BusinessWeek is running a fairly lengthy interview with Google VP of Marketing David Lawee. In the interview, Lawee talks about how easy it is being the VP of marketing for a company with the brand image that Google commands:

It’s not that he doesn’t have to do any work, but Google’s brand has taken on such an aura that he says he doesn’t have to do much of the usual care, feeding, and policing of the brand-let alone run any television or print ads. […]

The honest answer is that the first thing we think about is our products. First and foremost, we’re always thinking about what’s best for the user. We have a true north that’s always easy to touch back to. […]

We don’t really want to tell the world. We’re a pretty humble company. We don’t always come off that way. But we don’t actually want to be out trumpeting ourselves and beating our chest. That actually doesn’t feel comfortable for us. […]

We try to emphasize trust, humility, responsibility, innovation, user focus. We typically try to emphasize quirky. You can do those things via marketing, but if they don’t seem authentic, people quickly dismiss them. That’s really where the strength of the brand comes from. People trust that Google is not going to get paid for putting some search results higher than others.

I could post several more clips from the interview. But something tells me that many an outsider would disagree with some of Lawee’s assertions about Google.

For example, “humble” is not a word I would use to describe Google. In fact, I think the company is quite the opposite. And I’m pretty sure Google’s first consideration is often the bottom line (I don’t fault them for this… they’re a company… it’s what they do… I just wanted to point it out).

And last time I checked… Google *does* in fact get paid for putting some search results higher than others. Sure, they have a nice little box around them to say they’re paid. And I’m pretty sure I know what Lawee was trying to say. But his wording was just poor.

With privacy groups throwing stones at Google from all sides, the European Union and U.S. government both involved in investigations of the company, and a growing sentiment among some very vocal users that Google is becoming too powerful, I’d also counter the assertion that the VP of marketing wouldn’t have much to do.

Quite the opposite, actually. I’d think Lawee would have his hands full right now. But maybe that’s part of the “quirky” approach that he was talking about - let all of the naysayers speak their mind while Google sits by and does little to counter them.

I won’t argue that Google doesn’t have a strong brand image. I know it does and, for the most part, that image is well-deserved. But a strong brand image is no excuse for sitting on your laurels and talking about how little work you have to do.

To other marketing professionals out there: don’t follow Lawee’s example here - even if you’re the Google of your industry. Your brand takes a long to time build up… it could always be stronger… and it takes so little to bring the whole thing crashing down.