WHO SHOULD POLICE THE BRAND – CLIENT OR AGENCY?
by The employees of the company must act as the brand police. Given that companies constantly generate new product, operations, decisions, competitive reactions, and goals, it’s unlikely that any agency would be embedded enough to see how each one of these will affect the brand, making it impossible for the agency to effectively serve as the brand police. This question leads us back to a fundamental point: If we agree that the brand is far more than marketing, then delegating the policing to an agency makes absolutely no sense as it’s not a marketing issue.
That said, if you look at policing as simply managing the look and feel – e.g., the brand expressions – then although I still say this should be managed internally, I concede that it will require agency work and support. If brand oversight is under the auspices of the marketing department, then this group will undoubtedly lever their agency relationships for opinions and guidance on any issues that are important enough to hit the radar – for example, items cooked up by product development or M&A activities. Even so, how you govern the brand guide is up to the employees of the firm and should not be delegated under any circumstances. Anyway, who would want to pay agency fees to police creative?
Internal employees and business requirements drive this creative development, and it’s important to hire internal talent who can both guide communications and police creative execution. Ideally you’d like every employee to be a member of the brand police[md]that would be powerful. (Can you imagine having articulated what the brand stands for so clearly that even the newest hire would know if an action isn’t brand-aligned?) So those of you readers who work on the client side, get out your badges and have at it. You probably have permission to police far more than colors and fonts, so don’t limit yourselves to creative.
Popularity: unranked [?]
