Nokia SRES Now how I can use the tagline “Connecting People”?

Brands come and go. Even the largest suffer improbable mutations. It has been the case the mobile phone division Nokia, recently acquired by the giant Microsoft.

It is true, Nokia, mobile theme, I was recently in the doldrums. But I remember a few years ago that Nokia was the king of mambo mobile phone. In 2007 yes, European Brand Institute He published the news that Nokia was the most valuable brand in Europe. Anyway, After trying several brands, I ended up falling in love with Nokia to 1998. I had 4 wonderful terminals. They had no rival. simple operating system, Call quality, good toppings, reasonable size, clear and keyboard, the most important, two iconic elements of the brand I do not know if they will continue with the new phase of Microsoft, but they are the authentic brand equity:

  1. The slogan: Connecting people. Simple, of course, direct, minimalist. One of the best in the history of advertising, definitely. With 20 year term (How many brands have endured so much time, a claim?), I have not been able to find its author, but I warmly congratulate. As people of Nokia says, “connecting people” is not just a phrase or slogan, It is a corporate mission, And hence their success.
  2. The characteristic line (click here), a natural brand identifier that became a benchmark. The curious? It corresponds to the bars 13-16 the guitar solo Gran Vals Spanish guitarist and composer Francisco Tarrega, written in 1902. Screenshot 2013-09-04 to(s) 17.34.43

I will not go into the reasons that have led Nokia to divest its telephony (it is clear that the economic offer was tempting Gates), although I bet the emergence of Apple with long boring IOS i thereafter Google with long boring Android They have much to do.

Perhaps now that Nokia wants to focus its activity on renewable activities will arise change “Connecting People” for “Long life for our planet”. Then, Like I borrow them “Connecting People” to work on personal branding. Do you think I would leave?

Let's be clear, Apple has never done very well without Steve Jobs

History repeats itself. It seems that Apple not getting off without asked.

First came the bold John Sculley who in 1985 He dismissed the founder of the company, Jobs, just one year after launching the Macintosh, the computer that would revolutionize the world of computing and design. Things started to falter in Apple, while Jobs founded Pixar and NeXT Computer.

With Apple in decline, Jobs returned to the company 12 years later, on 1997. He grew the company into the world's first stock market value. Its innovative energy led him beyond the computer, and promoted the launch of iTunes, yes, iPod, the innovative iPhone and the 1st tablet market, iPad.

Then it was he who resigned as CEO of Apple 2011 in favor of Tim Cook, due to advanced disease. In October of that same year Steve Jobs died.

From the standpoint of personal branding, Jobs was passionate about innovation and trendsetter. The interface of your MacOS He was kidnapped by Microsoft with the first and later versions of Windows. But each “inventions” Apple has been plagiarized a large scale for many brands. The most obvious cases are the iPod, the great MP3 player that opened a new avenue in the market música.Pero if any “device” has been plagiarized has been the iPhone. There is no brand that does not include in its high-end touch devices and large-screen graphic interface “friendly”.

The disappearance of Jobs has had a first debatable effect: Tim Cook He decided to distribute dividends after exercise 2011, something he had never done Jobs. Jobs reinvertía, reinvertía, investigated, created, fomented new ideas. Not that he did not care shareholders. He thought he had enough prize with regular revaluation of its shares.

The first major release of the Cook era, yes, iPhone 5, he has “punctured”, He has not had the host nor the success of previous versions. And if that was not enough, the Iphone 5 It has changed the characteristics of the connector, Uppercase cabreo for users of previous versions. But perhaps the worst of the iPhone 5 is that, for the first time, does not exceed the high-end devices Android, his great competitor made in Google. Cook should not forget that, Despite the appeal of the Apple brand, yes, consumer is not stupid, and that ultimately if there is a greater benefit than the brand image Apple devices will no longer be the object of desire.

Will this be the beginning of the end? Is there not a dolphin in the world who can take charge of Jobs at Apple? What would now Jobs whether the cancer would not have been?

If Apple loses, we're all going to hell

Today is a great day for innovation and creativity.

Today we learned that Samsung You shall indemnify Apple plagiarism. Specifically, They were at stake iPhone patents. Samsung, with all my respect, He had no qualms about copying your model Galaxy everything that was in the iPhone. Of course, also he introduced some new, just missing, but Samsung saved millions in research.

So far the news, not just. Samsung appeal (of course) and the wheel continues. But why it is important that Apple has won the first pulse?

