What's it all about, Rodrigo?

Today, I decided to take a different approach with this post.  Rather than writing a structured post, I met my opinionated and grumpy Brazilian friend, Rodrigo, to talk about a series of random topics around technology, people and brands…here’s where we ended up:

Note: Whatever is written in italics is Rodrigo and the rest is me

To start things off, I asked Rodrigo, "What should we blog about?" This was the question that got us going and stopped us dead in our tracks.

It’s difficult when you put two professionals together, on a Sunday, to talk about only one topic in an area we work with every day. Instead there are various pockets of things to discuss.

So that’s what we’re going to do – talk about a bunch of random topics.

But first, SOCIAL CURRENCY – Rodrigo had to check us into The Providores on Facebook:

Isn’t it sad that we are in a real social environment, with real people and we’re checking our Facebook? Your virtual presence should be helping your real one – not the other way around, like it has become. It’s like we care more about our invisible self…

That reminds me how much I’m beginning to hate the word ‘Like’ these days…

There’s a difference between sharing and liking something. Brands are so hung up on their ‘Like Vanity' – building their communities, striving for the largest fan base – but does this really do anything for the brand? It means so much more when a community member is moved by what the brand is doing to a point where he/she actually shares the content! That’s the value.

Couldn’t agree more! That’s why I’m tired of clients requesting another Facebook Page or application with no means to an end. “We want more likes”…but why? What value is it really going to give you or your consumers?  There’s so much opportunity online to engage with qualified people and provide actual value to the community, rather than appealing to the masses and trying to win by the law of numbers – a small percentage in a big number is a big number – sure, but it’s a large number of people who don’t share the brand’s values to be a true advocate.

Facebook is interesting as it's going to seize from being a social network and become a browser. It will become the hub where we begin to access any content on the Internet. I mean we’ll see blog posts, articles, pictures, videos, etc. from our newsfeeds – in fact, I think Facebook is the second largest distributor of video next to YouTube. And with everything being shown within the page, you never need to leave facebook…

I don’t think Facebook will replace my need for Google. My network won’t be able to give me information on everything I look for on the internet.  I guess Google is good when I have a specific inquiry, but Facebook may be the platform I learn about new topics or content I wouldn't come across if it wasn't for someone else posting it... 

Just a thought, but tsn’t it interesting that, now, with digital TV, we fast-forward the ads, but then we go on Twitter and Facebook to follow and like brands, which, in essence, brings a version of that ad content back into our lives…

But in this situation, it’s an opt-in! People, for the most part, are choosing to get information from brands they are interested in. People can pick and choose the brands they want to hear from.  And if done correctly and for the right reasons (i.e. attracting people who share common values with a specific brand), brands can engage qualified consumers/people on a more personal and meaningful level, rather than the general public, who become annoyed with ads because, really, most are not for them.

Okay, so now that we have a community of interested and engaged people – we being a brand/organization – we can give them a platform to contribute and/or be heard by the brand, like My Starbucks Idea…

Yes, it’s important to have a conversation to involve and learn from your advocates, but brands still need to have amazing curation of ideas, otherwise we just end up with normal, basic ideas…

Actually, I read a great quote from Richard Seymour, in June’s Wired magazine, saying, “Don’t ask people what they’re going to want – they don’t know”…

Totally, don’t ask people what they want, because they don’t want to think about it – it’s too much work. Over the years, I have created a list of 12 things I need to consider when designing something, and at the top of this list is, people are lazy!  And it takes a lot of work to really define what we want…

So really, great crowdsourcing isn’t about asking people what they want. Instead, it’s about bringing lots of minds together to talk about specific topics. From these discussions we can learn where people’s heads are at (trends, interests, etc.), what they’re missing from the brand experience (products and/or services) or what they want more of (what the brand is doing well). Then, from here, brands can evolve based on people’s wants/needs to remain relevant.

It’s curation at a different level – it’s curating conversations.

Innovation is weird, because we tend to take it for granted. Most people don’t stop and think about the evolution of things. To me, the million-dollar ideas are about creating new processes for basic things – how to we brush our teeth without needing water, a toothbrush or toothpaste – how do we optimize something to be less reliant on certain tools.

