Creativity Gap?

The dust is just now settling on the infamous re-branding effort that turned out to be a false start and a stubbed toe for Gap Inc. Much of the buzz in marketing circles is centered on how loyal brand believers came to the rescue of the brand, to save it from a fall into the breach (or the gap) of brand irrelevance. The agency was fingered as an accomplice to the crime, for leading the client to a decision point that was a proper from a market research perspective yet woefully ignorant from a customer relationship standpoint. In our opinion, Gap Inc. had lost its way long before the agency work was commissioned.

The key deficiency for Gap was not their inability to create an effective brand logo -- it is their inability to find their strategic compass. Gap is wandering in the dark, trying to find the new path to glory, tragically ignoring the signs that the original path was indeed the right path.

Looking at Gap's financials over the past five years, their revenues have been steadily declining, from $16 billion in 2006 to just over $14 billion in 2010. Two of its erstwhile competitors (Aeropostale, American Eagle) have seen sturdy growth in the same timeframe, though neither is at the $3 billion mark. One of the common symptoms of a major brand that is wandering aimlessly is that it seeks to copy the strategy of competitors who are stealing their market share, even if the competitor is one-quarter of their size. It's like Goliath looking down at David, thinking that maybe he should buy a slingshot. What Gap really needs to remember is that they are Goliath (so to speak, in their respective category) and that the brand equity created by their loyal Gen X customer base can be extended to reach the new Millenials...without sacrificing their loyalists.

Continuity in brand strategy over multiple generations is a challenge, because turnover in Marketing and Brand leadership (coupled with frequent knee-jerk directives from senior management that does not understand or appreciate the importance of brand strategy) results in a loss of institutional memory. New CMOs and Marketing VPs are prone to want to create new brand strategies rather than evolve their existing brand strategies. Why? First, gives the impression of progress. Second, it is an easier path; much like the person with serious health problems who would rather find a new doctor than commit to a new regimen of diet, exercise and moderation. And third, the CMO is focused on brand growth...although the brand is his/her personal brand, which would be famously bolstered by getting credit for leading a bold, radical move. We're sure that the VP Marketing who thought that New Coke was the "real thing" was guilty of this version of brand malpractice.

Our advice to Gap: take stock in your enormous brand equity, control your "brand envy" of Aero and AE, and get to work on re-presenting yourself as the hip, classic, authentic icon that you are. If you build it, the Millenials will come. Remember that Apple lost their way for a short while too.