I pondered that question for the umpteenth time when I read about Fast Company's 12 Fast Cities. Of course it was nice to see that my City of Denver met the magazine's criteria of smarts, foresight, social consciousness and creative ferment. Qualities I think I have my the way. But, just because Fast Company is a valued brand, should I think that their rankings enhances the community brands that they like? I value the opinions of their writers and editors, and on most occasions I agree with them, so I have some interest in what they say. This situation is very similar to one experienced in my world of higher education brands.

When I first became engaged in education branding, many colleges and universities embraced branding because they thought it would some how improve their rankings in publications like the US News & World Report. Schools quickly devoted resources to integrating their communications, increasing their public relations efforts, spent money on new advertising campaigns and more. After several years of trying schools realized that those efforts did not really improve their rankings, and I think to their credit many realized that the rankings were not as important as they once thought. Many are realizing mission and core values outweigh their previous obsession with rankings.

I think rankings can add value, but I caution any organization that puts all their eggs in the ranking basket. That obsession can dilute your brand, even if you rank high. If your city does not appear on the Fast Company list does that dilute your brand? What do you think? Can you successfully recruit and retain brand champions based on third party rankings?