Havas Media have published their annual The Meaningful Brand Index (MBi) where one of their top featured findings says that most of the respondents would not care if 70% of the brands ceased overnight. I find it alarming.

On a first glimpse and in the short run the response can be understandable. People may have lost faith in one or another brand, think that a particular brand is not fully delivering to their expectations, is not bringing value to their individual and/or societal needs or consider that brands are easy replaceable and so on. Also, people may view brands and business organizations through the capitalistic evil discriminating lens.

My aim is not to blame people on their views the way they punish brands, do not understand them or even betray. It’s not their fault. Businesses are accountable. Neither I want to diminish the role of brands. I think that a concept of brand in its core has a meaningful and very profitable notion.

Then why is it alarming?

The research results that revealed cool hearted attitude towards brands, in more general terms, marginalizes numerous relationships that are far more than just “brand-customer” affair.

A brand is not an abstraction. It is a living organism where various actors are involved in multiple relationships that have a direct and indirect impact on individual lives: from the internal organizational level to immediate stakeholders to direct consumers and further beyond. Brands – commercial, institutional and organizations – are a binding element of numerous networks that affect the state of economy.

What consequences would the global economy experience if 70% of brands disappeared overnight? Most likely it would turn out to be a far more-bigger nightmare for governments (if they had a chance to exist at all) across the globe than handling the current Greek drama and juggling the stability of Euro.

Brands have outgrown their mission as symbols of differentiation only – a territory still for many organizations. Brands must have a clear purpose for an existence that should become an organizing principle for a business or any organization internally to build up relationships with all relevant stakeholders.

I am suggesting that a concept of brand should take up more visibly a new (additional) role – brands as infrastructure. Thus, I suggest to approach and manage brands as significant elements of a global infrastructure. A conventional view assumes that physical assets, such as roads, ports, airports, pipes, telecommunications, supply of water, electricity and so on, are an infrastructure.

Strong brands support the global infrastructure with their physical (product/service) offering and emotional significance. It is not delivered in purely marketing or advertising terms but rather culture – contagious both inside and outside the organization – that is at the heart of continuous sustainability.

Poorly managed brands are infrastructure’s weakest link. Irrelevant purposes, incapability of galvanizing internal teams, short-term opportunistic behavior, inappropriate offerings or bureaucratic working cultures could be some of the causes.

Each brand is unique and plays its own particular role in the notion of “brands as infrastructure”. Every brand has an individual purpose for existence, they are competing, making individual profits yet cooperating and inspiring each other.

At the core – brands as a pool of diverse elements build up a physical and emotional infrastructure – from a great working place to being accountable for an environment and foreign cultures to engaging in brand authentic relationships with stakeholders.

Brands as infrastructure keep the economy and global affairs running by giving humans a sense of wellbeing, meaningful predictability and security.

Simon Anholt, Policy & Brand Advisor, was a keynote speaker at the European Public Communications conference in Brussels, 19-20 Oct 2011.

His speech was provocative and trended a buzz.

Simon Anholt challenged the EU of developing a brand by redefining its lost purpose. Also, pointed that government officials should think and act more like brand managers not only policy officers.

He used a simple example of Nike to illustrate the essence of brand purpose, which is about getting groups of people in organization to act collectively.

Anholt’s point was that currently EU communicates even if it does not have a product, nothing to say and no-one (consumers) has asked for it.

His noted that politicians are irresponsible and wrong to exclude from their profession and called for imagination as it is what sets humans apart.

During the speech he challenged EU to come up with a strategy what EU is for and why people are glad EU exists.

Recently I was speaking at “Back in Focus” conference in Tallinn where I presented a case study of rebranding Parex bank to Citadele. (I wrote briefly on this back in August ‘10)

Here is a top line summary of my presentation:

Problem:
Banks were a symbol of trust and credibility until Sep 15, 2008 when Lehman Brothers collapsed. Reckless behavior was cross-border and had its consequences also in Latvia, where the government bailed-out Parex bank and had to deal with its liquidity crunch.

As the result, Parex reputation was deadly damaged. Its image perception was a barrier to attract new deposits – it was associated with its previous owners but not with a bank you would trust your money and the brand was linked to the collapse of the country (Latvia was bailed-out by IMF and European Commission). Needless to say, the damage was mirrored also in the reputation-ranking top.

