Pro Sound Web: I believe in being loyal.
When I was a TD, I built several key relationships with vendors, manufacturers and reps and funneled as much business as I could to them.
Rather than shop every single purchase, I went to one of my two vendors, got a price, and if it felt right, I placed the order.
Same with gear. Once I found a company that made products that worked for me, I stuck with them.
11 comments:
I also tend towards brand loyalty, but not in broad categories. My hand power tools are all Makita, my stationary ones Dewalt, and my hand tools vary by whatever Homedepot made look shiny that day. But the more I feel like a company cares about me, the more I will stay loyal. I briefly had a sponsorship deal with Chipotle and I think I will never stop loving them. Despite the fact that I can not even remember going into a Qdoba, I'd be happy to tell you why Chipotle is better. Although a pretty significant deterrent for brand loyalty is Amazon. The last few times I have purchased tools it has been online, and I can sort by the highest reviews. I prefer to have a brand to love, but even I can't stay loyal when there is so much evidence not to. I think brand loyalty might be dying out as online shopping gets easier and easier.
Imagine a supplier who delivers that last minute hardware you need by drone. Who cares what the brand is.
Like the author of this article, I think loyalty needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Brand loyalty certainly pays off in your relationship with the company, and if customer relations are your primary goal, then my all means, continue. However, the article is right when it says that you may be missing out on quality products. It's also worth mentioning that there may be some issues in price. Not every product within a brand will be accurately priced, and you may find yourself over paying for a mic when you like the brand for their speakers. I'm all for brand loyalty, but only as long as the brand is the best for you. It is worth it to hunt and perhaps make individual brand relations a little less strong for the sake of having a diverse but top quality collection of gear. I might suggest being loyal to a specific product in a brand, for example, rather than using one brand for everything. That way you still build loyalty without finding yourself shackled to a brand that might not be entirely right for you.
At one point, brand loyalty meant having an actual relationship with your vendor, rather than just ordering things online or from catalogs. In a way, even though technology is wonderful, it's taking a chunk out of the meaningfulness of brand loyalty. it's easy to say "don't just use one brand" but from a consumer's perspective, it's just so gosh darn easy. However, the consumer is taking a huge risk on those products. You can relate it to a forest - if one species gets the blight, and your entire forest is oak trees, then your forest is gone. If you have a diverse forest, then only some of it will be affected and therefore die off. Now, I'm not saying that all of your microphones are suddenly going to bite the dust simultaneously one day, but if you had light boards (wifi enabled) that were all from the same manufacturer, you're putting yourself at risk that if someone hacks the main server, every single light board you have will be affected. I think it's time we take the loyalty out of it and choose the right product, which I understand is easier said than done.
I admit to have fallen into the perilous pit of brand loyalty. I love Nikon cameras and therefore do not buy Canon products. Recently I have realized that they are in essence the exact same products, and there is virtually no difference. With this in mind, do I still only purchase Nikon products? Yes, in fact I do. I admit to having no logical reasoning to it; I just prefer the brand of Nikon over Canon. It also helps that I get a family discount due to my uncle, but that’s beside the point. If Canon had a better camera, I probably would still find a reason to keep to the Nikon brand.
I think that reputation is a large factor in one of the reasons why I stick to one brand over another. In the photography world, you are either one brand, or another. There is very little cross over and I’m not sure that the products are actually compatible. If I was going into professional photography, I might change my mind and explore the brands more freely, but I don’t have a real need.
I think brand loyalty is a good thing up to a certain point. Like the author of the article said, you need to be careful to not ignore advancements and progress out of loyalty to one brand. If you can do that then sticking with a few brands can be helpful. Aside from things like not having to have as many different parts in stock to repair things there’s also a lower chance of compatibility issues if all of the equipment you’re working with comes from the same company. However, there’s also a downside to that kind of setup. If the company you rely on runs into trouble and releases a flawed product or worse closes then suddenly your entire set up is at risk. Like one of the other comments has said, if everything is from one company you’ve created an ecosystem much like a forest. If you suddenly add flawed products from the same company (anything from bad updates for software to things that just don’t work right) or a product from a different company, it can throw the entire system into disarray.
I think the author does a great job of emphasizing the importance of staying educated while having a preference. Sessler says “I’ve seen too many people pass up on great products because they have a brand anti-loyalty” which is probably so accurate for so many salty old carpenters and TDs in multiple businesses. I have had many bosses swear by a brand no matter what and only stock that particular brand. But what the author points out is that being loyal to a brand is totally fine, but being blind to all the other options in the world is not. I think this is important because even having a loyalty situation with a company and the rewards it brings can sometimes not be significant enough to be beneficial to you and your company in the long run. By only focusing on one brand, you are limiting yourself to a world of possibilities – no matter how good the brand may be.
