Brand Failures

278 Brand failures
‘was that they kept thinking of themselves as a camera. But the “[brand]
vision” process taught us something: Polaroid is not a camera – it’s a social
lubricant.’
If Polaroid had concentrated on the unique ‘sociable’ aspects of the brand,
rather than the unique technological aspects, it would have certainly been less
vulnerable when technology overtook its core product offerings. But by the
end of the 1990s it had left it too late. Debts were mounting, and the brand
was by that point associated with the Polaroid camera. The terrorist attacks
of 11 September 2001 caused a slowdown in travel, and consequently a
decline in demand for cameras and films. These bleaker market conditions
proved too much. By that time Polaroid had amassed debts of almost US $1
billion, and the company’s share value slipped from a high of US $60 in 1997
to a low of 28 cents in October 2001. That same month, the company filed
for bankruptcy.
Lessons from Polaroid
Be quick. Polaroid was slow to anticipate and respond to future trends,
such as digital photography and one-hour photo shops.
Don’t be over-protective. In forcing Kodak out of instant photography,
Polaroid was defending its brand at the expense of the market. Very few
brands can sustain a product category single-handedly over the long-term.
Polaroid therefore went against ‘The Law of the Category’ as formulated
by Al and Laura Ries. Namely, that ‘leading brands should promote the
category, not the brand.’
Focus on values, not products. According to Kevin Roberts, the US chief
executive of Saatchi and Saatchi, for a brand to be truly successful it needs
to become a ‘lovemark’ rather than a ‘trademark’. In other words, the
brand needs to inspire passion. Roberts cites Coca-Cola, Nike and Harley
Davidson as classic lovemarks. In order to create a lovemark, Polaroid
would have needed to focus on its value as a ‘social lubricant’ (to borrow
John Hegarty’s phrase). This would have helped to increase Polaroid’s
elasticity (see below).
Be elastic. Branding author Jack Trout observed that companies are limited
to one idea per brand. When that idea is the product itself, as opposed to
the values it represents, brands become inflexible.