Branding Update
December 11, 2013
Holding an Annual Efficiency Summit
Since most utilities are part of municipalities or are
public agencies, people are often suspicious that they are not very efficient.
This categorization occurs for a variety of reasons, one being that most
utilities are monopolies, so they don't have a strong competitive incentive for
increasing efficiency. Utilities do pay attention to efficiency, but it's
difficult to benchmark. And having the lowest rates does not mean you are the
most efficient. A "you're not efficient" brand is definitely a problem when it
comes time to propose higher rates.
So, utility managers need to demonstrate to policy
makers (and anyone else who is paying attention to the utility's finances) that
efficiency is a core commitment of the organization. A good way to do this is to
hold an annual efficiency summit. This meeting/workshop should focus on the
status of current efforts, brainstorming new ideas, and setting goals for the
upcoming year. This approach has several benefits. It helps to ensure that the
organization is expending sufficient effort on efficiency improvements. It
institutionalizes the process of increasing efficiency, which communicates the
organization's commitment. And it will be a breeding ground for efficiency case
studies. The summit should be billed as one of the year's most important events.
This will generate publicity, and publicity builds brands.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Branding Update
December 4, 2013
Practicing Transparency
December 4, 2013
Practicing Transparency
Most utilities are not trying to hide information. But despite their best intentions, they may appear to be holding back because they do not understand how to be meaningfully transparent. In past Branding Updates we have discussed the need to share the motivations and standards driving the activities, decisions, and proposed investments of the utility. This is especially true with respect to planning and finances.
However, in many cases standards are sprinkled throughout the strategic plan or other policies and procedures. Major standards may be called core values or goals. Standards can even be found in lists of activities. One way to facilitate increased transparency is to compile the important standards in a single document so they are readily accessible to the staff. The process of listing and reviewing the standards forces the organization to reconfirm their commitment to the standard, or revise it. It also reinforces the need to share these standards when communicating and making the case for needed investments. It is very difficult for utility managers and staff members to be transparent if vetted standards are not easy to find and use.
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Branding Update
November 5, 2013
Internal Communications that Build Trust
In previous Branding Updates we have discussed how communicating standards and motivations is essential for providing meaningful transparency. Transparency not only applies to communicating with customers and the community. It is just as important, if not more important, for internal communications.
Use Standards to Build Trust with Employees - One of the most effective ways to build trust with employees comes into play when announcing important decisions. The announcement is meaningful and builds trust when the logic and motivations behind the decision are clear. And the most powerful motivations are the utility's standards. For example, if the utility announces that it is building an additional water pipeline to a given community, it is important to mention that the reason is to comply with the standard of having redundant water-delivery paths. The standard provides the logic and actually enhances the perceived value of the investment. Being clear about the standard also heads off questions like "why do they need an extra pipeline and who is paying the bill?" Remember, there may be several standards that apply to a given decision.
Standards Affect All Levels of the Organization - Every decision communicated by management to employees should include the motivations or relevant standards. Without this accompanying logic, employees will come to their own conclusions (often erroneous) or just brand the decision as another edict from management. Also, when employees understand the standards, they make better decisions while performing their duties.
Failing to Communicate an Important Decision - This is a trust buster. And every decision that directly affects an employee will be considered important by that employee. Failing to inform the employee of the decision tells them they are not important.
Standards Should Be Accessible - Notwithstanding the need to be transparent with the community, building internal trust is another reason why utility managers need to compile a list of standards that are driving their decisions and investments. Standards are usually sprinkled throughout the strategic plan, board or city council policies, and other management documents. Since they are essential for making the case for investment and providing meaningful communications, they should reside in a single document and be very accessible to management and staff. This document can also be used for periodically reviewing the standards and approving changes.
Monday, October 7, 2013
Branding Update
October 7, 2013
Using the "Branding" Word
Employing the term branding in connection with managing a water or wastewater utility triggers a variety of reactions, ranging from very positive to very negative. The negative reactions are often rooted in the following sentiments:
Here are some of the reasons why the branding term is appropriate:
Branding Brings Attention to Needed Change - The term gets people's attention, which can inspire utility managers to improve planning, communications, and making cases for investment.
Utilities are Being Branded - Public utilities are being branded whether they like it or not, which means they are being categorized in ways that affect public trust. An example is the often-heard claim that government organizations are inefficient.
