It’s little wonder that many who fall in to the traditional definition of ‘professional services’ feel somewhat stymied when it comes to expressing their vision, let alone sufficiently focused to deliver their message when marketing their services.

Areas of expertise have come under increasing attack from the ‘new professions’ encroaching on territory previously called their own, as well as from their peers and a more uncompromising consumer.

And in a sector that’s not overly used to brand building, it’s enough to make many regress in to the shell of the brand that they could be.

However, none of these battles should be feared.

The definition of being of a ‘profession’ I would argue, is better based on a state of mind and a mode of operation that distinguishes the high calibre business, rather than on a specific market sector.

Though this does open up the territory to all who think they are similarly professionally minded and can act accordingly, the good news is that this can only improve the reputation of all who attach themselves to the category and whose brand can stand the test of time.

You might be an accountant, lawyer, surveyor, insurance broker, architect or an IFA. But whichever your trade and whatever your modus operandi, it cannot be an act. The way you are must be sustained by the service matching the brand promise, a belief in your offering, the customers’ expectations being fulfilled, if not surpassed and their recruitment as brand champions, repeating the experience and extolling the virtues of your brand to their peers along the way.

A doctor that solely clinically fulfils the functionary role is unlikely to be as spoken of favourably by patients and peers if he has a lousy bedside manner. He will quickly lose his ‘professional’ reputation, at least by those who care to check him out properly or seek an endorsement of his services. He would soon be struck off my personal ‘professional register’.

You need to make sure your brand has a good bedside manner!

With better brand marketing, your values can be leveraged to astutely position your brand as a sector leader, owning your distinct portion of the market through a better articulated offering.

Professional services are no longer the strict domain of lawyers and accountants. There is a blurring of the boundaries between the services offered and others are making inroads on the long-held, carefully schooled and previously jealously guarded disciplines.

Take Inheritance Tax Planning. Where do the individual roles for Accountant, Solicitor and IFA start and finish? And in our own world, there is patently duplication in some areas from ad agencies, management consultancies and brand consultancies.

Without clear demarcation, it is your brand character and the communication of how those services are practiced that will engage customers, old and new, in your brand, which will win business and engender that sought after loyalty.

Yet, few ‘professional’ firms are positioned appropriately to take advantage of their unique brand character and realise their vision. They could be communicating more appealing values, a more inviting personality, and a more credible consistent message as reasons why business should find their home with them.

These are all important differentiators in the battle to gain and retain clients.

Undoubtedly, the communication, implicitly or explicitly, of a Brand Personality is increasingly the key delineation for Professional Services.

It should be a reflection of the manner in which you do business, with a combination of values that are unique to you and of course, which can be substantiated.

Even more so if you have an off-the-shelf offering within your portfolio. Rarely will such a service escape the need to have a personality underpinning its offering to secure business. How else would one differentiate the ‘me too’ offering from some professions, such as payroll services from some accountants? Your brand personality should not and cannot be excluded from communicating your offering, however supplementary it is to your core services.

With professional services brands often comprising complex product areas, offering bespoke services, the construct of your brand and its personality should be as bespoke as the principles of your firm are individuals.

Yet some professions are on the retreat and taking a different tack, many unnecessarily so.

Accountants are a case in point. Quite a number are appearing somewhat ashamed of calling themselves by that name. In an attempt to differentiate themselves from other firms, it seems that they’ll try their damndest to deviate from this, by adopting monikers ranging from ‘management consultants’ to ‘business advisers’ and many variants in between. In fact, they’ll use more nom de plumes than you might care to count to, rather than be called by the title the consumer understands them to be, under which they have practiced for many years and through such credentials they will have gained many clients and retained them.

I believe these firms are in danger of losing some of those brand loyal clients if they jettison such heritage, throwing out the baby with the bath water by seeking a new personality, in their goal to secure new clients.

And it needn’t be so.

Smarter brand development and canny planning will deliver greater clarity for your brand, add greater value to your business, create a greater gap between you and your competitors and establish a cohesive platform for all your communications.

In short, you’ll deliver a true reflection of your brand personality, with what you wish to be heard communicated in the manner it should be heard; so distinguishing you from the herd and achieving a greater connection with your audiences.

And in my experience it is clear; a more connected customer is a more loyal customer.

