http://www.npr#mce_temp_url#.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104791125&ft=1&f=5

What Makes Us Happy?

Talk of the Nation, June 1, 2009 · Journalist Joshua Wolf Shenk gained access to one of the most comprehensive studies conducted to find the formula for happiness. “What Makes Us Happy?” is his essay in the June issue of The Atlantic. Shenk, along with Todd Kashdan, professor of psychology and author of Curious: Discover the Missing Ingredient to a Fulfilling Life, explore what makes us happy.

• E-mail|
• Share|
• Comments (13)|
• Recommend (28)

PS I was curious to find this story about Ben Goldhirsh and his Good Magazine.
http://www.bnet.com/2422-13721_23-168499.html

From the DMarie presentation especially, there was a continuing reiteration of the power of passion, love, and social impact. Whether its a service or a consumer product, people feel good when they are part of something bigger and effective brands (and marketing) tell the social mission that brands have (in DMarie’s case, creating makeup that improves self-esteem).

A final set of takeaways, before we all begin our own adventures in the ‘real’ brand world:

• Simple frameworks. Big results. Never forget the tried and true image-identity gap analysis, especially at the starter to a broader conversation with the owner of a brand.
• Got Marketing? Many companies have tiny marketing departments, with substantial overlap in responsibilities for senior management, who may share these duties. There’s tremendous value delineating these responsibilities explicitly.
• Telling stories. Perhaps the most obvious statement of all: Powerful storytelling and design has significant power to redefine a brand. And yet, it’s important to realize that customers will associate you with where you’ve been, so that brand changes can be difficult (for example, Distilled).
• Employees. Customers. Both groups are important stakeholders which need to buy into the brand and its vision. The former is often neglected and yet they are brand ambassadors, who can provide significant leverage to a marketing platform.
• And finally, the iceberg. The power of brand is in the bottom of the iceberg, where a brand can subtly promote itself, rather than simply in the top where the brand directly imagines itself. Great things come from the bottom (of the iceberg).

Signing off …

A few quotes:

• “Now, Hammer (born Stanley Burrell), speaks on behalf of social media in front of Intel, Harvard and Stanford.”
• “In February, Hammer spoke to the Harvard Business School about social media. In March, he addressed the MIT/Stanford Venture Lab about using technology to promote music. On May 17, he’ll talk at Stanford University about branding.”

Hammer, glad we were able to help.

The participant tweets focused primarily around the old news of Twitter’s opportunity to partner with Google, the thoughts that it is too early to develop a robust revenue model, the suggestions to add more features, and the risk of Twitter losing its brand and turning into a “distributed ecosystem.”

Even though the conference was supposed to show businesses how to use Twitter for customer engagement, the stickiest takeaway for me (and also for many, as this quote has been forwarded all over Twitter) was a tweet from @TripAustin that defined Twitter’s edge in the social media space:

MySpace is for people you don’t want to know. Facebook is for people you used to know. Twitter is for people you want to know.
(http://twitter.com/TripAustin/status/1985641175)

Typically, Twitter’s “following/followers” device has been perceived as a detterent for everyday users who feel too much pressure to constantly tweet or too little confidence to believe they could have a great following. @TripAustin’s description could really help Twitter welcome and retain more users. It’s a great example of (a) differentiating Twitter and (b) appealing to the masses. He turns Twitter’s definition around by saying: There’s another smart way to use Twitter. You don’t have to become a broadcaster. Use Twitter to meet the people you want to know right now.

• Show the expected in an unexpected way!
• Show strength as a presenter and don’t apologize for “what you really wanted to show…”
• The hardest moments are the transitions from one presentation style to another (e.g. from showing a movie to integrating the auditorium)

All in all, still a lot of work left for the next two days until the dealine of the project, but we left the workshop with a lot of new ideas what we can do better.

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_gilbert_asks_why_are_we_happy.html

Second, the New York Times is running a blog happydays.blogs.nytimes.com, a blog about “The Pursuit of What Matters in Troubled Times”. It brings together musings and reflections on this topic by world renowed writers and scientists. Be warned that most of these folks are way beyond the 26 – 30 year age range. And from yesterday’s class, you now know what kind of happiness they will talk about .