Solution:
Re-branding was the only commercially viable solution. Build a brand driven business to attract new deposits, restore credibility and build a new value.

Challenge:
It was not about changing a new logo, but building a new bank.

Approach:
1) Started at home by understanding what’s special about Parex brand and what should belong to the history.
2) Involve stakeholders across all levels to identify brand’s strength and weakness.
3) Build a single minded positioning: a new role for the business that captures market opportunities and society needs.
4) Make positioning propositions relevant for business areas.

Implementation beyond visual identity:
(1) Cultural change & internal communication
From: closed & elitist
To: open, transparent & accessible
(2) Making a business sense to organizational structure
From: various independent and competing “republics” (units)
To: synchronized and efficient units
(3) Cost efficiency (-40% in 12 months)
From: über (!) excessive & lavish lifestyle
To: business efficiency

First results:
Primary, business stabilized and in particular saw a growth in corporate deposits. That led to repay the state deposit prior the set deadline. Citadele’s liquidity indicators substantially exceeded the requirements.

Awareness results after two weeks of the launch indicated that 88% (in higher income group it was 99%) had heard of the new brand.

Needless to say, the negative publicity was eliminated: only 2% of publications within 8 months after the launch could be associated as negative towards the new brand Citadele.

What’s behind a success?
- Top management’s total commitment & involvement
- Stakeholder and shareholder involvement
- Thorough structural changes
- Ability to make a fairly quick cultural turnaround internally
- Hiring brand business experts – Wolff Olins

Challenges:
- Highly political environment and strict confidentiality
- Proving to shareholders that re-branding is not a cost. Significant costs would arise by not rebranding it.
- Immediate results were expected. Although, we know that cultural change doesn’t happen overnight.

Timeline:
The chart bellow illustrates a timeline of Parex liquidity crunch. It’s important to note that one of the most critical milestones for the business was to reach an agreement of restructuring syndicate loans. When CEO Nils Melngailis successfully negotiated and stabilized the business, only then could seriously start a work on a brand. The new brand strategy and identity recommendations and plan was presented to the Council by mid-August 2009. It was stressed to launch the new brand immediately in a staged and economically efficient manner. The new brand was launched 12 month later – on Aug 1, 2010.

What’s next?

Re-branding is not a one time-project. It is a kick off for a continuous business and cultural journey. Thus, the new Citadele management team is expected to continue building a value by brining out new products and delivering brand’s experience. In fact, it would be about the right time since the kick-off of Citadele last year in August.

Today, on Europe’s Day I was browsing through my recent New Yorker’s I had not time to read over previous weeks. Coincidentally, I stumbled on article “The Grand Tour” by Evan Osnos (edition on Apr 18, 2011). As a foreigner living in China, he joins an organised Chinese tour group on a trip to Europe. Travellers boarded the plane in Shanghai, landed in Frankfurt and went on “Classical Europe” bus tour to visit five countries in ten days.

Very well written article, entertaining and insightful look, particularly, how a Chinese guide Li introduced Europe to his group.

Here are couple of his quotes on European economy:

“That’s the way Europe is. On the surface it appears to rely on everyone’s self discipline, but behind it all there are strict rules”

“We have to get used to the fact that Europeans sometimes move slowly. In China, we are accustomed to three of us putting our items on the counter at the same time, and then the old lady gives change to three people without making a mistake. Europeans don’t do that.”

“I’m not saying that they’re (Europeans) stupid. If they were, they wouldn’t have developed all this technology, which requires subtle calculations. They just deal with math in different way.”

“Let them (Europeans) do things their way, because if we’re rushing then they’ll feel rushed, and that will put them in a bad mood, and then we’ll think that they’re discriminating against us, which is not necessary the case.”

On Mediterranean life style: “Wake up slowly, brush teeth, make a cup of espresso, take in the aroma. With a pace like that, how can their economies keep growing? It’s impossible.”

“The European economy is in decline. Times have changed. Can a place where workers go on strike everyday grow economically? Certainly not. People here are strangely used to it. …. You can be stuck at one spot for four hours because the streets are blocked. I hope that you will never encounter a terrible situation like that.”

