Is branding branding?
An example of a confusing term commonly used by marketers is “Cause Branding”. As you probably already know, it refers to the concept of a company aligning itself with a “cause” to help meet a social need. This is designed to entice consumers to buy from that company and, by doing so, support the cause they care about.
But according to our definition of branding, the term “Cause Branding” is innately nonsensical. Let me explain. The branding that this term refers to isn’t creating a brand for the Cause, and a Cause can’t be branded – it’s not an animal. Cause Branding also alludes to genres or categories of branding. The question I ask is can branding be a category of branding, or is branding simply branding?
To clarify the idea one could ask, is a family formed from categories of families? To me, this is an absurd concept. Just as a family comprises individual members, branding may comprise a variety of activities. These activities are not “categories” or “types” of branding, they are simply branding, or branding activities, tactics, initiatives.
The industry also refers to the cause marketing tactic as 'brand marketing'. Again I would ask can you have a type of marketing? Not according to our definition of marketing. It’s the numerous throw-away terms like these that are causing so much confusion, even within the industry itself. A better term for “cause branding” would be a “cause campaign”, “cause alignment” or “cause alliance”. These are marketing or branding tactics, not genres of marketing or branding. Marketing is marketing and, yes, branding is branding. Branding is a marketing strategy, and branding comprises activities designed to form a brand.
Splitting hairs you say? Superficiality and confusion at this foundational level builds a very inconsistent and fractured understanding of branding that crumbles when put under the pressure of scrutiny.
Related articles:
The confusion – where does it come from
More on branding confusion
Branding before marketing?