In summary, if all is deemed a good brand fit, then your marketing communications, be they in print or on-line, or expressed in a meeting across a boardroom table, will be viewed similarly: appearing seamless, underpinned by a robust brand and have a singularly focused message, right across the media spectrum.

In fact, quite professional really!

Often when I get in such a mood, my mind turns to life’s luxuries that would leave me feeling a little more fulfilled. Perhaps even more motivated. It might be the same for you?

And so this morning, my attention has turned to the marketing of luxury goods, not least the brand owner’s dilemma in an economic downturn.

In overturning the conundrum of a customer unwilling to part with hard earned cash in a  recession to satisfy what some might call a ‘whim’, my aim is always to adopt a more robust positioning for the brand, so that any purchase is deemed to be ‘considered’.

So I often turn to poet John Keats when faced with achieving greater clarity for a luxury brand and positioning it appropriately. Specifically, one of his quotes that has remained in my consciousness for quite some years…

‘O for a life of sensations rather than thoughts.’

My rationale for having this in mind to better define, develop and deliver a luxury brand’s marketable facets is this…thoughts are tentative, but sensations prompt actions which are definite and tangible. And so it will be a sensation or a desire to experience a sensation that will in my experience lead to action, particularly in this sector.

The action we require is unquestionably a purchase, followed by brand loyalty. But we can only follow that path if the brand’s essence is an intrinsic  part of some pretty engaging communications, underpinned by values that if sufficiently aspirational, yet attainable by our target audience, will engender an inner pride, often peer approval and even  ’recruitment’ of brand champions.

Yet, anecdotal evidence would have you believe there would be a substantial shrinkage of the luxury goods market in uncertain times. For higher capital cost items this may well be so.

In actuality, certain segments hold their ground, if not grow their market share amongst specific target groups, often defying the times we live in. The luxury leather goods segment is undoubtedly one sector that remains buoyant.

For those who like to engender a feel good factor and to have nice things around them, luxury leather goods are a great antidote to depressing financial times. 

Their feel, their touch, their smell, their relatively low capital outlay relative to the kudos they bring, enable luxury leather goods brands to ride the tide of  a recession and have been seen to come out the other side a stronger brand.

Equally, in such financial climates and in particular the luxury goods sector, giving the consumer implicit permission to purchase is often the key to securing their custom, way beyond their need to buy a gift. They may rationalise the purchase along the following lines, with words that spookily all being with the same three letters as ‘sensations’…

Sense:                        common sense; you get what you pay for

Sensible :                   functional –  durable/ long lasting

Sensual:                     touch; feel; smell

Sentimental:            to give is to gain; reciprocity

Sensational:              undeniable quality

So, striking a credible, believable balance between communicating appealing positives of product form, as well as function, will provide more good reason for the consumer to purchase and thereafter, if need be, to rationalise his or her purchase without too much angst. And you, as a brand owner, will have captured hearts and minds and I venture to say that these will remain the difference between your brand and another, long after this snow and the recession has passed.

At first I was a little offended in that I’ve spent the best part of the last 25 years planning and crafting campaigns and today they still pay a good proportion of our mortgage. But then I got to thinking that I’m a little glad of his present addiction to C-Beebies and his disdain for the ads that interrupt his viewing on the other side.

Pester power from kids and the guilt that one might say “No” to fulfilling their every desire, are very powerful opposing weapons in the parenting armoury. Yet, they’re equally powerful weapons in the constructing of campaigns and should be handled sensitively.

So we make our ads appealing, our executions believable, implicitly invite the little ones to be part of the club and if we’re canny, we make our call to action at this time of year appear time sensitive.

But our credibility as practitioners of the craft is at stake if we aren’t also cognisant of communicating the brand’s values and the need to establish trust for the parent as much as for the child. 

As parents, along with most others, we are similarly cynical throughout the year of ads designed to capture our kids’ imaginations, without a thought given to the battle of wills that takes place in the home.

Yet at this time of year, we might seem to some to be blinded by the lights, as some ads fail to deliver the trust, let alone fulfil our need to post rationalise the purchase.

So, advertisers - client and agency alike - have a thought: When it comes to non-seasonal purchases from the same brand, when a birthday comes along, will we feel as we might have done about the brand?

But when it comes down to it, your customers will be self-selecting of the information they retain, be they implicitly or explictly delivered to them.

