If you are going to chart where you are going, you need to understand where you're at, and where you've been. In consulting speak we call it "current state assessment."

Hi Jennifer

I question whether your Circle of Inluence members are the most important 'target audience that can affect the perception of the brand'. Do you also talk with actual consumers i.e. the people buying the product/service? With the rise of the internet including discussion forums, review sites etc, the ordinary consumer is empowered to influence other like-minded consumers. I would argue it's the actual customers (or potential customers) that should be at the heart of any strategic marketing analysis. They are the people marketing should ultimately be 'talking' to, not attorneys and bankers (unless, of course, they are the core audience for the product/service!)

Cheers
Jon

I was thinking exactly the same as Jon before seeing his comment.

Indeed, the Circle of Influence (TM) is incomplete without customers themselves.

- Vince

Paul is on target. When we are hired to create or reinvigorate a brand image, we do an analysis that begins with past state, and then looks at current state, and concludes with future state. That is the process.

However, while I agree with your circle of influencers, which we use to gather inside information and get a sense of what they believe the future state should look like, we spend most of our energies talking with and listening to customers, who are far better at helping us create a picture of the current state--what is working and what isn't. Without them, I don't think we could present a credible future state image, complete with how to get there. After all, it is their perception that defines the brand image.

All, thanks for your comments. Yes customers are part of this circle of influence. In the chart example that is given on the post the graphic I show represents a venture capital firm's circle of influence. The portfolio entrepreneurs are the "current customers" of the venture firm. These portfolio companies' opinions are very important for sure. I also always gather perceptions of the "people inside" as well as the people outside and also delve into the past, current and future.

There's nothing wrong with talking to influencers, but in the end you still need to have something that's projectable to the relevant universe. If you talk to the bull's-eye target audience, you should get a sense of what the influencers have told them.

When you get ready to do a quantitative study, it's unlikely you'll be able to survey all the influencers anyway, so how do you know if what you've learned is representative? Or do you just rely on a small sample of the influencers?

I think the premise of talking to influencers sounds nice, but it's impractical and potentially misleading.

I'd start with a sampling of the core customers, then move to a projectable, quantitative study.

Michael: I think somehow it has gotten misconstrued that there are not customers included. In the example shown, which is a venture capital firm example, portfolio companies are the "customers". Also, it is important to note, that this is not a quantitative assessment but a perceptual assessment. I have found this process to be effective for a perceptual assessment. Normally I end up talking to about 35-60 people and after talking to that many influencers; I do hear common themes. That is how I know I have interviewed enough people. It essentially is testing and summarizing the "word of mouth" of the influencers.

Hi Jennifer

Thanks for clarifying; I now get who the core customers are in your example (current portfolio entrepreneurs). From my perspective, the core customers should be the key audience surveyed (whatever industry it is).

Cheers
Jon

Hi Jon, I agree. The customers are the core of the people interviewed. They are the majority for sure. But I have also found that in a professional services business like venture capital or investment banking, the referral network's perceptions are very strong and matter a lot in building a brand image. Therefore, it is important to know what the "referral network" thinks and it is why i include them in the assessment.

Thanks for the great post.

I think the very important aspect in "brand market assessment" which is the employees. This is really absent in current practices while my believe is that they are the core segment to be interviewed.
I love to call them "internal customers". And them, having the right perception of their brand, is vital. Or else, they wouldn't convey the right message to the final customer and their sum of efforts will not be positive towards the growth of the company.

Majd: I do think employees are often ignored as well, that is why i include them.

Also I was asked to credit the source of the graphic by Jeremiah of PodTech and since I created it I made the assumption that it was evident i did. This graphic is mine, and part of the illustrations i use for educating clients on how to think about the audiences for their brand and the building of the circle of influence.

Hi Jennifer,

You're right! Outside of FMCG, comprehensive professional strategic marketing processes are reasonably rare in the corporate space.

But, may I say that the first step ain't about brands...it is, without doubt, market mapping....part of the opportunity assessment process. Brand work comes later.

Strategic marketing can only be about two issues....opportunity....and capability.

Down here in Oz and in NZ, we have some damn good marketers...in fact, Australians are leading the world in marketing metrics thinking and development....did you know that?

cheers!

Pete Jeans
CEO
SMO Sydney (Australia)

http://www.strategicmarketing.com.au

Hi Jennifer

It is important for you to always remember influencers of a customer purchase decision in examining perception of a brand in a market place.You are right Jennifer, but i will suggest you dont only look at the people but also the processes and systems that influence the customers purchase decision.

Peace

Sheik Sadik

Jennifer,

Well done post (although the specter of those Venn diagrams from math class haunt me now...)

I totally understood what you were saying and, at the risk of heresy, the "customer as end all be all" and "product as end all be all" can sometimes be stated too much as abstractions that it distorts the broader strategic planning.

When you're charting influence, there are many layers, levels, dynamics, and relationships involved. If everyone is an "influencer", a "stakeholder", a "decider" so be it. But when it comes time to then determine who bears the impact of the effects with everyone on one side of the equation, what would you be left with?

No one's role is diminished by simply allowing a little distance and perspective to gain a clearer picture of how everything flows.

This is a bit of an aside, I suppose, but I'm very curious how you can trademark such a commonly used phrase as "circle of influence"? This seems very odd to me. It's a phrase I've used for years -- as have many other people. What does it mean to have trademarked it?