Everybody understands happiness but not many can predict happy moments of customer for branding purposes. I think the concept of the lifting of this problem one level higher and instead of trying to run behind the customer’s mood it is much more sustainable and visionary to brand around your customer’s process to help customer to catch up with little happy moments everyday is just brilliant. So another takeaway by systematic and be chaotic in the same time to be sure that your brand associates with a happy life unless you are “Prince of Darkness”.

Last takeaway was about divorce. I was unhappy with Manchester United performance in the Champions League final today, but I was happy to learn that one of my favorite brands “Manchester United” talked to me and I talked to him. According to professor’s hint I and MU are not going to divorce nearest future.

How Singapore Airlines converts the biggest critics into its strongest brand advocates

.

You can win an autographed copy of a book on Singapore Airlines or a 4GB iPod by Tweeting any quote from this article or writing a comment here. Find out more here.

Remember the story about food on Virgin Atlantic?

Earlier this year, I had published an article on how Virgin Atlantic had dealt with a passenger whose grievances about bad food had made it to The Telegraph, as the “world’s best complaint letter”. Sir Richard Branson had personally called him up and requested him to help choose the menu for future flights. Virgin Atlantic had successfully turned a critic into a fan.

Generally, this is an exception in the airline industry, as complaints often fall on deaf ears. But as I discovered, at Singapore Airlines, it is a practice to take special care of a disgruntled passenger, ensuring that he is a convert by the end of the brand engagement. The first time I heard this, I was wondering how this was possible. That’s when I was enlightened by an experienced SIA crew member.

The downside of an unhappy passenger

On every flight there are bound to be passengers who feel that they have been shortchanged, mishandled or even mistreated in some way or the other – often resulting in anger or frustration. But instead of trying to understand the situation and try to appease the passenger, most airlines tend to ignore such passengers, to not cause further trouble. But in such bad economic times can airlines still afford to maintain the same attitude when dealing with unhappy passengers? Probably not. And here’s why.

• With social media, an unhappy passenger can spread the word far and wide. Did you read almost a hundred comments on the United Airlines saga?
• An unhappy passenger not only doesn’t fly the same airline again, he also takes away other potential business
• We all know it’s much harder to get a new customer, than to please the current customer and get him to fly again

Therefore it makes perfect sense to treat an unhappy passenger like a VIP and this becomes even more so relevant in an enclosed and constrained environment like an aircraft.

How Singapore Airlines cultivates VIPs?

Singapore Airlines has a very systematic approach to service recovery whenever a problem is encountered within the flight. And here’s how they turn unhappy passengers into their biggest fans:

1. If the problem is directly or indirectly caused by the airline, the airline acknowledges the problem and assumes full responsibility. EG, if the in-flight entertainment system doesn’t work on a flight, the customer if offered a seat-change and if he doesn’t take that up, he’s given a $50 voucher. Who wouldn’t be pleased with that?
2. Other than generous compensation, having an ever-smiling and courteous cabin crew helps calm nerves in a tense situation as well. SIA Girls seldom lose their cool.
3. If for some reason the crew isn’t able to resolve the situation, he or she doesn’t hesitate to ask for help from the in-flight supervisor.
4. And even the in-flight supervisor is not reluctant to apologize. He knows that if he can make this customer happy, he will be back.

Here are the simple rules SIA crew follows in making a decision in situations like these: If it’s simple, give it to the customer. If the thing that was miscommunicated is easy to do or follow through with, just do it. If it’s complicated, try to compromise.

And it’s these simple practices that make Singapore Airlines the only airline in the Forbes Top 50 brands in the world.

What do you think? How has SIA managed do it consistently while others are struggling with this? Let’s discuss…

Special thanks to veteran airline crew, Z. Ahmad, for his inputs for this article.

There are still 4 more autographed copies of the book to be given away, and a 4GB Apple iPod. You too can be a winner, just by re-tweeting a comment from SimpliFlying or leaving a comment on this site. Learn more here.

