Ask HN: Lean methodologies and Brand frameworks?

I don't think there's a "standard" however you might want to poke at some or all of.

* The upcoming book on branding in the O'Reilly "Lean" series http://www.leanbranding.com/

* Bill Beard has been doing some thinking / workshops about the topic. There are some links to his talks on http://www.writebeard.com/

* My session from Lean UX NYC last year http://www.slideshare.net/adrianh/leanuxnyc-leanbranding (probably doesn't make any sense without me rambling in front of it ;-)

It's true, defining what "branding" is can be all over the place. But the simple way to look at brand is it's the mix of identity(logo) and story(content). Your #1 job is to make the story clear and actively promote it. Over time you'll be able to train your audience to use this story to share with their network.

From a Lean POV(not sure that this aligns 100%) I have a couple notes for you on the structures I've used with previous clients. It's the simple path of hypothesis, test, iterate, optimize.

The end goal here is to gather real "data" in the form of your users'/target audience's own words to help clearly define a core brand story/positioning statement they can internalize and share with their networks.

Hypothesis: Company X is a (what/label) that (why/benefits) by (how/features).

I use this as a general guide to get the core keywords of the brand story.

Audience Testing: the goal is to test the hypothesis and answer two basic questions. 1) Is this compelling? Do people give a shit about this and would they buy it? 2) Is this clear? Do they quickly understand the statement and internalize it? Or do they have follow-up questions?

Data Sources: This is the footwork. Gather feedback on that statement to from random samples of your target demo on the street. Ask them to repeat it back? What words do they use? Do email surveys to your network and contacts, always include an opt-in at the end to note if they're okay with a follow-up call for more direct input. Phone calls/interviews, some paid FB ad testing. I say FB b/c it's generally been cheaper and quicker for feedback for me than AdWords.

Note: I try to record as much of this as possible, and have a partner to take notes if I'm on a call or interview. The unfiltered verbatim comments are what to use in your revisions.

Iterate: based on the data gathered, make revisions to the core statement and retest. I typically go 3-4 rounds before getting solid on something. Expect about 30-60 days to execute depending on your resources.

Core Brand Statement: once you've tested and finalized, you'll have a compelling and clear brand statement that effectively uses your audience's own words. It's time to actively work this into the balance of your marketing across your site content and other channels.

Don't just sit back now. Actively tell that story. Use it to share al your marketing, PR, brand-aligned partnerships, etc. And keep testing. New data sources will be A/B LP testing, content metrics, social engagement metrics, etc.

If you've got other questions, I'm happy to chat. Email is in my profile.

Thanks for including me on this. Thanks Adrian for the kind words. I think Adrian and I are in broad agreement as well.

I've spoken to Gardner, he's a good guy. But he and I have some fundamental differences in opinion. Admittedly, some of it is semantics, but when you're talking about branding, I think semantics are critical.

-To me, a brand is the emotional associations a customer has with a product/organization. Branding is our attempt to influence the customer into that desired emotional state. Hence, not really a relationship. (Adrian's point about a brand not being a logo, etc., is critical and something many people don't understand.)

-I hesitate to call a brand a relationship, because that's not how a customer thinks, or ever will think. It's our job to build that emotional association. Also, ultimately, the customer gets to decide what the brand is (if we drop the ball).

-To your point that started this thread, traditional branding processes don't work for lean orgs. Take too much time, too much money, don't provide any strategy or flexibility when encountering change (!), contain too many rules, limit your teams' ability to creatively solve problems in real-time. Loved adrian's point about the golf course.

Happy to chat offline (or a hangout, or whatever) about this. Also, I'm working on a short summary of my interpretation of Lean Branding, will share when it's done.

Something to consider: I don't know much about about Laura, but I anticipate my perspective on the subject to be slightly different from those two books in that I worked as an ACD/Copywriter on LeanUX and Agile Dev teams in a startup, and was in charge of maintaing the brand. (We noticed early that the brand was going to suffer using Lean if we weren't careful.)

That's where we developed my version of Lean Branding, so I assume it's a little more in the trenches and focuses more on the day-to-day building and curation side, and (total assumption) may be more actionable. I think they both approach it from more of a strategy perspective.

(These are assumptions based on observations, and I'm not saying either perspective has more value, just that they're likely going to be different.)

Thanks for opening this fascinating discussion @decentrality. Sean's structure (which has clearly emerged from practice) coincides with the Lean Branding book's perspective on brand building, measurement and learning.

I wanted to share how my perspective weighs in on the "semantics debate", and it is a product of both my academic and consulting experiences. I studied business (undergraduate), design management (graduate) and psychology (doctoral) to arrive at an integral definition of brand that would incorporate both business objectives (which in the startup world often translate to traction and conversion) and consumer psychology. After looking at these definitions theoretically, I began doing consulting work for politicians, government institutions, and companies of all sizes in South America. In particular, I led a Lean Branding program for 303 entrepreneurs (97 tech startups) over the last 3 years to arrive at a framework that would effectively help practitioners "that need this muddy water cleared to be able to aggregate their values"(like you pointed out). After all, it is a matter of pragmatism: we need to understand this in order to capitalize on it. That's exactly why I wrote this book.

