How well is it positioned? What are its points-of-parity and points-of difference?
Android is positioned pretty well amongst the smartphones, with it's main competitor being Apple and the iPhone. It managed to climb quite high because it offers many of the things that consumers have come to expect from a phone, such as a touch screen and multitude of applications. What sets it apart is the fact that it is open source. This allows for many possibilities of customization, something that Apple cannot say it offers.
7. What recommendations would you make in order to maximize Android in relation to all of the other software and services Google provides?
I think the first step is to release their own phone that uses Android so that they have a product that people can relate to, instead of being the secondary name to another company's phone. From here they should ensure that all of their other services work on Android, from the search engine to maps to google docs to gmail. It will then be possible to have Android be the number one Google product and have everything else be a subsidiary of it.
8. Who is Google’s consumer base? Does extending its brand bode well for the brand?
I'd say Google's consumer base is anyone between the ages of 8 and 80… old enough to know how to use a computer, and also young enough to know how to use a computer. I do not feel that they have been targeting a specific demographic. However recently with the release of Android it seems like maybe they are trying to target a more hip demographic. By extending the brand they are narrowing their consumer base, whether it is accidental or not. This may lead to a loss of many of their consumers, but for now they are still a company for everyone.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Critical Questions 02-23
For Video: The Changing Face. For Reading: Before & After.
To me, one of the interesting parts of the video was when he talked about how "people are becoming more aware of being marketed to and filter out a lot of current marketing." This then forces advertisers to think differently about how they are going to get the attention of consumers.
When he first mentioned this I thought straight away of my parents. Whenever they are watching TV, as soon as a commercial break starts they put the TV on mute. Just like Ewen says, they are aware that they are being marketed to and they don't want anything to do with it.
My question is: How do advertisers reach people like my parents who are purposely avoiding them?
I believe that it is through family and friends influence. When my parents do take the TV off mute to listen to a commercial it is often one that they have heard other people talking about. I may have mentioned to them about Google's Parisian Love commercial and how I thought it was clever and neat, so the next time it comes on they are inclined to take the TV off mute and watch it, simply because I recommended it.
So perhaps the right direction for advertisers would be to try and make commercials that can become something that people want to talk about and tell others about.
When reading Before and After in the Designing Brand Identity book, I found myself pausing over the section about packaging redesign, specifically the box on HP Inks.
The box reads "HP's new packaging increases appeal to a younger audience while staying true to HP's world-class leadership position."
This is all well and good that they want to try and target a younger audience, but when they already have such a recognizable package ca it be harmful to their brand image to change?
I myself am an HP user and whenever I go to buy ink for my printer I am looking for the recognizable blue HP box. Of course, when I can't find the blue box, I look a little further to see that the ink is still there just in a different box, and I can deal with that, I'll just know to look for a different box next time. The problem is though that not everyone may be as open to change as I am. Perhaps hay do not trust the ink coming from a different box, perhaps their perception of the entire company changes because of the frustration they felt when they couldn't find the box they were looking for.
Packaging redesign can work wonders for lesser known companies who are trying to stand out amongst the crowd. But for larger already established companies the change can end up being a negative rather than a positive.
To me, one of the interesting parts of the video was when he talked about how "people are becoming more aware of being marketed to and filter out a lot of current marketing." This then forces advertisers to think differently about how they are going to get the attention of consumers.
When he first mentioned this I thought straight away of my parents. Whenever they are watching TV, as soon as a commercial break starts they put the TV on mute. Just like Ewen says, they are aware that they are being marketed to and they don't want anything to do with it.
My question is: How do advertisers reach people like my parents who are purposely avoiding them?
I believe that it is through family and friends influence. When my parents do take the TV off mute to listen to a commercial it is often one that they have heard other people talking about. I may have mentioned to them about Google's Parisian Love commercial and how I thought it was clever and neat, so the next time it comes on they are inclined to take the TV off mute and watch it, simply because I recommended it.
So perhaps the right direction for advertisers would be to try and make commercials that can become something that people want to talk about and tell others about.
When reading Before and After in the Designing Brand Identity book, I found myself pausing over the section about packaging redesign, specifically the box on HP Inks.
The box reads "HP's new packaging increases appeal to a younger audience while staying true to HP's world-class leadership position."
This is all well and good that they want to try and target a younger audience, but when they already have such a recognizable package ca it be harmful to their brand image to change?
I myself am an HP user and whenever I go to buy ink for my printer I am looking for the recognizable blue HP box. Of course, when I can't find the blue box, I look a little further to see that the ink is still there just in a different box, and I can deal with that, I'll just know to look for a different box next time. The problem is though that not everyone may be as open to change as I am. Perhaps hay do not trust the ink coming from a different box, perhaps their perception of the entire company changes because of the frustration they felt when they couldn't find the box they were looking for.
Packaging redesign can work wonders for lesser known companies who are trying to stand out amongst the crowd. But for larger already established companies the change can end up being a negative rather than a positive.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
