Hugh at Cluetrain wrote a cool summary of the history of brand influence. The point being that the newest model, which he calls “expressive capital”, is manifest in brands taking the “Love Mark” to a new level by allowing people to believe something about themselves–to bring context to their beliefs.
- First we had Human Capital. You There Go to the next village and kill everybody because I’m the Chief of this village and I say so etc.
- Then came Physical Capital. Land, property, factories etc.
- Then came Financial Capital. Money, credit, dollars etc.
- Then came Intellectual Capital. Our widgets are better than your widgets because our engineers are smarter than your engineers etc.
- Then came Emotional Capital. People love our product more than they love our competitor’s product etc. This is the space “Love Marks” plays around with so successfully: “A Love Mark is a brand that is loved by its user beyond reason” etc.
- Expressive Capital. Our products make it easier for the end user to find and/or express meaning, narrative, metaphor, purpose, explanation and relevance in his/her own life than our competitor’s products.
It’s a bit like Seth Godin’s riff in “All Marketers are Liars”, where he suggests that it’s the marketer’s job to frame the offer/experience along lines that sync with consumers’ hard-coded “world views”.
It got me thinking that neither idea goes far enough for today’s consumer climate. Instead of simply helping people believe something, find or express meaning/purpose, why not help them DO something? I mean partner with their customers to shift the needle on some point?
I guess the version of “Social Marketing” that helps corporations leverage their Philanthropy strategically touches in this area –CIBC’s “Run for the Cure”, Ronald McDonald House and
Timberland’s “City Year” are successful examples of this. But making sure you don’t come off as capitalizing on the cause must be a tough line to tow. And even in these examples, how many people remember which non-profits are the beneficiaries?
Social media is a boon to marketers who want to pay attention to what their prospects deem worthy of espressing publicly. And of course it’s an unheralded opportunity for nimble organizations who “get it” to enage directly with their buying public for feedback on successes, failures and opportunities. But wouldn’t it be cool to find out about a brand who was using social media to partner with their public–as citizens in a community of interest, to fix something they felt was broken?
I’m going to investigate instances where a brand is teeming up with the public to change the world.
I’m sure it’e being done. Patagonia, or Trek– someone who emplys people that enjoy the outdoors (and partake) must be protecting some geographic region or something.
Anyway, here’s the original link.
via gapingvoid: “cartoons drawn on the back of business cards”: the hughtrain.
