brand crisis Tag

Bank Relationship

How would you define your Relationship with a Bank?

Timothy Sloan is replacing John Stumpf, as the new CEO of Wells Fargo, due to the bank’s inappropriate and, perhaps illegal, cross-selling practices.  In the October 13 Wall St. Journal, Sloan is quoted as saying,

“I don’t believe that strategy was fundamentally flawed. We are not abandoning our cross-selling focus. Cross-selling is shorthand for growing relationships with our customers.”

This shows a serious misunderstanding of what “relationship” means to Sloan and to the Wells Fargo organization. Only a banker would say that their relationship with their customers is based upon how many products the bank can sell them, whether they need them or not.

A relationship to most people involves some kind of human connection. A positive relationship is one in which people regard and behave toward one another with respect, understanding, and truthfulness. Strong brands are built on individual connections, not financial transactions, but most big banks seem to get this wrong. Perhaps this is why most banks typically rank very low on brand satisfaction surveys – they are focused on the wrong kind of “relationships.”

Wells Fargo and its new CEO need to give some serious thought to what is needed for the bank to truly serve its customers’ needs. They should change their focus on building the bank’s income and instead focus on how customers might define a profitable relationship. That is how we would recommend Wells Fargo make its next efforts to become appreciated, profitable, and to a grow a lasting brand.

0
6

How Branding Is Helping GM Survive Recall Disaster

The news about GM this year has been grim. We’re not even through 2014, and so far GM has had more than 60 recalls. The total cost will likely top $1 billion and involve more than 26 million vehicles.

And yet, GM just paid its shareholders a quarterly dividend in September. Despite everything, GM’s stock valuation is holding relatively steady.

How can a company that has been in the news all year for extremely negative reasons, continue to be valued on the stock market? Partly it’s a matter of brand management.

READ MORE

0
0

Brands in Crisis: You Can’t Hide

Malaysia AirlinesAfter the back-to-back tragedies of Malaysia Airlines flights MH17 and MH370, we’ve seen some news reports that the airline is looking to rebrand and change its name.

While I can understand why a brand in crisis would want to distance itself from these terrible events, I think it’s a mistake. Here’s why:

The damage is already done: These tragedies have dominated the news for many months, and the misfortunes of Malaysia Airlines are seared into the mind of the world’s population.

Superficial rebranding looks like hiding: When a brand has been through a disaster, a superficial change in identity makes it look like you’re trying to hide something. Instead of helping, it can backfire, provoking condemnation that further sinks the brand’s reputation, revenue and market value.

What really matters is demonstrating integrity: Instead of hiding, brands going through disasters need to demonstrate a real and total commitment to making meaningful change. For Malaysia Airlines this means rethinking every aspect of the airline and implementing major changes in critical areas (safety, management, training, operations, policies, service and transparency). In this way the brand could signal its commitment to ensuring that these tragedies did not happen in vain.

Brands in crisis can turn tragedy to triumph. But doing so requires investment and integrity. Malaysia Airlines could successfully change its identity and name if they introduce these changes as a high-visibility sign of their commitment to completely re-vamp their airline, and to be held to the highest standard. If the airline is truly changed, its identity could be changed. Handled correctly, that’s an opportunity.

0
3