I’ve written about the criticism that Unilever has faced with the Dove and Axe brand before on this blog. Two modern day “conversational brands” that sit in different markets, have different target audiences, yet are taking flack because they both have the same Parent, Unilever. How can Dove credibly champion the cause of real women, when it comes from the same stable as Axe some cry?
Personally I don’t see this as a dilemma. Unilever has created two conversations in the market and consumers are clearly free to join or reject either. I do think however that it raises interesting questions for all Brand/Communication Directors who are trying to adapt to our increasingly transparent world.
As the Unilever example demonstrates, product brands and corporate brands no longer live in different worlds. They cannot be managed as individual challenges. The corporate brand can no longer be constructed solely for internal/financial audiences. It must be a living and visionary manifesto – a public declaration of the core intentions of the business, its guiding principles and policies.
I therefore suggest that a 5th P is added to the classic 4P’s of marketing. In addition to Product, Price, Promotion and Place, should we not add Parent (the Corporate Brand)?
If you believe, that the strongest brands in future will be those who best engage their audiences in an open two-way conversation, doesn’t it make sense for the corporate brand to be considered at every stage of the brand planning process?
[...] Stage two is to activate these advocates. Marketing started with Brand Advocacy and started with my 5th P of Marketing, the Parent or Corporate brand. The founders of the company describe themselves as “the first [...]