As president of the Dollar ReDe$ign Project, I recently contributed to the New York Times's Room for Debate feature, "Bringing Dollars and Cents Into This Century." I think U.S. currency could use a lot of improvement, especially in these 5 key areas:

1. Size

It’s novel that each bill is the same size, but really it’s such a simplistic idea it makes our currency look like it was created by a group of Luddites. 

2. Color

You could argue the term “greenback” is part of American culture, but that’s not significant enough when you consider using one color not only impairs recognition for the sighted, but also paints a single-minded picture of America’s philosophy. 

3. Functionality

It’s absolutely imperative that our currency includes the latest security features. That’s a given. But why not also include additional features to make it easier for the visually impaired to distinguish each note? 

4. Composition

America is one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, so why aren’t we using a material that’s as technologically advanced as we are, something synthetic like plastic? 

5. Symbolism

We should use the design of our currency as a means to celebrate multiple aspects of what makes the U.S. great. We live in a culturally rich and vibrant country that is idolized all over the world for what it represents, so we should use our currency as a vehicle to “advertise” all that we are. Not just a few dead presidents.

Read the whole article and tune into the debate here.

As smartphones become ever more pervasive, it's increasingly imperative that brands extend their communications strategy to mobile. In a recent interview, TheSociable.com asked me to explain mobile brand engagement and how it differs from traditional and even other digital forums. I've excerpted my five key points below, but be sure to check out the full article.

Customers
Customers are already on mobile, so brands should be there, too. Brands don’t have to convince consumers to use the platform/channel; only to use/download their apps.

Accessibility
Mobile presents the potential for an unprecedented level of access to customers. People take their smartphones everywhere, and it’s culturally acceptable to use them virtually anywhere, anytime. Through apps, brands can engage with customers more frequently and more directly.

Lovemark
People are mentally, emotionally, and physically attached to their smartphones. When they download an app, they invite a brand into their personal space. With the right mobile experience, brands can become a fixture of an individual’s daily routine. The brands that successfully enter this space are the ones that tailor their apps to the user’s needs, likes, and behaviors.

Interaction
The inherently interactive quality of mobile makes it an essential channel for reaching today’s conversation-seeking consumers. Mobile serves as a forum for developing a brand’s reputation as “modern” in the sense that the brand appears both tech-savvy and responsive to customer opinion.

Engagement
Use of mobile devices and the possibilities for mobile brand engagement are only expanding, so it’s wise for most brands to extend their communications to this key channel—to both increase engagement and prove that they are changing with the times.

This post originally appeared as an op-ed on AgencySpy on April 3, 2012.

Tiger Woods is back. 

Well, sort of. With his first PGA-tour win since 2009 at the Arnold Palmer Invitational last week, he’s back in the spotlight as a golfer—not a sexting adulterer. 

All eyes are on the 37-year-old as he heads to Augusta this Thursday for the Masters. If his streak continues, we wonder if maybe he’ll be the greatest golfer of all time after all—he trails Jack Nicklaus by just four major titles. Could the steel-minded prodigy we used to love win back our hearts with more wins on the course?

Maybe… but probably not. Tiger Woods’s personal brand took a big hit in 2009 when his sex scandal revealed how little we really knew about golf’s biggest star. Scandalized celebrities certainly make comebacks. They repent, they reinvent themselves, and they come back better—and with more valuable brands—than ever. But for several reasons, I don’t think Tiger’s brand will ever fully recover. 

The value of an athlete’s brand relies predominantly on performance. People like famous athletes and watch them play because they love the vicarious adventure, battle, and victory. We idolize the most talented sports stars because we want to be like them. If an athlete can perform excellently and consistently, his or her brand will always have value. Just how much value depends on more subjective attributes—such as personality, background, and how hot they look in their underwear.

Scandals will always make headlines, but their damage isn’t always permanent. Kobe Bryant’s philandering and Michael Vick’s dog-fighting weren’t nearly as shocking as Tiger’s secret sex life, because—in a way—their actions didn’t completely contradict their bad-boy brands. Our expectations for Bryant and Vick just weren’t very high. Woods, on the other hand, had built his brand on purity, hard work, and an obsession with perfection. He was a squeaky-clean Stanford grad who loved his family. Tiger’s weaknesses stunned us because we never imagined he had any.

We don’t expect movie stars to be role models either, because their brand stories are so complicated and fragmented by the roles they play—which are more naughty than nice these days. Entertainment celebrities consequently have an easier time recovering from scandal because we assume scandalous behavior is part of their on-screen and off-screen lives.

Athletes, though, always “play” themselves, in the same scene, and we only want to watch them if they’re performing well. We also assume that athletic excellence requires discipline and control off the field. So, as an extremely successful athlete with an unblemished record, Woods was especially vulnerable to a devastating scandal.