I guess when we listen to people, we need start to redefine the problem and look at the fundamental behaviour, rather than just trying to create a new version of something…

So it's like looking at transport – rather than trying to make cars better for the environment (i.e. Hybrid, electric, etc.), we should look to change how people get from point A to point B…

Totally, like why do people need to own cars anymore? Why is ownership of a vehicle so important? I mean people only use their cars for a tiny fraction of the time they own them… 

So, Rodders, we've talked about everything from virtual social vanity, to Facebook as our next browser, to crowdsourcing, to rethinking basic processes…What does all this mean?

I guess it’s interesting because we both are in marketing, typically a message-pushing business, but most of what we’ve talked about is getting people to talk and having brands listen.

You're right – the relationship between people and brands has changed. It’s more transparent and open, looking for a personal interchange, which gives people a voice to contribute, and create a more relevant experience.

But the questions remains…are brands really listening? And are they ready act on what they’ve heard?

Rodrigo Lebrun – Creative at Wieden + Kennedy, currently working on Nike

Talk with me... Not at me

This week, I came across this amazing presentation from a Cannes Workshop.  It talks about brand's starting movements, and I couldn't help but think this is the future of advertising.

Strawberry Frog Cannes Workshop 2011

View more presentations from Heather LeFevre

Clearly we can tell people don't want to be talked at -- instead, they want to be spoken with.

Creating movements is about organising a group of passionate advocates who rally around an idea on the rise in culture to bring change.

To a certain degree, this is what brands with purpose are trying to do -- create change or contribute to the greater whole. The key point, in the above definition, is about rallying around 'an idea on the rise in culture'. This indicates communicating your message to in a relevant/meaningful way to capture the interest of your audience.

People today are looking for meaningful brands more and more, and like I've mentioned before, this is not just a western desire, rather it's a global demand. So really, it seems like a natural evolution for more static one-way dialogues, traditional advertising, to transform into a more immersive and relevant conversation through messages and actions!  After all, it's in our nature to be social and want to belong to something greater than our everyday.  Brands have the power to inspire and excite people.

Lastly, movements are about the people and issues that are important to them. This is another huge opportunity for brands to leverage movement creation rather than traditional advertising, because they are engaging with their audiences in a more relevant and meaningful and the product becomes a facilitator to accomplishing that shared, overarching goal/dream/purpose.

I hope you enjoy this presentation as much as I did.

How People Talk About Brands

Currently, I'm reading a book called How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read, by Pierre Bayard.  It's interesting because it says rather than consuming yourself in the details of books, since there are more than we could ever read in a lifetime, we should consider the context in which the book was written and the author's overall idea for the story. Bayard says it is this that will help us understand how the book fits among other literary pieces -- or in his words:

"Paying exclusive attention to an individual volume causes us to risk losing sight of that totality, as well as the qualities in each book that figure in the larger scheme"

Bayard also mentions that taking this approach is good even if you've read the book because no matter what, everyone develops their own version of the story in their mind. This is because different elements become more salient and/or significant depending on the reader, as people's divergent life experiences impact their perceptions/interpretations of the book.

I find this concept is not only good for books, but it's also a good way to view brands and how people think about them.

To understand how a brand fits, or the role it plays, in the global market, we need to consider the brand's central idea, or what I call the brand's purpose. This provides context to what the brand is about, what makes it special, and how we should view it relative to other brands.

On a more granular level, as people engage with a brand they develop their own perceptions of it, making it important to note that these perceptions are influenced by both the direct experience with the brand and the life experiences of the person interacting with the brand. These life experiences include what they've already heard about the brand.

To this point, Bayrad also mentions that books do not live on their own:

"A book is not limited to itself, but from the moment of dissemination also encompasses the exchanges it inspires"

The same is true for brands. They are greatly influenced by the stories told about them by others, who could be existing customers, ex-customers, analysts, or people who have just heard things second hand. We know it's this external world that has the greatest impact on the definition of a brand, making the salience and clarity of the central idea for a brand essential.

Lastly, this philosophy, of having a central brand idea defining its stance in the global market and accepting that the idea comes to fruition through various interpretations as people take it in differently based on their individual backgrounds, can be leveraged when taking a brand to other markets.

The brand must keep its purpose intact, but find details that resonate with people in the new market so it's interpreted in a way that adequately reflects the brand's desired position in the global market.

Who knew books and brands were so closely related...well, they are both stories to be told, experienced and interpreted.  I guess they're not that different at all.