This is how I've been thinking about things lately.
[I wondered if I could post something and not write any words at all.
Turns out: no.]
http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&c2=7400849&c3=1&c4=&c5=&c6=
http://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js?c1=7&c2=7400849&c3=1&c4=&c5=&c6=
26 responses to “Brand / Belief”
Brand belief can only be achieved when there is a brand truth at the heart of the message. I’ve been amazed at how much advertising is failing to communicate any “Brand Truths”. No real surprise that Brand Belief is often lacking and advertising is struggling to change the balance book of many businesses.
This is simple and brilliant. It’s a perfect model for how brands should think about marketing in an age where they have do do, invite, share and involve. And most importantly earn attention through added value and inspiration. Will use in some of the classes that I teach. Thanks.
I agree. I often go back to Steve Hayden’s idea of a Brand Ideal. A north star that guides the actions and communications of the brand. Lots of ideas can live under that star, as long as the all point to it. Steve captured the ideal with this phrase: “The world would be a better place if…(insert brand ideal here).”
He gave an example from Nike – The world would be a better place if everyone could unleash the athlete inside of them.
With a belief like that at the center of Faris’s model, it easy to see how it all comes to life—for the business, brand and people.
@faris I heard this on the twitters. Simple. Can you explain what some of the tools might be? If behavior precedes the narrative, the onus remains on the brand to do something and avoid a response-based consumer initiative. Wally Ollins wrote “Every aspect of what they do and what they are reinforces everything else.” I break that down to mean: What you do is who you are. @edwardboches Will the invitation come soon enough to get anyone involved? Perhaps the invite and share are the same thing.
Forgive my probably ignorance but I’m not sure how to read ‘Brand/Belief’. Is it what the brand wants to think/believe about it – the brand truth kind of thing?
Or is it two separate things – the brand, and your belief in the new ecosystem?
I have a psychological issue with the model. In almost every 2×2, we’re aiming for the upper right quadrant. Like it or not, that is the area people will assume is the desired end point. So your end point is “advertising”, valuing “telling” over “doing”. I’m sure this is how brands wish the world was, hence why so much communication is focussed on creating differentiation via emotional means. But wouldn’t it be better if “stuff working” was our priority, maxing the delivery of functional benefits. I doubt you meant to demote it, but in this model you make this the base situation.
Ahoj Faris,
This is so simple and elegant, and actionable it should have us all out of meetings a bit sooner and creating things more well-attuned to the goals at hand.
Bravo and thanks for sharing.
This is interesting Faris. Can you expand on the dimensons / definitions of “behaviour” and “media” in this model. The way I work with both in reality, requires them to be pervasive and interchangable, i.e. media can deliver actions and tools as well. Thanks!
Hello! Yeah I like this brand ideal thing – Ogilvy is using it a lot – and making the world a better place is a great way to start!
agreed – it has to inform actions in totality – generative, it has to help make decisions etc.
thanks dude! very kind of you.
Hello Gavin!
So – in the model, the way I was thinking of tools would be anything that helps a person do something – branded utility if you like – a service, or program, application etc.
I think yes – I think we need to move into more metacommunication – actions essentially – as these communicate more powerfully. so – as per my post digital strategy thing – do things, and then use advertising to tell about the things.
http://www.slideshare.net/bdwcu/faris-yakobwe-were-wrong-all-along
Hi Aaron!
I guess I should write this up more 😉
What I think I was reaching towards is the idea that a brand is a belief system – a behavioral template that helps inform everything a company does.
Should we do this? ===> Brand +++ YES/NO.
Hello Guy!
Thanks! FX
Hello!
Hmm actually I see your point. But that’s not how I was thinking about it – it’s not that kind of matrix, it starts at the centre.
So – my point was rather – with the arrow – the perhaps we should do stuff for people and then use advertising to tell people about – which is still in line with metacommunication principle of reciprocity.
I will post my admap paper and that may help…
Hi Paul!