The Need for Category and Audience Focus - Branding efforts strive to ensure that a target audience properly categorizes a product's value (safe car, leading energy drink, best smart phone), and ultimately decide to buy the product. Similarly, utilities need to focus on ensuring that policy makers and the influential public (the target audience) trust the utility's planning and investment proposals.
Good Brands are Genuine and Long-Lasting - This is a testament to the power of branding and demonstrates that competent branding is not spin. Utility brands must be true, helping people to accurately categorize the utility's roles and expertise.
The Brand Determines Price - Likewise, perceptions about the utility by policy makers and the influential public ultimately effect rates.
Branding is Powerful and Cost Effective - Utilities need to tap into the power and efficiency that comes with being brand focused. In fact, good branding is more cost effective than unfocused outreach efforts that often fail to make an impression on the "general public."
It's Wise to Use the Term Appropriately - Announcing to the community that you are undertaking an expensive branding program that focuses on logos, slogans, or advertising is asking for trouble. Good utility branding is the quiet process of clearly defining your value and important standards, providing great customer service, making compelling cases for investment, and building meaningful relationships with those who can influence policy decisions on rates and investment.
October 7, 2013
Using the "Branding" Word
Employing the term branding in connection with managing a water or wastewater utility triggers a variety of reactions, ranging from very positive to very negative. The negative reactions are often rooted in the following sentiments:
- Utilities are monopolies and don't have competitors, so there is no need for branding
- Branding is spin, and is designed to fool people into buying products they don't need
- The public will react negatively to utilities spending money on branding programs
Here are some of the reasons why the branding term is appropriate:
Branding Brings Attention to Needed Change - The term gets people's attention, which can inspire utility managers to improve planning, communications, and making cases for investment.
Utilities are Being Branded - Public utilities are being branded whether they like it or not, which means they are being categorized in ways that affect public trust. An example is the often-heard claim that government organizations are inefficient.
The Need for Category and Audience Focus - Branding efforts strive to ensure that a target audience properly categorizes a product's value (safe car, leading energy drink, best smart phone), and ultimately decide to buy the product. Similarly, utilities need to focus on ensuring that policy makers and the influential public (the target audience) trust the utility's planning and investment proposals.
Good Brands are Genuine and Long-Lasting - This is a testament to the power of branding and demonstrates that competent branding is not spin. Utility brands must be true, helping people to accurately categorize the utility's roles and expertise.
The Brand Determines Price - Likewise, perceptions about the utility by policy makers and the influential public ultimately effect rates.
Branding is Powerful and Cost Effective - Utilities need to tap into the power and efficiency that comes with being brand focused. In fact, good branding is more cost effective than unfocused outreach efforts that often fail to make an impression on the "general public."
It's Wise to Use the Term Appropriately - Announcing to the community that you are undertaking an expensive branding program that focuses on logos, slogans, or advertising is asking for trouble. Good utility branding is the quiet process of clearly defining your value and important standards, providing great customer service, making compelling cases for investment, and building meaningful relationships with those who can influence policy decisions on rates and investment.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Branding Update
September 17, 2013
Standards, Brands, and Transparency
September 17, 2013
Standards, Brands, and Transparency
Standards are
the Essence of a Brand - In past Branding Updates we have discussed the
terms above. However, it is interesting to explore how they are related. It
turns out that the foundation for a good brand is its standards. These
standards can be broad, like Rolex focusing on producing luxury watches. They
can be more detailed, like Starbucks making sure the coffee in its stores is a
certain temperature or strength. In every case, the value embedded in a product
or service is determined by standards. Related terms are specifications or
requirements. Regulations are an imposed standard, and failing to comply is a
negative branding moment.
Utility Branding
and Standards
- A utility’s mission and brand commitments are its fundamental standards, for
example ensuring water-service reliability, water quality, or public health. However,
within each of these categories there are multiple standards that drive activities
and proposed investments (and add meaning to the value that the utility
provides). For example, stating that a community’s water supply will be
climate-change resilient qualifies and enhances the meaning of the water-service
reliability commitment. Deciding that each customer-service interaction must create
a positive impression triggers the need to define more detailed standards that ensure
this occurs. This would almost certainly include a maximum hold time for
customers who call to report a problem. Making sure all important standards are
identified and meaningful is an essential element of effective strategic
planning and communications.
