Metaphor

When audiences grasp ideas, they do so with minimal effort if they can relate the communication with a past experience, and with greater effort without it. With past experiences that can be related to new communications, a relationship is born (but not necessarily a logical one). Ideas have often been powerfully communicated through nostalgia for example; as in the case of the re-introduction of the VW Beetle. And the Pavlov's dog response is a widely known phenomenon in psychology.

Complex phenomena such as gravity are easy to conceptualize but difficult to understand empirically. To truly understand gravity, an understanding of quantum mechanics and relativity is inevitable. On the other hand, simple ideas such as; the color Mauve for example, are relatively easy to understand empirically (with a little understanding of light wavelengths) but difficult to conceptualize unless the audience has had a past experience with it. Ideas that are difficult to conceptualize are also difficult to communicate easily since past experience is a significant aid. So if we are trying to communicate meaning, an important consideration is the past experience of our audience. Without it, we will have to expend a lot more effort to communicate an idea effectively.

Given this, what is the power of metaphor in branding? In trying to convey belief systems and emotional elements through brand, metaphor has been shown to be a powerful ally. Strong brands express the heart of a brand's offer, combining functional and emotional cues allowing its audience to interpret the company's culture, attitude, personality and benefits. With such a complex formula of communication elements, evoking a past experience in the audience is paramount. A deep understanding of the brand however, is not. I point this out because I have seen many brand managers make the mistake of explaining a brand (to support understanding), but fail to inbue it with the simplistic elements that would allow one to conceptualize it through imagination.

Consider the brand "Kayak". First off, the name is unexpected. It gives the listener reason to pause and ask for more. There is an element of intrigue in metaphorical names. Kayak? It's an on line travel booking site that can move you along, help things flow, streamline your travel plans, get you on your way, keep things afloat, stay above water, etc. etc. This type of naming strategy provides more than a mere moniker because it evokes thoughts, feelings, and images from past experience. The same holds true for great brand names such as Amazon; an endless source of diverse products. Jaguar; a luxurious car with speed, responsiveness and agility. Even John Deere, a legacy name, plays off the animal vs. the surname (“Nothing runs like a Deere.”)

These are powerful brands because they don't explain much at all, but rather use common sources of metaphor to invoke a relatively complex array of thoughts and emotions.

Sustainability in Growth Markets

Is an analytical culture necessary to support environmental sustainability efforts in growth markets?

Today, the Earth’s ecological footprint is 23% over capacity.* The growing gap between human demands on the environment and our planet’s ability to meet them necessitates that organizations monitor, and measure their carbon footprint. This is particularly true in high growth countries, where currently, growth is still measured in purely financial terms that do not account for the cost of environmental degradation. After reviewing the national agendas of over 30 growth markets, only 5 (ANZ, China, Austria, and Philippines) cited environmental issues among their top priorities. For growth markets to prioritize sustainability, they must monitor and manage their environmental impact in a way that directly correlates it with profitability. Sustainable practices will only become attractive to growing organizations in these countries if they contain cost cutting or revenue enhancing incentives. But for the relationship between sustainability and profitability to become clearer, sustainable business practices must be just as measurable as the financial gains they produce. If one thing is apparent from the absence of sustainability as a priority item in most of these countries, it is that the limitations of our planet's natural resources have yet to be given the importance they deserve.

To comprehensively measure an organization’s carbon footprint, analytics must be applied across the company’s value chain; extending beyond its operations to those of its suppliers, customers, and even its disposal practices. Existing product life-cycle management software (PLM) is only a partial solution because business leaders use it as a one dimensional “measuring stick”; rarely using it to influence decisions that extend beyond organizational boundaries.

Such all-encompassing carbon footprint measurements require an analytical culture. The pervasive use of analytics throughout a value chain enables a carbon footprint measurement comprehensive enough to correlate with long-term financial performance. Nowhere in the world are such implementations more important than in growth market countries, where the growth in demand for natural resources is expected to increase the fastest.