Well, it’s been a sad day.

After hoping against hope that the inevitable would not materialize, it did today when one of my former companies, Eastman Kodak, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. As other retirees, I am wondering about the fate of my benefits, but using the planning skills I learned at the company, I think I am prepared for this day.

Plan development was just one of the learning experiences I had at “The Yellow Box.”

Much of my brand management background came from working with colleagues who had spent time at P&G, SC Johnson, Lever and Gillette. I was fortunate to work for a future and now former Kodak CEO – Dan Carp. Another of my senior managers – Bob Keegan – went on to to be the successful president, CEO and chairman of Goodyear. Two of my other bosses became CMOs – one at Coca Cola and another at Levi Strauss. I also got the chance to work with some of the most talented advertising agencies in the industry – J. Walter Thompson, Young & Rubicam and Ogilvy.

Unbelievably, they paid me to go to the office every day to get a business and marketing education that I use all the time here at Mary Beth West Consulting to help our clients improve their business performance.

I literally saw the world, thanks to Kodak. My company work assignments took me to Japan, Europe and Latin America. I used to boast that “I had worked on four continents for the fourth most-recognized brand in the world.” The fourth most-recognized brand boast is kind of an empty one now, but the experience of living and working aboard changed my perspective on how to effectively manage and interact with people. It also enhanced my appreciation for our country and the benefits of being an American.

The six years my wife, two sons and I lived in London while I was director of marketing communications for Kodak’s Europe, Africa and Middle East Region has left a lifelong impression on all of us. Like all multi-national companies, Kodak paid for the educations of dependent children. Both of my sons received educations at that American School in London that ensured their entry into top-tier colleges and universities. Their London legacy has followed them into their career fields, helping them secure jobs and assignments based on their personal international experiences.

I recognize I have been very fortunate in many ways, and not all ex-Kodakers have fared well in transitioning to “life after Kodak.” But many have parlayed the opportunities the company afforded to forge new businesses and totally different careers.

In this day and age, no company can promise you employment forever, but it should provide you the chance to improve your skill set and your employability.

Kodak did that for me. Thank you, Kodak.

Dominating the news since last weekend, the alleged Sandusky crimes and the deep implications for Penn State’s leadership are opening a lot of eyes at iconic institutions across the country: 

Could the same thing happen here? 

If confronted with the deepest and most disturbing allegations of criminal wrongdoing among one of our own – particularly when that “one” is a stalwart figurehead – is our leadership and our culture such that we would do the right thing morally and legally, regardless of the near-term ugliness and damage to the institutional brand?

Every organization should take some serious time well-spent and ask itself these questions.  

Looking at another institution’s misfortune, it’s easy to say, “How could they ever have let that happen?”  (It’s always “they,” right?)

In truth, however, there are many cultural nuances within large institutional settings – be they academic, governmental, corporate or otherwise – that place major obstacles to dealing with these kinds of crises in a timely and effective way. 

It’s certainly not a free pass for making bad decisions, but it’s purely a reality – and as such, it’s something that organizational leaderships must be in tune with and show appropriate judgment and character to manage appropriately, whenever circumstances demand. 

Human instinct almost always is to go through phases of disbelief, denial and hope against hope that if an ugly secret is ignored, it will go away.  As is well-documented, it never does.  Deflection of the truth is generally the next phase . . . “he didn’t see what he thought he saw,” “there is an underlying agenda driving the accusations,” “it’s all a big misunderstanding,” etc., etc. 

That human instinct-based reaction is allowed when it lasts about 30 minutes.  Months, years or decades is quite another matter entirely.  All organizations — collegiate institutions in particular, in light of this case — must fight like crazy the elements in their own cultures that allow these types of instincts to manifest themselves and do their untold damage. 

In particular, managing the additional layer of complication tied to legendary — even mythic — programs and individuals must be dealt with and overcome, and it takes true leaders who hold a real grasp of the risks at stake to make that happen.

Penn State’s board had better pull out all the stops to right the ship to whatever extent doing so is even possible at this juncture.  The president and head coach ousters are only starting points on a road that may take as many years to recovery as they took in the perpetration of Sandusky’s alleged crimes.

Simply put, your brand is your identity. It’s your essence. It’s how customers, pundits or even the general public view and know you. Whether you’re representing a small business, large company or yourself, your brand defines and shapes everything about you and your company.

Personal and/or company-focused advocacy programs can help mold a brand, offering consumers and the general public a glimpse at what really matters to you and your organization.

Let’s look at a few examples, beginning with Hardee’s.

What does Hardee’s value, and in turn want their customers to value? In a recent interview, the company’s chief executive Andrew Puzder describes how he rescued the company from a “freefall” in the early 2000s.