Standards are
the Key to Meaningful Transparency – It is easy to think that transparency
means sharing everything. But if we ponder this idea for a moment we know it is
not true. No utility would go out of its way to share specific dimensions from
the drawing of a pump, or the chemical composition of the chlorine product it
uses for disinfection. However, utilities share information all the time that is
not very meaningful or transparent. Content tends to focus on facts and figures
rather than the motivations or standards driving a decision or activity. So,
when communicating with the public or policy makers about needed investments or
rate increases, the utility needs to articulate the standards pertinent to the
recommendations. This must include relevant planning and financial standards. Without
this information, the value embedded in the proposal will not be clear or
compelling, and there is arguably no real transparency.
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
Branding Update
August 14, 2013
Focusing on Staff Proficiency
August 14, 2013
Focusing on Staff Proficiency
In past Branding Updates we
have discussed some of the intricacies of building public trust through a
conscious branding effort, creating compelling arguments for investment, and
building relationships with the influential public. In case it is not yet clear,
this is all about forging relationships. The trust being sought is trust in the
leaders and employees of the utility. To build this trust, senior managers and
staff need to be well versed in branding and communication principles, and be
capable of taking effective action. So, it is essential to think in terms of
increasing the staff's proficiency in specific areas.
Key
Principles -
Understanding the application of branding principles to water and
wastewater utilities
Mission
and Vision - Fully
grasping the difference between the brand, the mission statement, and vision
Transparency - Creating transparency that builds
trust...by sharing information that emphasizes the logic behind important
policy decisions and investment proposals
Planning - Developing a strategic plan is that is
brief, based on the brand, empowers the staff, and communicates the significant
standards influencing activities and proposed investments
Relationship
with Governance -
Understanding and meeting the needs of policy makers
Investment
Proposals -
Making a compelling argument for an investment or rate increase
Policy
Briefings -
Creating and adopting a "policy brief" that outlines the information
necessary to create a compelling argument
The
Need for Investment -
Developing an investment imperative that becomes the foundation for connecting
with community leaders
Community-Leader
Relationships -
Systematically building relationships with the influential public
Meaningful
Information -
Properly categorizing shared information, so people reading the utility's
communication materials immediately know what they are reading and why it's
important
Focused
Outreach -
Prioritizing and designing outreach efforts that support policy makers and
sound policy decisions
Website
Effectiveness -
Designing a website architecture that reflects the brand, makes it easy for
customers to solve problems, is not loaded with unnecessary information, and
provides important facts about long-term planning, needed investment, and rates
Case
Studies that Build Trust in Specific Areas -
Drafting and sharing return-on-investment and efficiency case studies
Annual
Report -
Producing an annual report that articulates the "good deal" that the
utility provides to the community, using language that conveys relevant facts
and is not perceived as self promotion
Opinions
about Public Employees -
Crafting communication strategies that enhance perceptions of public employees,
including their value, professionalism, and compensation
This
journey can be described as "practicing principles to achieve
proficiency." The good news is that the process of becoming proficient
also builds the brand. The result is managers and staff members that are able
to increase trust with customers and community leaders, and secure the
financial resources needed to fulfill the utility's mission.
Friday, July 12, 2013
Branding Update
July 12, 2013
Unique Aspects of the Brand
July 12, 2013
Unique Aspects of the Brand
Previous
Branding Updates have addressed common elements of the utility brand. However,
each agency will have aspects of the brand that are somewhat unique. The unique
elements will depend on the specific roles of the utility (its mission) and the
distinctive aspects of the community the utility serves. For example, a
wastewater utility that serves a small affluent community in the mountains with
a pristine watershed will have a different brand than the city of Chicago. The
smaller utility in the mountains will likely need to have a very strong
environmental ethic, resulting in high standards for preventing sewer overflows
and ensuring that water discharged into the river is high quality. A sewer
overflow is bad anywhere, but it will arguably be viewed differently in Chicago
than in Vail, Colorado. And the political issues facing as a large municipal
utility are clearly different than the challenges in a small town. These unique
qualities and roles must be considered when defining the brand.
Branding
Applies to Small Utilities - As noted above, a distinctive quality of a
utility is its size. Some may argue that a small utility cannot implement
branding because they do not have the financial resources to fund a large
outreach program or to even have a full-time communications person. It pays to
remember that branding is not just about what you say, but who you are.