We start simple, but soon fill up with angst and feelings of confinement, until we leave those behind to go conquer the world, before gradually trading ambition for balance, developing an appreciation for our bodies and our children, and evolving a sense of connectedness, for which we feel grateful, then happy, calm, and finally blessed.

Two problems:

1. If people (implicitly) perceive happiness as an endpoint, they believe they should be able to chase it. Untenable, frustrating goal.
2. People often do not remember exactly what brings them happiness. People often remember Disneyland as one of their happiest memories. But online experience ratings caste doubts on this. Finding parking is difficult, lines are long, and the park is often full of children who are crying. So why is it that you go home, wake up and can’t wait to return to Disneyland? Perhaps, at least in part because of the photos taken of you grinning ear to ear after exiting the ride (Sutton, 1992). 

Four pillars of happiness:

1. Autonomy
2. Competence
3. Relatedness
4. Self-esteem or set point

Barriers to happiness (Note: Be sure to weed these out if they seep into your organization)

• Confusion
• Loneliness
• Lack of control
• Struggle for survival

You need to either create the environment for happiness or you have to intervene in the barriers…which means that where there is misery and annoyance, there is opportunity to make $$ making people happy. Car rental companies (zipcar), airlines (southwest), and telcons (skype) have done exactly this.

• Name an experience that made you miserable. Could your brand that does the opposite? Advice: mute annoyance and play up happiness (80/20 rule)

Expectations are malleable.

• You can lower your expectations to be more realistic. The lower the expectations, the higher the happiness.

Create a reward system.

• The power of a small reward. Little things make a big impact.

You can gain the most important insights into an organization by finding answers to the following two questions:

1. What are the stories they are telling?
2. What are the experiences they are celebrating?

It is clear that as organizations and markets mature , cultivating social intrapreneurship will yield innovative business models , educate and learn from consumers to remain ahead of the curve and recruit and retain talent motivated by a larger goal and purpose.

http://www.storycenter.org/stories/

- Shal

“You talk about the Hammer when you’re talking ‘bout a show 
That’s hyped and tight 
Singers are sweatin’ so pass them a wipe 
Or a tape to learn 
What it’s gonna take in the 90′s to burn 
The charts legit 
Either work hard or you might as well quit“

I was impressed with Hammer’s Talk. I didn’t realize how calculated he was in his marketing initiatives. Few insights that really stuck with me (and are illustrated in the You Can’t Touch This lyrics above):

• It’s all about creating buzz. Initially, word of mouth was his greatest form of marketing.  MC Hammer created momentum by forcing the clubs to play his songs and showing everyone how to dance to his music;
• “Put on the Hammer” He mentioned his name in every song;
• Establish the brand and then sow the seeds.  T.I. started by saying he is the king of the south, and now he is known as the king of the south.
• The earlier the better.  MC Hammer started talking about his product and brand before it was established, allowing him to get all the negative publicity out before it is detrimental.

Twitter is just the beginning for Hammer. Here’s a link to his blog page with links to his twitter, favorite videos, hammertime radio, and much more. http://mchammer.blogspot.com/

After Thoughts:  Iwould like to learn exactly how social media (especially Twitter) has helped him with his career.  Also, did he discuss his bankruptcy at all, and how bankruptcy impacted his personal brand?

Axe commercial (great storytelling about a brand, simple concept well-executed; racy):

Super Bowl ad with a good twist:

Dove Evolution:

Dove Evolution Parody:

Another DE parody:

When I google “authenticity,” these are the first three things that come up:

1: Wikipedia (no surprise): “Authenticity refers to the truthfulness of origins, attributions, commitments, sincerity, devotion, and intentions.”

2: Miriam Webster (I selected the more relevant definitions): “authenticity: worthy of acceptance or belief as conforming to or based on fact, conforming to an original so as to reproduce essential features, made or done the same way as an original; not false or imitation; true to one’s own personality, spirit, or character.

3: authenticy.net: this is the website of an ADVERTISING AGENCY. (I am not making this up.)