These experiences shaped my definition of brand, which is described in the book as "the unique story that consumers recall when they think of you. This story associates your product with their personal stories, a particular personality, what you promise to solve, and with your position in relation to competitors. Your brand is represented by your visual symbols, and feeds from multiple conversations where you must participate strategically."

There are four key aspects to the definition that the Lean Branding book proposes:

- It embraces consumer co-creation: your brand does not exist in isolation. It is shaped by consumer perception. - It is story-centered: consumers recall your brand as an holistic story- the sum of both experiences AND symbols. (Coinciding with Sean here) - It highlights empathy: consumers look for your brand because of what it can do for them (how your value story connects with THEIR personal stories). - It allows for iteration (a dynamic brand): the brand feeds from multiple, ongoing conversations (about its value).

The most commonly known definition of brand comes from the American Marketing Association: "A brand is a name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller's good or service as distinct from those of other sellers." As you've probably noticed, it is focused on identity and assets.

The Lean Branding book's definition is closest to Seth Godin's, which is: "A brand is the set of expectations, memories, stories and relationships that, taken together, account for a consumer’s decision to choose one product or service over another. If the consumer (whether it’s a business, a buyer, a voter or a donor) doesn’t pay a premium, make a selection or spread the word, then no brand value exists for that consumer."

I'd be happy to answer any questions via Twitter (@laurabusche, @leanbranding) or email laura@laurabusche.com

Lean Branding is out now (Amazon, Barnes and Noble & O'Reilly) and I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Thanks for opening this thread.

My very best,

LB

Regardless of how you define brand, most of us appear to agree that the world has changed and so branding itself needs re-branding. I think all the responses here address that with viable viewpoints. The mistake would be -- just as with implementing lean startup on the product side -- is to believe that there's a silver bullet or "one right way."

The key is to digest the principles and eventually 'make them your own', so that you develop products, services and yes, brand, that are true to your values and authentic.

There are a lot of variables at play here, not the least of which is, how "disruptive" is your startup endeavor? If you are truly disrupting a market or turning an existing market on its head, your methods around brand development differ versus re-segmenting [Steve Blank] an existing market, or merely re-branding an existing market, or creating new markets within the innovation efforts of existing large enterprises.

IMO, to think that a brand definition is owned by the consumer is as foolhardy as to think it's owned by the business. This is why it's a relationship: it's two sided; it encompasses both the promise of the product plus the emotional impact the customer hopes to achieve with her relationship to the organization.

This is pretty straightforward, actually. And, by the way, measurable. Customers don't share, endorse, show-off, or refer products they are satisfied with. And yet, products themselves most often can't achieve an emotional impact beyond 'satisfaction.' So what's the difference between brands that satisfy and those that generate passion?

This is what The Lean Brand tackles. How do you discover and create a lean value stream that purposefully creates "satisfaction" from the product utility and "passion" from the emotional impact the entire organization delivers.

I love that this discussion is happening. I think there are certainly more points we agree than disagree on. The entire concept of “lean branding” is such new territory, we should first think of ourselves as allies more than protecting our own dogmatic definitions, ideas or positions.

With that said…

IMO, customers absolutely think about brand as relationship. “I love Lululemon…I hate Toyota…I am an ‘Apple guy.’” As Laura said, “your brand does not exist in isolation.” This is very true.

We relate to organizations in the same way we do with people (which is where the whole ‘corporate personhood' argument was generated). We have deep expectations, emotional connection, and preference about which organizations we choose to be in a relationship with, and which we choose to ignore or treat with ill-will (to Bill’s point).

Branding shouldn’t be about trying to influence that relationship through clever wordplay, coercion, or beautiful “symbols." These things are lie on the surface of a much bigger and more meaningful depth - the relationship. More to the point, it’s not YOUR brand…it’s shared.

The best copywriting, logo design, brand positioning statement, and so on are completely meaningless without a connection to an audience – which is the relationship.

Instead, branding should be about trying to build a relationship based on co-creation, co-participation, and co-value. Which is to say, that the point of “branding” is to discover the shared value (emotional impact, shared aspirations, shared journey).

Which is to Brant’s point, "How do you discover and create a lean value stream that purposefully creates "satisfaction" from the product utility and "passion" from the emotional impact the entire organization delivers.”

That’s the key question. That’s what any discussion about lean branding should address.

Shameless community plug: the community around The Lean Brand (which has been out for a while) is tackling these questions together with innovation, intelligence, and an incredible amount of enthusiasm.