A recent client workshop highlighted the challenge of what I call “overbranding”. This is where new products or even just new features get their own shiny new brand, including a name and logo. This is no surprise, as marketers love new brands! Creating a new brand allows you to use the whole branding toolbox, from positioning to naming to visual identity. However, whilst this might be fun, it’s bad for business.
1. Why Over-branding is bad for business
The problems of over-branding has several negative consequences for your brand and business:
-
It eats up cash: new brand names and logos don’t come cheap. You need to brief, design, test and trademark them. And then, if you want them to actually live, you need to invest to drive awareness.
-
It drains team time: Instead of focusing on growing the core Masterbrand, teams end spend time designing and debating the new brands
-
It’s a wasted opportunity to grow the Masterbrand: every time you create a new mini-brand, you’re missing a golden opportunity to build equity in your Masterbrand
2. Stretch Smartly and strategically
Before teams create a new brand for their new product or feature, we get them to analyse the stretch from the core Masterbrand along two dimensions: i. emotional stretch, influenced by the target audience and value positioning of the new category, ii. functional stretch, influenced by the competence and capabilities needed to compete in the new catgeory.
This analysis, done using judgement and/or research, then guides the optimum branding strategy:
-
Small stretch = Descriptive name
When you’re close to home, just say what it is and use a Descriptor. Dove Deodorant builds equity in Dove. The same goes for Apple Watch. You’re selling more stuff (SMS) while building the masterbrand -
Medium stretch = Sub-brand (use with caution!)
Sometimes a bit more distinction is needed, especially if you’re stretching on the emotional dimension. Here, a sub-brand can be considered. Gillette Fusion added “sizzle” to the product “sausage” to help support a premium priced proposition. But beware: many sub-brands end up acting and being treated like stand-alone brands! -
Big stretch = New brand (last resort)
Only when the new offering breaks completely with your core equities should you consider a new brand. Think Marcus from Goldman Sachs for the bank’s digital personal finance play. But be sure it’s really needed, given the massive investment that new brands require.
3. Examples of Getting It Wrong… and Getting It Right
Let’s look at three brand examples to explore overbranding and how to get back on track.
Momentum Insurance (South Africa): from sub-brand to descriptor
Momentum Insurance marketed their life insurance range under the sub-brand Myriad. The risk was that Myriad could get treated like a standalone brand. Now it’s just Momentum Life Insurance: a smart move that reinvests every marketing penny in building the Momentum name.
WD-40 brand: from new brand to sub-brand
WD-40 initially launched its professional range under the new brand Blue Works. This added complexity to the portfolio, fragmenting investment. It also reduced the potential of the new range by failing to leverage the trusted WD-40 brand name and distinctive brand assets. The company re-launched the range with the WD-40 Specialist sub-brand. This have the new range a much better chance of success and also focused investment on the WD-40 Masterbrand.
ITVx: the courage to revitalise the core brand
When ITV relaunched its streaming offer, there was a lot of internal support for a new brand. This would have in effect doomed the core brand to be only a linear TV brand and also required massive investment to create and launch a new brand. The brand stretch framework helped give the company the confidence to use a sub-brand strategy with ITVx. This gave some stretch from the core whilst also leveraging and revitalising the ITV Masterbrand. The launch boosted streaming hours by +29% and +56% in the key 16-34 age group, generating one billion streams in the first four months, as we posted on here.
In conclusion, to avoid falling into the overbranding trap, ask yourself if you are stretching far enough to justify a new brand. Maybe a descriptive name could do the job better, leveraging and building your Masterbrand.