There are a couple of interesting things here in regards to theatre. One of them is the notion that newer is necessarily better. We so often tend to think of new technology being what the theatre needs. However, as a non-profit company's purpose is to serve the community to which is belongs, it cannot be denied that part of that community means the stores in that community and therefore loyalty to those brands. This is because the community connection is far more important than having the most 'innovative' technology. In truth, when it comes to theatre, in my opinion the most important thing is to focus on human connection and imagination. If there is something that the theatre definitely needs, then of course buy it specifically to those needs. However, in most situations, our emphasis on newness, staying 'current' with technology, and not letting theatre fall behind are things that ultimately do very little for the advancement of our trade. I would emphasize focus on seeing how all functions of a theatre company serve the community, and refocus our conversations on that point.
I struggle with this every day. I like a few brands of things, and I’m so locked into my ways that I don’t really explore outside options. For example, I don’t think I’ll every buy a non-Apple computer again.
So that being said, this goes the same with vendors too. Very recently I’ve fallen into a four vendor rut. Everything I need I can buy from Rosebrand, McMaster, Paul Lumber, or Home Depot. I don’t really find myself needing anything else very often. And even if I can get it a little cheaper somewhere else, those four vendors are always the easiest, most convienient, most reliable place to get things. And because of that, I’m willing to spend a little bit more of (the school’s) hard earned money to use those vendors.
I guess that goes for brands too. I wouldn’t but anything but an Apple computer these days. Their much more expensive, but have a much longer life span, and have a much more familiar experience to me. Sure, the new operating systems that run on the “other guys” systems are more and more catering to that mentality of easy end user manipulation (like MacOS) but I’m loyal to apple, and I don’t think I’d be willing to change my ways.
I understand that this article promotes the pitfalls of brand loyalty because you are making the conscious decision to stick with one brand and ignore the others. By ignoring the others you are limiting yourself from the opportunities to be able to potentially experience something better. What I wish the article would have addressed more on the psychology of why people are loyal to specific brands. They spoke about the practically of know-what-you-are-getting and not having to worry about obtaining so many different parts if something is broken or needs fixing. At the same time, people are more often brand loyal because it’s the popular/ industry standard company and using those specific brands promotes an image of success. Like how in society the iPhone is seen as the popular smartphone to own, while there are several models of android phones that are just as good if not better than the iPhone that people are limiting themselves from. People aligned themselves with certain brands always to promote an image and the missed opportunities are the cost they have accepted.
This article brings up some really important points. In the event production industry there is a lot of competition from equipment manufacturers and vendors, and people love to pick their favorites and nay-say those they don’t approve of. But every now and then a company releases a product that, while it may not “change the game,” may change their entire brand-view. Like the article mentions, that is why it is important to stay open-minded.
I think aside from brand-loyalty, something very important is vendor-loyalty (the article also mentions this). Some vendors are clearly better than others, and a big part of this is transparency and customer service. Being able to call up a vendor and get their input on a purchase without worrying that they are just going to upsell you is a very valuable thing. Getting help from a vendor to fit a product to an application is extremely helpful given that the vendor is knowledgeable and prioritizes giving you the service you need over getting the largest amount of your money. When you find a vendor who shares your best interests, they’ll also help you see past sometimes blinding brand-loyalty (or anti-loyalty) to consider a product from a manufacturer you have not used before and therefore are cautious about adding to you inventory. So, having a good customer-vendor relationship can be extremely powerful as well, but that can be tricky to find.
I too believe in being loyal to a brand. I think there are a lot of pluses to locking in with a few different companies and getting to know their product line very well. I think it is especially handy if you have built a relationship with a representative from the company or such so you can just pick up the phone and give them a call if you ever need some help. I suppose there is the potential to miss out on some new features or groundbreaking technology by locking oneself in to only working with a few different companies, but like everything, there are definitely tradeoffs to be made. And yet, nothing is set in stone, and nothing says you can't work with other people in the future if their products truly turn out to be superior.
Maybe this isn't a direct correlation, but in my mind, my biggest brand loyalty is to the CAD program Vectorworks. I know there are a lot of people in Purnell that bounce around between AutoCad, Vectorworks, Sketchup, Illustrator, etc.. As much as possible I try to do everything I can in Vectorworks, and in doing so have become much more facile with the software. It really is truly that by doing only one thing, you become really competent at that one thing!
Post a Comment