“The government wants to clean it (graffiti’s in Milan), but it doesn’t have enough money.”

“If this were China, it would be done in six months! (on the highway it took decades to build) And that’s the only way to keep the economy growing.”

“Analysts overseas can never understand why Chinese economy has grown so fast”

“Look at this – a hundred and ten thousand euros for a house! Cheaper than America. Much cheaper than Shanghai.”

Folks at Finnair (Finland’s national airline) provoked me to write this blog. Probably I would not bring out any of this if their positioning for a time being remained “The fastest route to Asia” and if a cute northern reindeer remained a hero in their communication.

Seems that sometime last year the airline decided that from now on they would stand for a quality travel. Without being cynical I think this an appropriate resolution at the time when a quality becomes increasingly rare. I also think that Finland (country as a brand) and Finnish companies have the right perception and matching general reputation to own the concept of quality.

Finnair has rolled out quite a few marketing initiatives to support this “sort-of-re-branding-quality-travel” strategic decision. They started off last year by launching a website called “Rethink Quality” and declared it will be the place for “Finnair’s continuous quest for better travel”. Actually the kick off was not bad, they had some interesting and high profile people writing, including Tyler Brûlé – probably one of the most demanding travellers in the world, the one who has a complete eye for quality and perfection.

I guess that “The Best Job in the World” – a hip campaign by Queensland’s tourism authority in Australia that earned massive global media coverage in early 2009 – was one of inspiration’s at Finnair to introduce their version of the most desirable job on this planet. The airline launched a very interesting marketing initiative – they were in a search for Quality Hunters – four people who would become their “independent advisors” and travel the world on Finnair’s destinations in a quest for quality.

The core idea behind Quality Hunters was great. I saw it as a superb platform to facilitate conversations across different fields, industries, people and opinions; a platform that had a great potential to nurture new ideas, concepts and experiences.

I also view that the initiative turned out to be a failure – a concept that was poorly executed: from designing their own website to the quality and the impact of the content. At the end it turned out to be “just another” sort-of travel related blog site with no real focus and edge.

If you boldly announce this is your quest for a quality and if you put a quality at the heart of your promise then you have to deliver it. Not making it as a statement but creating a new movement that is also an inspiration for many others.

On Finnair’s corporate blog you would find an excitement saying “Quality Hunters an international success” where presented numbers look big. While it looks relatively impressive I remain challenging Finnair of its real impact beyond a written word “campaign” in their yearly marketing plan. Comments on the airline’s Facebook page are pointing that the concept of Quality Hunters didn’t earn its right momentum.

Recently (Jan 2011) I was an economy class passenger on the return flight Brussels – Helsinki – Hong Kong – Helsinki – Brussels. It was good time to observe more of Finnair’s marketing activities and experience an idea of “quality travel” in action.

As I was browsing Finnair’s onboard magazine “Blue Wings” I was deliberately searching for adventures of Quality Hunters – in a form of a short story; exciting image; a quote; a tip; a suggestion; a fact; a wisdom; a new idea or whatever. I found 39 words that vaguely mentioned the fact…

However, what I noticed during my trip was the billboards at Helsinki airport that featured the updated Finnair’s logo and the new tag lines saying “New born” and “Designed For You”. One of the quotes in the onboard magazine’s article “Notice something different?” said, “We took the best parts of our old visual language and tweaked some of the details. It continues to reflect the smoothness with air travel, but with a more dynamic and modern look. A sense of dynamism is also visible in the new crew uniforms.”

“No” is my honest answer to the question whether I noticed something different.

I could start with a tiny detail that I didn’t see the crew wearing new uniforms in none of the four flights. But the point is not about the uniforms.

The point is about what you say and what you deliver.
The point is how timely you say things.
The point is how you roll out your great plans and visions.
The point is whether you want to make a genuine brand development or to roll out another advertising campaign.
The point is are you tyrannical enough when it comes to details executing a concept of quality travel.