They’ll read or hear the benefit first, if the advertiser has bothered to communicate one. But they’ll only buy into a brand if we, as brand architects, communicate the essense of that brand accurately. One that truely reflects the personality and character of the brand and therefore strikes the right note of credibility, so they’ll trust the communications from hereon in.

We all want the consumer on our side and delivering the tone of voice that endears them to our clients or creates an affinity for the brand, is in my view a key determining factor in doing so  and I would argue, one we should hold dear in all our executions.

Confident can equal Cocky, as Danyl Johnson’s personal brand has found of late, with his  roller coaster ride on X-factor.

BMW’s ride has been that much smoother over the years. But even their confidence maybe described as arrogant on occasions. And when times are hard, we want our customers on our side even more, so even BMW have interestingly injected some warmer, more emotive words to complement the often deemed harshness of their German engineering. We are all now invited to have JOY when experiencing BMW. We can also protest too much!

So striking the balance is key.

As architects of our clients brands we should be brand advocates and by that I don’t just mean having their beer in the agency fridge and bar, or staff being given ASDA vouchers as our Xmas bonus – yes, that really happended one year! We need to champion our brands with the tone of voice that’s communicated within the agency, outside of the agency and within the halls of the brand owner too.

As agencies, we acquire brands on loan. If we’re lucky it will be on a long lease, but if we adopt a policy of smoke and mirrors we treat the brand with contempt and the consumer similarly so and it will be short let. If we believe, so will many more.

Smoke and mirrors won’t do the job any more. We’re not all going to go and kit our homes out with IKEA furniture, but if we talk of it in the egalitarian way that reflects the band’s ethos and not necessarily the shopping experience, until they get that to a more widely appreciated level, then we will assuredly get the message across that’ll win hearts and minds, bums on seats and charm all for whom the message is intended.

Yet, one would have thought that in a supposedly prudent industry, they would have held on to their brands dearly and lived by my maxim for the sector; even if they’ve never heard me or anyone else utter it, ‘When consumers are insecure, your brand’s communications must reassure.’

But the insecurity doesn’t just come from the consumer, it comes from many decision makers in the sector too and it is often quite astonishing. They’ve either never quite believed in their brand enough, so as to walk away from the next ‘big deal’, or not stuck long enough with what’s in the consumers’ interest to build their brand’s equity.

As the ex bankers of Lehman Brothers will still tell you today, ‘there’s no point in being in this business if you don’t take risks’. And we all know what happened to that iconic financial services brand.

So that’s the nature of financial services sector, it’s a belief that permeates all. Even those not directly involved in trading are bitten by the ‘consolidate and grow’ bug.

Yet there seem to have been a rash of such manoeuvres of late. But in my experience these activities are not new.

With little brand clarity, the financial services sector has always been somewhat slow on the uptake that attributing a personality with solid brand values to their business can prove valuable to their brand, to the business and their bottom line. And we advertising and marketing folk have not been slow to propagate that myth.

I vividly remember an article in Campaign highlighting the findings from a survey of those in ad agencies as to which business sectors they’d prefer to work on. The accounts that won out were of no surprise and the headline was…‘Finance is hell, but booze is swell.’

And so the marketing departments from Banks to Insurance Companies, from Investment Houses to Fund Managers and the National Savings, all believed it to some extent too.

In my view it is not only the brands, shareholders and their staff that suffered from this downbeat view, but all of us too.

There’s a tendency in the financial services sector to be brand reactive rather than proactive, when it comes to longer term brand development.

A lacklustre approach to brand creation, brand clarity and better brand marketing, bar a few outstanding campaigns in the mid 80s, meant few established an affinity with the consumer and less still were able to show they fulfilled genuine needs.

There was The Leeds with their Liquid Gold account ‘Arthur Daily’ campaigns, the strong brand identity of Scottish Widows in their moody, attractive, but very corporate campaigns and there were less strong identities marketed for brands such as Abbey National and Legal & General, seemingly vying for who could establish the strongest brand identity by making best use of an umbrella, or was it a hod carrier In Abbey’s case!

These aside, large budgets often resulted in half-hearted attempts to develop brands, but more so to appease shareholders, (many of whom were new ‘windfall’ stakeholders), that the companies were aiming to grow market share by being on TV.

But few brands could be deemed to have derived some form of personality or competitive advantage from the experience. There may well have been some warmth built around the brands, but could we differentiate between them?