I mean, maybe someone created #3 as a like really meta comment on society. But it seems to be real. In fact, items #4 and #5 on the google search also relate to advertising. Which is pretty amazing, if you think about it. Clearly “authenticity” is suddenly a big deal in the advertising world. In fact, the evening before Dana Cho spoke in class, I went to a fascinating lecture by Alex Wipperfurth, author of Brand Hijacking: Marketing Without Marketing, which was also essentially about authenticity in marketing.

Like I said, I kind of get it at a gut level – we don’t want to feel like we’re being manipulated. We want to see the world like it “really is.” We want to understand what’s around us. The constant barrage of advertising that we’re exposed to on a daily basis makes us feel manipulated, targeted, out of control, disconnected maybe from the things we buy and use.

But really – does that have to do with authenticity? I mean companies are authentically trying to sell us stuff, right? I mean that’s definitely true to the “personality, spirit, and character” of a profit-maximizing company. I can’t think of anything more authentic.

So I guess the idea is that when companies try to convince us to buy something, they use some premise other than profit maximization, which makes the premise? the company? the advertising campaign? “inauthentic”.

So then companies realize this; enter “fabricated authenticity,” which I guess is when a company pretends that its “personality, spirit, and character” is about something other than making money in order to sell you a product. Because it is pretending, its advertising premise is actually inauthentic.

Following this chain of logic, the only way that a company’s marketing is going to be truly authentic (is it really ok to put modifiers in front of “authentic”?) is if its personality, spirit and character is actually about something other than just making money. If this is true, then that advertising premise can suddenly be authentic.

I mean, arguably this is a semantic distinction. What makes a company truly about something other than profit maximization? Beliefs of the founders? The management? Codified company values? This becomes a difficult metric to use to judge the “authenticity” of a company or ad campaign.

Which is why I think I keep coming back to social impact when I think about authenticity. Demonstrated commitment to social impact is a more tangible measure of company values than words on paper. And if that commitment derives from a desire to improve the company’s image and therefore increase profits – does it actually matter? Intentions are not measurable; actions are. Measurable social impact is maybe just valuable, regardless why it happens.

I think this related to our discussions of how well-designed social impact platforms can increase brand equity. They increase brand equity because they are perceived as authentic, and consumers are looking for authenticity. And I would argue that social impact is authentic. Or more important, maybe, than authenticity.

Anyway, this gets kind of circular and abstract, but it’s why I found Dana Cho’s talk totally fascinating.

Just two more notes on other things I found particularly striking:

-   Dana’s example of applying IDEO’s methodology to revitalizing an urban neighborhood in a post-industrial city was amazing – left me wanting to know way more.

-   Brandtags.net

• A great brand helps consumers connect … an extraordinary brand creates a new, interdependent world that blurs boundaries between consumers, company & citizens.
• Even with the struggling economy, people feel they best connect with their outside world through consumption – what are ways we can fulfill this crave for engagement despite scaled back spending? – this could be venting, sharing, lusting not necessarily purchases
• How do we support authentic connections & communities without falling victim to the latest fad and loosing our authenticity in the eyes of  our consumers?
• Unlike some of our other speakers, Dana believes brands are out of our control and urges managers to think of their comfort levels and how the brand can grow and excite when put in the hands of consumers.  This also means one has to take into consideration how to design for constant change and plan for this “human factor”.

What are the implications of the above in approaching brands?

• Design for participation (since consumers crave engagement)
• Does transparency matter in how consumers perceive a brand’s authenticity?
• Can you build collaboration into consumers interactions with your brand?
• Using scenography to create a culture and mindset that defines your brand
• Create a brand experience blueprint so you define and can become comfortable with which characteristics are constant and which are variable (the human factor)

——

After our discussion of Hammer, Dana Cho from Ideo gave a presentation about Brand Experience.  She gave 3 key insights and impacts:

Insight 1: Consumers are craving engagement

Rem Koolhaas said “shopping is arguably the last remaining public activity”.  The idea is that as we become more and more interconnected through technology, we are losing the personal touch that consumers crave.  However, as the economy worsens and money becomes tighter engagement is becoming more difficult.  So

