How is it that good salesmanship can defeat a brand?  It happens because good salesmanship, at its roots, is somewhat contradictory to good branding.  Problems occur when master salesmen set brand strategy.  The master salesman isn’t wrong…but his job is to sell a product, not build a brand.  Selling a product and building a brand are two distinctly different tasks.  Selling is short-term.  Branding is long-term.  Branding should outline what the salesman sells and how it’s sold.  Selling (as a strategy) leads to short-term rewards, but long-term identity crisis and price wars.  Branding (as a strategy) means slower growth, but creates longevity and higher price points.

This series deals with 5 areas in which good selling contradicts good branding.  The topic of this post is ARROGANCE.

One person’s money is as good as another’s, right?  Well, obviously speaking…yes.  From a not-so-obvious viewpoint…maybe not.  Now, let me say up front that this topic is all about brass tacks and tough cookies.  The object of branding is not to offend the consumer, but to engage the RIGHT consumer.  That implies that you won’t want to engage EVERY consumer.  Some will be left out.  Some SHOULD be left out.  My focus here is the danger of NOT leaving out the ones that SHOULD be left out.  With me?

Remember Stewart on Beavis and Butthead?  You know, the neighborhood dork who wore the Winger t-shirt?  Now, in reality, the record company exec (whose job is to sell records) would most likely clap Stewart on the back and encourage him to pllop down those $20 bucks for the WInger CD…and an extra $20 for the t-shirt.  Kip Winger, on the other hand, probably cringed at the thought.

The record exec did indeed do his job…he sold records…quite a few, in fact.  But where is Kip Winger these days?  I’m pretty sure he’s still singing, but he’s not cracking the top 40, for certain.  Who was right, Kip or the record exec?  Remember, successful brands are not measured in years, but in decades.

I guess the answer is that they were both right.  They were both doing their jobs…it’s just that their jobs were on a collision course.  One’s job was to promote his music and build a following.  The other’s job was to sell records.  Good salesmanship defeated the brand.

So, in branding, tough choices often have to be made.  You want to sell to those who reflect your core values.  This requires a certain degree of arrogance.  Yes, your brand is too good for some, and not good enough for others.  Find that sweet spot, own it, and attack it without compromise.  Yes, you will likely offend some.  But in the offense lies the perception of exclusivity:  we, as humans, want- even idolize- what we cannot have.  After all, if everybody has it, it really isn’t special, is it?

When it comes to picking and choosing targets for various tactics, embrace some healthy arrogance.  Here are some examples:

• a fashion boutique for 20-something girls ONLY accepts 20-something girls as friends on MySpace.  Everyone else is denied.
• a novelty t-shirt designer known for women’s t-shirts might refuse to design a t-shirt for men, regardless of the demand.
• a merchandiser might limit inventory to certain categories, even at the expense of limiting the target market.

Again, I’m not advocating being ugly to consumers.  I AM advocating a certain degree of arrogance in order to maintain targeting focus and build a loyal following of passionate consumer evangelists.  At the end of the day, branding is not about selling whenever and wherever the opportunity presents itself.  It is about being relevant to a small subculture.