Is Brand Dead?
To some in the FSI industry, brand loyalty is dead or at least certainly dying. Others still see ‘the brand’ as a huge unique selling point. The argument for the latter is that in an environment of many fragmented services all competing for the same customer, how do they keep them coming back? Brand can trigger an emotional override over function and act as a way to differentiate and help a customer decide to go back to that brand rather than a competing brand. Many believe the brands who’ll win are simply those who are going to give customers the best deal. To them, proposition + ease = loyalty. Amazon has absolutely nailed all three, a convincing argument could be made that proposition loyalty is purely function and ease of use, not trust has been absolutely phenomenal, scaling dramatically with no marketing spend.
Most people just want simple and easy, then loyalty’s out the window.
There’s also an intermediary brand in the middle which is your phone / watch or chosen item of hardware. So it raises the question, who owns the customer? If we’re making a payment transaction over Siri or Alexa to transfer money to a friend, does the user care what bank is used?
Brands should be more concerned and focused on how they disrupt themselves rather than what brands will potentially disrupt them. Brands need to realise that robots are there to enhance teams and individuals not just to gobble up jobs. The brands who win are those who embrace new technologies, experiment, iterate and utilise it to meet specifics goals or objectives. Experimenting and adopting technology for technology’s sake is an all-together too frequent occurrence. Instead brands should focus on what the problem they’re trying to solve is and then asses whether it’s technology, process or people or a combination of all three which can help solve or address the issue.