Get It Together

By Anson Lee  Karo Group

Get It Together A model for collaboration when analyzing the customer experience

Keywords Customer experience, brand, Dubberly model, service, organizational collaboration, Threadless, Starbucks

Abstract The customer experience has a multifaceted nature that makes it difficult to predict how isolated changes to the experience will affect the overall experience, and thus the brand as a whole. Anson Lee illustrates that the Dubberly Model of Brand can be used to better understand the interrelation of customer touch points and advocates internal cross-discipline collaboration as an effective method of developing a holistic customer-focused strategy.

Author Anson Lee Director, Customer Experience Strategy

Anson has more than 13 years, experience in branding and strategic management. With an education in computer science, communications and fine arts, Anson applies a unique combination of technology, business strategy and visual design to the strategic development and execution of creative concepts. Anson has become a leading authority on customer experience strategy and service design, having worked on numerous high-profile projects in Canada and North America.

b r a n d e x p e r i e n c e s e r i e s   Summer 2009

2

Introduction Working in the field of “customer experience,” you are constantly observing how things happen, how that experience is a series of discrete events. These events can be as explicit as typing in your PIN to complete a transaction or as implicit as a cashier’s instinctive glance away to afford you privacy as you enter those numbers. Events can be sequential, overlaid, integrated or dependent on one another. And as a student of customer experiences, you are always reflecting on whether the customers’ needs (stated and unstated) are being met at each touch point, never mind by the products and services they’re ultimately in pursuit of. These events typically happen over time, in many forms and in different physical and online venues. So in order to fully examine the customer experience, you must pull together that entire chain of events. Consider all the possible touch points involved in a hotel reservation and stay. It may start with a person searching for accommodations on the web, reviewing a hotel’s website, consulting her Twitter followers, reading travellers’ reviews and comparing with other properties, all before the reservation is made. Upon check-in, many facets must deliver on her expectations — from the staff to the signage, from room service to Internet access and other amenities. How do you illustrate such a complex, far-reaching system when it comes to doing a high-level analysis of your customers’ experience with your brand? Where do you start? In our practice, clients often come with biases usually rooted in the area they are most comfortable or familiar with. Take, for example, an online marketing team. It might be keen to redesign a website and immediately want to delve into the details of functional requirements, technology platforms, personas, use-case scenarios and web analytics, all of which are appropriate issues to explore. However, broader design thinking takes a more holistic, customer-centred view. In converging

b r a n d e x p e r i e n c e s e r i e s   Summer 2009

on one facet of customer experience, a company risks overlooking other — perhaps more pressing — opportunities. For instance, what events precede and follow a customer’s use of the website? How do they arrive at it? What expectations does it set up? How does the site initiate the next series of events?

“In order to orchestrate a seamless customer experience, large, diverse teams of people with different areas of expertise must be involved…” Much can be learned from this broader context and — just as importantly — from those involved in creating that context. In order to orchestrate a seamless customer experience, large, diverse teams of people with different areas of expertise must be involved in the planning, design and execution of the various facets of an experience. In this paper, I apply Hugh Dubberly’s “A Model of Brand”1 to Starbucks and Threadless, demonstrating how its cross-functional, multi-focal approach to evaluating customer experience facilitates a comprehensive view of brand, and in the process can lead to greater collaboration across an organization.

A Model of Brand Considering the many dimensions of customer experience, it’s logical that a multidisciplinary approach, drawing on the knowledge and views of specialists across the company, can provide a full-bodied solution. And while bringing people of disparate backgrounds together can have its challenges, in our experience, such teams can effectively — and innovatively — frame and solve a problem. They achieve this by using a common, clear language that contextualizes their perspectives and strategies and provides a platform for collaboration and communication.

3

To that end, when we work with our creative team, brand managers and C-level executives to develop a high-level, holistic view of their customers’ experiences, Hugh Dubberly’s Model of Brand is an excellent foundation on which to build those discussions. In a highly visual manner, this influential model captures the full spectrum of experiences, connecting the tangible and intangible and articulating the relationships between the driving factors. Dubberly’s model is a concept map — descriptive model, interrelationship diagraph and taxonomy tree combined — illustrating the depth, breadth, tangibility and intangibility of a customer experience. The model is based on four principles: “brand is more than a name or symbol,” 2 the essence of a brand is dependent on customer experience, a brand is both its name (or symbol) and how it is perceived, and those perceptions can be measured. Based on these principles, Dubberly’s model can be used to classify a brand’s many expressions, from the logo and spokesperson to the location and ambient environment. Its comprehensiveness makes it a helpful tool for auditing or creating an inventory of the brand touch points involved in rendering a customer experience. The model also bridges the interests of various stakeholders and business units, engendering an integrated approach to branding and minimizing siloed organizational views.

