Joe: Half of the biggest companies on the Dow Jones in 1995 were gone from the index by 2018. Vanished. It wasn't a slow decline. It was what one economist called a 'gale of creative destruction.' And today, we're talking about the one thing that decides if you're the storm or the wreckage. Lewis: The storm or the wreckage... no pressure! That’s a terrifying statistic. It sounds less like a business cycle and more like a corporate extinction event. So what's our guide through this corporate battlefield today? Joe: It's a book called Disruptive Branding: How to Win in Times of Change by Jacob Benbunan, Gabor Schreier, and Benjamin Knapp. And these aren't just academics; they're the top brass at Saffron, the consultancy co-founded by the absolute legend of branding, Wally Olins. They've been in the trenches with brands from YouTube to Siemens, so they've seen this storm up close. Lewis: Okay, so when they say 'disruptive,' I'm picturing a startup in a garage, a tech bro in a hoodie coding the next big thing that puts some hundred-year-old company out of business. Is that what we're talking about? Joe: That's the exact myth they want to bust. The book argues that this "David vs. Goliath" story, the Silicon Valley cliché, is way too narrow. It makes disruption sound like this magical force that only strikes from the outside. Lewis: But isn't it? I mean, look at what Netflix did to Blockbuster or what Amazon did to bookstores. That feels pretty external and pretty final. Joe: It does, but the authors reframe it. They pull from thinkers like Jean-Marie Dru, who said disruption happens anytime people stop thinking in a gradual, linear way and instead make "strategic leaps." And that can happen anywhere, in any company, of any size. It’s a mindset, not a business model.

Lewis: A mindset. Okay, that's a bigger idea. So it's not about being a startup, it's about thinking like one, even if you're a massive corporation? Joe: Precisely. The book’s first big idea is that we need to see disruption as a principle for continuous improvement and innovation. It’s about constantly asking, "Is there a better way to do this?" And the best example they use isn't some obscure startup. It's Apple. Lewis: Of course, the classic example. The iPhone. Joe: Yes, but go back further. Think about 1976. The computer industry was dominated by giants like IBM. Their names were technical, their products were beige boxes, and their focus was pure functionality. Then along come Jobs and Wozniak. Their first disruptive act wasn't a piece of hardware. It was their name: Apple. Lewis: Huh. I never thought of the name itself as a disruptive act. But you're right, compared to 'International Business Machines,' calling your company 'Apple' is a completely different statement. It’s human, it's organic, it's simple. Joe: Exactly. It was a strategic leap. They were saying, "We are not one of them." They weren't just selling a machine; they were selling a new way of thinking about technology. They designed beautiful objects people were proud to display on their desks, not hide underneath them. The Macintosh, with its graphical user interface and mouse, wasn't just a better computer; it was a disruption of the very idea of what a computer was for. It was for everyone, not just technicians. Lewis: So the technology—the mouse, the GUI—was the tool, but the disruption was the mindset that said, "Let's make this for humans." Joe: You've got it. The book argues that the tech is an enabler, but the mindset is the weapon. The disruptive question wasn't "How do we build a faster processor?" It was "How do we make a tool that feels like an extension of your mind?" That's a strategic leap. Lewis: Okay, I can see that with Apple. What about Netflix? That feels like a pure technology play. The internet got fast enough, so streaming became possible. Joe: But think about their journey. They started as a DVD-by-mail service. Their first disruption was a mindset shift against the inconvenience of Blockbuster—no late fees, a huge selection. They were already thinking differently. When broadband internet started to become a real threat to their DVD model, they didn't ignore it. Lewis: Right, they could have doubled down on DVDs, tried to make their delivery even faster. Joe: The classic incumbent mistake! Instead, they embraced the very thing that could kill them. They made the strategic leap to streaming, effectively disrupting themselves. They cannibalized their own successful business because they understood their brand wasn't about "mailing you plastic discs." It was about "delivering entertainment conveniently." That's a mindset, not a technology. They chose to be the storm, not the wreckage.

