Sony's board is contemplating breaking up the company. The agitator for this change is billionaire Daniel Loeb, whose Third Point hedge fund owns less than 10% of the Japanese tech giant but exerts massive influence. Loeb asserts that the structure of Sony is stifling its share price and has found an ally in progressive Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Loeb wants Sony to spin off its Entertainment/Content arm and Music label, file a separate IPO for those assets and refocus the core business on its consumer technology offering.

In the global context it is tough to argue with the proposal. Sony’s days as the driving force of consumer electronics behind brands like Walkman, Discman and Playstation have been eclipsed not just by Apple but by Samsung and LG. Loeb, with this move, is suggesting that focus has been the issue, not just the aggressiveness of the competition. He asserts that Sony has been pulled in so many different directions that its core business has lost its luster. It used to be that putting your CEO in an ad was the sure sign that a company was in trouble, but as I previously commented about Pfizer’s Starbursting and Blackberry, it appears that the new early warning sign has become pressure to “get back to doing what you do best."

Sony currently resides at number 40 on Interbrand’s Best Global Brands list but now sits a full 31 spots behind its more recent rival, Samsung in 9th place, while its share price has declined by 85 percent in the past 13 years. Despite the beautiful ads that surrounded its Bravia TV launches, the company has failed to fully replace its iconic brands of the 90s with new versions that can conquer today's even more competitive environment.

Sony’s brand has always been far more present in the consumer space, they created so many iconic, mainstream habits in tech (portability for instance) and gaming. The conversations at CES, SXSW, CTIA etc have been around gamification and bringing social tools and thinking to more parts of people’s working lives. Sony’s Make. Believe approach suggests that this is a focus for them as well but they need to be far more open and progressive in how they pursue partnerships and OEM relationships or else Microsoft, with Xbox, will move even further ahead because of how embedded Microsoft is in the workplace.

The Loeb proposal also highlights that it's time for Sony to rethink the practice of creating captive, proprietary technologies (Blu-ray for instance) that try to usher consumers into a single brand relationship. Consumers have balked at committing to a single provider for all their needs; even Apple has seen teething troubles in driving into the TV market. It's increasingly becoming a world where 'best partner,' 'most compatible' and 'most consumer-oriented' wins, and Sony risks becoming the odd man out if it doesn't integrate not only with consumers' lives but the technology that surrounds them.

Loeb's move could serve as a catalyst and spark to re-instill that fire into Sony that made it once so transformative in the world of modern consumer technology. To really rebound the company must understand consumers better than anyone else, be more open to partnerships than anyone else, be more creative than anyone else and be nimbler and less distracted than anyone else. This move addresses the last of these needs, the rest will come next. This pivot seems small on paper, but it's seismic for brands like Sony that risk marginalization if they don’t embrace change before they are steamrolled by it.

To make this happen Sony executives must mix "outrospection" with their current introspection. The questions they will ask themselves are both “how is our structure holding us back ” and, “what does the consumer’s life look like and how do I play a meaningful role in it”; not necessarily in that order. Loeb understands this distinction and though his motives will be questioned, the methods he suggests are a step in the right direction.

Hugh Tallents is a Senior Director of Strategy at Interbrand New York

As the world’s largest branding consultancy, Interbrand is proud to offer global opportunity to rising talent. With a multitude of disciplines, our internships allow undergraduates to gain hands-on experience in a branding environment. Interbrand’s unique program fully integrates the students into their respective departments and helps them gain an understanding of the branding world.

Our global offices host different programs tailored to their individual location. Internships range from Korea’s competitive BDVL (Brand Design Vision Leaders) course, which is a mix of full time and part time periods, to Zurich’s six month challenge.

Around the world, Interbrand interns are gaining valuable experience, helping to shape their future careers. Brand strategist intern at the London office Libby Clifton-Astley recalls, “Starting at Interbrand I was immediately placed on a project for Topshop. I think this is where I learned the most -sitting in on client calls and experiencing every part of the process, it was all so impressive.” The chance to work directly with different clients is a benefit of the intern program.