“Dubberly’s model is a concept map – descriptive model, interrelationship diagraph and taxonomy tree combined – illustrating the depth, breadth, tangibility and intangibility of a customer experience.” interviews, he’s discovered that most of them share the ability to consider seemingly opposing ideas and incorporate elements from all to resolve the variables with a far greater solution than if they had gone with one of the original ideas — an ability he calls integrative thinking. Like the Model of Brand, integrative thinking embraces the complexity of systems, and the ideas that grow out of that. As such, there are similarities between Martin’s stages of integrative thinking and the steps we walk our clients through as we explore customer experience using Dubberly’s model.

Integrative thinking

For example, Dubberly unpacks a brand’s symbolic representation to reveal the associated graphic, trade dress, spokespeople, words and sounds. In other words, the salient factors. The model then analyzes causality among all factors, encouraging us to question how issues regarding one area of customer experience may be drivers of outcomes in another. For example, how do external systems, such as a region’s cultural fabric, influence people’s perception of the brand? Or how does a store’s environment affect employee retention and customer loyalty?

Roger Martin’s notion of integrative thinking, explored in The Opposable Mind: How Successful Leaders Win Through Integrative Thinking, emphasizes the value of being open to complex systems and relationships and provides a method of working with the Model of Brand. In his 15 years as a management consultant, Martin has interviewed many business leaders. From those

Once these relationships are articulated, all their moving parts, and their interrelationships, can be mapped according to the model. From this physical representation, a team can easily see, and explore, those tensions and connections to reach a conclusion that addresses the multifarious nature of a brand.

b r a n d e x p e r i e n c e s e r i e s   Summer 2009

4

Integrative thinking

Customer experience model

Salience

Define the relevant features of the problem

Define the facets of customer experience

Causality

Determine how these features interact with one another

Determine how one experience influences another or the broader brand perception

Architecture

Visualize the entire system, keeping all parts in view

Illustrate the relationship and structure of customer experience elements

Resolution

Resolve tensions in the system to reach a creative solution

Use this illustration of the brand experience to inspire collaboration and reveal insights

Both integrative thinking and the Model of Brand can get messy. They go against the grain of human nature. People prefer simplicity and certainty, tending to avoid the complicated and ambiguous in favour of either/or solutions. However, when we use Dubberly’s model with our clients, they engage easily — we often hear “This is the first time we’ve seen all these elements on one page!” — and are usually immediately able to identify areas of concern or elaborate facets of the experience that exemplify their brand. Both Martin and Dubberly encourage us to stop thinking in silos. In our experience, we’ve found that if a company can do that, it will arrive at a solution that’s superior to any of the individual options. In the process, it will have engaged many of its teams, encouraging discussion, collaboration and creative problem-solving.

Applying the model Starbucks and Threadless present two interesting examples of how the Model of Brand works. The ubiquitous coffee company is hard to miss. Locations on virtually every corner. Every other person holding its iconic cup. On the other hand, Threadless has only one physical location, and

b r a n d e x p e r i e n c e s e r i e s   Summer 2009

its products sport its logo where nobody but the wearer can see it. But as the largest communitydriven online T-shirt store,3 its significance is unmistakable. Even examining only a few of the model’s concepts, as I do here, you see how Dubberly’s model illuminates the drivers of and differences between each brand’s customer experience. When it comes to symbols, it’s tough to beat Starbucks. Its iconic logo is very well integrated into its trade dress, environmental signage… and of course its cups. The Starbucks customer experience also includes its own special language, which is starting to permeate the coffee shop experience in general. Suddenly “I’ll have a grande quad-shot half-caff easy-whip Frappuccino” doesn’t sound like such a foreign language. Starbucks is also very successful at controlling perception of its brand. Its desired perception is two-fold: that of a small reward and the notion of the “third place.” 4 For a small (but not insignificant) amount of money, you can reward yourself with a caffeinated treat to see you through a long day at work. Or you might meet a friend at the third place between work and home — a place to “foster