Utilities, big and small, are being branded due to their customer service,
policy decisions, and the way they interact with their communities. This is true
whether or not the utility is "advertising" and independent of how many
communication people are on staff. Utilities that serve small communities are
not exempt from the challenge of building trust with the influential public and
securing appropriate investment. In fact, branding may be more applicable in
small communities because of the intimate nature of the relationships. Sewer
spills can make the front page of the newspaper. A person can call and ask for
the general manager of the utility and actually get to talk with him or her.
Because of this intimacy, the brand (especially the personal characteristics of
the staff) is very important in a small community.
Monday, July 1, 2013
Branding Update
July 1, 2013
Communications and Strategic Planning
Making Communications More Meaningful – Despite the fact that
branding is much more than just communications, it is still important to
communicate in ways that people can understand. Publicity programs,
relationship-development efforts, public-outreach programs, and advertising are
all forms of communications. Water and wastewater utilities have a tendency to
talk about technologies, activities, and events without reminding the audience
how these things relate to the value provided to the community. Making
communications more meaningful is an important outcome of good branding. The
principal rule is to never discuss an activity, decision, investment, technology,
process, or milestone without connecting it to motivations. The motivation
communicates value, and these motivations are often one or more elements of the
brand. This is illustrated in the following examples:
“The North Fork Reservoir project plan has
been approved by the City Council, which is a critical milestone in improving
water reliability and drought resiliency in the region. This project will allow
our region to weather multi-year droughts with little or no cutback in
service.”
“Completion of the water-quality laboratory
will allow us to meet our goal to improve water quality and increase our knowledge
of water-quality issues.”
This may seem like Communications 101, but these examples make
clear the motivations of the utility and the value created by the action or
investment. Being able to “weather a multi-year drought with little or no
cutback in service” is based on the utility’s reliability promise. It is also an
unambiguous statement of value. Conflict is often rooted in misunderstandings about
the reasons behind a decision or proposal. Utility managers should not make policy
makers, customers, and influential community members guess at the utility’s
motivations. Connecting decisions and activities to the commitments articulated
in the brand is not dumbing things down. On the contrary, it makes things clear
and reduces the likelihood of both confusion and conflict.
Communications and Strategic
Planning – It turns out that the
concept of meaningful communications is the foundation for a producing a good strategic
plan. It is essential for the strategic plan to connect proposed actions and
investments with the fundamental promises (the brand) of the organization, and
other important standards driving investment decisions and influencing
priorities. These other standards are major regulations like the Safe Drinking
Water Act, or might be internally generated ethics like improving water quality
or increasing knowledge about water-quality issues (as highlighted in the
example above). So, the strategic-planning process needs to be as much about identifying
and clarifying standards as it is listing proposed actions. This is not a
trivial exercise, but it is well worth the effort. Connecting activities and
investments with the pertinent brand promises and other motivations demonstrates
integrity. It also provides the meaningful transparency necessary to build
trust and make compelling arguments for investment.
Have a Fun-Filled 4th
of July!
Monday, June 10, 2013
Branding Tasks and Brochure
Building
the utility brand impacts all facets of the organization. It begins with
understanding the power of branding and the brand elements that support sound
policy decisions on rates and investment. The attached Resource Trends brochure
briefly covers many of the tasks associated with defining the brand, and
integrating it into planning and outreach efforts.
Resource Trends Brochure
Resource Trends Brochure
Saturday, May 18, 2013
Branding Update
May 20, 2013
May 20, 2013
Simple Concepts, Big Change
Although there are subtleties to branding and it takes experience
to implement a competent branding program, the principles are fairly simple. After
all, it’s not profound to say that a water utility should provide water
reliability and protect public health, or that the utility’s staff needs to be
trusted with respect to planning and finances. However, there is a big
difference between these ideas being very familiar and successfully building trust
with policy makers and the influential public. For example, you won’t build a
reputation for efficiency unless you systematically share information about
efficiency improvements with target audiences. Similarly, building a strong
financial brand requires being transparent with respect to financial
motivations, standards, and decision making.
Ultimately, the biggest challenge for utilities is that implementing
a branding approach usually involves considerable change, typically with respect
to the information they share and the community relationships they strive to create.
