Recently, I have been asked if Android is experiencing a brand identity crisis. That was my reply:

I know that Androids worldwide market share is very high, but it seems that people would go with the iPhone because of the mindset behind Android phones.  Many people think of them as slow, buggy phones that are lower end.  Android used to be a device for developers, but after reading Why Android First is a Myth, even that part of identity that seemed healthy, weakens.

Afterward, I realized I should not have mentioned the Android identity crisis or any identity crisis.

Although we all judge various brands’ potentials, threats, opportunities, and values, such acts are futile and serve only for social interactions. Someone outside a brand can never judge if that brand is going through an identity crisis and can even less judge brand value or any other brand identity element.

From the outside, you do not know the brand’s business model or what identity it would like to develop and run. They might be in between changing their identity plan for whatever reason. They might even decide to exit from some markets with the lowest cost possible, for instance, and silence identity completely.

A person who is an external stakeholder in a particular brand has only one option regarding that brand: to buy it or not to buy it. Only those who are part of that brand, who are internal stakeholders who have privileged access to a brand’s business model, are eligible to judge the brand. Only they can tell if the brand is in an identity crisis if they experience that crisis personally.

For instance, a person who audits a brand has another insight into that specific brand. Still, even such an idea is not enough to make solemn judgments about brand identity as a totality of all identity traits. No partial view entitles one to make any judgment about brand totality.

Could we then conclude that since even internal stakeholders can only have a partial view of brands they co-brand (work in), at least one position exists with a holistic view of the brand and can thus make reliable judgments about that brand? Would not that be a brand manager for a larger corporation? Would not that be a brand owner for a small, privately owned company?

Unfortunately no. As much as there is no privileged position of “me” in our brains, no centralized managerial position of an individual, there is also no such position for any brand. Brands are living creatures on their own. They have their personality that emerges from an immense number of interactions with various stakeholders. No one manages or owns a brand’s personality.

The brand manager, though, is the one who knows the most, but there are dispersed customers and other stakeholders who know nothing but decide about everything. They don’t know anything about identity crisis since they create or un-create it.