Hi friend – Rob here.

Today in Salmon Theory+: a summary of 'Positioning', by Al Ries & Jack Trout.

This book is a classic, and perhaps rightly so.

A lot of what i took from it, i still apply and come back to.

Especially when you consider that most 'modern' strategy disciplines seem to forget that our job is (still) to earn a place in people's minds.

Without that, we are nothing.

Let's get into it.

📝 TL;DR:

1. Do something better with what’s already there
2. Don't be the only, be the most likely
3. Bet on people's cognitive laziness and you might win
4. Start with the end customer
5. Sometimes the job is to protect our position

1. Do something better with what's already there

The beauty of this advice is that all you need to do is start by speaking to people.

And ask them what's already in their mind about you, and see if you can take that to your advantage.

Salmon Theory has been in the minds of many folks as "that philosophy newsletter", despite me drawing from more than philosophy.

But i told my ego to get a grip and reoriented this around "practical wisdom", which plays on the philosophy angle while extending it.

Similarly, brands like Cadbury or O2 consistently go back to their founding principles, the thing that made them special in the first place.

If you're a brand new brand, then well, you work with what's already in the mind about category entry points.

I find principles like these (go back to what made you special! Find a specific entry point you can be known for!) make the job emotionally healthier.

Because you're not trying to do something from nothing, you're simply trying to do something better out of what's already there.

2. Don't be the only, be the most likely

When people talk about "why could our brand do this", that often presumes there's a static position you own and that's that.

People are looking, in those instances, for what we might call "absolute differentiation", which let's be honest is very hard to a) have b) maintain.

Some blunt truth for ya: most functional things are easily copiable, unless you have patents, which most don't, so it's a hard strategy in the long run.

What's not as easily copiable, if you invest consistently in it, is what people think about you.

Even if competitors then try to copy you, they'll be seen as "the other you", because you were in the mind first, and stayed there for longer.

Case in point: every chocolate bar can claim they're good for taking a break, and yet Kit Kat is the "have a break" brand.

It's not because they are functionally better for breaks, it's that they've invested in that association the longest.

This isn't absolute differentiation (only brand for a break), it's relative differentiation (brand most associated with breaks).

People say "be the only X", but i'd argue a more truthful statement is "be the most likely to be associated with X".

It's not as quotable, but it's probably more truthful.

3. Bet on people's cognitive laziness and you might win

There's a great saying from Richard Thaler which goes along the lines of, we don't think people are stupid, we think the world is hard.

And this is a great complement to that line of thought, especially when i talk about tapping into people's cognitive laziness.

I'm not saying this to insult your audience, whether they're a single mum or a SaaS corporate buyer.

I'm saying this, in fact, out of respect for their time.

You see, these folks wrote about an "overcommunicated society" way back in the 1980s, so imagine how that plays out today.

It's all the more reason that while, yes, some people want to be more involved with brands, most people's attention is verging on the poverty line.

And in fact, it's healthier for us to assume so, because it means we don't waste their time with things that might make us feel good.

Instead, we create positioning statements and value propositions that are so simple you could understand them at a glance.

Which, let's be honest, is how 99% of anyone in the real world will ever perceive what your beautifully crafted brand is about.

4. Start with the end customer

It feels bizarre to reflect on this, but people are still shocked when i ask if anyone's done recent research on what people think about their brand.

In fact, it's even more bizarre when i ask this shortly after asking, "so what's the brand strategy?".

Because when i ask about the brand strategy, often there's a lovely set of words but, as far as i can see, little customer evidence to back it up.

Now, i'm not saying that evidence doesn't exist, but i think we need to be more transparent about whether a position is where we are, or want to be.

So if someone says, "our brand is all about building memories", the next logical question is, "and to what extent do people think this now?".

And if the answer is "we don't know", there will be problems further down the line, because:

1. It may not be something that people ever really think about your brand or category
2. If you don't have a measure of where you are now, you can't measure whether in 12 months' time you'll have build that brand

So starting with the end customer is not only good practice to know whether you're doing the right thing.

It's also excellent practice to know whether, sometime in the future, you can actually measure if your intentions were measurable in the first place.

5. Sometimes the job is to protect our position

Among the many things my IPA EffTest taught me, plus talking to other seasoned strategists over the years, is this.

Sometimes the role of marketing and communications is to protect our position in the mind, instead of necessarily growing it.

In technical parlance, it can play a defensive role (e.g. protect existing shelf space against challenger brands), not just an offensive one.

Now, of course, most brands grow by growing market share (not so much frequency), but equally when you're the leader you gotta protect it.

In some sense, this helps justify why some leading brands are persistently advertising even though the ads themselves are not that creative.

When you're a leader, creativity can help you justify higher premiums and pricing power, but media exposure does a pretty substantial job on its own.

Because it ensures you stay on people's minds, one way or another, and ensure salience which can make a big difference at point of sale.

Probably one of the reasons why, even though the Vitabiotics ads i see on the tube every week aren't very good, they're seen as the go-to vitamin brand.

The LinkedIn commentariat might argue they're shit ads, and maybe they're right.

But that doesn't mean they're not doing the job they've intended to do for regular people.

As for the challenger side of things, i'd argue the same principle is true.

You can't spend your way into persistent presence through paid media, but there are other ways.

SURREAL is never out of mind for anyone who follows them on LinkedIn.

The Do Lectures are never out of mind for anyone who follows their excellent newsletter.

Frequent presence will not guarantee current sales, but it will raise the odds of future ones when someone happens to be in-market.

📝 TL;DR:

1. Do something better with what’s already there
2. Don't be the only, be the most likely
3. Bet on people's cognitive laziness and you might win
4. Start with the end customer
5. Sometimes the job is to protect our position