Last Saturday, my brother Brent and I ran and rode OC Transpo buses all over Ottawa. Along the way, we (over) acted in soap opera, skateboarded, played croquet, danced around stripper poles (no nudity involved – this year), and ate really, really gross stuff. Not a normal Saturday for us or the more than 900 other participants – but all part of the fun in the Ottawa edition of the Mitsubishi City Chase urban adventure series. Which got me thinking about brands. Surprised?

My brother Brent and I still looking fresh(ish) at the beginning of the day.

Modeled on the same idea as the “Amazing Race” reality TV show, the CityChase is positioned as a ”One-day Urban Adventure Challenge”. “Chasers” (as we’re called) are given a clue sheet at the outset, then have to choose between 10 challenges or “Chasepoints” spread throughout the city. And challenges can range from whitewater paddling to rapelling down a building to eating bugs or other stuff with a high “ick” factor. Chasers can only use foot-power or public transit, and are allowed to use cellphones or smartphones with no limit on the amount of help you can get. This is the third year Brent and I have entered, and it’s a riot.

But since this is a blog about brand strategy, I’ll offer a few thoughts on CityChase branding and marketing.

Brand elements that work:

The name. “CityChase” is a great name. It’s descriptive enough to give you a strong sense of what it’s about (“Chasing” around a city), but the unusual term “chase” lends it enough character to a) force you to think about / explain / start a conversation about it, b) create a memorable impression, c) act as a strong, ownable trademark, d) create natural insider language (GO CHASERS!), and d) lends itself well to sponsor extensions – Mitsubishi here, Samsung and National Geographic overseas.

The logo: like the name, simple, strong. The arrow icon won’t win any design awards, but its placement on the right side of the wordmark, along with the small opening on the right create just enough distinctiveness to allow the organizers to use it as a repeated design element (as in the shirts above).

The sponsors: because it appeals to young, fit urban types 25-45 years old, and because the whole day is about combining fitness, fun, and technology, there are a huge range of opportunities to highlight sponsors in a way that doesn’t seem forced or unnatural. And do I fee better and more in tune with the Mitsubishi and BlackBerry brands after spending a day with them? Yeah. I do. 

Local exposure: but even better, because the Chase sends us out into urban retail areas, small local brands are able to highlight themselves and draw new people in. Would I normally walk into a Strip Fitness studio? Not on your life. Will I tell my friends about it? You bet.

The promise: It has been summed up by organizers as “you can expect a day of adventure”. And indeed, that’s what we get year after year. For the more competetive, it’s about moving fast, mapping a route, and strategizing. For the average Chaser, it’s about getting out and pushing the boundaries – testing yourself in different ways.

Brand elements that need attention:

Web site & social media: For a brand that’s built for a high-tech savvy audience, the Web site is pretty clunky, and the Social Media efforts are getting better, but need to be better coordinated as part of the experience. For example, while there are 1100 members of the relatively active  MCC Facebook fan site, on Twitter, @citychase has only 215 followers. Why? Because a) they don’t follow anyone back, b) they only use it as a “mesage blast” medium, not as a conversation among co-enthusiasts, and c) they don’t use the opportunity to live tweet or hold CityChase themed TweetUps between events. 

Logistics: two years in a row, after waiting several days for the results online, my brother and I have had our ranking assigned to other people. Last year we were 11th, and this year 12th, so we’d love to send the link to friends and family (and further extend the brand!), but this looks like we didn’t finish. We’re coming back next year, but these kinds of problems make it difficult to be unqualified in our praise.

I need to be less clumsy: I think the annotated picture below says sit all.

News item from last year in Philly – does a good job of explaining the Chase.

A recent Twitter friend of mine, David Olinger, who is the Manager of Marketing and Communications at the small Alberta City of Grande Prairie (population 50,000) has just announced the winning bidder for a branding project for Grande Prairie: a company from Seattle that specializes in tourism destination branding Great Destination Strategies . Was there great rejoicing in Grande Prairie? Um. Not exactly.

The response:

This was the grumpy and YIMBY (Yes In My Back Yard) response to the project from the editor of the local newspaper The Daily Herald Tribune:

FULL EDITORIAL HERE: Shop local doesn’t always apply to city

A few quotes to give you the gist:

The old saying, “a picture is worth a thousand words” can sometimes be even more important when it comes to picking just one image that is supposed to identify an entire community. Such is the challenge the City of Grande Prairie finds itself in right now as it embarks on a new “branding” campaign.

So with such a sensitive job one would think it would be important to consult with people from this region, lifelong residents and newcomers alike. But instead, Grande Prairie’s brand will be made in the U.S.A. in some Seattle offices 1,304 km away.

Will an American company know who Alexander Forbes was? Will they know what the Stompede is? … Will they know how to spell Muskoseepi without having to look it up everyday?

