McKinsey touts Branding, and why it’s a problem

McKINSEY, BRANDING, HAPPY, SAD, DISCONCERTED, ALARMED (you can see I'm torn)

A McKinsey study touting Brand/Branding as the Number One priority for CMOs came out last November, and after an initial firestorm it subsided a bit. But as of late it has resurfaced with a vengeance, and I’ve been seeing posts everywhere about it almost every day.

While it’s great that the critical importance of Brand and Branding gets attention, there’s a small tiny problem embedded in it: it celebrates and calls attention to something that means different things to different people in a world where only the very basics are (tenuously) shared & agreed tenets.

It’s the way I do ‘Branding’ the same as an ad agency, a PR firm, a business or marketing consultancy, a design firm, a digital agency, or an AI consultancy? It is (we tend to share the same general philosophy), it kinda is (we use the same terms but with varying definitions and inter-relations), and it is not (the perspectives, depth, and experience we apply are certainly different).

Plus, and hugely important, clients have their own perspectives and opinions on those matters as well.

Of all the professional disciplines, the only one that is in such dire straits (and that’s my favored band) is Marketing - and I have good friends there who share my same frustrations.

And so the more attention is called to the critical importance and value of Branding and Brand, the more confusing things get: it’s a greatly amplified Wild West mess - and thanks to the likes of McKinsey, it keeps getting louder.

-

I write on Brand, Branding, Identity, the associated profession(s) and what happens in the marketplace as it relates to those things - here on my Blog, in my LinkedIn posts and articles, on BrandingMag, on Substack, and on Medium. Would love to see you there - and subscribe to any or all of them if you wish!

-

#brand #branding #masterbranded #brandfundamentals #mckinseyandbrand #imgonnabeagurusomeday