Impact 1: Enable them to engage

Dana gave two examples, one controlled by the company (Nike sponsored marathons where users can interact) and one controlled by the consumers (Ikeafans.com)

She also mentioned a viral video made by a Trader Joe’s consumer and the value of consumers generating brand.  Video can be seen here:

Insight 2: Fabricated authenticity is everywhere

Business Developers and Marketers have become so sophisticated that they are able to create fake experiences that feel authentic.  As a result consumers are skeptical of authenticity.  So…

Impact 2: Start from the inside out

Focus internally and move externally.  Dana gave the example of Zappos which gives employees $2,000 to quit after training.  This policy weeds out the non-believers and only keeps those who are truly committed to the promise of the brand and company.

Insight 3: Brand is beyond control

“A brand exists entirely in peoples heads”.  Companies that want to change their brand don’t even know where to start.  Does brand come from the CEO, the employees, the consumers?  So…

Impact 3: Clarify the constants and variable of a brand

Take a top-down approach and understand what you can change and what you can’t change regarding the brand.  Focus on the variables that you want to change.

——

Dana’s personal blog can be found at

http://www.goodspace.typepad.com/

Vision for a brand: Extraordinary brands create a new interdependent world that blurs the line between consumer, brand, and community.

Current dislocations: Social media is changing the way we communicate and the role of the consumer. The recession is leading to a shift to non-conspicuous consumption and reduced trust in all brands.

Insights:

1. Design for engagement- Build a collaborative brand where consumers feel a part of the process
2. Become authentic- Determine your values and then engage your company’s employees to accomplish this. Select out the most authentic employees, and then help them to buy into this vision
3. Encourage the emergent- Allow the user’s power and control

Reflections from a recovering BiB Student:

• Lifecycle of marketing technologies. The give and take in the early stages when companies are all piling into a new form of media (often comically so, as Dana’s Tide Detergent example shows). And then the realization afterwards, of ways to use it effectively (or a decision not to use it at all).
• Ethical implications of marketing. “Shopping is arguably the last remaining public activity.” – Rem Koolhaas. To what degree has marketing led to a conspicuous consumption culture in America, where shopping is therapy and where there are so many benefits to fabricating authenticity? Can we somehow use marketing to create a more balanced level of consumerism?
• Crafting Authenticity. Everything wants to be authentic, and yet fabricated authenticity proliferates. For what customers and what types of brands is authenticity important? What ways can we promote authenticity in products and marketing, beyond company culture? And is authenticity overblown?
• Control. We all want it and crave it. And yet, as a brand how comfortable do we feel giving up control, and given that we may not like the results? Or is control in this new age of social media an anachronism?

For those who don’t know Christian Audigier is at the origin of the rise and success of Von Dutch. He is a self-made man that brands himself the same way Hammer did. He tries to be everywhere. He gives his t-shirts and hats to stars like Madonna or Britney Spears and then paid his own paparazzi to shoot them and sell the pictures to People magazine and every other tabloid. He organizes big parties and pays stars to attend and create the buzz.

We are very close here to Hammer’s strategy with DJs, radios, his own dancers and his name everywhere in the song. Audigier and Hammer dub themselves as kings of fashion or hip hop respectively.

What is the conclusion? They make a hell of money!

So, what is the role of a MBA degree when new grads try to apply frameworks and basically do not think exhaustively as these two self-made men do? Does it mean that there is a given sense of business that people cannot learn?

I don’t have all the answers but one explanation comes from the need to succeed and the degree of hungriness of each person. When people can get a great quality of life at low risks and normal efforts, the most entrepreneurial solutions, I mean by that the most “common sense” ones does not come first. Knowledge is a gift but can also prevent people from daring or thinking of the simplest solutions to the image and brand issues.

I will take away one thing: sometimes it is good to forget his degrees to instinctively react to business problems. LIKE A SELF-MADE MAN!