Success requires an appreciation for the substantial benefits of branding,
which in turn fuels a commitment to do things differently. The positive outcome
is a sizeable change in how the utility and staff are perceived, and a more dependable
process for securing investment and rate increases.
Sunday, May 5, 2013
Branding Update
May 6, 2013
The Influential Public
Giving policy makers the cover they need to make sound decisions
requires that we understand who policy makers look to for support, or who is
influential. Asking policy makers to be brave and make tough decisions without clear-cut
support is too much to ask. It also increases the risk that the community will
under-invest in resources and infrastructure. The last Branding Update recommended
providing support for policy makers by building relationships with community
leaders or the “authorizing public.”
Authorizing or
Influential - Authorizing is a
strong word, and to some this term describes policy makers, or only those people
with the authority to make policy
decisions. Developing a strong relationship with policy makers is clearly a priority.
But utility managers also need to identify those community leaders who are in a
position to influence decisions. So, a better term for the utility’s target
audience might be the “influential public.” Using this term does not mean that
individuals in this group have an objective to influence (although some might).
It simply means that if their position on a key issue is known to a policy
maker, it could affect how the policy maker votes. Ideally,
the individuals in the influential public are community leaders that represent (as
a whole) a broad cross section of interests. This means that utility managers
need to use this “general-public-interest” standard when identifying the
individuals that make up this group.
The Self-Selecting Public and Undue Influence - The influential public is not restricted to those who
show up for public meetings or workshops. As mentioned in the last Branding Update,
volunteers are self-selecting. They are engaged for a variety of personal
reasons or special interests. They do not represent everyone. Self-selectors
are surely part of the influential public, so they deserve a voice. But they
should not be exercising undue influence or dictating policy simply because
they volunteered to be heard. The mission of utilities is to serve the entire
community.
The Challenge - Building relationships with members of the influential
public requires that you know who they are and are able to peak their curiosity
with interesting information and compelling events. Encouraging people to be
interested and accept this relationship is a challenge. People are busy. And even
the majority of community leaders are not seeking to learn more about water.
Look for more information on addressing this challenge in future Branding
Updates.
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Branding Update
April 15, 2013
April 15, 2013
Reaching the "Authorizing Public"
When
thinking about public outreach, it is important to consider who you want to
reach and why. Often, who utilities reach is limited by who shows up at public
meetings or workshops, or who signs up to be part of an advisory group. It is
important to remember that these people are self-selecting, and they are
engaged for a variety of personal reasons or special interests. They do not
necessarily represent the general-public interest. Sometimes the only people
self-selecting are opponents or “squeaky wheels.”
Previous
Branding Updates have addressed the need for utilities to provide “cover” for
policy makers. This requires building relationships with those in a position to
influence policy decisions. Ideally, the utility needs to reach community
leaders who represent a broad cross section of interests. We have started referring
to this group of individuals as the “authorizing public.” Reaching these people
begins with knowing who they are, followed by proactively meeting and
communicating. Self-selectors are surely part of the authorizing public because
they are interested and engaged. But they are only a subset of this group, and
certainly should not be exercising undue influence or dictating policy. The
mission of the utility is to serve its entire community.
Saturday, March 16, 2013
Branding Update
March 18, 2013
The Nature of a
Compelling Argument
How High Is The Bar?
- Most people don’t part with their money easily. So if you want someone to buy
your product or invest in your endeavor, you need to make a pretty compelling
argument. Often, utility staff members expect policy
makers to easily trust that their rate-increase proposals are necessary. This
is an unreasonable expectation. When it comes to money, trust never comes easy.
Investment proposals must meet a high standard, characterized by extraordinary
clarity and highly-relevant information. The foundation for trusting a specific
proposal is the utility’s brand (or trust in the organization). No proposal is
compelling if it comes from someone you do not trust. But a strong organizational
brand must be accompanied by a strong case for investment. For water-utility
managers, the bar is especially high because policy makers often feel uneasy
about the consequences of supporting a rate increase. Furthermore, they and
their constituents typically have preconceived notions about the efficiency of government
organizations and government spending. Clearly, a compelling argument needs to be
so clear and meaningful that it displaces current thinking and ideologies. This
allows policy makers to fully appreciate the logic of the proposed investment.
How Should It Look?