According to Puzder, Hardee’s had become a “jack of all trades, master of none,” so over the next several years, he implemented “Operation Quality Service Cleanliness,” which is now referred to as “the revolution.”

Employees were scripted to be friendly and cheerful; he narrowed the menu selection dramatically and began focusing the Hardee’s brand to target “young, hungry men.” A new focus on what the customer wanted from Hardee’s and bringing the company back to “its burger roots” saved and re-established the Hardee’s brand.

Advocating within one’s brand doesn’t apply solely for large corporations. On April 14, the Wall Street Journal ran an article about a small business looking to expand its brand by aligning itself with a potentially polarizing public figure – NFL quarterback Michael Vick – who was involved in a highly publicized dog-fighting scandal in 2007 that nearly ruined his professional and personal life. In this unique case, the small sporting equipment company, Unequal Technologies, was looking to spread its brand to the masses, while the individual, Michael Vick, was looking to begin restoring his brand and reputation after years of negative publicity. As the article states:

Even with Mr. Vick’s brand tarnished from the highly publicized dog-fighting scandal — which landed him in jail for a year and a half and prompted companies, including Nike and Coca-Cola to drop him — Unequal Chief Executive Rob Vito sensed an opportunity. If the sporting world could be made aware that Unequal’s football pads had helped Mr. Vick’s spectacular comeback from a rib injury, it could help Unequal attract orders from NFL teams and football moms alike.

Unequal was advocating that its brand made superior sporting equipment, with an emphasis on high-performance and safety. Vick said the endorsement allows him to address the issue of concussions in the sport of football as he also tries to rebuild his blemished public image. The article continues:

News that Mr. Vick had signed his first endorsement deal since leaving prison caused a media explosion. “Within 24 hours, we had about 10 million hits on the website, and I was on CNN, Bloomberg, Fox, ABC and CBS,” Mr. Vito recalled. “We had so many hits, it crashed our site.”

The exposure gave Mr. Vito a chance to talk about Unequal’s insoles, golf grips, sneakers and body padding, which are currently available only on the company’s website. “The sales went up 1,000% when Mike came on board,” Mr. Vito said.

To bring this topic home, I invite you to take a moment to watch Starbucks  CEO Howard Schultz’ online video explaining the rationale behind the company’s latest logo redesign in honor of the company’s 40^th anniversary. Schultz uses words like, “embrace,” “essence,” “heritage” and “respect” – words carefully chosen in order to communicate to consumers how the new design is in step with the Starbucks mantra of being “True to Our Heritage.”

Without such clear communication as to why a company is or isn’t doing something, it’s not possible to create and maintain true brand advocacy and loyalty.

After all, isn’t building a brand with public and media advocacy really just trying to increase meaningful consumer interaction and experience in the long run? For better or for worse, your brand is you. What better brand advocate than yourself?

I encourage our blog readers to think about companies, like Starbucks, Unequal Technologies and Hardee’s, whose brands and images clearly display advocacy for what the companies truly believe in and how they share these messages with us, as consumers.

By Amy Schwinge, MAOM

Recently, someone gave me a newspaper clipping that highlighted the dangers of letting an infant child sleep in the same bed with his or her parents and how this always should be avoided. It was no coincidence that I had just given birth to my son, our second child. It is amazing how much “advice” you get when you have a baby, especially the unwanted advice in my situation.  If you haven’t been through the process, you are in for a treat. By the way, I agree that the safest place for an infant child to sleep is in his or her own crib.

Anyway, getting back to the newspaper clipping, I noticed that the clipping was taken from an opinion/editorial column that a concerned citizen had written; it wasn’t even written by an expert, per se.  This hit home to me just how much influence the general public and the media have on some people. The person who gave me the clipping implied that it must be true since it was in the newspaper. I think that a person’s perception is his or her own reality, as the saying goes.

The more that a company or organization can build its brand within the media, the better its public perception will be, which ultimately will improve the bottom line.

The landscape has changed in today’s world as anyone in the public can make online comments on just about anything, including online newspaper articles, product reviews on retail websites and popular social networking sites.  With this immediate access, it is even more important for organizations to make a concerted effort to build their brand by tapping the voices of their supporters via public and media advocacy.  Research has shown that consumers trust each other much more than they will trust what a company says.

Jeremiah Owyang of Forbes shared the following five steps for an organization to develop an advocacy program: 

1.) First, get ready internally.

2.) Find the right advocates who will represent your brand.

3.) Build a relationship for the long term.

4.) Give them a platform–but do not pay them.

5.) Integrate them into your business and recognize them.

These steps seem simple in concept, but they will go a long way in terms of building an advocacy program.

