The Business of Future

Are brand consistency and brand adaptivity at odds with each other?

This article was first featured on The Sociology of Business.

Brands are asked to stand for something. They find their meaning deep into their own archives (Bottega Veneta, Dior), a locale (General Mills, Made in Italy), in the personality of their founders (Kanye West, Ralph Lauren), an activity (Nike) or at the cultural moment they first emerged in (Madonna, Four Seasons). But the same thing that gives a brand a meaning is also the thing that often holds it back.

Initially, having a strong founder figure with a singular worldview and aesthetic language is an advantage, per The Galaxy Model of business growth. Opportunities for the brand extensions are endless (there can be a Kanye West aromatherapy as much as sneakers as hotels as spiritual experiences). Or, being synonymous with a time and a place and a mood (like Madonna is with NYC, 1980s, and ownership of a certain type of female sexuality) often propels a brand in a leadership position and commands its associations for a long time.

At the same time, when overly adaptive, brands are accused of changing their purpose as the cultural mood changes — at one point, they can stand for romance, at another for female empowerment, at the third moment, they are all for the social equality. By standing for the…