Clarity in language and design

Matt, over at the 37 Signals blog Signal vs Noise, has a great post about jargon in language and Chartjunk (Tufte) in the presentation of concepts.

The folks over at 37 Signals are doing a great job on focusing on simplicity and function.

The Clotaire Report: Cracking the Code

I recently read The Culture Code: An Ingenious Way To Understand Why People Around The World Live And Buy As They Do by Clotaire Rapaille. Rapaille is a French-born psycho-analyst, anthropologist, and marketing consultant. Rapaille is also a bit of philosopher in his latest treatise on culture. However, I don’t think that he’ll be celebrated in his home country among the pantheon of great French philosophers. Then again, I don’t think you’re reading this blog to discuss Camus, Sarte, Foucault, or Bourdieu. Although, Bourdieu’s “Language & Symbolic Power” is a great read and his work on symbolic capital is insightful, as we work to deconstruct what it means to live in a symbolically created reality.

Back to Clotaire Rapaille and Culture Code. I was intrigued by Rapaille after seing The Persuaders on PBS. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/ Rapaille’s description of the reptilian brain is useful in conducting research and audience segmentation – essentially, we don’t need to over-think why one likes our dislikes something. The reptillian brain is why we have Humvees in Manhattan - you can't really explain it logically, but emotionally, well that's another story. For Rapaille it’s either on code or off-code. And the code is simple, or should be. In his opioinin, it should be one word. I feel that some of his descriptions are over-simplified and sound more like an opinionated drunk. To his credit, his discussions of different cultures (in his book he compares and contrasts Italian, U.S., French, German, and Japanese cultures) help illustrate key differences in how culture influences meaning, motive, and identity, as individuals make purchasing decisions.

Qualitative researchers may be interested in his research methods which are built around a three-tiered interview structure. Rapaille tries to get to the deep meaning and emotion behind products and services by structuring his three-hour, in-depth interviews around the following questions:
1. How would you explain this (product/service) to me if I were an alien from outer space seeing it for the first time?
2. Utilizing magazine pictures, which pictures depict how you feel about this product or service?
3. What’s the emotional code – what’s your first memory associated with this product/service?

Those questions, while not exactly novel, help cut to the emotional connection and code associated with a product or service. I dare say its too simple, and not in a good Occam’s Razor kind of way. But, it can be effective.

Overall, Rapaille is doing some interesting work, but his opinions cloud the value of the research.

Now, look back at our picture of the author, from the book jacket and the Random House page for the Culture Code, is that on code or off-code?

Publishing Plug

I wanted to let readers know that you can now subscribe to Sanctioning Agent’s Notes from the Field. If you’re so inclined, to subscibe, please do so. I’ve added publishing chicklets for Feedburner, Google, Yahoo, Bloglines, and Technorati under the “Field Links” section of the blog.

I hope it helps you keep up-to-date with Notes from the Field.

End transmission.

Lovemarks and agency as commodity

More on LOVEMARKS. Hoag Levins and Ad Age editor, Jonah Bloom, discuss Kevin Roberts, his book LOVEMARKS, and the ad agencies as commodities, in the lastest edition of Why It Matters.

Aww, coming up with ideas is hard, pouting is easy

Via AdAge, three ad agency creative chiefs last week criticized the account pitching and compensation models that currently govern their business relationships with advertising clients.

I don’t think it’s just the that part of the model that’s broken. How about the results? If you don’t move the dial and generate more income or sales for your clients, do you give the a refund?

Wize is Live

Wize.com is now live, simplifying product research. Check it out.

iTunes 7

I just loaded iTunes 7 and its new album-cover-art-view absolutely rocks!!! Kudos to the design team on the image presentation and the flywheel motion.

Design Issues and Problematic Polls

It’s primary day in a few states, including Minnesota. Seth Godin highlights the problem with ballot designs in New York.

While most readers of this blog are two to three standard deviations above the mean, where the tail is so thin it’s nearly transparent, not all voters are able to track the meaning and impact of their ballot. The design on ballots is like reverse on a car, you don’t use it that often, but when you need you really need it.

Breakaway Brands: Ten companies that boosted their fortunes by cutting down on hype and connecting with customers.

The subtitle of this recent article Fortune, by Ellen McGirt, (via CNN.Com) says it all. Less with the hype, more with the meaningful customer connections.

This study of “breakaway brands” (see article for methodology) by Landor Associates highlights three essential components when it comes to break away brands – 1) trust, 2) community, and 3) a knowledge sharing dialogue.

