MarketingDoctor.tv
John Tantillo's Brand Winner... And Loser: Goldman Sachs and The Obama Administration
Posted by The Marketing Doctor at 7/14/2009 9:17 AM 
Categories: Branding
Tags: Congress TARP investment bank Capitol Hill brand forward momentum looking back Goldman Sachs investigation G.S. fads GS Legislature branding commercial bank marketing Tantillo Forward Motion South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Dick Cheney CIA White House Obama
Categories: Branding
Tags: Congress TARP investment bank Capitol Hill brand forward momentum looking back Goldman Sachs investigation G.S. fads GS Legislature branding commercial bank marketing Tantillo Forward Motion South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Dick Cheney CIA White House Obama
Brand Winner… | And Loser |
 |  |
John Tantillo’s Winner and Loser of The Week:
Winner: Goldman Sachs
Loser: The Obama Administration
Folks, without further ado:
The Winner
The banking system is not quite off the ropes, but one “bank” is poised to announce record earnings from its trading business: Goldman Sachs.
Trading? Is that how banks are supposed to earn their money?
Not really, but Goldman Sachs is the exception. Here is a venerable Wall Street powerhouse that became a commercial bank at the end of last year. At the time, I thought (and blogged) that this was a bad idea for many reasons —but looking back on the situation, it really is clear that given the economic climate, they had no choice.
However, Goldman Sachs did something that I didn’t see as much of an option at the time (truth be told I still have my long-term doubts): they became a commercial bank in name only and continued doing business as usual.
That is, they took the commercial bank designation and the government cash handout and ran. And, wow, how they’ve run.
In marketing terms, what they did was simple (and, again, for their sakes, hopefully it is sustainable): they remained an investment bank at their core and didn’t even bother to change their related characteristics. You haven’t been dropping into any Goldman Sachs branches lately, confronting new logos or watching ads that promote their new commercial bank identity, because they haven’t done any of this as far as I can tell.
Goldman Sachs is the winner this week because they have stuck to their core brand identity in extremely trying times, and this has paid off.
They are also the winner because they supply any potential brander with an important lesson: a strong brand can sometimes withstand major adjustments and still prosper, as long as the company remains true to its core characteristics.
In the end, Goldman Sachs’ core led it to quickly repay TARP, and my guess is that when all the financial dust has settled, G.S. will cease to be a commercial bank —and get back to its roots.
The Loser
This week’s loser is really a common marketing error rather than the whole Obama administration, but it’s such a critical error that, if continued, it could end up hamstringing and polluting the administration’s legacy.
I’m talking about the rumblings over Dick Cheney, the CIA and the opening of an investigation into the previous administration.
This is an awful idea.
My objections —as usual— have nothing to do with politics and everything to do with real marketing.
These rumblings might be coming from Capitol Hill, but whatever goes forward on this one —barring an investigation that is explicitly and emphatically fought by the Obama administration— is eventually going to be ascribed to the White House.
Either the Obama Administration will be seen as actively promoting investigations of the Bush administration, or it will be seen as being too weak to prevent such investigations. Neither perception is any good.
But the real problem here concerns the concept of Forward Motion.
Forward Motion is what President Obama so successfully embodied in his campaign and has, so far, carried into his presidency. Forward motion is the elixir of real marketing —a potent, but elusive, force that attracts people to a person or a product.
It’s hard to create the sense of forward motion and it is easy to lose it. Fads are built around this concept and illustrate both the power of forward motion and how quickly that motion can be lost. A few of my posts on the principles of fads: here and here.
Basically, the only time you should go backward in marketing is when going backward is the only thing that will help drive you forward. For example, South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission was a way of going backward into the past so that the entire country could move forward into the future.
In most cases, going backward is a bad idea (especially in politics, where both sides are assumed to have “dirty hands” and every investigation can be framed as a political witch hunt and power grab).
The folks on Capitol Hill and in the White House should let the historians analyze and cast judgment on the Bush administration. And if the folks on Capitol Hill don’t take a pass on this one, then President Obama needs to send a clear message that he intends to keep moving forward.
His presidency might depend on it.
And remember, it’s always easier when you keep marketing and branding in mind.
TODAY'S TANTILLO TAKEAWAY -
One of the most powerful marketing concepts is Forward Motion —a hard force to generate and an easy one to lose.
Comments