The level of loyalty or “bonding” (the key metric that helps determine the brand contribution) of the current top 100 most powerful brands is more than twice that of the average brand. This is the same as we saw 10 years ago, showing that the relationship consumers have with brands is as important as ever.

The brand with the highest bonding this year is also the most valuable – Google with 45 per cent. In 1998, this honour went to Gillette (48 per cent) which still has one of the highest bonding scores, showing the power and endurance of a strong, well-managed relationship with consumers. But it also illustrates the shift from grocery and personal care brands to technology.

Looking at the top 20 bonded brands across 20 countries and comparing the findings of 10 years ago we can see this distinct shift in consumer priorities.

The number of technology brands has more than doubled, including the shift of telecommunications brands to wireless. In 1998, mobile phone penetration rates in many western countries were less than 50 per cent and computers were still a significant investment for a family.

Today in most western markets mobile phone penetration is in excess of 100 per cent and a new laptop can be purchased for little more than a couple of days' average pay – if it is not actually given away as an incentive for some other purchase. In emerging markets there are millions of potential consumers with the desire, the need and the income for technology.

Ten years ago most consumers had not even heard of Google, today's number one, or BlackBerry, this year's fastest riser and top new entrant. Now it is common to see BlackBerry users accessing the internet and searching with Google on the move in many parts of the world. It is therefore not a surprise to see technology brands are worth 52 per cent more on average than other brands in the top 100.

We seem to be more health conscious – the bottled water segment of the soft drinks market has boomed over the last decade. However it will be interesting to see how much the growing concern about the environmental impact of bottled water affects the category.

Health takes second place to convenience for some – we have seen an increase for fast food brands – but legislative pressure on advertising and labelling and self-regulation on health issues is likely to spread, affecting much of what we might like to eat and drink. This may eventually change our attitude to and relationship with key brands.

There are fewer financial services brands represented among the top bonded brands than 10 years ago and even those financial brands in the top 100 have lost a quarter of their bonding. The negative press on the sub-prime lending crisis and on financial probity may exacerbate this. A look across the Brandz data shows that consumers are nearly half as likely to tell others about financial services than almost any other type of brand, but that they are more likely to listen out for information about them. The implication is that consumers are primed to watch for negative finance stories.

Our analysis shows that one of the main barriers to bonding with financial services brands is a lack of trust, in both developed and emerging markets.

We have learnt that the top brands' success comes from four key areas:

•Strong business basics

•Clarity of brand associations

•Projected leadership

•A great product experience

Most of the brands in the rankings have strong business basics, usually backed by a strong corporate culture. GE, IBM and McDonald's (with its latest initiative to provide recognised academic qualifications for its staff) are all good examples.

The second crucial element is that the brand stands for something. The most successful brands are very clear about what they offer the consumer.

Gillette is “the best a man can get”; L' Oreal is “because you're worth it” and “for everything else there's Mastercard”.

These are the convenient handles consumers need to choose between brands.

The third criterion is whether a brand acts like a leader in its category. A brand needs to demonstrate leadership in a relevant way. Perhaps there is something in the innovation or product style or how the brand interfaces with the customer that sets it apart and drives perceptions. Nokia, Porsche and, of course, Google have these qualities in spades.

Finally, a strong brand needs to deliver on its promise through a consistently good experience – preferably a great one. BMW's driving experience, BlackBerry's ubiquitous convenience for mobile professionals and Zara's delivery of tailored fashion at affordable prices all get users talking.

As Hayes Roth, chief marketing officer at leading branding and design business Landor Associates, observes: “In the end, all the fine promises and business and marketing acumen come down to one simple question: does my actual experience with the brand meet or exceed my expectations?”

“It is no coincidence that virtually all of the Brandz top 20 most valuable brands invest heavily in providing consistently superior product, service and retail brand design as the most tangible and compelling expression of a positive brand experience.”

Innovation and revitalisation allied to a clear brand promise, delivering a great experience backed up by a sound and ethical corporation – that is the route to continued financial success.

