In earlier articles I've talked about the need for companies to start looking at what I call "version 2.0" type websites. (ABN - June 1999) A recent study completed by ABN shows that in Asia 58% of companies are doing just that by adding e-commerce/e-service elements to their on-line presence. (ABN - Sept 1999 , page 33) However, many of these companies are 'building these sites' as a project for their IT department, or as a trial-by-fire experience for a junior marketing executive, without realizing the implications of all the decisions that go in to this type communication.

Print vs. On-line
When a company is putting together a print ad or DM piece we look at the connotative effects on the brand things like media placement, imagery, copy and paper stock will have. Almost all of these also apply to an on-line effort as well, but the factors, which can have a dramatic impact on the brand, does not stop there. The fundamental difference lies in the fact that a version 2.0 website is not merely a marketing piece. These sites are also potentially the retail venue, a channel for dialogue with the customer, and representative of the company's entire customer service levels. The key word is "functionality". Customers come to a version 2.0 site to do something, not just to read about how great a product is.

A fine example of companies putting their brand at risk by overlooking these factors lies in the recent boom in on-line grocery stores. PARKnSHOP in Hong Kong (www.parknshop.com), NTUC FairPrice / Cold Storage in Singapore (www.fairprice.com.sg & www.coldstorage.com.sg), and the leading www.Peapod.com in the USA each have made interesting decisions in their websites which either reinforce or damage their traditional branding efforts.

Environment:
The user interface is the equivalent to the retail environment in the traditional bricks & mortar outlets. These large retail chains have gone to great lengths (some greater than others) to ensure a consistent interface between the brand and the customer in their stores which are not necessarily reflected in the sites. The stores have their HR departments train the staff to behave in certain ways. The employees all wear consistent uniforms, and the stores themselves are specifically laid-out to reflect the stores positioning in the market. (Compare the stores with dark narrow isles versus the new open market bright layouts)

On-line though several of the stores have "layouts" which are inconsistent with the brand off-line. Even worse, the interface on several of the sites does not follow the way people shop for groceries. Some use the same template as a e-banking/bookstore website. Imagine the effect on the stores' brand if their retail outlets had one check out line and you filled out a withdrawal slip for the food you wanted, or if the shelves were scattered around the store with sofas to relax on while you browse for food. NTUC Fairprice on the other hand has gone to the other extreme by trying to directly copy the grocery store 'interface' on to the Internet. This doesn't work because of the two-dimensional limitation of a screen. This winds up further cheapening the customer's opinion of the store.

Old Habits Die Hard
When a company is looking to convert their :brochure-ware" site to a version 2.0 type destination it is important to ask "why will people want to come here as opposed to my traditional channels?" or what is my Value Proposition of the site (not the products on the site). Lastly, the company needs to understand impact this drawing card will have on the brand. In each of the Grocery sites looked at this vital point appears to have been overlooked. The answer being: "People will want to shop on-line because well, it's on-line". Home delivery is not a compelling value if a customer can get home delivery through the phone/fax, which they can do quickly/anywhere. The current sites do not provide any reason for the customer to break their tried and true purchasing habits.

Nice to see you again
The single most important technology on the Internet, when it comes to branding is the ability to recognise a customer and deliver to them a truly personalised level of service. Imagine being able to create a million different versions of your ads and corporate identity, which are sensitive to the desires and taboos of each individual customer. To a low-income housewife, you are an economical alternative for her groceries; To a busy young doctor, you are a convenient way for her to get her groceries without going to the mall; and to the bachelor, you are the brand that helps him by reminding him what that product was he had last time. The company's brand becomes organic, reinforcing itself with each customer in a way that best fits the relationship with that customer.

These on-line grocery sites should be able to say: "By the way John, that brand of juice you bought last month is on special today, would you like to buy some more?" The companies who have chosen to build their on-line presence without considering the risks and opportunities for their brand put that brand at risk. We need to understand that 'branding on-line' goes beyond selecting a catchy url, and should be carefully managed, or risk damaging our off-line branding efforts.