Because if Apple lost, we're all going to hell. Mean that those who believe, those investing, those investigating, those who innovate have no place in the world. That place would become of those who plagiarize, those who imitate.

This morning I read a tweet from a guy who was wondering what I get if Apple gets compensation from Samsung. Such symphony lacks vision (Thank you Daniel H. Pink), and trees do not let him see the forest. If justice does not protect those investing in R & D, back to the caves.

What if I have an iPhone? Why not, and my daughter has a Galaxy.

Back to look at this ad campaign “Think different”. May help us better understand how creativity works. Thanks Steve Jobs, Today's sentence is a great tribute to your work.

[youtube] = EryxBXY8OHo[/youtube]

Y… What will Mark Zuckerberg with 11.000 millions more?

The news of the IPO of Facebook will generate a value to the company 88.000 millions of dollars, a record in a dotcom since valued at Google by 23.000 million 2004.

It is clear that now all we can own a piece of Facebook, But that's not the point. The question is what will Zuckerberg with near 11.000 million dollars you can report this IPO. Be a little richer, yes, It is clear. But what will you do, which company will buy… Are you dare to Yahoo? Who will be the candidate?.

We have recently learned that Apple, the first market capitalization of the world, He has decided to distribute dividends to its shareholders. With that and you notice that Steve Jobs is not, because he sure had used the profits to buy other companies that do grow Apple. How Apple will grow now? Surely slower.

Clearly a Facebook IPO force Zuckerberg to grow steadily, and that means significant investments. That's probably why goes public, because it already has in mind buying a company key.

Bets are accepted.

Ultra-discreet strategy CEO

I refer article Tino Fernández “Ultra-discreet strategy CEO” published last Thursday Expansion in which I participated with many other, and analyzing whether or not the CEO to face before the public. There are for all tastes and opinions. And what do you think?

They are founders, presidents and top executives of firms. Rarely granted interviews, Rationing and often exaggerated his public appearances. It may be a well-studied plan or simply his way of being, but this particular attitude has consequences on the mark, in the company and the people who work there.

In April 2009, two employees of an establishment of Domino’s Pizza North Carolina hung in YouTube a video in which repugnant acts performed with the food they thought to send home. That clip He achieved one million hits in two days. The speed with which the lethal joke for the good name of the company spread contrasted with the delay in responding to its first executive, who apologized in a video. The company also mobilized Twitter and Facebook, but the slow response made only saw 66.000 people at the end of the day. Someone commented then that “the damage done 30 minutes of exposure on the Internet 49 year history of the brand is not cured with this patch”.

CEOs are the public face of their organization and, in times of confusion, It is expected to be visible and honest about any problems that arise. The episode of Domino's Pizza raises the debate of managers, company founders or presidents who prefer to keep a low profile; I rarely give interviews or out on photos or participate in public events. The question is whether this is a strategy designed to the case or is it a personal matter. And whatever, should analyze what consequences this discretion excessively -sometimes in the company and its brand, as well as those who work in it.

Vivian Acosta, director general partner of consultancy Norman Broadbent, remember that “there is a style of leadership that turns out to be austere in communication. It is characteristic of those who link their success to their organization rather than seek personal recognition. They relate their personal mark with his job and the company; They work more inward than outward; and generate more equipment. Brand a company builds a team. And more cohesion and group consciousness is generated. It is therefore the management team that creates the brand and not a single manager”. A case of discretion in this regard is the CEO of the former Bankinter, Juan Arena, who he never allowed to take pictures during his tenure nor appeared before the media, except for shareholders' meetings. “The important thing is the bank, and not”, It seemed to be his motto. This attitude generated much sense of group membership, and a differentiation strategy. In his years at Bankinter he wanted to prove that you can manage a company in the shade without being the visible face of the company.

Santiago Alvarez de Mon, del IESE professor, explain what “there is even very transparent management internally but retract to the outside. They prefer that their teams are those who leave the fray and appear. It is a low profile typical of those who are comfortable with their work and who love what they do, but they want to minimize the external impact of the activities performed. They do not want to customize the company”.

Acosta remembers theories Jim Collins referred to fifth level of leadership, which are based on most of the great firms today have always been great. Most companies, nevertheless, only become good. Managers who make good companies in excellent stand out as being discrete, humble and do not keep too many public interventions.

according to Collins, the true leader level 5 It is what generates long-term change and sustainable; who is more interested in the success of the organization that their personal achievements and has enough self-confidence to hire competent people; which it is modest; who assumes responsibility-not blame others when things do not work as expected-; and one whose ultimate ambition is the organization.