The opportunity to travel to intern internationally is also a possibility with Interbrand. Cincinnati resident Jessa Strayer, who interned at the Singapore office, observed, “Being from America, I've learned how different aspects of design (color, pattern, shapes) can have different meaning for these brands than what they might have back home.” Interning abroad can be an exciting endeavor and an important tool in fostering new perspectives on the branding industry.

At Interbrand New York, our interns participate in a ten-week program where they split their time between working as a team for a non-profit client and on billable deliverables. Last year, the interns of IBNY worked with Per Scholas, an organization dedicated to breaking the cycle of poverty through their Bronx-based IT training program.

Former BMS/Implementation intern Sam Schulman shares, “Working with Per Scholas was an amazing experience. Because of such a positive partnership, the work we did has actually been implemented." The team worked on solutions for re-shaping the Per Scholas brand and as of February 2013, the efforts of the intern team are now actualized on the organization’s website.

Interbrand New York is gearing up to welcome its Summer 2013 interns and Interbrand offices around the world have openings for interns throughout the year. To see our current international list of open internship positions, please visit our Careers Page. Interbrand across the globe is dedicated to providing an educational curriculum to students interested in the future of branding.

For more photos and quotes from our internship program participants from around the globe, please see our full album on Facebook.

I’m currently reading Dan Ariely’s The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty. Read it – it’s a fascinating insight into how the human mind works, and it has much wider application than honest/dishonest behaviour.

I’m increasingly interested in how behavioural economics is playing a role in challenging some of the tenets of brand building. And I’m also noting that a number of our clients are paying similar attention.

Ariely runs an experiment repeatedly throughout his book that tests our tendency to cheat. The overall conclusion is that humans are all predisposed to cheating a little bit if we think we can get away with it. He then introduces variants along the way to tease out a few related issues to dishonesty.

A number of thoughts have struck me about the results and how they relate to our work at Interbrand. Here are two:

The first was around honour codes and how fragile they are. Ariely runs the experiment with first year students of a well-known US university who have all recently signed an ethics code where they pledge not to cheat. And he then asks these students, after completing the test, to declare that their answers are honest (despite giving them the chance to cheat in a way that they know thy can get away with). The results? The students still cheated.

But he then re-ran the experiment and asked the students to sign the declaration of honesty before completing the survey. The tendency to cheat was greatly reduced. The conclusion seemed to be that you need the reminder right up front and in the moment for the honour code to be effective.

As Areily points out, any industry – for example insurance or tax collection - that relies to some extent on the honesty of its "customers" should look to put the “I hereby declare…” at the start of the form.

I think it has application for us at Interbrand too, in particular where we do a lot of internal engagement with businesses that are looking to embed brand thinking into their organisation as part of a culture change programme. Too often this is treated as a communication campaign that assumes that if you tell employees in a bright and compelling way, the behaviour change will happen. My conclusion is that we’re all inclined to laziness, and need constant little reminders to "do the right thing" rather than a big moment in time.

Honour codes work, but they need constant reinforcement against the human inclination to inertia.

The second theme that struck me was about the social aspect of behaviour change. In Ariely’s experiments he demonstrates that people will cheat if they can, but will cheat more if they see their peers doing it and getting away with it. It’s what Ariely calls "socially contagious" behaviour. Again I’ve got to think there’s a parallel here to the bahvioural change that many culture-led programmes look to engender. The conclusion for me is that we need to work hardest at getting the right behaviours adopted by a few influential employees, and then noticed by their peers, rather than just looking at better company wide communication.

There’s more to come from Behavioural Economics in the brand world.

Fred Burt is Managing Director, Global Accounts, for Interbrand.

Yahoo’s acquisition of Tumblr may be dominating Internet Week news, but close on its heels is the newly announced merger between Seamless and GrubHub—two food delivery companies that target the same audience with a seemingly indistinguishable value proposition.

Two weeks ago, we evaluated the two brands and their ability to use creative expression to differentiate where they cannot through functionality alone in our post Subway Standoff: Using Brand Voice to Stand Out, One Train Car Ad at a Time.

GrubHub is the burly, unexpected, anything-for-a-laugh comedian. Seamless is the refined older sibling who knows everything about you, but refrains from judgment. It comes down to a matter of taste—literally (the restaurants you’re connected to) and figuratively (the brands’ personality and marketing style).