- A compelling proposal provides the rationale behind an investment in clear
and precise terms, for example by:
·
Describing the fundamental roles and commitments
(promises) of the organization
·
Reviewing ongoing efforts to increase
operational efficiency
·
Providing meaningful transparency
o
Which means listing the key standards, driving
forces, or other motivations for recommending the investment
·
Stating the problem to be solved
o
Which can be a current problem or one that
will manifest in the near future if action is not taken
·
Emphasizing and explaining significant financial
standards and challenges
·
Justifying the timing of the proposed investment
·
Communicating the ramifications of failing to invest
or delaying investment
o
Typically in terms of reduced service
reliability, increased risks, or higher costs in the future
What Doesn’t Belong? –
Technical, financial, or any other facts that don’t make a relevant point
or clarify the argument for investment.
How Should It Feel?
- Policy makers should feel “compelled” to support the investment. More
specifically, they should get a strong sense that voting no will be difficult to defend. A compelling argument
exposes a “no” vote as being motivated by things
other than meeting the utility’s operational and financial needs.
What Do The Results Mean? - A vote that tracks political-party lines or
ideological beliefs means that the argument was not compelling. Therefore, the standard for a compelling argument is
a unanimous decision, despite the fact that this is not always achievable
(especially with large governing bodies). However, the unanimous-decision
standard is suitable because it encourages the utility’s staff to take
responsibility for the result, and continue to improve their planning and investment
proposals.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Branding Update
March 5, 2013
Unpacking
Planning and Financial Transparency
Previous Branding Updates have introduced the importance of making a compelling
argument for investment and rate increases. The foundation for a compelling
argument is trust in the person or organization making the argument. For
utilities, building this trust (or brand) depends on providing meaningful
transparency, especially with respect to planning and finances. In this
context, meaningful transparency can be characterized as information that is
both understandable by the audience and highly relevant to proposed investments
or policy decisions. Sharing technical details with a non-technical audience may
seem like transparency, but this doesn’t build trust.
Motivations and Standards are
Relevant – This is because motivations and standards are what drive people
to take action, make a change, or spend money: for example, a person taking
public transportation to work every day because it’s less expensive, less damaging to the environment, and they can work while in transit. We can
argue that these motivations relate to the personal standards of being smart with money, having concern for
the environment, and being efficient with time. Understanding motivations
and standards allows us to fully appreciate a situation or decision. With
respect to planning and finances, utility proposals need to highlight the
following types of information:
Planning Standards, Motivators
·
Acceptable levels of risk related
to water resources and water reliability
·
Infrastructure-replacement and lifecycle-cost
standards
·
Both regulatory and internal water-quality and environmental
standards
·
Guidelines for addressing anticipated growth in
the community
·
Planned increases in operational efficiency
Financial Standards, Motivators
·
Debt ratios (which impact the cost of borrowing
money)
·
Liquidity and cash-flow standards
·
Maintaining financial reserves, and the logic
behind recommended levels
·
The desired level of debt, and logic behind this standard
·
Costs/financial ramifications of delaying
proposed actions or investments
Whatever the motivations and standards, they need to explain why the utility is recommending a
specific course of action. Planners and chief financial officers are all too
familiar with the issues above, but often the utility fails to provide the
needed transparency. Presentations are better received and instill confidence when
they begin with the pertinent motivations. And this can be done simply and
briefly. Without this clarity and context, even policy makers familiar with the
organization are hard-pressed to fully appreciate the utility’s proposal. Often,
the unfortunate results are probing questions about why a proposal makes sense,
confused enquiries about extraneous technical details, and ultimately erroneous
conclusions about the urgency of the proposed investment.
The Bottom Line - The
utility’s brand and the quality of the investment proposal have significant
impacts on policy decisions, the performance and financial health of the
utility, and ultimately quality of life in the community.
Friday, March 1, 2013
From Jan 9, 2013 Branding Update
Resource Trends Branding Brief on City and Community Branding
Resource Trends Branding Brief on City and Community Branding
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When working with water and wastewater departments
within a municipality, questions often arise about the department's brand and
its relationship to the city's brand. This in turn leads to discussions about
effective and ineffective ways to build the brand of a city or community. The
following Resource Trends Branding Brief outlines key issues related to
developing a city or community brand, and what we can learn from Proctor and
Gamble, owner of 300 consumer brands.