The entire public relations message and the design talk about the new logotype is totally irrelevant if the substance (a newborn quality designed for me/you) is not present. For example, the relevance would come if just few of “more than 1000 ideas for service upgrades suggested by staff and customers” (as mentioned in Blue Wings magazine) would be practically executed, communicated and explained to a wider audience. Probably, new uniforms was one of suggested ideas and nothing is wrong with that; employees working in a narrow space and at high altitudes should have an appropriate dress code that not only represents a brand’s design identity but also is comfortable to wear. New uniforms is a strong and one of many internal and external communication and brand engagement tools. Sure, that in a service industry looks play a great importance for a brand; but more importantly is what it actually does.

Advertising is not a solution and a roll out plan for a brand development. Brand engagement starts internally and then by implementing a tangible proof of change or improvement

As I said, a notion to own the territory of quality in airtravel is noble and Finnair is quite well placed to earn that position. To do that the strategy needs some serious rollout planning and the implementation should be staged prior coming out with bold and unsupported statements. Until then it is just untimely done marketing stunt.

January’s issue of the onboard magazine also said, that “the company will continue to scout for feedback from experienced travellers”. Here are my three suggestions that would help Finnair to own the territory of quality travel:

First. Be transparent. Your website says that Finnair Lounge is available “for any customer wishing to use service for a charge of 45 euros.” My transit time was more than 7 hours and the truth I experienced that 45 euros are charged for every three hours.

Second. Pamper you customers with more of quite time on long haul flights. Departure time to Hong Kong is around midnight and 1:15 am on the return flight to Helsinki. This is a time when people (not only in a business class as ads usually portray) want to relax and fall a sleep or as you say “have an enjoyable flight”. Instead, we get full lights on until 2:30am or even longer, inappropriately heavy meals and hard sales announcements. Without any exaggeration I saw zero people within a visible radius of my position who would buy anything at that time of the day/flight. If you think that onboard sales are still important stream to you revenues, come up with more innovative ways – may be a screen in front of a passenger could help to place orders.

Third. Rethink your menu. Appropriate and digestive meals on your transcontinental flights would be highly desirable. I do not think it is a sign of quality when you are offering me a heavy meal at 1 am or a stuffy sandwich in “the morning” after 8 hours of motionless sleep when a fresh smoothie would be just perfect and enough. In fact, I even wouldn’t mind to pay for that if you had offered it to me.

To me these are some basic elements and first thoughts based on experience that can enhance the quality of travelling also in the economy class and it does not require more space or a glass champagne prior the take of as in the business class.

I will be curious to follow how Finnair navigates their brand in the future.

I have recently returned from a short trip to Hong Kong. It’s a very special city to me. I have both – respect and thrill toward this Asian metropolis. I lived there and went to school. This was my second trip in many years since the graduation.

Land in Hong Kong and you will not be left indifferent. It will not take you long finding the words to articulate your opinion.

It’s one of the most capitalistic cities in the world. Its brutality is part of charisma. A fast-paced economy lifestyle is in non-stop and continuous pursuit of perfection and development where an individual wealth is the main measurement of success. In one of the conversations after I asked to reflect how people feel about being part of China after 1997 and how it has influenced their lives suddenly I felt that this questions has very different relevance between West and East. The opinion was that if Hong Kong remained a part of the British colony it would have been hold back its development. China has ensured that the economic activity keeps driving the metropolis further. It is a growth that defines the significance of Hong Kong.

A fairly socialist European view would consider a work-life balance for a majority of Honkongers as unfair. While certain aspects of life in Hong Kong may require more of personal stamina, there is plenty Europe can learn to keep up – not only in terms competitiveness but also in several other areas that contribute towards a quality life.

I am talking about the undivided attitude and flawless service quality I experienced both in public and private sector.

Here are few basic examples:
a) Landing in the airport. A perfect signage system that will continue to accompany you on every step in all corners of Hong Kong.
b) Amazingly efficient and brisk crowd handling skills at the immigration area. And guess what, it is done by humans not machines.
c) Public toilets. Basically it is a network of well-maintained and free toilets across city.
d) Getting a local mobile SIM card. I am not over-exaggerating but it took me no longer than 2 minutes in a fairly crowded shop to complete a transaction and start calling around. (I got a suggestion for an option that suits my needs the most, I paid, and then a shop representative installed the new SIM card and adjusted my phone settings).
e) And yes, you will find a bunch of ex-pats living in Hong Kong who are naming (complaining) a lack of service infrastructure in the West (Europe, Canada and U.S) as one of the key reasoning for not “returning home”.