It’s also interesting to compare Woods to political celebrities, many of whom have been embroiled in similar exposés. It would seem that many (if not most) men in positions of power have been unfaithful to their wives—in France, it’s practically expected—but Americans are up in arms when their leaders get caught. In some cases, we construe infidelity as confirmation that the politician was rotten all along, especially when his policies have proven ineffective.

Other times, though, we find ourselves forgiving, accepting, and maybe even forgetting the extramarital deviance. Bill Clinton is the perfect example. He found his way back into favor because he didn’t let scandal shake his focus on the “game” (Tiger’s first mistake), and he kept up his innate and undeniable charm. Monica Lewinsky or no Monica Lewinsky, it was just so hard to not like him. 

Tiger was the undisputed king of golf, but he doesn’t have any charisma. As dynamic a golfer as he is, he’s always been aloof, and even somewhat boring as a person. If a winning streak gets him out of the gutter, I would advise him to start warming up to fans and to the press. But, truth be told, I have no reason to believe he’ll pull it off.

From a branding perspective, Woods’s audience has significantly narrowed, and his endorsements will reflect that. If he gets his mojo and trophies back, he can count on the loyalty of hardcore golf and sports fans. But Woods has probably lost the support—and trust—of people who didn’t care about golf before he made it exciting fifteen years ago. That’s especially true of women and more morally minded audiences. No matter how well he plays, Woods’s personal brand is now much less elastic, and his endorsements shouldn’t stretch far beyond brands that connote athletic performance. 

Stick to Nike, Tiger, but don’t take “just do it” too literally.

The Web Marketing Association presented Columbia Management a 2012 Internet Advertising Competition (IAC) award for outstanding achievement in Internet Advertising. Columbia Management's "A Way of Working that Works" campaign, developed by Sullivan, won for Best Financial Services Online Campaign.

Click here to view the official IAC award announcement. You can view Sullivan's creative entry here. Keep reading to learn how "A Way of Working that Works" came to be:

Columbia Management is one of the nation’s leading asset managers. However, a history of mergers and acquisitions had clouded its story. Within the firm, and in the marketplace, there was no clear picture of who Columbia Management was or what it stood for. Columbia Management enlisted Sullivan to create an advertising campaign aimed at driving brand awareness and consideration while simultaneously promoting its high performing mutual fund products.

Sullivan developed a compelling creative platform that captures Columbia Management’s true point of difference—a way of working defined by rigorous research, discipline and an eagerness to question established thinking—especially their own. As part of the surround-sound campaign, Columbia Management launched a series of standard online advertisements targeting financial advisors and financial intermediaries.

The online advertisements showcased three distinct investment themes: income-oriented equity, short-term credit and scarce growth opportunities, each linking a top performing fund with some aspect of how Columbia Management works.

We are thrilled to announce that BtoB Magazine has named Sullivan top agency of the year in the small-agency category in the annual Top Agencies report. A special thank you to our team members, our clients and our suppliers—all of whom make Sullivan the special place it is.

On March 19, we issued a full press release, whose text also appears below:

Brand Engagement Firm Sullivan Named Small Agency of the Year by BtoB Magazine

Sullivan Previously Named a BtoB Magazine Top Agency of the Year in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011

NEW YORK, NY--(Marketwire - Mar 19, 2012) - Brand engagement firm Sullivan announced today that it has been named 2012 Small Agency of the Year by BtoB Magazine. This award follows an impressive year for Sullivan, which grew its total revenue by 43 percent in 2011, picking up a record 18 new high-profile clients such as BlackRock, Deutsche Bank, Merrill Lynch, Wolters Kluwer and Tom Ford Beauty, among others.

"We are honored to be recognized as BtoB Magazine's Small Agency of the Year," said Barbara Apple Sullivan, Founder and Managing Partner of Sullivan. "Sullivan has built a reputation for strategic and creative excellence for its growing list of world class clients. 2011 was really a game-changing year for us in every area of our business, and we couldn't be more excited to share this achievement with our clients, partners and employees."

In addition to its revenue and new business growth in 2011, Sullivan won higher education accounts with New York University Stern School of Business and University of California-Berkeley Haas School of Business, as well as high-tech accounts with Liquidnet and TOA Technologies. In addition, the agency expanded its client roster in the financial services category with new clients BlackRock, Deutsche Bank, Merrill Lynch and Oppenheimer. Also last year, Sullivan entered into a joint venture with mobile experience company Two Bulls to expand its digital capabilities and expertise.

To compile the list of Top Agencies, BtoB surveyed agencies in its database through an online entry form. The Top Agencies report includes four categories: small agencies (revenue up to $10 million); midsize agencies (revenue between $10 million and $99.9 million); large agencies (revenue of $100 million and up); and interactive agencies. The finalists in each category were selected based on percentage of total business that is business-to-business, revenue growth, new client wins, innovative work and expanded service capabilities.