• Find a great intro story: You don’t need to have an exotic, out-of-the-world story, but you need an initial story that has most of the components that will be further developed. And make sure you show your feelings (anger, sadness, disappointment). Stop the story when you have said enough to keep people interested and don’t answer all the questions at the beginning, leave them asking for more
• Make sure your story flows: This was the most difficult part for me. And I iterated on the flow/structure probably 5 times. It’s just very hard, but the flow should be focused on answering the questions that are raising in people’s minds. Once you have finished one story, questions arise, so make sure you answer this questions in the next story. And people want a clear flow, not necessarily linear but clear
• Try to involve your audience: Provide details they can relate to. For example, I used some situations in which I could call out the names of some of the classmates I knew would be there. It just makes the audience feel closer to you
• Show how this story is important to you: I told them at the beginning the reasons why I was giving this talk, which was mostly that I wanted to share about myself before leaving business school, showing them that I was much more than just a smile. I framed my story as “the story behind the smile” what creates this smile and the tears that sometimes are behind it
• Finally, be authentic: It shows. Don’t try to pretend something that you’re not. The audience really appreciate this. If you feel like crying, then do it, breathe and continue talking. Of course you’ll feel vulnerable but it is a HIGHLY rewarding experience

“Why do people use Twitter for trivial information? ‘Who cares what you are eating for breakfast’?” - Hammer responded, saying that Twitter is a way for him to humanize his brain at times.

Hammer’s thoughts on negative YouTube comments - It is important to remember that the people that leave comments usually arent your fans. This is why the majority of them are negative and also why YouTube views dont necessarily translate into album sales.

How’d you get connected into Silicon Valley and prominent investors such as Ron Conway? - Early on Hammer was interested in finding ways to get his videos up on the Internet – which brought him to Silicon Graphics in the Valley.  However, at the time (early to mid 90′s) Hammer was about 8 years too early in making this goal a reality.  He encountered many issues regarding broadband capabilities at the time, but he kept with it and spent time at YouTube in the early days.  During this time, he became an expert on the internet and remained on top of the trends in silicon valley.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=526630

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=6928447

- Shal

Hammer was extremely approachable and gracious, taking photographs with everyone and joking around as the earlier class trickled out v-e-r-y  s-l-o-w-l-y, until Prof. Aaker had to call a group photo and get us in our seats.

Hammer just impressed me so much with how on top of things he is, and how strategically and thoughtfully he approached every aspect of marketing – starting with his early days launching his first album in 1987, selling records out of his trunk. I was eight years old at the time (!) Hammer may well have come through GSB Executive Education, he seemed to hit on every major point Prof. Aaker has been taking us through all quarter – this guy is just a natural Social Media marketing machine. 2 Legit 2 Quit.

Takeaways and priceless quotes:

Every thing you do can be used to craft your brand, to “create and control…perception.” E.g. his first song, “Let’s Get it Started,” answered in the first verse who he was and why he was there – “put on the Hammer” and he would help you p-a-r-t-y. His first video was as much a “commercial”  for the Hammer brand as anything else. He looked outside the industry to find a hot new director who would understand Hammer’s desire to capture the energy of his moves.

Get ahead of the curve. Hammer got curious about the Internet early (’94-’95) and went looking for whoever would help him realize the vision he saw for it. Silicon Graphics, Apple, YouTube (when it was two computers above a pizza place), what have you.

Web 2.0 gives you an important tool - the ability to humanize yourself, reach your audience without intervening layers, and immediately and directly counter less direct forms of negative media.

The way to push your brand is to put it in the hands of very creative people. Create a groundswell, word of mouth.

“Every superhero must have one” - Hammer on Will.I.Am’s song for President Obama

“I have 20/20 vision – I didn’t need glasses – I wore them foryou to see me better” - Hammer on why he wore glasses when performing

“Never apologize for your success. Just tell the other guy he’s gotta work harder”

