The global financial fall out has seen accelerated market consolidation as companies in survival mode play predator and prey depending on their circumstances. The classic so-called orderly ‘migration’ strategies of companies seeking to ‘merge’ their brand equities are suddenly irrelevant when speed and opportunism are priorities. The niceties of gradual absorption or a sensitive fusion of identities and cultures are history when a fast morphing is required to maintain market share or advantages in a more brutal economic climate.
It exposes the potential hypocracy of corporate
speak euphemisms blurring the fact that a more aggressive successful company
has taken over a less agile, less powerful, or sometimes just unlucky
competitor. The dominant party dictates the new board and subsequent staff
redundancies and organisation. That’s
capitalism in the raw and tough times may at least remove the corporate deceit
of proposed ‘mergers’ and their ‘spin’ in waffling about mutual gains and
‘synergies’ Taking out a competitor and
grabbing their market share makes commercial logic but we do not want to be
reminded of the often inevitable clash of shareholder interests over lesser ‘stakeholders’
– staff, the community, suppliers, etc.
It certainly exposes any bullshit when it comes
to brand equity. Those who still believe
branding is about the name over the door must be in a dilemma if the services,
process, people and offer are basically the same. Does it matter the ‘name’ has been around for
years? Heritage is presumably about
earned reputation not longevity. On this
basis any ‘new’ brand has got a problem. Woolworth’s was part of our past but
not relevant for our present - that’s the reality. Santander’s planned removal of the English
icons Abbey, Alliance & Leicester and Bradford & Bingley from the UK
high street is surely a totally expected logical move not a surprise. Sure we hate cloned high streets and
predictable tenant mixes in shopping centres but ultimately the harsh economic
times are shaking out business that should not have been in business. We cannot have it both ways. Mourning shops we did not frequent is pure
hypocracy. In the end we get what we
support if I understand how supply and demand works.
Obviously it is not that simple. Shopping is satisfying lifestyle and emotions
providing appropriate, interesting enriching experiences. However, do we feel anything for banks,
particularly now given their all-time low point in terms of public esteem? Do I want an ‘experience’ or just a highly
efficient process increasingly by computer with the occasional real person
phone call. Am I really going to feel
worried about a Spanish name over the front door if they do what they say they
will do?
We are supposed to be in an age of new honesty,
transparency and straight talking as our M.P.s have now acknowledged. The test is whether we can handle the truth
unwrapped or whether we still need nice ‘packages’ and aspirational promises to
make us feel better. Lets see if
honesty, trust and transparency can really drive a company’s values and
behaviours. Generic values of all companies should include these basic
attributes plus perhaps Stability and certainly Relevance. Without the latter any business is doomed.A DIY brand, Ronseal’s back-to-basics ‘does
what is says on the tin’ slogan is particularly apt for such times. Direct, honest without hyperbole - a lesson
for all of us I guess.
Cutting jobs and culling companies is never
going to be good news for those concerned.
The realities of share price and political interests make straight
talking difficult but everyone understands ‘survival’ as a strategy.
Comments