Today, the companies announced their intent to merge, bringing together their technological capabilities, and broadening their restaurant access and domestic and international presence. The merger would also enable the two companies to trounce up-and-comers like Delivery.com and Eat24.

From a business perspective, the decision makes perfect sense, and consumers who toggle between the two will rejoice in the new simplicity, and, ahem, seamlessness.

But it poses an interesting question—what will happen to these two, well-formed brands? Will they veer in one direction over another, try to bring them together (SeamlessHub, anyone?) or create a new brand entirely?

In our last post, we argued that by tapping into the desires and trends of its target audience, Seamless has created a more compelling expression—one that may ultimately connect users to the brand beyond the moments they spend using the service.

However, both brands are successful, and part of what makes them so is their commitment to a central idea, weaving it through their name, visual identity, and voice and messaging. If, in coming together, they try to be everything to all people, the new, consolidated brand might lose it’s way, failing to be something special to anyone.

This is only just beginning to unfurl. We’ll be watching, observing, and sharing our thoughts, but we want to hear from you, too. What do you think should happen? Should one brand remain strong, or will a hybrid identity emerge?

Comment below and tweet to us at @Interbrand with #Seamless #GrubHub #IWNY.

Darcy Newell is a Consultant in Verbal Identity for Interbrand New York.

Mary Hirsch wrote, “Humor is a rubber sword – it allows you to make a point without drawing blood.” With pins shaped like swords, Interbrand London cut out jargon, celebrated rapier wit and proved excellent at swordplay.

The Verbal Identity team creates workshops for clients with expertise and passion, but found it had been some time since they’d directed that love of language to building a workshop for themselves. As the Swordplay event took shape, in an anti-silo, breaking down barriers of specialty move, the team opened the invitation to participate to the whole of Interbrand London.

Bringing in favorite pieces of writing from song lyrics to poems and comics to famous quotes, participants shared what resonated with them and the words that get stuck in their heads. Playing with words in words, such as lust in lackluster or rue in accrue, rewriting film dialogue and thinking about how very little changes can have big impact on meaning, the Swordplayers enjoyed the fun of language and felt the power of each word choice we make.

Laura Tarbox, Strategy Consultant, said, “Like a ‘Magic Eye’ of language, the Swordplay workshop gave me a new perspective on life, ideas and language, revealing and bringing into focus the hidden heart of words like a true love that’s been right under your nose all along.” Lesley Stuart-Jones, Client Manager adds, “Insightful and inspiring – fun too!! We should do more sessions like this!”

Looking at paragraphs of business jargon, Sworplayers discussed how challenging jargon makes what could be simple copy to understand and its stark lack of joyous words. Taking sword pens in hand, it was time to stake out the jargon. Rewriting the copy it was clear that a few words could easily replace a paragraph of jargon, serving as a powerful reminder of the traps all writers should avoid.

Cat Totty, Senior Consultant Writer, shared that the conversations sparked interesting questions on a business level. To the question “If clients speak formally, do we need to mirror?” Totty stresses authenticity and advises, “Don’t be a chameleon. Be your professional self.”

Plans are in the works for more innovative Swordplay workshops at Interbrand London, and to explore different practice areas. Sandy Jones, Client Management Intern commented, “I found it was a really creative concept, and very well planned from top to bottom. It was obviously really well prepared, especially when we were presented with words we chose at the end of the session, that was a really good touch.”

“I found it especially beneficial to analyse the ‘jargon’ ridden text examples, and identify what is truly necessary when speaking with clients or other members of staff,” Jones says. “We tend to use 20 words when 10 will do, and changing that attitude would go a long way to making work-related communication more relevant. I think everyone was really open to the concept of the exercise because it was really enjoyable but perhaps most importantly inspiring.”

Joanna Jenkins, Senior Client Director, agrees, “Really got the creative verbal juices flowing. And forces the mind to look at words differently to get the most from them. Great hosts too!” Michael Quirke, Consultant Writer, concludes, “Beautifully simple and, later, even life-affirming – really enjoyed it.”

For the full Swordplay workshop photo album, please visit us on Facebook.