I noticed that the locals use a term “convenience” quite frequently in our conversations. For example, one of them would say that a life in Sydney “was not convenient” for him.

The insight is that “convenience” stands for speed, efficiency and accessibility. It also embodies undivided attention towards a customer. A simple and common thing – accepting or passing a credit card or money (also business card) while holding it in both hands and slightly bowing is a symbolic example for me that illustrate both respect to money (hard work) and customers.

Hong Kong is a fast-pace and high-density city that is largely driven by affinity towards wealth. Thus, a concept of “convenience” is the fundamental basics for any brand in Hong Kong regardless of its price positioning and/or other value proposition. If you are not “convenient” someone else will be.

“Convenience” at a very basic level is defined by simple physical attributes like location or store’s opening times; but at its core “convenience” is delivered by individual and human attitude of a person who represents a brand.

Having said that, more often I feel in Europe that there has been increasing Ryanairization not only of services as a physical offer (which is fine) but also in human attitudes; that means that honestly good and human service becomes increasingly rare and is available with pre-defined premium brands or selected few.

It would be unfair towards Europe to over-glorify Hong Kong. The growth and convenience has its costs. World Wide Fund came out with rather shocking study at the day I was departing Asia. Their latest research says that 2.2 earths would be required to sustain the pace of consumption if all people in the world live a lifestyle like that of Honkongers.

So, here is a trick and challenge: how to find a healthy equilibrium between convenience, growth, sustainability and quality of life?

Today I received a promotional email from a car rental company I used earlier this summer. The email did not earn my long attention.

However, it reminded me of a thought that has been popping up my mind every time I rent a car.

My question is: “Is there a way to re-design a car rental business model and drive car brand sales (or significantly increase a brand preference) while customers are renting a particular car brand?”

Here is a thing.

How many car brands can you name confidently top of mind? May be up to five, probably no more, unless you are really a car geek. Sure, a list is getting a little longer when you have more time for a thought. You will have your favourite brands, neither nor brands and those with your biases that will not place them on your shopping list that easily.

Over the last two-three years I have encountered that principally all cars I’ve rented have been on my neither nor or bias list of car brands. Sure, you switch on your prejudices already during a booking process. You choose a car based on a size, which is reflected into a price, and then look a possible choice of cars, but usually a list is fairly limited. Generally speaking, an offer among companies is very homogenous. You don’t bother too much unless a proposal is a real disaster and then look for an alternative.

These rentals are actually a comprehensive and personal test drive. And most likely it’s happening at a period of holidays when the time is all yours. Suddenly you experience a car brand that have not considered before or have seen with a fixed perception. I must say that some of the brands have pleasantly surprised. (Sure, there’ve been cases where a car brand and I didn’t have chemistry.) Those few days you spend with a car can make an influential change the way you will see the brand in the future.

If a positive driving experience of a rented car can unlock a potential for a brand of further mutual relationships, why there are no brands that build up a seamless experience that links car rentals to a total brand experience (that eventually leads to sales)?

Imagine this. A new model that revamps existing purely transactional car rental business into brand’s driving experience, operates in selected places and environments where a brand soul can be expressed at its fullest, learn experience insights from people and earn their passion to connect when appropriate also later where ever they may be or live.

If so, probably today I would not receive another direct email with a low added value, but would be invited, for example, to an opening of a new urban slow-wear fashion event that is happening next week in my city and happened to be sponsored by a brand I drove just a while ago.

The closing scene of The Social Network movie captures an importance of a brand’s perception and how communication impacts it.

Mark Zuckerberg in the interview to The New Yorker have said that he is not planning to see the movie and responded, “I know the real story.”

So, let’s assume the movie is a fiction. The scene still gives a short and sweet lesson on brand building and communications.

The final dialogue in the movie is played between Mark (Zuckerberg) and Marylin Delpy. She is a junior associate at the law firm that is settling Mark’s legal battle between his business partner and three other gentlemen who are claiming to be owners of the idea that later became known worldwide as Facebook.

