The consistently good Brand Mix pointed me in the direction of a great article in the New Yorker about the psychology of delayed gratification.  Experiments were conducted with 4 & 5 year old kids where they were given the choice to eat a marshmallow immediately or if they could wait 15 minutes, they could have two.  See this hilarious video example of it in action.  Psychologists stumbled on the theory that those kids who were better at delaying gratification became more successful in later life (as measured by academic and career success, wealth etc..).

It made me consider whether there are brands today that could be considered to be delayed gratification brands? By this I mean brands that increase in value because we have to wait before we get to use them. I found it really hard to generate a list, mainly because we can pretty much have what we want when we want it today. Even a brand like Starbucks with its new VIA coffee ensures that you can have a great cup of coffee even when you’re nowhere near a cafe.

Apart from serious luxury goods, the only things we typically crave but can’t immediately have are either distributed on a limited basis OR have not yet launched (like a new movie not yet in theaters, a new iPhone not yet on the market). Even big ticket items like cars and vacations are easily accessible to anyone with a decent credit rating. What brands these days have created greater value by making their customers delay gratification?

I often find it interesting to check out how local influences impact global brands (does McDonald's in Glasgow have deep fried mars bars and a McHaggis burger for example). The main things I'm looking for are a) Is this idea authentic to the local culture?  and b) Is it a natural fit with the brand?

Starbucks in the UK sells these great crisps called Real, which are gourmet style potato chips with interesting flavors like Mature Cheddar and Spring Onion or Sour Cream & Cotswold Wild Garlic. With their handcrafted look, sophisticated packaging and premium ingredients, they're a definite fit with the Starbucks brand, and while they're not quite the flavors American coffee drinkers would imagine tucking into with their caramel macchiatos, the English love any excuse to eat crisps so definitely authentic to the local culture.   Nice. 

I'd like to open things up to the best examples of global brands thinking local.  Send your best observations from your international travels and we'll collect them all up and do a top 10.

Good is good. The second major innovation opportunity for 2007 comes from doing good works. We’ve reached a time when consumers have lost faith in our institutions to do right by the world. Yet, rather than give in to despair, people are reaching out to help others around the globe the best and simplest way they know how — through consumption capitalism.

Products with purpose have great selling power — so long as that purpose is real and the company lives up to its promises. (With the amazing transparency available these days, remember that consumers will check up on you, and if you’re cheating, they will let everyone know.)

This is a time of optimism and outreach, when we believe that, as bad as the problems of the world may be, a better future is within our grasp. And products like Ethos water (from Starbucks, my favorite editor) and (Product) Red enable us to help create that future.

It’s not enough to simply donate a portion of the profits to charity. When you think about good is good, challenge yourself to build a better business model. Match the brand idea to the brand ideals. Make an impact. Do good works. Don’t wait.

My dad, a fabulous writer, used to tell me never to underestimate the power of a good editor. Ain’t that the truth! While editing used to be a talent reserved for the literate, today it’s a role being played by brands in the modern marketplace. With an excess of choice and an explosion of information, we’re all challenged these days to make it through what used to be the simplest of tasks. We’re drowning in brands, retail channels, media choices, an ocean of constant communication, and blather. We’ve got all the information in the world to make smart choices (more on this another day, as true transparency has reached the marketplace - corporations look out!), but we’re left without the time, desire or the sheer capacity to wade through it all.

How’s an informed, intelligent consumer to make a decision?

Trust the editor!

It used to be we sought human consumption editors. Oprah is a perfect example. An Oprah book recommendation could turn a dusty orphan paperback into a bestseller in a matter of minutes. Her Christmas Wish List is legend. And her disownership of the beef industry put prices in a free fall. (Ah, the editors can give and also take away. More on that another day.) When Oprah spoke, we listened. And followed. And bought.

Today’s consumption editors are often less human, but equally powerful, authentic and single-minded — they are brands and retailers. When Starbucks promotes a CD or a movie, its millions of coffee addicts (me included!) pop it right on the Starbucks card. The Buck has become not merely a source of caffeine, not even a simple third place, but a trusted arbiter of taste for those of a certain age (again, me included!). Rather than sort through the thousands of CDs at my local Target (assortment selected based on billboard sales, not “ear”) or the millions of songs available on iTunes, I go to the retailer I trust to make a recommendation.

My other music editor is Pandora. And she’s a natural! Pandora, an internet streaming radio (for those not in the know - www.pandora.com), makes music recommendations based on my own musical preferences. It’s a personal editor (much like a personal shopper, but not on commission!).

Daily Candy, one of my favorite email newsletters, sends out edited information every day about what’s hot. This weekend, my husband and I will be dining with Ghetto Gourmet, an exclusive underground supper club, based on their recommendation.

Which leads me to Wal-Mart. Awkward transition, but the point is, Wal-Mart is missing the boat. Wal-Mart still views themselves by the old school retail model of an assortment provider, not an editor. They offer stuff cheap. That’s their value proposition. That’s their positioning. That’s their message. They could be a discerning editor of value. They could offer families what they need and want, at the best possible price known to humankind, based on their unbeatable, unassailable, untoucahble ability to work over the manufacturer (if you know what I mean), but instead, they don’t edit a thing. It’s just stuff. Cheap.

Perhaps they need to edit themselves?