BRAND STATURE

Now this time let’s take Marketing where it truly belongs – in the recesses and sub conscious of the human mind and well beyond the articulated inane-ness of popularly practiced ‘Market Research’. And so we begin somewhat semiotically from some simple and basic understanding of Evolutionary Psychology delving into the basis of beliefs. This time it is not about all the formulaic check boxes one must tick to give a brand ‘stature’, but about understanding outside-in, what the human mind is willing to grant stature to. So while the subject is called ‘brand stature’ and is the same for both cases, it is the order that is reverse.

So here we go, in the reverse order as always, in our attempt to hone marketing acumen, by simply looking in, through the eyes of the consumer. Remember even while we market and sell, we consume too! It is the eyes of the latter that we have to don now.

Yet again, to simplify, we shall liken brands to people with the simple truism that brands are like people.

Now this simplifies the task of arriving at the starting point as we begin first by asking the question what does ‘stature’ mean (semiotics) in the context of people. And then proceeding into the realm of evolutionary psychology where we then ascribe the basis of belief, no matter how distasteful it may be or how unacceptable, since afterall it is true that the human mind is not a moral firmament of uprightness all the time. It is after all the sub conscious that we will now dig deep into.

Now first on the literal meaning, the proximate meaning of ‘stature’ and then to the deeper meaning or the ‘insight’.

‘Stature’ is therefore ‘an achieved level: status’.

Semiotically speaking, the stress is on the word ‘achieved’ – the opposites of which would be when you achieve by luck, chance or some illgotten method. Infosys, as a Corporate brand would fit this archetype. Even though Reliance should have also been here, but the attributable causes to success and achievement makes them elude this level.

Or indeed it is ‘the natural height of a human or animal in an upright position’.

This translates semiotically into stressing on the word ‘natural’. In other words, this is a level that is naturally ‘earned’ not snatched or taken undeservedly. This also means that this is not a person who fits into the position uncomfortably, but easily, deservingly, calmly. Psychologists would infer that the greatness of Mr Bachchan also has to do with having stressed ‘Lamboo’ in many a film. The fact that his modesty over so many years have gone on to convince both viewers and watchers that he has never ever himself talked about his greatness. Others have done so. This adds to his ‘natural’ height as against a self proclaimed altitude that many of us are fond of claiming, often without reason!

Many brands have those extra inches of rulers in the physicality. There is no need whatsoever for the Jaguar car to be so huge and long. Doesn’t it also explain why the Hummer, an ugly Army personnel carrier is now a domesticated passenger car forever on display by the owner!

Or ‘the degree of development of a person’.

Semiotically? Well this is awe that one experiences when facing this person because he /she is more ‘evolved’ and better developed. This is a reminder to the ‘followers’ about the gap between them and their leader. What better example than Gandhi here when it comes to people or Apple when it comes to brands. Not just innovation that moves on copycat trends, but out of box unconventional daring accentuates the sheer degree of surprising development. Gandhi and Apple – just think about it.

Or ‘intellectual or moral greatness’

Semiotically, this is an imperative for stature. It is about objective loftiness . This is a person who is always objective and sits on a high moral pedestal. The word ‘intellectual’ in turn semiotically also implies equidistance from opposing parochial positions. An intellectual person is oriented to think by balance. This is the knowledgeable judge of the debate, not the debator who has been assigned to speak either for or against the motion. Benetton, as a brand evidences cultural equidistance. Closer home, we come to a wholly Indian example, who have uprightness written large on their DNA and everywhere else that the DNA impacts. Tata is a great organization to work for with upright people policies. It has often paid the price for sticking to principles of fair play (even exited West Bengal when a few green pieces of paper may have done the trick), has absolutely fair and honest pricing and value delivered to customers. And it accordingly has the stature and therefore the market share. Across an amazing number of diverse industries it leads the pack by far, even though the efficacy of the ‘conglomerate’ type of organisation is far from proven. Even while the world celebrates the likes of AirTel in telecom for its achievement, little does it realize that Idea Cellular is the only one to have increased market share by an amazing 12 percentage points in a handful of years. Or that TCS is and was (and well might remain) larger than Infosys. And one could go on. But semiotically, an intellectual with moral greatness cannot be bothered claiming moral greatness and that is the pivotal difference. We will never see Tata 'advertising' its moral values!

Now switching to an acceptable easy dose of evolutionary psychology, lets understand the ‘why’ behind accepting some person or brand to have stature or to not have stature:

Brown and Chia-Yun have analysed it thus (I have simplified the theory for easy understanding).