Friday, February 22, 2013
Branding Update
February 22, 2013
The Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) and the "Source of Quality"
February 22, 2013
The Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) and the "Source of Quality"
Since CCR season is at hand, it is a good time to review
important branding and trust-building principles that can be embedded in your
report. The following Utility Branding Network tool is a good place to
start:
One of the most important principles is the idea of
establishing the utility as the source of quality, as outlined in the tool and
below:
Become the Source of Quality - The
objective of the CCR should be to increase confidence in the water. However, we
have another important branding objective: to establish the utility as the
trusted source of quality. This is important because people tend to associate
water quality with its physical source ("Water from a mountain spring is best").
Consumers need to understand that investment, competency, and diligence on the
part of the utility are what make water fit for drinking and other uses. This
source of quality brand reflects the importance of appropriate investment and
the local utility's values. This brand is especially important when implementing
new sources of water, such as recycled water.
The principles noted above, and in the Branding Network
tool, can be used in any communications designed to build water quality
confidence and establish the utility as the source of quality.
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Branding Update
February 14, 2013
February 14, 2013
Branding Network
Subscribers Focus on Finances and Rates
The Changing Water-Investment Landscape - Utility
management is changing rapidly. Water reliability is increasingly stressed by
population growth and climate change, and water quality and
environmental-protection costs are rising due to new regulations incorporating
higher standards. Despite the need for public support, people brand taxes as
bad and frequently categorize government organizations as inefficient. The
result: elected officials often don’t feel safe to support needed rate
increases.
The Need for Sustainable Finances – Quality of
life and the economic health of communities is fundamentally impacted by the
availability of water and wastewater services. Ensuring high water reliability
and public health requires fully funding the utility’s operating costs and
capital investments. A “negotiated” lower rate typically results in systematic
under-investment in resources and infrastructure.
The Politics of Rate Increases – Investment
and rate-increase decisions are made by the policy makers (city councils or
boards of directors) of local water utilities or regional water agencies. Given
this, it makes sense for utilities to provide policy makers the clarity, confidence,
and support they need to make sound investment decisions. Providing this
support or “cover” requires that the utility address the following:
· Building trust
(or a strong utility brand), especially with respect to planning, finances, and
efficiency
· Developing a compelling
argument for a proposed investment or rate increase
· Building relationships
with community members in a position to influence water-policy decisions
The Utility Branding Network Helps
Utilities Get Started and Keep Going - Addressing these critically important
issues is an ongoing journey. Subscribers to the Utility Branding Network get
support in building and maintaining their brand and ensuring sustainable
finances by…..
· Auditing
Communications and the Strategic Plan
· Developing
Branding Statements and Strategic-Planning Sheet
· Aligning the Mission
and Vision Statements with the Brand
· Tailoring
Communications to be Meaningful to Policy Makers and Community Leaders
· Making a Compelling
Case for a Specific Investment or Rate Increase
· Developing a Standardized
“Policy Sheet” that Outlines Proposed Investments
· Drafting Return-On-Investment
and Efficiency Case Studies
· Establishing a
Website Structure that Reflects the Brand
· Using a Major Investment
Imperative to Build the Utility’s Brand
· Producing an
Annual Report that Communicates the “Good Deal”
· Creating a
Systematic Process for Engaging with Community Leaders
The Utility Branding Network is committed to
ensuring that water and wastewater utilities
are trusted and that rate setting fully funds utility operating costs and needed capital investments.
The Network is managed by the National Water
Research Institute on behalf of water and
wastewater agencies.
Download Copy of Latest Branding and Rates
Presentation
Resource
Trends' latest presentation covering utility branding, investment, and rate
increases covers the following important topics:
- National and Local Investment Trends in the United States
- Branding Principles and Myths
- Utility Branding and Relationship to the Rate-Increase Process
- The Utility's Bottom Line - Sustainable Finances
- Elements of a Compelling Argument for Investment or Rate Increase
- Transparency in Planning and Finances
- Engaging with the Community
- Getting Started and Addressing Barriers
Link to the presentation: Resource Trends Presentation
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Just Added the Blog
Just Added the Blog for Resource Trends
Just added the blog so we can post the articles from the Branding Updates and provide a more dynamic web presence for sharing information.
Just added the blog so we can post the articles from the Branding Updates and provide a more dynamic web presence for sharing information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)