The blurring between segments within the sector and very few doing very little to explain, meant that all us confused consumers had to go on, was that warmth. Increased regulation and information distributed by the forerunner of the FSA, the Personal Investment Authority and bodies such as IFAP, promoting the benefits of independent advice, did little to sharpen the focus.

The next decade brought a brief respite when Virgin Money came on the scene, as there was by M&S attributing its values to a financial services operation. But as mergers, takeovers and strategic alliances continue to take place, it is my experience that sadly many financial service brands revert to type and consumer interests become secondary.

There have been some attempts to retain past brand glories. Though it is somewhat incongruous to me that Barclays has maintained the Woolwich name for mortgage products, when you are patently not ‘with the Woolwich’ anymore!

Here I must confess a vested interest. As a senior account director at the agency who held the Woolwich account at the time of the merger/takeover, we had strategically and creatively moved the brand on, without throwing the baby out with the bath water.

In short, we all felt that the brand had legs and that if distinct brand identities as
well as budgets were maintained, the brand might stand a chance, because back
then it stood for something.

Instead, in Peperami style, the brand had its legs unceremoniously chopped from beneath it; though I do remember the senior execs at The Woolwich doing very nicely thank you, from the consuming of what one might consider an iconic financial services brand. And I don’t believe its call of ‘Do you wanna be in my gang?’, (thanks, Gary!), has been matched since in the sector, although Halifax does make a valiant and consistent effort.

I’m currently working with a long established accountancy brand whose bowler hatted founders were the inspiration behind Geers Gross’ flour graders for Homepride. And that brings to mind another bowler hatted duo, Bradford & Bingley.

Where has all the latent warmth built up in that brand gone? Again, executives there allowed an impasse to be created and did not move the brand on with the times and all they could do was accept the inevitable, when it was time to be swallowed up by Santander.

And then there are the meaningless holding company names that become the brand, engulfing all in their wake:

Way back, I was working on the Commercial Union account, moved agency to work on the General Accident account, then the two merged to become CGU only to later be consumed by the holding company that owned Norwich Union.

I remember editorial at the time, quoting company executives, saying Aviva would never become the trading name of the ‘tri-merger’. Yet here we are in 2009 and the undistinguished name of Aviva is replacing Norwich Union, which surely has/d some strong brand attributes. Though Commercial Union ‘not making a drama out of a crisis’ arguably had the greatest brand awareness and consumer affinity than any of the three and it didn’t stand the test of time. I’d warrant consumers in large numbers will still remember that strap line today. I’d love to read some qualitative research findings from consumers prior to these decisions being made. Assuming of course there was some undertaken?!

Am I a marketing man of the 80s? Maybe so, but I hope also of the 90s and naughties, so I can continue to espouse the benefits of creating strong financial service brands with credible values, bringing greater clarity to their communications, greater value to their businesses and a greater gap between they and their competitors. That is, better brand marketing.

Paul Weinstein
Paul Weinstein is a Director of PAW!

The answer could lay in the legacy Napoleon may well have left to horse racing.

He’d gathered the largest army Europe had ever seen. Some 500,000 troops were amassed on the Russian border, awaiting a response to his final offer of peace to Tsar Alexander I.

So, to say Napoleon was a gambler was an understatement.

And his likely bequest? The NAP, as the tip of the day and the NB as the Next Best bet.

Although I can’t quite see the very self assured Napoleon running down to the bookies, handing over a wad of notes from beneath his tunic to place a bet on himself as the favourite in the 3:30 at Moscow, he did have a reputation for getting his own way.

Indeed, he forecast that the war would be over in 20 days.

And it would seem, at first, he might have backed a winner. They didn’t fall at the first fence, nor the second, but at heavy cost continued their march to Moscow.

So what communications advice would I have proffered? How transparently should he have briefed his men and how best could he deliver the persuasive argument that an invasion of Russia was a good idea?

At the time of the invasion, Napoleon was at the height of his power and no European power dared move against him. As a commander of his troops, no one challenged his authority or questioned his motives.

I once had an MD whose strong belief was that in order to rally the troops it was necessary to inject fear in to their lives and said as much. No doubt something he learned at Henley, rather than in the race for Russia.