About Sullivan 

Sullivan is a multi-disciplinary brand engagement firm dedicated to connecting customers to brands at the very moments they are likely to make decisions. Our capabilities span all aspects of strategy, design, and delivery, across traditional and digital media. The firm boasts relationships with many blue-chip for-profit and not-for-profit clients including American Express, BlackRock, Charles Schwab, Citibank, Human Rights Watch, NYU Stern and UC Berkeley. With a focus on actionable touchpoints, Sullivan fills the capability gaps left by traditional branding firms and advertising agencies.

[This article originally appeared on IHaveAnIdea.org on March 7, 2012.]

Until this February, Jeremy Lin was having a tough time at work. His dream of playing in the NBA had come true, but after going undrafted out of college and eventually seeing only little playing time during his contracts with the Golden State Warriors and Houston Rockets, his future in basketball looked dim.

Still, millions of Americans have had a much tougher time. The economic recession of the past three years has meant salary freezes, budget cuts, layoffs, debt and a lower standard of living for people who thought they lived in the land of opportunity.

It only took one night and one opportunity to turn Jeremy Lin’s life around, and all of a sudden anything was possible. Linsane, right?

There is no doubt that Lin is an extremely talented basketball player and an impressive human being, but his performance alone can’t fully account for the Linsanity that has taken America by storm. I’d argue that Lin emerged at an ideal moment in time, when his success story was exactly what Americans (and New Yorkers in particular) were waiting for.

In branding, we talk a lot about the product and our audience. Much of the press surrounding Lin has focused on his personal “brand,” and his high-quality, unique “product.” But I’d like to look more closely at the consumers who have devoured Lin and propelled the Linsanity.

First of all, who are they? The fact that Lin has made headlines in virtually every major news outlet, and exploded across social media networks, suggests that his audience is more than pro-basketball fans. Nor is it limited to Asian-Americans, or Christians, or Ivy-Leaguers. 

Jeremy Lin has a near-universal appeal. His is a true “feel-good” story. Call it Cinderella or the American Dream—it’s the classic underdog tale that Americans love. Lin’s early struggles, combined with his impressively humble behavior, make him deserving of success. And moreover, believing in him helps us believe in our own potential.

But we don’t just like Lin; we obsess over him. Why? Lin draws our collective attention because he represents a refreshing divergence from all the things we’re used to—and tired of—hearing about.

From basketball to politics, there hasn’t been much good news lately. By the time Lin took off, we were exhausted from months of internal strife in the NBA that ended in a lockout and the season’s delay. New Yorkers then had to wait for the battle between MSG Networks, the Knicks’ parent company, and Time Warner Cable to subside before pro sports returned to normal. The 2012 election didn’t offer much remedy or distraction, either—no candidate has been able to claim widespread allegiance, let alone maintain a consistent image.

Lin also sets himself apart from (maybe even above) the tabloid culture of Tiger Woods and Kim Kardashian (whom Lin was ironically and falsely rumored to be dating). Why watch reality TV when you can watch “The Jeremy Lin Show”—uncut? The appetite for scandal and debauchery has waned in recent years, especially as they’ve spread to politicians who might end up running our country. The same is true of the super-rich and extravagant displays of wealth. Every time Lin turns down a luxury endorsement, we love him more. 

Lin makes up for his absence in the tabloids with his presence in social media and his willingness to take interviews in traditional media. By creating a dialogue with his fans on Twitter, or chatting patiently and openly with reporters, Lin gives his fans just the right amount of access and satisfies their expectations of interaction with celebrities in the digital age.

Paradoxically, though, Lin is in many ways an old-fashioned celebrity—the kind who doesn’t seek fame for its own sake, but who gets famous for achieving the extraordinary. The more Lin resists the spotlight and the temptations of wealth and celebrity, the more we respect him and wish him greater success. 

It’s unlikely Linsanity will stay at fever pitch for the rest of Lin’s career. But if Lin’s performance continues to impress, and his story remains authentic, he’ll have a loyal audience for years to come. The Jeremy Lin brand could have considerable long-term value, and we can’t wait to see what he makes of it.

Many celebrities are thinking bigger and more long-term about their personal brand. Rather than endorse various corporate brands, they're creating their own, taking on entrepreneurial risk in the hopes of a bigger return.

But it takes more than a famous name to make a profit. Last week, Portfolio.com interviewed me about the best celebrity brands. There's a reason why David Beckham can sell underwear and Martha Stewart has a home goods line. Check out my explanation in the full article.

[This post originally appeared on the iMediaConnection Blog on Feb. 24, 2012.]

Social networking is leveling the marketing playing field, offering small businesses broader and cheaper venues for building their brand.

