For $150, NikeiD lets you customize a pair of shoes with anything you want. Well, almost anything.
The company has an official list of personalizations that it strictly prohibits. These include anything that “may seem objectionable” like profanity, inappropriate slang, potential trademark violations, celebrity names, certain color combinations, or just any material “that we do not want to place on our products.”
In other words, outside of a few neon colors these shoes are barely customizable at all.
The same false promise applies to countless other products, from M&M’s to pro sports apparel to California license plates. It’s their version of the arbitrary liquor store “We have the right to refuse service to anyone.” But it’s also indicative of a broader phenomena with large brands: censorship.
Most companies have internal brand guidelines that mandate what can and cannot be used in relation to their brand. That’s great. They nailed down who they are and how they communicate. But problems start to surface when they also fall for the allure of customization. Giving people a chance to make their own version of your product is a fun idea, but it lets them play a role in defining and reshaping your brand. And not many brands are confident enough to let that play out.
When a brand tells people their products are customizable but certain things are off limits, the consumer’s natural inclination is to push the boundaries of those limits. You ask yourself what you can get away with. You try to sneak something past them. The brand is unintentionally creating an adversarial relationship with their customers.
Really though, what’s the worst that could happen? Who cares if someone writes ‘Reebok’ on the side of their Nikes? They still paid $150 for them without the possibility of a return. They still bought your product.
If you’re going to allow personalization, go all the way. Either open the sandbox or put in a slide. Don’t be that guy who makes playtime full of lame rules.
Want more brand goodness? Follow us on Twitter.