February, 2002 - Issue 10

The Promises Kept in Service to Others:
Nonprofits, Brand and the Internet

Part One in a Two-Part Series: Defining Brand for Nonprofits

By Darrow Zeidenstein, Ph.D., Marts & Lundy, Inc.

The Internet is a powerful medium for strengthening a nonprofit's brand. Yet it is underutilized in brand building because the concept of brand does not enjoy wide currency in the nonprofit world.  Typically associated with the profit-driven marketing of products, brand ostensibly runs counter to the mission-centered services of nonprofit organizations.  Compounding the confusion is the loosey-goosey use of the word "brand" in business and popular media--ranging from a minimalist notion of name differentiation to the ethereal idea of brand as the complete realm of senses and perceptions consumers feel about a product.  None of these ideas is strictly wrong, but they are ineffective in doing what a good, working concept should do: draw the attention of a nonprofit's leadership to things that matter deeply. 

A productive working concept of brand emerges when we bracket out its commonplace connection to the customer and tie it to the cornerstone aspects of mission and commitment that the philanthropic community shares.  The distinction between customer and community is crucial in differentiating how a brand works productively in commercial versus philanthropic contexts. 

In both contexts, brands are shared public symbols referring to something of note, to something that stands out from the ordinary.  Brands are references, and a strong brand's consumers are referenced to something very clear and obvious. 

	The NRA and ACLU neatly illustrate the point that a brand doesn't have to be 'popular' or even well-liked to be effective.
	Darrow Zeidenstein Marts & Lundy, Inc.

Commercial brands differ sharply from their philanthropic counterparts because they reference individuals to relatively flat memberships of status or preference: a woman wearing Ferragamo shoes is referenced to a status group of preference; and a man driving a Volvo is referenced to those with a preference for safety. Yet, the woman wearing Ferragamo shoes and the man driving the Volvo do not feel in league with their fellow "Ferragamoites" or "Volvonians."  They are not united for a common purpose, a shared cause, a lived history or a desired outcome. Commercial brands are flat because they reference a relatively static image, even if this image appears historical, such as Ralph Lauren's leisurely wealth of times past.

In contrast, nonprofit organizational brands work best when they reference a community of people who, though connected in one way or another to an organization, share a bond that is greater than the organization per se.  Strong brands in philanthropic contexts reference a mission, or a defining purpose, that is why an organization and its community exist in the first place.  Unlike commercial brands, the strong nonprofit brands are rich is history and even lore.  Consider two strong brands in "environment"-- Green Peace and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.  One understands almost immediately that these organizations are two very different kinds of communities evolving from two very different historical trajectories.  Without knowing much about each organization, it's clear what kind of organizations they are and generally what to expect from each. 

A weak philanthropic brand does not set a clear reference to a community of purpose and place. Consequently, would-be supporters have no clear expectations of what to expect and how to serve the greater mission or cause.  Far too often, institutions of higher education have weak or blasé brands, characterized by:

• Promises that are indistinguishable from any other institution of higher education;
• Mission and vision statements that do not reflect the institution's origins, place, unique culture and vision;
• Personnel who merely work as opposed to community members who are invested in taking the organization and its community to the next level; and
• Alumni who are left out-of-touch save for annual appeals for money.

Elements of Strong Nonprofit Brands
Strong nonprofit brands emerge from referencing a community, specifically from the special promises of value that a non-profit organization makes and keeps to its community.   

Promises...value...keeps... community are the four terms that stand out. The power of this working concept to focus attention on things that matter lies firmly in the connections between and among terms, as follows:

• Promises...keeps: the onus is always on the organization to know and be faithful to its mission and values of service;
• Promises...value...community:  the organization must seek to do important things (and shun insignificant things) in terms of delivering good to its community; and
• Promises...keeps...community:  the value of an organization's brand comes from enduring relationships of shared trust that generate greater good to the immediate community and beyond.

This definition of brand makes a clean break from common notions of brand as a static symbol or mark and advocates a more dynamic concept of brand as relationship building through service to the community in the form of promises expected and delivered.

This dynamic sense of brand is useful in differentiating an organization's reputation from its brand.  Case-in-point:  the National Rifle Association (NRA) has a very strong brand because it consistently delivers on its promise to uphold the rights of gun owners who, in turn, trust the organization and finance it to excel in its mission (i.e., the organization sustains impact).  However, the NRA has a poor reputation in many quarters because of its hardball tactics in keeping its promise to shoot down (figuratively) gun control.   The same could be said of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and many other organizations that enjoy strong brands but aren't universally "loved."

The NRA and ACLU neatly illustrate the point that a brand doesn't have to be "popular" or even well-liked to be effective.  There are at least two dimensions to brand effectiveness.  
         

	...nonprofit organizational brands work best when they reference a community of people who ... share a bond that is greater than the organization per se.
	Darrow Zeidenstein Marts & Lundy, Inc.

First, a strong brand is effective in always already communicating what prospective members of the community should expect.  For example, most people have never attended MIT or stepped foot on campus, but they probably have a fairly clear impression of what MIT is about--and so do its prospective students, faculty members, administrators, etc.  The ability of the MIT brand to communicate the organization's mission, values and sense of place enables a powerful process of member self-selection to take place.  Individuals first come into some form of interaction with the organization already seeking a longer-term relationship built on expectations of value.   

A second dimension to the effectiveness of strong brands is in their ability to attract and sustain "true believers"--individuals whose personal hopes are tied to the greater community and mission of the organization.   Although there are many psychological and semiotic processes that help create the true believer, the bedrock of the true believer's connection to an organization is a powerful sense of fulfillment.  Whether the fulfillment stems from narrow personal gain or a broader sense of public good is immaterial:  the promises of value an organization delivers make an important difference in the true believers' lives.     

Four Important Precepts
A working concept of brand should keep a nonprofit's eyes on the important things. Defining brand in the moral terms of promises kept, a nonprofit organization's leaders should follow four basic precepts to enhance their brand:

1. Know what the organization promises and keep it:  effective brands are built on the trust community members hold of the organization to keep its promises in the execution of a clearly articulated mission and vision;
2. Don't fault the constituents:  effective brands are built over time, with the burden of executing important tasks on the organization, not the constituency;
3. Be true to the mission, even in the face of wide-spread unpopularity:  effective brands are not necessarily popular or well liked; and
4. Shun insignificant things: great brands belong to great organizations because they push fast and hard to do more.

Understanding the foundation for creating a strong brand, how then does a nonprofit utilize the Internet to strengthen its brand?  Part Two of this two-part series, scheduled for the March 2002 edition of Convio Monthly, will explore the relationship between brand building and Internet strategy. 

________________________________________________________________________________________

About the author:  Darrow Zeidenstein is a  Senior Consultant and Head of the Marketing and Technology Practice at Marts & Lundy, Inc.   Marts & Lundy is a full-service consulting firm serving not-for-profit organizations.