Unlike traditional media, social networking sets up a marketing meritocracy in which size doesn’t matter. At very little cost, small businesses can now access major channels of communication, and by extension a much larger customer base. Social networking is virtually money-neutral; it’s all about content generation and authentic interactions.

Small businesses’ experience with “authentic interactions” offline may give them an advantage in using social networking as a marketing tool. They tend to be closer and more familiar with their customers in general because their small scale makes it easier to do so. Translating this attitude to the online world may be more natural for them than it is for larger companies whose relationships with customers have been more distant.

From local coffee shops to tech start-ups, a Facebook page and a Twitter feed are becoming par for the course. But a whole new set of social platforms (themselves start-ups) has emerged to deliver growth opportunities to the social-savvy small business:

• Kickstarter: Before entrepreneurs can think about boosting sales, they need to get over the fundraising hurdle. Kickstarter makes this key first step social, allowing entrepreneurs, inventors, and artists to crowdsource capital—faster and in greater quantities than through traditional avenues. Just this month, an iPhone dock project and a video game design group soared well over $1 million. 
• Open Forum (AMEX): American Express Open (a longtime client of ours) hosts a community for business owners called Open Forum. Connections among members can often lead to collaboration, partnerships, and even new leads. Open Forum is a place where small businesses can gain knowledge from a marketing powerhouse, as well as share their ideas in a more egalitarian conversation. 
• 99designs and DesignCrowd: Thanks to a growing number of social sites for crowdsourcing creative work—like 99designs and DesignCrowd—agencies now have access to a broader selection of branding talent on-demand. These platforms let small firms tap into communications expertise without having them on staff.

Inherently, social media is democratic and accessible—and relatively low-cost. Facebook and Twitter can do a lot for any brand, but specialized platforms like these allow small businesses to develop even more creative strategies for brand-building and growth.

Admittedly, I was only watching the Super Bowl to see Madonna at halftime, Tom Brady (in spandex) at any time, and a good commercial or two along the way. Of all these things, I didn’t expect an insurance ad to stick in my head, but I can’t stop thinking about MetLife’s new campaign, “Everyone,” by CP+B.

The ad was entertaining and uncontrollably lured my attention with cartoons from my childhood. I usually associate MetLife with the Peanuts gang, but here were the greatest hits of cartoon characters from the late 70s and early 80s alongside Charlie Brown and friends. I liked how the ad resolved this uncanny assemblage of cartoon characters with a message that more or less went like this: “No matter who I am or how much I earn, I can secure a better financial future. I can do this.” A welcome, positive message for a rather tricky subject.

But why did MetLife feel the need to bring in other cartoons beyond the Peanuts gang? To a certain extent, the Peanuts characters with their myriad (and strong) personalities support the message of “Everyone,” but that’s a bit of a stretch. And it probably wasn’t Charles Schultz’s intention to represent every type of American; he more likely used the comics as vehicles for humor and social commentary. Moreover, not “everyone” reads Peanuts, which most often appears in print; I would hazard a majority of people get their cartoons on television. 

MetLife didn’t look for a cartoon with more plurality of representation for its “Everyone” campaign. Instead, it turned to a plurality of cartoon character sets, among which everyone has a favorite, but who collectively represent a shared past. Whether you were watching the Jetsons or reading Peanuts, you still wax nostalgic. And since you can’t take in all the characters in just one viewing, the campaign invites you to interact with it on other channels. 

I’ve been on Facebook all week, watching “out-takes” and meeting the “cast.” Yosemite Sam, Waldo, Fat Albert, Marvin the Martian! But what really got my “like” button going was the video of Voltron doing the robot. Good for the person at CP+B who thought of this! I’ll do the robot for you any day. Clearly, they have their target down pat, as I’ve been sharing this video internally at work, with friends on Facebook, and on my Twitter feed. Good God, have I become an insurance sales person? A well done social media blitz for an insurance company! 

My only gripe is that after such a masterful experience from TV to Facebook, the linkage to the actual MetLife site from its Facebook page was a letdown. Say I’m actually interested in learning more about MetLife’s products, and click on the link provided in the “About Us” section. It directs me to a lifeless page with contact numbers on MetLife’s corporate site. Without He-Man, Judy Jetson, or even MetLife’s trademark Snoopy, the party is grimly over, and I am suddenly no longer interested in learning more. To be fair, MetLife’s homepage does a better job of connecting with the campaign and engaging with the actual products. It might be better to lead potential clients there instead.

Will this campaign get people to buy more insurance from MetLife? Who’s to say? But it certainly gives MetLife’s sales force a fair chance to break through, especially if they’re offering Voltron action figures. And if their salesperson can do the robot, all the better.

Graphis's Logo Design 8 selects the best work in logo design across industries. With our submission of the logo we created for CQ Roll Call (in the Corporate category), we made Graphis's Gold list.

We're thrilled, and we couldn't be prouder of our team.