Greenfield Belser 2017 Annual Review

Greenfield Belser has been a Finn Partners company for almost two years. This year we are adopting the new Finn brand style we created for the firm that is on the second spread of our book. That’s exciting for all of us here at Finn, but that’s hardly all that has been going on this past year. Really, it is impossible to say we love the work we did for one client more than another, but our goal is always to show you a balanced portfolio—across sectors with firms of varying sizes located all around the country. Read more here.

See More

the dish
on websites

the largest professional service firm
and association websites at a glance

See More

Brand Thinking
Bleeding edge thinking on branding and marketing

big idea

Has the Great Recession led to Brand Regression?

By Joe Walsh
March 11, 2014
Has the Great Recession led to Brand Regression?

This article began as a rant. 

It started in a conference room papered with top professional service firm website pages, advertisements, pitch materials, thought leadership pieces and other forms of marketing communications. We assessed what we saw, shook our heads in disbelief and uttered a few choice words. Fortunately, what happens in the conference room stays in the conference room. Or not.

It appears to us that the post-recession state of professional services branding is like living in a bland, empty room. Wherever we look, we see reduced brand activity and sameness. Once creative and compelling, professional service brands (via websites, advertising and other channels) now seem less visible. Sadly, it appears to us that both the quality and quantity of firm branding efforts are regressing.

Are past failed efforts to blame? Is the stumbling economy a disincentive to act? Or is it the pendulum swinging to business development, creating tremendous pressure on CMOs to drive revenue? Has anyone else noticed the falloff in brand awareness and memorability? Do we still believe brand is critical to creating preference?

Good questions, we thought. So, we polled CMOs and CEOs at law, accounting and consulting firms around the world for their opinions. Respondents included leaders of local, regional, national and international firms ranging from three professionals to 2,755. The average firm size was 382 professionals. Roughly half were local/regional and the others were national/international in scope.

Questions, answers and insights.

We asked 20 questions in eight brand categories. Here, we’ve summarized four of the most important findings, including the questions asked, the answers received and the topline takeaways.

1. Brand Health. We asked how important is brand to the success of your firm, how helpful is your brand in achieving that success and is your brand understood by key audiences?

• 95% of CMOs and 92% of CEOs/managing partners believe their brand is moderately or extremely important to success
• But only 26% find their brand “very helpful” 
• On understanding, only 21% replied that their brands were well or perfectly understood by prospects.



  Brand Health

The takeaway? Yikes! How can something perceived to be so important yield such poor scores in helpfulness and understanding? In live presentations of these findings, some of our CMO friends suggest that the answer lies in the degree of difficulty of doing branding well in any professional services firms. One shared this comment, “these days if you wish to undertake any sort of brand exercise, it must be titled, ‘Strategic Positioning Initiative' to avoid the factious response that sometimes arrives as talk turns to brand." Whatever you call it, our view is that pioneering brand efforts among professional service firms have given way to safer, less expensive efforts that suffer from a lack of uniqueness and are easy to ignore. Conventional wisdom suggests, that in times of recession it’s better to tighten the belt and cut marketing and branding expenditures to focus on sales, however, when firms stop investing in brand and marketing they have fewer opportunities to sell. Healthy firms require strong commitment to both brand/marketing and business development–they go hand in hand.



Brand Distinction  

2. Brand Distinction. Is your brand promise—the value proposition—unique? Is your brand expression (look, feel and voice) unique? Do you consider your brand to be innovative?

• only 20% say their brands are “very” or “extremely innovative”
• 66% respond that their promise of value is “marginally” or “moderately unique”
• 54% say their brand Identity or expression is “marginally” or “moderately unique.”

The takeaway? Unicorns and innovative brands are as rare as hens’ teeth. Again, responding CMOs and CEOs believe brands are important to success but say uniqueness is hard to come by in the professional services space. Perhaps the reason why relates to the fact that lawyers and law firms follow precedent (and one another), accountants follow standards and consulting firms honor process. Meanwhile, marketers toil in the awareness building and differentiation business. That’s the rub. The most innovative firms and best marketers have the courage to take risks and break with convention. Doing so is good business because opportunity starts with interest.



  Jar of Pickles

3. Brand Quality. How do you rate the quality of your firm’s brand communication tools (things like websites, advertising, content marketing, etc.)?

On a scale of 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) CEOs and CMOs graded their own efforts:

• they gave websites a mean rating of 3.6 on the five point scale
• core identity (logo and such) scored 3.5
• proposal and pitch materials were 3.5
• videos, 3.1
• thought leadership and content marketing, 2.8
• advertising, 2.8
• social media, 2.5

The takeaway? On average, brand communications quality is, well, average. Given the type A personalities in leading professional services firms—those accustomed to performing at the head of their class and fields—the low scores might be hard to figure. But the effect of the economy sheds light on the tough grading. During the great recession, we saw marketing attention focused heavily on business development. And why not? Sales were hard to come by as firms hunkered down among bleak predictions. We saw marketing communication investment devalued and more do-it-yourself branding within firms. Yes, that led to savings, but at what cost to quality, awareness, memorability and preference for firms? Previous research among professional services firm clients and prospects shows that people have preconceived and immediate feelings about the quality of your firm solely based on the quality of brand communications. This, in turn, can have a noticeable impact on opportunities and then, on revenue.



Brand Channels  

4. Brand channels and investments. Which communication channels are most important and where do the greatest investments go?

• 85% believe firm websites are the most important channel; 92% say it is the greatest area of investment
• 67% rate proposals and pitch material as the second most important channel; but only 30% say it is an area of greatest investment
• 59% say substantive alerts, speaking and thought leadership are very important; 32% indicate investments here are highest
• 35% viewed firm and practice advertising as most important; 45% reported it as an area of greatest investment.

The takeaway? Tuning the channels for the clearest return is a challenge. Website investment matches its perceived importance (shocker) but other communications are either overfunded or underfunded relative to perceived importance. Major events are viewed as much less important but still command a disproportionate financial commitment (boondoggle, anyone?). Pitch materials are not getting the love CMOs and CEOs feel they deserve and blue sky thought leadership is short-changed as well.


What to do about brand progression?

While our study and data does not prove that branding in the business-to-business services sector has regressed following the recession, it does confirm that there is significant room for improvement for professional services firms. To advance your own branding cause, consider these tips:

Increase investments in both marketing and business development simultaneously. By the way, increasing investments does not always demand higher dollar levels. It could and often should be a reallocation of funds from unimportant or ineffective programs to the ones that matter most. Think of it as found couch money; the dollars and cents may be rattling around your firm–you just need to collect and spend it wisely. This often requires doing less, better.

Have the courage to do memorable, engaging and high quality brand communications. The great ad man, David Ogilvy, said, “you can’t bore people into buying your product or service.”  Firms need to take greater creative risks to achieve differentiation. For those of you who see branding as lipstick or worse, take the words of another “counsel.” Andy Warhol commented, “I may be superficial, but I’m deeply superficial.” 

Demand that the investments made in marketing and business development yield measurable results in the form of better brand awareness, increased leads and a higher leads to dollars conversion ratio. Our study looked at brand tracking and you can read more of it by accessing the link to the full results below. But the bottom line is that few in the professional services world have the patience or budgets to do tracking research well.

For brand skeptics, keep this in mind–following the U.S. Stock Market crash of 1987, Nike tripled its marketing spend and emerged from the recession with profits nine times higher than before the recession started. Yes, we know Nike is not a law, accounting or consulting firm, but they are great at marketing. And you have to admit a 9x increase in profits is something smart to just do.

To download the paper directly, click here: Brand Regression Research.