Alvarez de Mon believes that this attitude of discretion is, rather than a strategy, a way to be, and coincides with Ovidio Penalver, managing partner of Isavia Consultants, in which “There are examples of leaders who are shy, They are suffering from resources to appear before the public; they do not have good image, or are not comfortable”.

He adds peñalver “for any company it is very convenient be present. It is a matter of survival, because if you're not, do not exist, and that presence can be very varied: publish books, make announcements, give interviews, be in fairs and events”.

For any organization is convenient 'be present’

The expert identifies three possible strategies: the first is “only brand image of the company and staff opacity”. It is characteristic of large companies, and it is carried out through responsible communication or a media agency. In this sense Andrés Pérez, positioning consultant staff, ensures that “some departments and communication directors has excessively 'hidden’ their managers. It is they who really dominate the enterprise communication and excessive discretion of those CEO, presidents or founders, rather than a thoughtful strategy or reason, It is due to a matter blocking, or to have gotten them a certain fear to intervene in public”. Peñalver explains that in this first strategy “the name of the organization is sold and who appears in public need permission from the. If we as a country example, we could say that Switzerland has very good brand image, but very few people could say the name of its president. In this case, what sells is the country”.

Another plan is to turn companies around the mark of a person. Peñalver clarifies that “It is very media leaders, with a strong personality. Here, rather than a strategy, It is the personality of these individuals. At Banesto of Mario Conde everything revolved around him. If we go to other examples, in Venezuela is much talk of Chavez and less country. And there are political parties, as UPyD, They are revolving around their leader, Rosa Díez“.

Isavia director partner also identifies a mixed model: which it is based on a highly valued company and a founder or president with a personal stamp splendid. “It is the case asked onApple. And one could say that is the case Emilio Botin on Santander“.

Minimum issue

Santiago Alvarez de Mon warns that you can not be a CEO without assuming that should represent the brand: “There must be a minimum for this. It goes in the salary and it is your responsibility. Discretion should be practiced in moderation so that it is not secrecy”.

Vivian Acosta meanwhile says “when one does not create a brand, others create it for him. If you let other minted that mark, which results can be negative”.

For Guillem Recolons, partner Soymimarca, the non-presence “It causes a dehumanization of the company. If there is a person in front is colder. Crisis management, there is no one to take responsibility, and it tends to charge the brand. Given the inaccessibility, Besides, a lack of dialogue is given, No one can give the face. The first brand ambassador is the CEO. If your image is opaque entire company oozes opacity“. Andrés Pérez agrees that “opacity that generates desconfinza. If you're invisible you may think you have something to hide”.

Partner Soymimarca adds that “Spain long term we will import the type of attitudes of leaders who use person to person communication“, taking into account how others perceive the message and how to transmit it to your network of trusted people. It is the case Barack Obama and actions around him, which they became his trademark a symbol and icon worshiped by the great social masses.

media leaders

During the crisis of the automotive industry in Detroit, in the decade of 1980, President Chrysler,Lee Iacocca, It made famous by putting its image and personality in the service of the company, becoming known worldwide phrase “if you find a better car, buy it”.Fifteen years later, Chrysler used its media potential for a new campaign deals.

The Spanish Iacocca was Manuel Luque, general manager Camp, that as a media leader became fashionable cars slogan applied to detergents. Even those who have never seen the announcement of Columbus known and “I searched, compare, and if you find something better… Buy”.

Just as an exaggerated discretion may be negative, leaders who choose to be media may fall into excess. Some think that the most effective leaders seem to be those who “son” their own business and they embody the image of your company, especially when it comes to transmitting values ​​and emotions. Andrés Pérez, positioning consultant staff, He cites examples of exaggerated media Donald Trump or Richard Branson.

Perez recalled that “leadership is based on someone with clear objectives, you must have defined the objectives of its people. Branson knows what he wants, what people want, and communicates perfectly”.

The decision to be a media manager may be due to a vision of the kind patrimonialista “the company's me”; or also the model “the company is my springboard”, something typical of those managers who use the media platform to get a shot headhunters. In addition, the great iconic personality of certain chiefs, as may be the case Jack Welch, CEO of General Electric, o Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple, You can become an inconvenience, because a giant figure like these leaders can cause an eclipse of talent in the organization, which sometimes it is atrophied and is unable to respond appropriately when these leaders are leaving the company (Welch) or die (Jobs).

This leadership implies that those who exercise spend many years as CEO, influencing the design and strategy of firms. How they manage institutionalized and it is almost impossible to find new leaders to replace them.