5

symbols “To inspire and nurture the human spirit – one person, one cup and one neighbourhood at a time.”

logo: mermaid rondelle trade dress: ubiquitous cups and packaging

name

corporate: Starbucks Coffee language: e.g., Grande, Tall, Frappuccino, Bean Stock

brand

measured

PERCEPTION

a small reward the third place

promise

PRODUCT

EXPERIENCE

retail cafe goods

coffee

beverages beans accessories VIA Instant

food

breakfast lunch baked goods

service

social

baristas store procedures HR programs

online ambience

signage decor/furnishings music aromas

music games gifts

individuals

Starbucks.com MyStarbucksIdea.com Shared Planet (CSR website) Twitter: starbucks

Engaging people online (MyStarbucksIdea) and creating a community helps Starbucks democratize decision-making, influences product design and demonstrates transparency

stewards

CEO & Chairman Howard Schultz Partners (employees)

Persona: Everyday explorer

external systems trade organizations

competitors

World Trade Organization TransFair / Fair Trade

McDonald’s Dunkin' Donuts Tim Hortons

Figure 1: Starbucks customer experience model. Shaded area indicates areas of growth or evolution of the experience.

conversation and community.” 5 in many circles, at least one trip to starbucks in a day is a given — more of a necessity than a reward. Threadless too has done well with managing perception of its brand — although it’s easy to get the sense they don’t have to do much to manage it. What Threadless is selling, as much as T-shirts, is the community and the experience of participating in that community, the sense that you have a say in the direction the company is going. suddenly the boundary between customer and company is blurred. people like to participate. They want to participate. And Threadless lets them, in spades. On the product side of the model, it’s easy to identify the categories forming the core of the starbucks customer experience: beverages, food and other coffee-related accessories. secondary products, such as exclusive music collections and board games, augment that notion of the third place. even the store environment plays a key role in the experience of the product. The physical space and furnishings, store signage

BrAnd experience series

summer 2009

and wayfinding, sounds and smells all contribute to perception of the product. Think of it as a curatorial and choreographic approach to creating an experience. Threadless is also notable for its focused product offering: T-shirts primarily, along with prints of select designs. Anybody can submit a design, which is then voted on by the Threadless community. every week, Threadless prints nine of the top 100 designs, reserving its right to weigh in on the selections. For example, staff sometimes elect to produce designs that have garnered both high and low scores — they tend to elicit discussion and debate…and sell very well. in its nine years of operation, the company has sold out of every T-shirt it’s ever printed.6 That’s the beauty of crowdsourcing. crowdsourcing is what makes the application of dubberly’s model such an interesting exercise when it comes to Threadless. Look, for example, at the stewards and individuals concepts. While there’s a distinct delineation between the two in

6

symbols “a technology company that loves coming up with ideas to foster communities that people benefit from and have fun with – online and off”

logo: wordmark

trade dress: a variety of graphic T-shirts corporate: skinnyCorp: Threadless Tees

name

tag: Nude No More

brand

measured

promise

PRODUCT

EXPERIENCE

PERCEPTION

online

retail store goods

service

ambience

T-shirts

design classes gallery space critiques/discussions

merchandising displays music (last.fm: tless_chicago) artwork

extensions

external systems

Threadcakes Naked & Angry Threadless Kids TypeTees Twitter Tees

Threadless creates a physical retail environment in order to give people a space to experience product and engage in community

co-founder Jake Nickell

New, fun and for the community

individuals

Threadless.com T-shirts Contests

stewards

crowdsourced designers voters buyers Threadless customers and designers blur the line between traditional stewardship and consumer

collaborators

The same crowdsource model easily extends to other segments, product types or partnerships

“sponsors Threadless Loves program” American Apparel Twitter Blik

Figure 2: Threadless customer experience model. Shaded area indicates areas of growth or evolution of the experience.

