|
|
|
|
|
|
by erable
5366 days ago
|
|
|
While both articles address a company's outward image, I'd say that the two touch upon very different things. I understood OP's post to be more about the quality of marketing collateral and making sure that the client experience was well fleshed-out, and I read your link to be a lesson in messaging. I didn't find the two to be mutually exclusive. |
|
|
Your brand should be something your customers expect, but only just.
Smart Bear was a small, upstart company, selling cutting-edge tools for developers into a relatively new market.
Developers and their managers value directness, especially at small companies. A vendor that shows all the signs of being a peacock while obviously being a pigeon will come across as scummy, because your market is expecting one of "small upstart dude in shed" or "massive enterprise company with a headcount greater than many cities", and not something in the middle.
Iron Port's customers, on the other hand, are buying security products, and frankly, the security industry is almost all theatre. An impressive-looking website, bespoke-looking product, and glossy sales brochure is all in the ante of playing at the security-vendor table, especially before Web 2.0.
Your company has to dress for the occasion.