I suspect it was similar in Napoleon’s communication with his troops. But fear can mean failure, while confidence in a campaign is a far better bet. Yet, a winning strategy founded in a confidence too far, or arrogance, will belie all efforts.

Napoleon was a shrewd operator. He never showed his hand. But as a steward of this cause, he was lacking. If the going was good, he would call it soft. If the going was soft, he would call it firm.

Hoodwinking your audience is never going to get them backing you again. And he never got the chance. If the troops were looking for a Steward’s Enquiry they would have been disappointed. The opportunity cost of his pomposity defied his confidence, overshadowed his victories and ultimately led to defeat and retreat.

He had advisers, but the pundits’ advice was ignored. That’s like employing Planners and letting the Creative Team lose with a blank sheet of paper. The only tipster Napoleon listened to was himself – NB!

He was no doubt already crafting his view of how the battle went. So, it would have been relatively easy for him to work in reverse, to outline and rationalise the objectives for the campaign, highlight the likely obstacles, align the motivations and values of him as commander with those of his troops, get them on side and run the race together, from those on the front line to those who were bringing up the rear.

Listening is the most important skill of a communicator. So while gut-feel and opportunism have a place in planning a communications campaign, I’d prefer to place my bet on educated insights, rather than be handicapped, choose my races carefully and produce the kind of incisive communications that will achieve the necessary impact and objectives.

That’s my NAP for today!

Paul Weinstein, Director

First and foremost, ditch the word ‘speech’ and substitute this with the word ‘dialogue’, for this is the first step in you establishing a conversation with prospective partners and customers.

Then if you want to achieve that lift to the next floor and beyond, all the way to the penthouse, in my view, here are the top 10 do’s and don’ts when developing and delivering your message…

Do…

• Prepare
• Know your audience
• Adopt a tone of voice that is a good ‘brand fit’ for that audience
• Include some of their values and link them seamlessly to your own
• Ensure the construct leaves your audience feeling positively disposed and keen for more
• Look your audience in the eye
• Have a beginning, a middle and an end that link
• Ensure that there is just one underlying message your audience will take from your discourse
• Have a memorable sign-off that is absolutely in tune with your business, your values and the benefit for your audience
• Ensure that sign-off is action oriented and benefit led

Don’t…

• Walk about the room – you want the audience to focus on what is being said, not what is being done
• Patronise – don’t alienate your future prospects by belittling them or any other group they might be associated with
• Hard sell – this is not the time
• Tell a joke – you’re not a comedian!
• Evangelise – you’re not a priest!
• Lecture – you’re not a professor!
• Shout – they’re not deaf!
• Use inappropriate props – they’re distracting at best, irrelevant at worst
• Use inappropriate language – it won’t get them on your side, you’re more likely to be taken aside later
• Race to the climax – it’s not speed dating!

Best & Worst Elevators

Best…

At a recent event, a Director of a start-up software developer gave perhaps the most relevant, real and reassuringly jargon free introduction to his product launch I’ve heard. Not just from his sector, but business wide.

In 60 seconds, he delivered a benefit led, succinct, but not rushed, pithy presentation of the key facets of his organisation’s area of activity. He identified his core target customers and how we could identify those clients too. In effect, he gave us the tools by which to advocate his product to anyone we thought fitted the bill. And yet we’d only had the briefest of introductions. I was totally switched on to his product, his company and his personality, which no doubt permeates his company too. And I’m no friend of technology! It absolutely got me thinking of who I might in turn introduce to him.

Worst…

The worst elevator I’ve heard of late, came from a seemingly well respected lawyer. Yes, this is someone who is supposed to be good orator, communicator and persuader.

Coupled with these characteristics, you would expect expertise, experience and reassurance to positively radiate through his very words when presenting his business. Nothing could be further from the truth, in this instance.

The man was so busy trying to deliver the name of his firm, obviously believing brand awareness was the be all and end all, that he failed to deliver any points of differentiation that would enable him to stand him out from a crowded legal community.

The lawyer’s delivery was benign. He listed the generic services his practice provides and repeated the firm’s name time and again. At least I wouldn’t forget it! However, there was no point at which I could distinguish his from any other firm and certainly he delivered no determinable personality that would identify and establish in my mind, whether I or any other potential client would feel comfortable in his presence, let alone reveal sometimes intimate details of business or personal affairs.

His delivery and content just left me cold and I am sure, the rest of the 100 delegates.