the model, with Threadless, there is a great deal of overlap. (Even literally: most of its employees were part of the community before they went to work for the company.) 7 The Threadless community at large has the potential to be as big a steward of the brand as its staff. Jake Nickell, co-founder and CSO of Threadless, has said that its customers are the brand, that without community they are nothing.8 That community now numbers over 850,000 people,9 recently passed the 600,000 mark in Twitter followers10 and marked more than 65,000 designers who had submitted designs.11 The Model of Brand states that individuals choose a brand by comparing their needs with their expectations; without a match, they’ll move on or modify those expectations. However, with Threadless, the customers’ needs and expectations very directly influence the company’s offerings. This synchronicity helps turn customers into stewards. Starbucks, in contrast, maps more traditionally to the model with regards to its brand stewards — a

b r a n d e x p e r i e n c e s e r i e s   Summer 2009

customer’s experience can be greatly enhanced or diminished by their interaction with staff. It’s quite possibly the most variable and fluid part of the entire experience. Consider how a company might ensure its human resources practices help promote staff alignment with the overall customer experience. Compensation and benefit packages are tailored to individuals’ needs and are called their “special blend,”12 reflecting the values of the brand through both language and design. “Bean stock” or equity in the company is offered to all employees, giving them a sense of ownership and personal connection to the company’s performance.13 Such seemingly unrelated measures can have a very real impact on the frontlines. Individuals’ perceptions and expectations of a brand are also influenced by external systems. Consider how perception of Starbucks was affected by the events of the 1999 World Trade Organization conference in Seattle, where people rallying against the threats of corporate globalization vandalized Starbucks shops

7

in protest against the company’s perceived exploitation of coffee growers. In a less radical but nonetheless effective manner, perceptions are affected by how Starbucks interacts with organizations such as TransFair and the Fair Trade certification system. In 2008, it committed to doubling its fair trade purchases, making it the largest purchaser of certified coffee in the world.14 Let’s look at how the notion of “promise” from Dubberly’s model factors into the Threadless experience. In a 2006 paper titled “Reducing the Risks of New Product Development,” Susumu Ogawa and Frank Piller refer to the process of integrating customers into the product innovation and development cycle as “collective customer commitment.”15 And if operating under this business model, full disclosure – at every stage – is imperative. The process must be open. In effect, it’s a promise of trust and transparency that in turn feeds back into that synthesis of customer and steward. Threadless empowers its customers by listening rather than talking. It promises, and delivers, an experience that fulfills their expectations – and results in products they want, because they’ve created and voted on those products themselves. The online realm permeates many aspects of the model. However, it naturally plays a different role for each of Starbucks and Threadless. On MyStarbucksIdea.com, anyone can make a suggestion for how to improve the experience. People can read the suggestions, leave comments and vote them up or down. Ideas are reviewed by Starbucks. Some are implemented. For example, the top-rated suggestion at the time of writing (95,180 votes and 1,030 comments), posted in March 2008, asks how Starbucks might “provide cultural leadership through media to promote conversation and community within Starbucks locations.”16 By November 2008, Starbucks had implemented a program to address this idea.

b r a n d e x p e r i e n c e s e r i e s   Summer 2009

With Threadless’s business being almost exclusively web-based, that online experience is absolutely core to the customer experience. It is the foundation of the customer experience. What a business model like Threadless does so successfully is leverage the web to engage its customers in a number of ways: blog forums, T-shirt scoring, podcasts, customer photos, contests and design challenges, for instance. The net effect is that of a democratization of the brand. Customers have their hands on the wheel, driving the brand as they see fit. Jeffrey Kalmikoff, CCO of skinnyCorp, Threadless’s parent, has remarked that they simply “manage the parameters.”17

Using the model as a strategic planning tool When working with customers who are considering taking their brand in a new direction, we’ve found that Dubberly’s Model of Brand also helps to evaluate that evolution, how it might affect the rest of the parts and where it fits (or doesn’t) into a brand’s existing framework. Starbucks chairman Howard Schulz’s own observations expressed in an internal memo identified specific examples that contribute to the “dilution of experience.”18 These include the introduction of automated espresso machines that, although efficient, are larger than traditional manual machines, creating a barrier between the customer and barista. This resulted in what Schulz termed the loss of the “romance and theatre.”19 Other experience facets were diminished with the introduction of packaging that seals in freshness and, with it, the aroma of ground coffee. Similarly, the introduction of hot breakfast foods brought peculiar new smells into the environment. Individually, these changes were likely based on good business decisions. However, examining their impact on the entire system, soliciting input from everyone from baristas to category managers, may have yielded different results.