Lewis: Okay, so it's a mindset. But that mindset is operating in a world that feels... weirder and more connected than ever. My online life and real life are totally blurred. I'll research a new TV online for an hour, go to the store just to see it, and then buy it on my phone while standing in the aisle. Is that part of this? Joe: That is the perfect description of what the book calls 'The Great Convergence.' It's the second huge idea. The authors say the walls are collapsing between three key areas: the physical and the digital, the consumer and the producer, and the global and the local. Lewis: Let's unpack that. The consumer and producer one sounds interesting. What does that mean? Joe: It means the audience is no longer just a passive recipient. They are now 'prosumers'—part producer, part consumer. They have a voice, a platform, and they can directly influence a brand's direction. The most famous, almost painful, example of this is the Gap logo disaster in 2010. Lewis: Oh, I remember this! They had that classic, iconic blue box logo for decades. Joe: And then, one day, they just replaced it with this generic, bland, sans-serif thing with a little blue square floating off to the side. The internet erupted. People created protest groups on Facebook, Twitter was a firestorm of mockery and outrage. It wasn't just a few complaints; it was a full-scale digital revolt. Lewis: The Gap story is wild! It's like the audience stormed the stage and rewrote the play. It proves brands aren't in control anymore. Joe: Not in the old way. Less than a week later, Gap's brand president issued a public apology and brought back the old logo. The prosumers won. The book uses this to show that brands have to be transparent and responsive. You can't just dictate from the boardroom anymore, because your customers have a megaphone. Lewis: And that megaphone is global. Which brings up the global and local convergence. How does that work? Joe: The classic mantra is 'think globally, act locally.' A brand needs a consistent global identity, but its products and services have to adapt to local tastes. The book's go-to example is McDonald's. Lewis: Right, you can't just sell a Big Mac everywhere and expect it to work. Joe: Exactly. In India, where a large portion of the population doesn't eat beef, they have the Maharaja Mac, made with chicken. In Chile, you can get avocado purée on your burger. In China, they've offered tofu and fish nuggets. The book points out that in 2014, McDonald's sales were struggling in Russia and China, and the CEO at the time, Don Thompson, directly blamed a failure to localize properly. He said they needed to deliver a "more relevant experience" that was "personalized and local." Lewis: So the golden arches are global, but the menu is local. That makes sense. It feels like a tightrope walk, though. How do you stay 'you' while also being so many different things to different people? Joe: That's the challenge, and it leads to the third convergence: physical and digital. The experience has to be seamless. The book highlights Amazon, the ultimate digital-first company, opening physical bookstores. Lewis: Which still feels so strange to me. The company that killed the bookstore opens a bookstore. Joe: But look at how they do it. The sections in the store aren't organized by genre in the traditional way. They have sections like "Books with More Than 10,000 Reviews on Amazon" or "Page Turners: Books Kindle Readers Finish in 3 Days or Less." They are taking their digital data and making it a physical experience. They're blurring the lines, creating a seamless loop between their online and offline worlds. Lewis: That's clever. They're using their digital strength to disrupt the physical space they once disrupted. It's a full-circle moment. Joe: It is. And it shows that brands that master this convergence, that create these authentic, seamless experiences, are the ones that thrive. In contrast, the book points to Snapchat. They had a brilliant, disruptive feature—disappearing photos. But it was just that, a feature. When Instagram and Facebook just copied it with their 'Stories' feature, Snapchat's growth stalled. They were too reliant on a single gimmick and hadn't built a deeper, more integrated experience.

Joe: And that brings us to the ultimate defense against all this chaos. If your features can be copied, and your customers can revolt, what's left? The book argues it's the one thing that can't be easily replicated: your 'Why'. Lewis: The 'Why'. Okay, this is where it can start to sound a bit fluffy, a bit corporate-retreat. "Finding your purpose." How does a 'Why' actually prevent a company from going under? Joe: Because the 'Why' is your North Star. It's the organizing principle for everything you do. The book breaks it down into a simple framework: 'Why' is your core purpose, 'How' is your values and behaviors, and 'What' is your product or service. Most companies know what they do. Fewer know how they do it differently. Very few can clearly articulate why they exist. Lewis: Give me an example of a powerful 'Why'. Joe: The book uses Apple again. From the 1980s, their 'Why' was, and I'm quoting, "To make a contribution to the world by making tools for the mind that advance humankind." Lewis: "Tools for the mind." That's a powerful idea. It's not "we sell computers." Joe: It's so much bigger. That 'Why' tells you who to hire, what products to build, how to design your stores. It's why their products feel intuitive and empowering. It's why their ads feature creators and thinkers. It's a filter for every decision. Nike is another great example. Their 'Why' is "To bring inspiration and innovation to every athlete in the world." And then they add that brilliant parenthetical: "(If you have a body, you are an athlete)." Lewis: That's genius. It's both incredibly focused and infinitely expandable. It lets them sell shoes to marathon runners and yoga pants to someone just starting their fitness journey. Joe: Exactly. Now, contrast that with the cautionary tales. The book points to the early days of Uber. Their 'What' was brilliant: a taxi app. But they had no clear 'Why' beyond aggressive growth. And what was the result? A toxic internal culture, regulatory battles, driver protests, the #deleteuber campaign. They were a product without a soul, and it almost destroyed them. Lewis: And what about HMV, the British music retailer? They were a high-street giant. Joe: A perfect, tragic example. What was HMV's 'Why'? It was "we sell CDs and DVDs in physical stores." That's a 'What', not a 'Why'. So when digital downloads and streaming came along, their reason for being evaporated. The product died, and because their identity was tied completely to the product, the brand died with it. Lewis: That's a brutal but clear distinction. If HMV's 'Why' had been something like "We are the ultimate curators of entertainment for passionate fans," maybe they could have evolved. They could have become a streaming service, a podcast network, a live events company... Joe: You've just articulated the entire point. A strong 'Why' is a roadmap for evolution. A weak 'Why' is a tombstone. Amazon's 'Why' isn't "we sell books." It's "to be Earth's most customer-centric company." That 'Why' gives them permission to go into groceries, cloud computing, healthcare—anything that serves the customer. It's the engine of their disruption.

Joe: So when you pull it all together, the book's message becomes incredibly clear. Disruptive branding isn't about a single killer app or a clever marketing campaign. It's about building a resilient, evolving identity. Lewis: It feels like a three-step process. First, you have to adopt the right mindset—see disruption as an internal engine for change, not an external threat. Joe: Then, you have to master the new landscape, this converged world where the lines between everything are gone. You have to be authentic and seamless across every single touchpoint, from a tweet to a physical store. Lewis: And finally, all of that has to be anchored by an unshakable 'Why'. A purpose that guides every decision and gives you the flexibility to evolve without losing your identity. It feels like the big message is: stop focusing only on your product, and start obsessing over your purpose. The product is the proof, but the purpose is the engine. Joe: That's a perfect summary. The product is how you deliver on the promise, but the 'Why' is the promise itself. And in a world of constant change, it’s the only thing that truly endures. Lewis: What's a brand you think has a powerful 'Why'? Or one that's totally lost its way? We'd love to hear your examples. Find us on our socials and let's continue the conversation. Joe: This is Aibrary, signing off.