The conversation is very brief. It’s a late evening in one of law offices. Marylin passes the room finding Mark playing alone on the Internet. He is asking her, “What’s next?” She serenely replies that lawyers of both parties are drafting a settlement agreement, it will be presented to him and he will have to pay a little extra. He questions “Why?” in a manner in between of surprised and indifferent. Marylin proves he would loose the court jury in his first 10 minutes. She depicts and summarizes that it is all about LIKEABILITY. Period.

Through out the movie Mark is portrait as insanely egocentrically idea obsessed young geek, with a little experience in relationship building at its broader sense who has built an influential digital empire and during a legal dispute sessions is over defensive, uncooperative and firmly locked.

Likeability is a connector. I like you. I like this idea. I like this design. I like this city. I like this ambience. It is easy to make decisions when you like something or someone. It’s instant.

Likeability is perpetual and contagious when there is a fusion of tangible and intangible assets. In the context of brands tangible assets are everything that relates to brand concept, proposition, experience, impact and execution. Intangible assets are a collection of particles how a brand behaves at various touch-points and everything in the air you feel about the brand.

The trick is that a chemistry of likeability works when both tangible and intangible qualities are switched on. You may have the best product proposition and technically justify all aspects of tangible assets, but alone it won’t have much impact, is just does not connect.

A communication management – through out all stages of a brand development and through out all levels of organization and across different stakeholders – properly targeted, segmented and synchronised does help enormously making a positive brand perception, a fusion between brand’s tangible and intangible assets.

Resume:
- High likeability = Positive brand perception = favourable outcome
- Low likeability = Negative brand perception = unfortunate outcome

Recently I have encountered three wonderful stories from the field of development. They tell us about a power of simple, focused and meaningful innovation that is so essential in reaching Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

First. Melinda Gate’s speech at TEDxChange event in September 2010 is challenging non-profit organisations to learn from a business world how to achieve impactful results in health and development sector. Here suggestions are sound and super logical. And of course, the foundation she is co-running is very much linked with a result of Bill Gate’s successful Microsoft business. Although in here speech she is using an example of Coca-Cola that is present at all corners where development aid and programs should be but are not.

Second. The New York Times article “D.I.Y Foreign Aid Revolution” where Nicholas Kristof has brilliant case studies on development initiatives rolled out by devoted individuals. These initiatives are not overly idealistically blunt. They are built on meaningful ideals but more importantly these ideas are executed in very focused, inventive and well thought manner.

Third, a speech by Mechai Virvaidaya at TEDxChange in September 2010. He is running family planning and poverty reduction programs in South East Asia. Also known as “The King of Condom” he has utterly fantastic case study how Thailand in 25 years managed to improve family planning. In 2000 Thailand achieved 1.5 children per family (population growth 0.5% per annum). That is an incredible result compare to 7 children per family in 1974 (population growth at 3.3% per year).

Each story is remarkable. Also, each story is a polite slap to governments, policy makers and aid donors as a note that they are not innovative and efficient enough, and far behind MDG targets. Fortunately, today’s digital transparency and individual initiatives are pushing more accountability, concrete actions and sound results from the policy makers.

However, it seems that one of the most serious issues is the unawareness of MDGs as such among wider audience. Back in September 2010 Bono, the lead singer of U2 and development promoter, wrote an article “MDGs for Beginners… And Finishers” where he said “The MDGs are possibly the most visionary deal that most people have never heard of”. The fact that MDGs is a buzz-word for few policy makers and development professionals is a considerable reasons that holds back results. Individual initiatives (that are so much needed) and media news stories from disaster areas (that are super essential) are not enough to engage people across nations to be committed to these ideals.

Let’s put this straight.

First, the modern developed world does not have a modern development education.

Second, the modern world needs a comprehensive development education in school programs at all levels.

Look at Europe – one of the major development aid donors that have serious difficulties even to convince all member states to contribute to its development budget. That signals a lack of understanding of development importance and what benefits it can reward in medium-long term to member states. Also, we already know that European Commission champions developing wasteful, short sighted and untargeted communication across many fields including development sector.

Now Europe has a chance to pioneer and do something significant. Make development education real. Integrate it in school curriculums. Create it engaging, targeted and efficient. Make it impactful on all levels – national, European, global.