当前百大品牌的忠诚度或“黏合度”水平（帮助确定品牌贡献度的关键指标）是普通品牌的两倍以上。这与我们10年前看到的情况相同，表明消费者与品牌的关系同以往一样重要。

今年黏合度最高的品牌也是最具价值的品牌——谷歌(Google)，黏合度为45%。1998年，这项荣誉的得主是吉列(Gillette)（48%）。吉列目前仍然是黏合度得分最高的品牌之一，显示出管理良好的强大消费者关系的力量和耐久性。但它也印证了消费者忠诚度从百货及个人护理品牌向科技品牌的转变。

看看全球20个国家黏合度最高的20个品牌，将它们与10年前的结果进行比较，我们可以发现这种消费者优先关注点的明显转移。

科技品牌的数量已增加逾一倍，包括电信品牌向无线品牌的转移。1998年，许多西方国家的手机普及率不到50%，而电脑仍是家庭的一项重大投资。

如今在多数西方市场，手机普及率已超过100%，人们用几天的平均工资，就能买到一台新的笔记本电脑——其实，这几乎是白送，以便鼓励他们购买其它商品。在新兴市场，成百上千万潜在消费者具备对技术的渴求和需要，他们也有收入来购买技术。

10年前，多数消费者甚至从未听说过谷歌（如今的冠军）或黑莓(BlackBerry)（今年上升最快和排名第一的新上榜品牌）。如今在全球许多地方，黑莓用户在旅途中访问互联网和用谷歌搜索的现象颇为普遍。因此，在百大品牌中，科技品牌价值比其它品牌平均高出52%并不奇怪。

我们如今似乎更加关注健康——过去10年，软饮料市场的瓶装水领域得到蓬勃发展。不过有趣的是，我们可以看到人们对瓶装水环境影响的日益担忧对这类品牌的影响。

对某些人而言，健康需让位于便利——我们看到快餐品牌的增加，但广告和贴牌面临的法律压力以及健康问题的自我监管可能会蔓延开来，影响到我们喜欢食用和饮用的许多东西。这可能最终会改变我们对关键品牌的态度和与它们的关系。

在黏合度最高的品牌中，金融服务品牌的数量没有10年前多，即便是登上百大品牌榜单的金融品牌的黏合度也下降了四分之一。关于次贷危机和金融操守的负面报道，可能加剧了这种情况。浏览一下Brandz数据，我们就会发现，消费者愿意向他人讲述金融服务的可能性只有其它品牌的一半左右，但他们更愿意留意这方面的信息。这意味着消费者随时准备留意负面的金融消息。

我们的分析显示，金融服务品牌在黏合度方面遇到的一个主要障碍是缺乏信任，不管是在发达市场还是在新兴市场都是如此。

我们已经认识到，顶级品牌的成功来自4个关键领域：

•强大的业务基础

•明晰的品牌联想

•突出的领导能力

•优秀的产品表现

榜单中的多数品牌都有强大的业务基础，通常都有强大的企业文化做支撑。通用电气(GE)、IBM和麦当劳(McDonald's)都是这方面的典范。（麦当劳最近率先向自己的员工提供经过认证的学术资格证书。）

第二个关键因素是品牌的象征意义。最成功的品牌非常清楚自己向消费者提供的是什么。

吉列是“男士的选择”；欧莱雅是“因为你值得拥有”；还有万事达(Mastercard)的“万事皆可达”。

这些可以方便消费者在品牌之间做出抉择。

第三个标准是，一个品牌是否能成为同类产品中的领军者。一个品牌需要以相关方式证明自己的领导能力，通过创新、或是产品风格、或是品牌与消费者之间的契合，让自己从各类产品中脱颖而出，加深消费者的感悟。诺基亚(Nokia)、保时捷(Porsche)，当然，还有谷歌，都极具这些特质。

最后，一个强大的品牌需要能通过持续良好——最好是上佳——的表现实践自己的承诺。宝马(BMW)的驾车体验，黑莓为移动专业人士提供的无所不在的便利，以及Zara以可承受的价格交付时装，都赢得了用户的口碑。

正如领先的品牌推广及设计企业朗涛策略设计顾问公司(Landor Associates)的首席营销官海斯•罗思(Hayes Roth)所发现的：“最终，所有的美好承诺及业务和营销才智都会归结到一个问题上：品牌的实际表现是否达到或超出了我的预期？”

“在Brandz最具价值的20个品牌中，几乎所有品牌都会大力投资，始终如一地提供优秀的产品、服务和零售品牌设计，将其作为良好品牌表现最切实、最具说服力的表达，这并非巧合。”

将创新与振兴和明确的品牌承诺相结合，由健康、有道德的公司提供上佳的产品体验——这是取得财务上持续成功的必由之路。

• 6小时掌握学英语的秘诀！——点击看答案
• 专治男女记不住单词的秘密