SAVE THE DATE:

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 8-10AM

BRAND
FOR BREAKFAST

Make Your Business Healthy In Ninety Minutes

Marketing expert John Tantillo, PhD, a TV, radio and columnist
personality, delivers you Value for money in his latest acclaimed Power
Course and New York networking opportunity at top Manhattan restaurant
Etcetera Etcetera.
(Breakfast and Subscription Web Support Included)

You’ll Receive:

1) Actionable brand and marketing intelligence
2) Timely and specific brand guidance
3) Instruction on Tantillo’s NAV protocol
4) Tips on how to rapidly develop your Target Market
5) On-line and continuous lesson support
6) The chance to meet other like-minded professionals

SAVE THE DATE!
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 8-10AM

TODAY'S TANTILLO TAKEAWAY -

Never forget your core brand essentials, especially when you’re taking actions that you can’t easily change if you have to. 

John Tantillo’s Winner and Loser of The Week:   

Loser: The Nobel Prize

Folks, without further ado:

The Winner

With a 22 percent spike in ratings, David Letterman is our clear brand winner for this week.

Looks like he followed the Marketing Doctor’s Crisis Action Plan to a tee:

1) Respond quickly;
2) Be contrite and sincere in being contrite;
3) Take responsibility;
4) Be honest; and
5) Communicate a plan of action.

Most importantly, the Crisis Action Plan is not mere public relations; it is marketing. Therefore, each pillar of the Crisis Action Plan is built around being true to your particular brand. 

Take Letterman. Some in the peanut gallery have complained that he wasn’t emotive enough in his apology. Well, being emotional is simply not Letterman’s brand. 
Letterman apologized the way only Letterman would apologize: Humor mixed with sincerity, and never pitched too high above his Midwestern dryness.  

Apologizing in his own way insured that his apology (#2, be contrite) came across as sincere, because it was in keeping with his brand. Always make sure that the statements you make for your brand appear as the truth best told. 

Letterman did this, and like all great brands, personal or product, Letterman demonstrated how staying true to his core characteristics under pressure pays off.      

Loser

No doubt about it: The Nobel Prize committee has just done its brand significant long-term damage by awarding Barack Obama the peace prize.

Any prize —big or small— courts controversy. People will always debate the worthiness of particular recipients and the criteria used to pick them. 

But the reason everyone —right and left— is so shocked about the Obama award is simple.

The Nobel Prize committee basically violated their core brand characteristics and squandered 100 plus years of credibility in one false move.

The Nobel Prize is retrospective —not prospective. It’s all about achievement —what you’ve done. Not what you will do. 

Unlike President Obama, the prize is not only about hope.

So let’s look at this decision from the perspective of other Nobel prize categories.   

Imagine a young scientist. A guy who has plenty of optimism. He’s gotten great grades in school; his professors love him. Now he wants to cure cancer. Mind you, he hasn’t even started the work he needs to do to cure cancer. In fact, there is no evidence beyond his optimism and energy that he will ever cure cancer. He doesn’t even have any clear ideas about how to cure cancer. 

Then imagine this guy being awarded the Nobel Prize. Fuggedaboutit. The science prize would lose all credibility. It would become a joke.

Now the peace prize is a little looser than the science prize, but bottom line —it’s still about genuine achievement, not hope for future achievement. 

So what’s to be done? Well, the President’s brand emerged as a winner amidst the Nobel Prize committee’s fiasco. He handled this uncertain award gracefully, admitting right up from that he didn’t deserve it and announcing that he would donate the prize money. Some are saying that he should reject the prize outright, but that would probably be a mistake. Why? Because it would essentially be a negative brand statement, and negative brand statements often have serious unintended consequences.   

The road forward for the Nobel Prize itself is less certain. In addition to violating the core brand characteristics, there’s what I call the “Wizard of Oz effect.” Basically, the less people think about how a decision is made, the better. (It’s like that old saying about politics and sausage making: it’s best done out of sight.)  As far as most people are concerned, the Nobel Prize has always been handed down from on high. But now we all know that it’s chosen by five left-leaning Norwegians. We’ve seen behind the wizard’s curtain, and we’re not impressed.

The only way to undo the damage will be with time. The prize next year (and the year after that and the year after that) have got to be unassailable and re-assert the prize’s brand essentials of achievement.

And hey, if they’re lucky, Obama will live up to the potential they see in him and they’ll look like geniuses (and we’ll all forget the wizards pulling the levers behind the curtain).

And remember, the business of entertainment, politics and prize giving is always easier when you keep marketing and branding in mind.