 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||
|
Why Corporate Images Die a Slow Death? Seven Reasons When sleek world
class corporate images go up in flames like ENRON, WorldCom, GlobalCrossing,
and start looking badly charred like ENWRONG, WorldCon, DoubleCrossing
or when names become obvious liabilities like, Consignia,Thus,Thales,
Xansa, or Uniq.... then it's time to call the gate-keepers of Corporate
Identity on a red carpet. Andersenization
of corporations started when voodoo accounting met voodoo branding and
a hundred million dollar corporate image road show became a standard.
Start with, a splashy logo, a great color scheme, pick any name along
the way and roll out a Corporate Identity show. Steal money from shareholders,
but give them a decent Corporate Image, at least, in return. CEO's forged
ahead making their marks, the likes of Zorro! Only this time, it was
zero, really Zero. While ENRON, led the way, with the only tilted logo
in the industry, clearly pointing the slippery, southbound slope, shareholders
gasped and waited. Within the last
few months alone, PWC Consulting, did a self-destructive branding number
to become Monday. A dumb name of the period. During this 60 million
dollars makeover and while still in a shock gets picked up by IBM for
a merely 3.5 billion. The name Monday is dropped immediately. Only a
year ago, PWC did reject a 12 Billion dollars offer by Hewlett Packard.
Deloitte, spends
40 millions to become Braxton , a name they picked up from the past
so that the future can be their judge. KPMG also kicks in 40 million
to be re-named to BearingPoint. Their challenge is now to unite 16,000
bright consultants under this difficult term on the global scene before
they reach their breaking point. When two complicated ideas like 'bearing'
and 'point' are combined they will only become initialized as BP, because
it's only the fickle and lazy public at large which decides what to
think of a name and what to call it and no amount of money will ever
change their mind… In the meanwhile, the real BP, which is British Petroleum,
is trying very hard to shed the 'British only' image by re-inventing
as BP as in "Beyond Petroleum" one of their short-lived campaigns.
We are not amused. BearingPoint's symbol is not BP rather it's BE. Pity.
Lastly, Anderson, before their demise also spent 160 million on Accenture,
a name suggested by their employee. So be nice to your employees who
knows one day they may end up naming your corporate destiny. This fancy colorful
makeover of the worlds top four consulting companies, plus a 300 million
budget for four new names, has certainly guaranteed them a chapter in
the branding history. While the ad agencies collect their design awards
the army of consultants get ready to fight for their corporate identity. One hour on the
net and you go through enough logos, artworks and design which is equal
to the entire work by all the logo shops in the whole world created
during the last century…as business gets more complex, search ability
of a name becomes ever so critical on the global e-commerce… under the
new laws of corporate image, its all in the name stupid. One: Name
is lost in the crowd for being similar or identical to thousands of
others. Names borrowed from a dictionary, part of an everyday lingo,
never achieves distinction and despite extraordinary expenses it will
simply die out of exhaustion. Two: Name
is too old fashioned to convey today's dynamics. Three: When
the spelling of a name requires a higher IQ. Weird spellings are used
to avoid trademark problems or to fit the creativity of a spinning logo.
This only ensures obscurity. Spell four different ways, and it will
only bring 25% of the hits or profits. Four: More
money is spent in explaining the origin of the name. Why advertise to
educate the universe of this name dysfunctionality. Customers only care
about their perceptions they don't care about your cute story. Five: Corporation
does not own a trademark or an identical domain name. Why bother? Six: Name
is embarrassing in certain countries. Seven: Name
is too long, too difficult, too confusing, too complicated or simply,
too boring. Using lower cases, dashes or slashes and other dingbat characters
in a name, will only ensure its self-destruction. So, are we are out
of names? Hell no. This is only a myth, successfully established by
ad agencies and logo shops, leaving the clients with often-silly names.
Naming is a serious black and white exercise and should not be confused
with color design, logos, and holistic branding campaigns, because today
these components have a very limited value. Naming is naming, which
is when a name has been selected under the proven and established guidance
of a master naming architect. Voodoo accounting is hurting us all; voodoo branding is hurting agencies. Now is the time to get really serious about corporate names.
|
|||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||