Although it would come at least 25 years too late, it is still vital for many reasons, such as:

First. It will expand horizon and promote more comprehensive understanding of development issues. It will teach how interdependence of regions, religions, politics, history and culture impacts regional and global affairs. It will answer questions what it means for people both in developed and developing world, the planet and common future. Also, it will help to appreciate own backgrounds and its role of influencing (or being accountable) of events and decisions (made or to be made).

Second. I expect that the effect of development education will create more participatory citizens. More advance development knowledge and digital transparency will be influential. It will ensure that thoughts, ideas, reflections and actions will spread more rapidly.

Third. It will not only create stronger bonds with the NGO sector and initiatives for cause, but also stimulate more action. We will find more passionate social entrepreneurs very soon.

Fourth. Development education will influence the decisions people make: when they express, act, get involved, vote and purchase.

Fifth. At the time when Angela Merkel has declared that multiculturalism in Germany has “utterly failed” and ultra-radicals are gaining seats in national parliaments (Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark, Hungary, Finland and Sweden) Europe urgently needs to address the development issues at a broader scope within itself (as it also correlates with immigration matters) to reach more harmonized and respectful integration among all involved sides.

To start with I am mainly a bio food buyer. Since I remember myself we always had an honest food at home. Tomatoes that smell like tomatoes. Cucumbers that is fresh and juicy. We also had a garden so I know how to take a good care of these plants. And so on. Of course, during a student years there were times when I paid less attention to food but always could recognise a real stuff from speedy imitations. Now life in a city occasionally is an obstacle for an easy access to authentic products.

In a nutshell: fresh, honest and real food is absolutely vital.

A business numbers show that people have realised the importance of eating well and bio-farming products are one of the fastest growing categories. I am sure that food lovers have seen a documentary Food Inc and read Michael Pollan’s book “The Omnivore’s Dilemma”. As businesses want to capitalize on the idyllic picture of organic farming massive challenges are ahead to keep up with good intentions.

Industry has grown, so does the communication – from packaging to point of sales materials and to advocacy of neighbourhood organic farmers’ markets in life-style magazines. We are invited to rediscover basics and enjoy a community feeling and a pleasure of personal communication. Personally, on certain occasions I have found a personal communication and “back to origins” approach is so inefficient and is on the edge of annoyance. For example, the farmer I am buying most of my weekly food for last 4 years (with small intervals) only this year started to use an electrical scale. Also, a calculator is a new introduction. Previously everything was summed up by mind using a pencil and a piece of paper. I am not suggesting he has to turn his enterprise into a supermarket. Just there are few more efficiency opportunities to move from “back to basics” to “lovely and smooth” experience. All in all I truly believe community and farmers markets are valuable. They celebrate many things that make future optimistic.

Meantime, the communication of organic products (in different categories: from food to cosmetics) is getting very homogenous. Sure, it’s about honest product. Sure, it’s about authenticity. But look, everything is pretty much the same. It’s balanced. Colour coding is predictable. Tone of voice is almost identical. I suggest there is very little differentiation.

The thing is that most brands (of different categories, that also includes markets) talk to pretty much the same people. First, the ones who are already well aware organic products and have their buy-in. Second, brands assume organic means mature, balanced and tranquil mindset and that this is a full stop and nothing beyond.

The good news are that gradual change is on the way that hopefully will move the industry. While ago on Twitter I can a cross British farm named Yeo Valley Organic (@yeovalley). First, I found their tweets are surprisingly thoughtfully decent that is rare for corporate accounts. Secondly, the brand made a fantastic appearance by premiering their new TV ad on Saturday 9^th October 2010. By now it is already well spread across social networks.

I am thrilled of this work. It is amazing – they keep the soul of organic farming, the beauty of countryside but give a new twist and appeal. It is definitely differentiating. It breaks a status quo of category rules. It not only turns farm products hip and urban but also celebrates the work of farm people behind products. Furthermore, it is a big step forward to make good organic food tasty in the group that is attached to sugar sodas and fatty burgers.

A new dimension of bio-farming marketing is not only about differentiating a particular farm or brand. It is much bigger. It is about making world healthier and happier. It is also about solving issues that Jamie Oliver brought up by winning his TED prize. It is also about Michele Obama’s cause “Let’s move”. Well, it’s big. It is a call for a true partnership among farmers, educators, speakers, rap artists, food lovers, businesses and many more.