By Joe Bogardus

Last week my colleague Amy Schwinge had a great blog post titled “Don’t Forget the Employees.” It was a piece on how employee communications impacts a company’s bottom line.

Humbly, I will try to build on Amy’s excellent ideas using a real-world, real-time experience in which MBWC is currently engaged.

The agency has a client that is considering re-launching its brand. They are insisting their company employees be involved in this process. This involvement is something we would normally recommend, but the insistence the client has exhibited on this matter is laudable.

The company is in the service industry. They believe, and rightfully so, their people are their brand. We are in the process of developing a battery of qualitative and quantitative research studies relative to brand messaging and other insights that need to factor into the process. Our first studies will involve individual and group interviews with key personnel in the company to grasp their understanding of the brand. This exercise will not only be informative to us but also will act as an ownership-building activity for the company’s employees. They are going to be involved in the process right from the start and will be informed as the process continues.

In her piece, Amy stressed keeping employees informed about critical company matters. We are presently fortunate enough to be working with a company whose management believes in this principle and is taking the concept an important step further by involving them in the development of the company’s brand re-launch at its inception.

The company believes if its employees feel fully vested in the process, it will positively impact their performance. With the company view that their people are the brand – and we know that brands are assets – this approach should support long-term revenue growth and corporate valuation.

It’s a great example of the two-way communications Amy references, and it’s gratifying to see this process happening first-hand, starting right at the beginning of a major company initiative.

As always, consistency works best when managing your brand, especially with regard to new social media tools.

These new channels of communications do present some interesting challenges to brand stewards, because more departments are in the business of touching a company’s clients ranging from sales, marketing, communications, R&D, customer-care and more.

It is essential for the long-term well-being of the brand that people connecting with a company’s clients have an understanding and appreciation for the brand’s essence, its key messaging and the tone and manner in which these messages are to be consistently delivered.

More and more brands are looking to establish a set of social media policies that are readily available to all employees who come in contact with a company’s customers.

A popular management model being instituted is the formation of a social media stakeholder committee that consists of representatives from the various departments that use social media to manage various aspects of customer relationships. They are charged with working out how to position the brand effectively with their constituencies and making sure the brand voice is consistent across all platforms of communication.

Other brands are looking to a more centralized model with either a single person responsible or a decentralized approach making all employees responsible for communicating the brand message.

Whichever model your company chooses, it is critical that it be consistently employed and all the team members are fully aware of the roles they are expected to play.

Selectivity works.

In this time of instant communication across a myriad of channels, selecting when and how to respond to a brand criticism presents an added challenge to the art of brand management.

There is a growing apprehension among senior managers that one tweet, one blog posting or an unkind brand comment will devastate the brand forever. Helping managers deal with their cyberspace concerns requires thoughtful and selective counsel.

Here are a few quick considerations that should be deliberated or offered to managers when confronted with an uncomplimentary remark:

1. Consider the source – is a long-time user of the brand complaining?
2. Seriousness – is what is being reported a really grave matter?
3. Totality – will this situation make a difference to all of the brand users?
4. Repetition – has this circumstance been previously reported?
5. Restoration or Aggravation – will a response be a solution or feed the complaint?
6. Environment – where was the comment posted? The larger the audience, the greater the potential fallout.

Using these criteria should help the evaluation process and eliminate the majority of the cranks, quacks and minimalists when it comes to unpopular brand comments.

Still, the biggest challenge of all remains selecting when and when not to respond to a brand criticism. It’s a judgment call, but a call that needs to be made nonetheless in order to be true to your brand.

We are all familiar with the phrase: “The only sure things are death and taxes.”  This old saying obviously was stated before the advent of brand management.

In this age of new media, experiential marketing and social networking – like death and taxes – it still is all about selling the brand. Communicators continue to be charged with creating awareness, fostering understanding, convincing customers about the benefits of a brand and driving people to buy the branded product or specifying the service over and over again.

This continuum has not changed, but the tools and channels for clients to achieve this success by telling audiences about their brand have expanded dramatically in recent years. And, this expansion is for the better, because it offers clients many more opportunities to establish a brand relationship with their current or prospective customers.

The challenge for communicators, as client counselors, is to offer thoughtful advice on which of these new non-traditional vehicles might be appropriate to meet their clients’ business objectives and help create long-standing brand relationships.

Traditional modes of communication still have immense value, especially in driving awareness and brand comprehension. The newer elements of the communications mix – Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and blogs, etc. – offer speedier avenues to nurture brand relationships with interested groups of customers. The ideal situation is implementing a program of these old and new media forms to move customers through the brand consideration and selection process as quickly as possible.

But, in the end, it still is about selling the brand.