So – yes that makes sense – the world is always more blurry – all models are wrong but some are useful and so on.
So -actions as opposed to utterances. Any media artefact can be used to tell people about actions, which is itself an action, and speech acts are a class of actions that are only speech [like promises] but for the most part people get that a brand action and an advertisment are different – advertising draws attention to things, those things used to be products, i’m saying now they should perhaps be brand actions since all products operate at functional utility in most categories.
so…yes they all work together!
Hi Faris! Could you give an example or two of “actions”? Thanks 🙂
Ok, the Paul Feldwick quote is now stuck in my head. Thank you for the sharing the other slides. I have been putting to use the “do first, then share” method and it already feels more honest in the board room(my dining table). What does it mean that people are more affected by a relationship, than by what actually is communicated? Do we really influence decisions?
Hello!
sure thing = my admap paper on future of planning and that has some = i will prob publish it on the blog at some point…
meantime i mean [i think, i don’t always know] things like:
Pepsi Refresh, Canon Second Shot, Domino’s Turnaround, VW Fun Theory, Gatorade Replay, BMW ActiveE Experiment [disclosure i worked on this[, Sprint Random Acts of Togetherness, Nikon Film Festival [disclosure etc]
So – like – doing things in the world. then – talking about them in ads.
You know?
FX
Hello!
yes. feldwick is awesome. Post Kahneman – lawrence green has also taken up the challenge
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businessclub/management-advice/9307587/Think-Tank-Target-consumers-unconscious-and-reap-the-rewards.html
it’s an important question. in fact – it’s really the only question we need to answer as an industry.
and i think it’s a qualified maybe yes, but not how we thought we were.
so all communication is in service of relationships – not message transmission – but that’s not how we thinkdo it….
I’ve been playing with a similar model as well. I am trying to parse out the difference between “actions” and “behaviors.” The examples you listed have a level of participation and at their best of transformation that makes them more than just ‘actions.’ Bad ugly long words, but might be more specific. If I land on the word I’m looking for, I’ll let you know. Thanks for sharing your process.
I like this. As you say, Faris, no model is perfect, but I appreciate this version of how things can work.
This is a nice simple example of the top half of your model: http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/2012/7-eleven-byo-cup-day/
It also reminds us of the strengths and weaknesses of our respective ‘doing’ and ‘telling’ actions. The more bespoke the experience, the less people you are likely to give that experience to (Not everyone in America will take a strange cup to the 7-eleven). But this is why using broadcast media to spread the word about potent, exclusive experiences works well. Spoil the few, tell the many. And of course, if the way you spoil the few is remarkable in its own right, others will spread the word too.
I like to think of this kind of thing as ‘dramatised doing’. Rather than dramatise your offering in a message, dramatise the experience directly and spread that.
Makes sense 🙂
Thanks for the response!
DG
Kahneman’s research is difficult to read. Most creatives who already assume their work is not doing anything, now are even more sorely convinced. I’ve seen beautiful and creative work fail because the company and product itself is poor. The divide between the quality of the message and what it represented was too wide. This happens enough where I can imagine a product like, Jiffy Corn Muffin mix that has never spent a dime on marketing is doing it right. Kudos to the family owned Chelsea Milling Company.
yes! wonderful. dramatized doing. doing nice things for people and or creating behaviors that can be copied is a more powerful mode of communication than declarative claims.
then broadcast gives them scale.
Hello Gavin!
perhaps the academic research – although for academic papers it’s quite accessible I thought – but his book Thinking Fast And Slow is very very readable and I recommend it highly.
So – yes, nothing kills bad products faster than good advertising – this is so true it’s a truism.
the whole point of planning is to help creative concept and craft ideas that DO WORK. and messages may not be the best way to inform content. actions and culture and other stuff might be .
at least, since science is suggesting our model for communication is at best naive and at worst absolutely backwards, we should definitely keep exploring!
rock ON FX
Lindsey
Talent imitates, genius steals: Brand / Belief