"QUALITY"

I believed with a movement over 40 years in the making would have congruence and convergence in its meaning and interpretation? As I started ruminated over an experience, I wanted to know if etymology of the word ‘Quality’ and whether it reflected a penchant towards the producer or the consumer. I was pleasantly surprised, when I visited Wikipedia for the etymology - From Middle English, from Old French qualite, from Latin qualitatem, accuative of qualitas, from qualis (of what kind), from Proto-Indo-European pronomial base *kwo- ("who", "how"). It is believed that Cicero coined qualitas as a calque to translate the Greek word ποιότης ("quality"), from ποῖος ("of what nature", "of what kind").

“Who”, “how” – Yoo Hoo! I thought to myself… the proclivity is definitely towards the consumer, the user, the “Who”, and “How” she or he chooses to use, apply or merely CONSUME the product. I have been a long time believer in the fact that quality is what ‘the consumer’, ‘the customer’ makes or perceives of the product or services (I do remember some text book definition from my engineering days). As for me ‘the producer’ or ‘the purveyor’ may believe or think highly of the goods and services BUT if my consumer does not place the same or enough value in their quality of the merchandise means nothing… nada!

While I felt good I did feel a little uncomfortable about ‘the’ experience. I recently spent time with an executive who believed that ‘quality’ is their diligence and effort invested in the products and services they offer and as long as the performance indicators identified upfront were met and or exceeded the “promise” had been kept? I must say I beg to differ! All I had to say was lets stop focusing on QUALITY and start focusing on the CUSTOMER, the CONSUMER let her define the standards, let her define the baseline and quality will happen! Quality is truly the price of entry not a value-add unless we operate in a monopoly.

OpenAds...

When I read the article on Advertising Age this morning I was impressed but quickly that feeling turned inside out... is OpenAds another form of UGC for agencies? Are the professionals just up to some fun or is it for real? With big names like Gillette and P&G, there must be some meat on the bone. Clearly the cases and the article in Financial Times made it that much more credible. Yet, I remain a skeptic? There is something about the concept that seems too good to be true? For starters:

• Longitude & relationship with the agency
  
• Ownership & Commitment from the agency
• Security (the risk of share, learn & reapply)
  

The one thing that I agree is an open system is always richer than a closed one! On that note I was reminded of a poster (sponsored by Ameriquest) I saw by the Chelsea Pier in New York city last year - "Imagination Begins with Inspiration"

Building Winning Brands

Branding Strategy Insider: Building Winning Brands

1. Brands are personifications of organizations, products, services and experiences and they are the source of relationships.
2. Top management support is crucial to a brand’s success.
3. A brand’s identity must be frequently and consistently presented.
4. Profound customer knowledge is essential to building winning brands.
5. The brand and its products and services must exceed customer expectations.
6. Brand building begins with awareness.
7. Relevant differentiation drives customer brand insistence.
8. A brand should strive to evoke emotions and create sensory experiences.
9. A brand should exhibit admirable human qualities.
10. A brand must stand for something.
11. Constant product and service innovation build strong brands.
12. A brand should strive to create a sense of community.
13. The corporate culture must reinforce the brand essence, promise and personality.
14. Internal brand building is essential to external brand building.
15. Front line employees are key to a brand’s success.
16. Co-creating a brand with its customers will help the brand continue to thrive.

From the Blake Project.