Three unmistakable themes bubbled up from this year's survey, and most of the breakaway companies are standouts in at least two of them. "Today it's all about trust, community, and creating a dialogue with your customer that shares real knowledge," says Hayes Roth, chief marketing officer for Landor.

Why It Matters: Branding Iron

In the latest edition of Why It Matters, Hoag Levins interviews William Jeanes, the co-author of the new book Branding Iron. Jeanes is the former editor of Car And Driver. Branding Iron looks at the identity problems plaguing the U.S. auto industry.

Here’s a snip-it from the interview that I found the most interesting:

“In your book you say ‘the car business spends more on consumer research than any endeavor other than politics. Much of its research is syndicated and available to everyone – buyers studies, shopper studies, consumer satisfaction index, etc.’ And what that makes me wonder is that if all the car companies are creating brand identities based on exactly the same study data, how can any of them expect to have products that stand out from each other.”

Jeanes argues that courage is what’s missing. The courage to say that we’re all playing in a ‘me too’ environment and failing to connect with consumers in a meaningful way. You can hear more on the AdAge/Why It Matters site.

It sounds like the U.S. auto industry is more of a commodity industry than many execs care to admit. A sign that you’re in a commodity industry, when prices and financing options are the key points in your commercial. Another sign, a loss of your consumer advocates and repeat buyers. Jeanes says that a brand is a promise wrapped in an experience. In other words, advertising does not equal successful brand building.

Many people may want to blame market research and a dysfunctional addiction to research... and for the most part that’s fair. Research, like computer programs, is a garbage in, garbage out endgame. What are you doing to ensure that you are asking the right questions and segmenting your market in meaningful ways? What are doing to cultivate and ground a unique symbolic identity?

All Symbolic Identities Have Shelf Lives

All symbolic identities have a shelf life here's a perspective from Seth Godin. I may explore this topic in greater detail on "Notes From the Field" in the future.

Lovemarks nets a $430 million fan

AdAge reports that Kevin Roberts, CEO Saatchi & Saatchi, and his book Lovemarks wooed JC Penny away from DDB Chicago. I had read Lovemarks last winter and thought it was OK, but reread it after I saw the AdAge piece. If that’s worth $430 million, I can start highlighting ideas on my blog that should be worth a few million a pop.

I stand by my “ok” assessment on my first read. The book is interesting, more so for its presentation and graphics than the content. The premise is that emotional connections with customers are what make a relationship between customer and product/service. No big news there, emotional connections are important. Roberts argues that love is the top emotion and claims that the future beyond brands is lovemarks. I’m still a bit befuddled by the future beyond brands, but what’s a book subtitle if not provocative.

Roberts seems to treat the concept of a brand more as a commodity. I think he’s wrong in doing that. I concede that many marketing people try formulaic approaches and pseudo-science which treats consumers more like sheep than humans. Hello Dolly! However, lovemark is really just a strong brand or symbolic identity.

I too try to stay away from the term brands at times, saying that what a person or organization is striving for is a unique symbolic identity. While I agree that emotion is critical in winning the hearts, then the minds (it’s easier to find reason afterwards), it’s more than emotion when it comes to a winning symbolic identity. Unique symbolic identities address human meaning, motive, identity, and emotion. As I mentioned in my critique of Primal Branding, emotion is necessary but not sufficient in developing and grounding a unique identity.

Roberts talks about love, or lovemarks, being comprised of mystery, sensuality, and intimacy. This is where I think Roberts provides strong insight into human connections to brands, lovemarks, or symbolic identities. When he talks about mystery, he’s referring to great stories, myths, dreams, and icons. When he talks about sensuality, he’s referring to the senses – sound, sight, smell, touch, and taste. When it comes to intimacy, Roberts, says that’s “commitment, empathy, passion.” These are important concepts for marketers to consider as they fight the evils of commoditization.

In the cocktail version of the lovemarks story, presented as a photo of cocktail napkin, Roberts shows that at heart he’s really a social scientist as he presents a two-by-two matrix, with one axis as love (low and high) and the other axis as respect (again high or low). In the desired quadrant of high respect and high love, you have a lovemark, the exact opposite of a commodity. Again, I think that lovemark is synonymous with a winning brand or symbolic identity. Interestingly enough, Roberts has fads as low respect, high love. I agree with that assessment, but wished he would have dug a little deeper into the shelf life of fads, or all symbol systems and identities. They will all expire. I’m not sure if Mr. Roberts sees that with lovemarks.

In addition to a discussion of the shelf life of an idea or lovemark, I would have liked for Roberts to separate awareness from advocacy. I see so many marketers talk about awareness and buzz as if it’s all good. It is not. You need awareness, but awareness alone does not constitute success.

You can read more on the lovemarks site.