Up the Ladder OR Down the Ladder?

[I'm on a visual kick these days.]

Let your marketing mind wrestle with David Armano's nifty depiction of the ladder up to Brand Heaven and the ladder down to Brand Hell. Good Stuff!

Comments

[Kenyatta]

At what level does profit come into play? If you are making money consistently at "negative interactions", wouldn't that be considered a strong brand?

My point being, any level, in heaven or hell, that produces a consistent profit should be considered a strong brand - or at least the stakeholders would think so.

[Jill]

Good question, but how long will the / could the profits last at a "negative interaction?"

I feel as though the company I work for is in Hell (maybe at negative interactions), but we've been surviving for 5 years now. The question is, how can I convince the stakeholders that we won't survive much longer if we keep walking down the steps deeper into the hot zone even if we keep seeing a marginal profit?

[Jim Bender]

Great graphic. Personally, I'd put consistency before trust, just because I never trust one-hit wonders. I'd also characterize the attutide toward the bottom-dwellers of hell as outward, proactive aversion. "I'll get the dirty &%#%*s ...."

[Tom O'Brien]

Love the graphic - wonder what all this activity of companies launching communities will have on where they sit on the ladder?

More here.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/685e3x

TO'B

[Tracy]

I'd add evangelism to the top of heaven and terrorism or sabotage to the bottom of hell. Your best customers and most displeased former customers are seldom so passive to be merely "loyal" or "disloyal." They're either out there selling on your behalf or very actively preventing sales.

[Restaurant Commando]

I second Tracy's comment. Looks like a couple of steps are missing.

[andy]

All I have to say is that it looks more like a stair case than a ladder.