8

“While Starbucks and Threadless present distinct business models, the Model of Brand illuminates the breadth and depth of their respective brand experiences.” When it comes to its T-shirt business, Threadless has kept its focus. The original concept hasn’t changed much — although the winners do get paid more now. So far, there is one retail location, in Chicago. The store stocks only the newest shirts, with the idea that it’s a channel to drive people to the website. Most of the people who visit the store aren’t familiar with the brand and have no preconceptions of what Threadless should or shouldn’t be.20 Although Nickell has said they opened the store for the fun of it, 21 the site gives two main reasons for being: giving back to the community, such as hosting design talks or art shows, and being able to tell the story of the products and their creators. In fact, the importance of telling that story is critical to the Threadless experience: they’ve turned down overtures from retail heavyweights Target and Urban Outfitters for fear that narrative would get lost in such environments. However, the Threadless crew hasn’t always been successful in its ventures. Its founders tried to start a similar concept with music, called 15 Megs of Fame. The site allowed users to submit their tracks, which were then rated by other users. The plan was to sell that data to record companies. But the record companies are an example of how an external system can’t be controlled. As it happens, they weren’t interested in the data, and the site closed in October 2006. Sticking closer to the Threadless premise that’s proven so successful, skinnyCorp is now trying its hand at a similar concept that it deems an “extension” 22 of Threadless — Naked & Angry. Designers submit pattern designs that are scored

b r a n d e x p e r i e n c e s e r i e s   Summer 2009

by users, and the highest-scoring designs get made into items inspired by those patterns. Products currently include dinnerware, neckties, wall coverings, handbags and other accessories. While it’s nowhere near as dynamic a site as Threadless — the last blog entry at time of writing was more than three months ago — hopes have been high for Naked & Angry. In 2008, Kalmikoff said this extension had the potential to be bigger than Threadless given its application to “everything.” 23 Sometimes, however, an entirely new model may be necessary to support proposed experiences, initiatives or products. Take, for instance, Starbucks’ foray into the $17 billion instant coffee market 24 with the introduction of VIA. Meant for more portable situations, instant coffee certainly doesn’t uphold the notion of the third place, so can’t fully participate in the company’s current model. However resolving that apparent tension can inspire new scenarios of use — camping or travel to places where no Starbucks stores exist! — and set the stage for an entirely new customer experience model. This may involve different associated values and perceptions, such as convenience, or emergency, or replacing the notion of the “third place” with “anyplace.” While Starbucks and Threadless present distinct business models, the Model of Brand illuminates the breadth and depth of their respective brand experiences. Both companies’ product focus is tight, and both are highly successful community builders, but they achieve these in wholly different ways. Dubberly’s model illustrates the elasticity of their actions and how they deliver on, or detract from, their brand promise.

Conclusion Through this exploration, it’s clear how effectively the Model of Brand facilitates visualization and articulation of a brand’s customer experience. In our implementation of the model, we have found the main benefits to be:

9

It’s easy to use: The structure of the model and

the language used to describe each facet allow us to help our clients easily organize information at the appropriate levels for discussion. Having all the customer experience “architecture” on one page forces clarity and accessibility. It illustrates that brand is more than a logo: This model clearly shows the relationship

between the expressions of brand in outbound communications and advertising, the physical objects or spaces where services are rendered and the online experiences, where boundaries between organization and customer are increasingly more permeable. In client workshops, seminars and other educational venues, we have found that it elicits discussion and examples about personal interactions and discovery of how they are connected to one another. It brings disciplines together and integrates thinking: When discussing a system of events or

connected elements of a customer experience, the model gives all participants an entry point into the

b r a n d e x p e r i e n c e s e r i e s   Summer 2009

conversation, and therefore a connection to the brand. The model can also lead to more detailed models as required. For example, it may point out a lack of understanding about “individuals” and lead to more specific market research in the development of personas. In strategic planning meetings, our clients can often easily identify who within their organizations needs to be involved in further discussion. By providing structure and definition to the facets of customer experience, the model helps tame complexity but at the same time provides a visual to stimulate the right conversations that keep all parts in play. In many respects, the last benefit has the most interesting and significant potential. Because Dubberly’s Model of Brand facilitates better communication across disciplines, it results in more effective and broader-based problemsolving. While capitalizing on the cumulative strength of a company’s cross-functional teams, it addresses the increasingly multiplatform, multifaceted nature of customer experience today.