The Muskoseepi dilemma

Now, without knowing anything about the company in question or very much about Grande Prairie (I thought it was in South-Eastern Alberta, not North-Western), and certainly having no clue what a “Muskoseepi” is (?) this debate raises an interesting question for brand managers everywhere:

Is branding better done by insiders (people who live, breathe, and bleed the brand every day), or by outsiders (people who come in “cold” and learn about the brand)?

I’ll let you think about that for a moment.
[pause, soft music plays]

The answer:

My own take on this: neither one. You need both insiders and outsiders for a great branding campaign to succeed.

The insiders:

The process and outcome have to be driven and owned by insiders – and particularly by leaders with enough 1) power (and courage) to make the big changes that a whole-brand approach will require, and 2) humility to truly listen to the voices of outsiders (by which I mean customers). If the insiders abdicate this responsibility, the brand will be defined by outsiders, and not necessarily with the best intentions or proper perspective.

The outsiders:

Because a brand is a promise that is actually owned by its customers, successful branding can’t ever be an internal exercise only. Otherwise it’s just an exercise at best (like an orchestra rehearsing without an audience), a time-wasting navel-gazing as middle ground (executive retreat anyone?), or at worst, a spectacular public blunder (like Pizza The Hut or last week’s Syfy debacle).

That’s not to say you need to hire an expensive American firm to do your work for you. A sensibly priced Canadian firm would be better, but even that isn’t strictly necessary. This role could be played by your Board of Directors or a panel of advisors, or if you have a really active customer base, include some real customers in the process.

The most important things are 1) to make sure somebody at the table is speaking for the customers. That is, they give themselves permission to challenge you, ask “dumb outsider” questions, and maybe even tell you that your customers don’t care about things you hold very dear (e.g. Is the “Stompede” really that important? Really?), and 2) to make sure somebody on the “insider” side of the table is listening.

Bon Courage Grande Prairie!

First off, happy Canada Day to everyone!  And to Timmies, welcome back!

There couldn’t be a more fitting time for such an iconic Canadian brand to return to its roots in the Great White North.  Sure, you’ve stated that your move back to Canada is for tax reasons alone, but I know the real reason, Tim.  You missed us!  You’ve always been Canadian.  Never truly left.  Three years you spent in your surrogate home of Delaware, and how awfully lonely they must have been.  No one knew your name, and I bet they don’t even play hockey on the street or order double-doubles.

I know that expansion is a necessary evil, and there are so many Americans that have never tasted your wonderfully consistent blend of coffee and doughnuts (excuse me – donuts).  I know that Times Square is slightly flashier than Hamilton or Oakville, and I get what you’re trying to do down there.  I just ask that as you expand, please remember your roots, and don’t leave us again.  Once you’ve surpassed Starbucks and are taking on McDonalds head-to-head, continue to tell the world: “We’re Canadian! We make doughnuts and we support Timbits minor sports!”

I hope that a slight tax break or a convenient partnership will not cause you to jump ship in the future.  I hope that Tim Hortons is here to stay.

So, this Canada Day, enjoy your double-double with pride.  Tim Hortons in coming home.

The Globe and Mail: http://bit.ly/8pe94
The National Post: http://bit.ly/P4G3o
Reuters: http://bit.ly/Pvs7Q
Forbes: http://bit.ly/i6PnO
Bloomberg: http://bit.ly/14lDE3

A Rant about Canadian Brands for Canada Day 2009

So you ask: “Mad at Switzerland? What could anyone possibly have against the Swiss” – those lovely Alp-ine purveyors of Rolex watches, Nestle chocolate, and fastidiously discreet banking services? Sorry Switzerland. It’s not about you. It’s about you beating the pants off Canada in the global branding arena.

And to be fair, in the rant video attached you’ll note that I have equal opportunity anger issues against Sweden, Finland, and even my own ancestral homeland the Netherlands. And as you’ll see, it’s all because of their brands. Each of these countries punches far above their weight in the contest for the global brand belt. As you’ll see in the stats below, these countries even beat the heavyweight in the ring – the USA – when you take their population into account.

So why the anger?

Okay, I’m a Canadian. I’m not actually angry per se: just hurt, frustrated, envious, mildly apologetic, etc.

Actually, I want Canadian brand managers to stand up and take notice. We need to get more internationally respected / recognized brands. In this deck on SlideShare, you’ll find some supporting data (from Interbrand / Business Week) and my challenge to Canadian Brand Managers.

Go Canada!

What Canadian brands are Global candidates?

Fortunately, the good folks at Interbrand also published a helpful guide in 2008 for that as well.

Interbrand report on Canadian Brands.

The top ten

1. Blackberry
2. RBC
3. TD Canada Trust
4. Shopper’s Drug Mart
5. Petro Canada
6. Manulife
7. Bell
8. Scotiabank
9. Canadian Tire
10. Tim Horton’s