branding

Quick Thought: International Brands in the US

Posted by Mike McLaughlin on Jan 05, 2015, in Thoughts , tagged with , , ,

Ignites ran an article last week (subscription required) about the emerging efforts of foreign banks – specifically BMO, HSBC, and RBC – to grow their asset management presences in the United States.

I have no doubt these firms can build successful, profitable US businesses. But I do ultimately question the overall brand strategy.

Time and time again, large overseas firms attempt to lever their global brands within the US. I think this is a problematic approach, in part because “large global brand” is mismatched with the typical business strategy. As Damion Hendrickson, senior VP of intermediary sales for HSBC, put it in the article:

In order to be successful, you really have to specialize in something when you’re starting out. You have to have some sort of niche to your brand.

 If this is the aim, firms like HSBC face two significant challenges:

  • Meshing Global with Niche: reconciling an image as a global financial power with a nimble specialty asset manager is an oil-and-water strategy.
  • Provincialism: at the risk of oversimplifying, US financial advisors are more provincial than most think. “Global” certainly matters in terms of the strategies and investment expertise a firm offers, but being an international financial powerhouse (e.g., bank) is overrated by firms in terms of how much advisors really care.

Neither challenge is of course insurmountable. But as these and future overseas firms try to gain traction in the US market, I think that seriously reconsidering the standard “let’s leverage our global brand” approach is something very much worth doing.

Positioning a New Product Family

Posted by Anu Heda on Mar 27, 2013, in Thoughts , tagged with ,

New ETFs from firms with no ETF history. Prestigious long-only managers launching alternatives. Massive non-US banks entering the domestic asset management landscape. All seem to be occurring at a more frenetic pace than ever.

We’ve been supporting clients in these and similar situations. A client from last year mentioned Killian Branding during an engagement. And their post recently on customer service is very poignant. More broadly than this post, our advice for clients in these situations is to carefully study the providers with significant market share. The burden of the new entrant is to provide a new reason to do business with them. Paradoxically, it’s a burden and a great opportunity.

27 Words: Can You Name that Firm?

Posted by Mike McLaughlin on Nov 28, 2011, in Thoughts , tagged with , ,

One of the tools we use in our marketing work is language analysis – the words firms use in talking about themselves. We use it to help:

  • Identify terms that are over- and under-used across the industry
  • Find opportunities for firms to uniquely position themselves
  • Evaluate if a firm’s brand aspirations are actually supported by the words they actually use

Most often we find that firms fail to differentiate themselves in a meaningful way. Take the word cloud below, for example. It shows the 30 most-frequently-used words one investment manager uses to describe itself. In this case we’ve blocked the firm’s name, variations on the name, and the city where it is headquartered.

It leads to a simple question: can you name that firm? If you work inside the industry, maybe. If you’re an institutional investor or financial advisor, I doubt it.

And while the word cloud is an oversimplification, the problem it uncovers – the lack of a differentiated voice – is real for many investment managers.