10

Notes

1 Hugh Dubberly, “A Model of Brand,” http://www.dubberly.com/concept-maps/a-model-of-brand.html. 2 Ibid. 3 Oliver Lindberg, “The Secret Behind Threadless’ Success: Founder Jake Nickell on the Store That’s Run by Its Customers,” TechRadar UK, May 28, 2009, http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/the-secrets-behind-threadless-success-602617. 4 Howard Schultz, Starbucks Fiscal 2007 Annual Report, http://investor.starbucks.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=99518&p=irol-reportsAnnual. 5 Howard Schultz, “Howard Schultz Transformation Agenda Communication #8,” February 25, 2008, http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/pressdesc.asp?id=833. 6 Jeff Howe, Crowdsourcing: Why the Power of the Crowd Is Driving the Future of Business (New York: Crown Business, 2008), 228. 7 Guy Kawasaki, “Ten Questions with Jeffrey Kalmikoff, Chief Creative Officer of skinnyCorp/Threadless,” How to Change the World, June 5, 2007, http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2007/06/ten_questions_w.html. 8 Graham Brown, “MobileYouth Meets Threadless: The Future of Youth Marketing?,” MobileYouth, May 20, 2009, http://www.mobileyouth.org/post/mobileyouth-meets-threadless-the-future-of-youth-marketing. 9 Oliver Lindberg, “The Secret Behind Threadless’ Success: Founder Jake Nickell on the Store That’s Run by Its Customers,” TechRadar UK, May 28, 2009, http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/the-secrets-behind-threadless-success-602617. 10 Threadless, Twitter, June 15, 2:51 p.m., http://twitter.com/threadless. 11 Jeffrey Kalmikoff, Twitter, June 17, 3:07 p.m., http://twitter.com/jeffrey. 12 Starbucks Corporation, “Your Special Blend: A Look at Compensation, Benefits, Savings, Stock and Other Rewards of Your Partner Experience,” http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/SB-YSB-US-HR.pdf. 13 Maryann Hammers, “Starbucks Is Pleasing Employees and Pouring Profits,” Workforce Management, October 2003, http://www.workforce.com/section/02/feature/23/52/96/. 14 “Starbucks, TransFair USA and Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International Announce Groundbreaking Initiative to Support Small-Scale Coffee Farmers,” October 28, 2008, http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/ pressdesc.asp?id=929. 15 Susumu Ogawa and Frank T. Piller, “Reducing the Risks of New Product Development,” MITSloan Management Review 47, no. 2 (Winter 2006): 65. 16 Conniemx, “Great Conversation at Starbucks?,” March 24, 2008, http://mystarbucksidea.force.com/ideaView?id= 087500000004LY7AAM. 17 Brian Morrissey, “These Brands Build Community: How These Web 2.0 Companies Build Good Relationships to Build Their Brands,” Adweek, May 12, 2008, http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/esearch/e3i5e732e045deaaba3ecab1948a0858e5b. 18 “Starbucks Chairman Warns of ‘The Commoditization of the Starbucks Experience,’” February 23, 2007, http://starbucksgossip.typepad.com/_ /2007/02/starbucks_chair_2.html. 19 Ibid. 20 Beth Wilson, “Threadless Puts Art before Ts,” Women’s Wear Daily 194, no. 133 (December 27, 2007): 9. 21 Maggie Gilmour, “Threadless: From Clicks to Bricks,” BusinessWeek, November 26, 2007, http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_48/b4060074.htm. 22 “Who Created It,” www.nakedandangry.com/process. 23 Max Chafkin, “The Customer Is the Company: A Look Inside the Most Innovative Small Company in America,” Inc. Magazine, June 2008, http://www.inc.com/magazine/20080601/the-customer-is-the-company.html. 24 “Starbucks VIA™ Ready Brew: A Breakthrough in Instant Coffee,” February 17, 2009, http://news.starbucks.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=168.

b r a n d e x p e r i e n c e s e r i e s   Summer 2009

11