Stature is accorded to what is called ‘a big man’. And ‘big man’ is a reflection or recognition in a culture of a pervasive feature of nature. Somehow no matter what the sales of Dabangg and 3 idiots tickets, Amir Khan and Shahrukh will have to be happy with other words to describe them because ‘stature’ is what Amitabh is ‘naturally’ blessed with. Abhishake his son, even if he does match the performance, was afterall born with a silver spoon in the mouth and it doesn’t help that the Bachchan clan continuously reminds us about this through frequent mentions of family traivails. They probably feel that the brand equity of the ‘father brand’ will rub off on the variant! But the psychological reality is always the opposite! Large physical stature contributes quite certainly no matter how surprising it may seem. In small town Hindi speaking India, the word ‘personality’ (pronounced ‘pershnaulty’!) is often a conversational ingredient while describing a man of stature. Sometimes, in those hinterlands, even mafia dons are accorded that privilege. But then hastily the ‘Robin Hood’ element is mentioned in order to make the man qualify as a man of stature. The Robin Hood element is suggestive of moral uprightness! But then it doesn’t work because it rings so utterly untrue. This is exactly what happens to fly by night brands and companies that do ‘Corporate Social Responsibilty’ rather visibly almost demanding stature! Bill Gates and Microsoft do highly visible charity but insofar as the ‘public’ (not 'consumers' this time) is concerned, the question in the sub conscious is, that if Linux is free, why do they charge!

In some cultures, say Brown and Chia-Yun, ‘leader’ is literally a ‘big man’ through the very language and idium. Metaphorically, it is no surprise that some people are ‘walking tall’ while others ‘are crestfallen’ The overweight logos of McDonalds are indeed a good category fit where 'sumptuousness' is an important element of the category code and ‘spread’ and ‘wholesomeness’ are suggestive euphemisms for value for money. Now here is another dimension.

There is ethnographic evidence that royalty seldom entered without announcement or anticipation. A king doesn’t simply show up. People wait for him in advance (kings always come on time; only modern positional satraps come late, in a puny way claiming seniordom!) and then he arrives on a very very long chariot. Notice the design of the Rolls and the sheer length of the bonnet. Who cares about the functional features of the Rolls. When we think of the Rolls, we see a person of staure seated in it and the car gliding slowly, yes very slowly. Infact the person seated at the back wears a hat in our vision! And a hat implies, that it is isn’t working attire and so you don’t have to work! Further, ‘Speed’, a critical association of all cars is not a logical association for the Rolls. Rulers are never in a hurry; only greenhorn enthusiasts are! Still further, somehow we always visualize a black Rolls when we close our eyes. And while we always visualize a person in it (in many cars the image doesn’t include any driver), but he is never the driver. And always, always, we always see it moving slowly, very slowly. Yes it is not commonplace because rulers aren’t. But the larger point is that it is very big physically.

So are we saying all leaders are tall? Certainly not and this is where it gets very interesting. Dannenmaier & Thuman explained as far back in 1964 that even with people we know personally, our mental image of their height is exaggerated, if we know them to be high in ‘social stature’.

That brings us to the example of Volkswagen. In an age where great cars are made by stressed companies, (many on the verge of bankruptcy, while others keep recalling cars) with much bloodletting, VW has a 36000 crore operating profit. But internally they first want to No. 1 in Customer Satisfaction. And then No. 1 in Employee Satisfaction. And only then in Earnings. Now what’s interesting is the faith they have in the order of priority. The other way round would perhaps be symptomatic of shortlived organizations. “Then we will have a volume of more than 10 Mn cars”, Chairman Martin Winterkorne says. Sounds like an intent of stature because the milestones are lofty and big and are about the causes, while the number of cars is the eventual effect. It comes as no surprise that despite being among the last foreign cars to enter India, VW has made a mammoth impact. Today worldwide they own apart from their own enviable marque, Skoda, Audi, Seat, Porsche and Suzuki. And they aren’t even bleeding. And this is despite having the lowest productivity in their Wolfsburg plant. It’s the consistency and long-termism of the company that has given it spectacular results even in short cycles! So even though VW doesn’t exactly make ‘huge’ cars or cars that make arrogant claims, it commands a stature that make one visualize their cars to be larger than they are.

So that is the importance of stature. It increases the perceived value of the brand and can therefore fetch a high price.

Finally I seek your pardon for this very long piece that I have written. But then maybe it has stature! (Oops! I claimed!)