Hammer Section

• Establishing a brand from the grassroots without social media is the base. The “tastemakers” – the mavens – are more important than the social media. You have to start from the ground up. Social media tacks on to this.
  • MC Hammer built relationships with radio & clubs. He got DJs to play his record and had his own dancers show consumers how to dance to his music.
• Controlling the perception is much more valuable than reality – at least today (but the two have to align). Create the perception. Control the perception. Do NOT use the old, traditional ways of “advertising.” Use social media to create momentum.
  • MC Hammer created the perception that things were HOT. This allowed him to sign the largest record deal at the time. “Once I figured out the model, I brought it to every city.”
  • How do you begin something when you start from nothing? You say that you ARE what you want to be over and over and over again. Then you and others start to believe it. (i.e. TI – the rapper “the king of the south”). It’s visualization.
• Social media is the perfect place to engage the opposition. You need to counter every single oppositional statement. Social media shortens the distance between you and your fans/enemies. Most of the people who love to make comments are NOT your fans. Competitors plant false stories that you have to stay on top of. You should always counter oppositional messages. One way to do this is to use your social media platform because is direct to the masses.
• Social media can promote a more authentic personal brand.
  • Manage your social media presence yourself because you can be more authentic. You can be yourself.
  • “When I use Twitter to talk about ‘what I’m having for breakfast’ – I use it to ‘humanize’ my brand” – Hammer

Effect of personal connection on happiness

• Greater happiness ensues from experiential purchases than from material purchases (Van Boven & Gilovich 2003, JPSP)
• Meaning of happiness evolves over a person’s lifespan. Happiness is associated with excitement in our youth and teenage years. Then, as we grow older, happiness becomes increasingly associated with peacefulness.
  • The meaning of happiness is malleable. A mediation session encourages young people to define happiness as peacefulness. As young adults feel a sense of connection through meditation, they begin to define happy as peaceful.

“Stanford Business School was great …thank you for the exchange.. Fervent minds …fertile ground .. Good harvest (ROI)…”

1. I thought Hammer’s role as a visionary early adopter of Twitter, and his impact on the adoption behavior of the “early majority” or “herd” (Read: Ellen and Diddy) was a great illustration of the phenomena we discussed with Geoff Moore.

Alex Wipperfürth will be giving a talk this Thursday, May 21st, at 8:00pm in Braun Hall (Building 320) room 105. This should be a fun talk. He’ll be speaking about how recent shifts in consumer culture have changed how and why people decide to buy products. The talk is part of the Liu Lecture Series in Design at Stanford University.

Alex Wipperfürth, trained in Marketing at Wharton, wrote a book called Brand Hijack that talks about Doc Martens, Pabst Blue Ribbon, Mattel’s Barbie, and other brands whose customers “hijacked” the original meaning of the brand and placed their own deep meaning in the product. It also talks about companies like Harley-Davidson, whose customers co-create the brand meaning.

Wipperfürth is presently a partner at Dialhouse in San Francisco. Dialhouse is part think-tank and part creative hot shop. The client list is diverse: from fringe (Napster, Doc Martens, Pabst Blue Ribbon, Jones Soda, Red Stripe, Altoids) to cutting edge (Current TV, New Yorker Magazine) to blue chip (Diageo, IBM, P&G/Clorox, Toyota, Coca-Cola). Projects range from innovative strategy, innovative research, meaningful creative expressions with DIY production to brand innovation. In earlier work, Wipperfürth had interviewed actual cult members and people in “consumer cults” (like Apple or Harley-Davidson fanatics) and made fascinating insights about their similarities.

Check out the Liu Lecture Blog for details on the series.

Another topic of interest to me  related to spaning silos.  The siloed structure most big firms have developed are a product of decentralization.  In an increasingly competitive world such siloed structures lead to inefficient use of marketing resources and duplication. The message that comes out lacks clarity and is often inconsistent.   Some of the more successful recent marketing campaigns are a result of breaking down the Silo’s.  Driving towards centralization is key to unifying the message of the brand and improving communications across silo’s. Silo spanning messages and operations are however very difficult to try it out or implement. it becomes the CMO’s  imperative to work with management to guide the company through this change.

AM with the Aakers Takeaways
1. Time vs Money – consumers who were asked to think about how much time they spent with their iPod had more favorable attitudes towards their iPod than did consumers who were asked to reflect on how much money they spent on their iPod. In a related study, students who rode their bikes with their iPods on and received a $165 ticket from campus police had significantly less favorable attitudes towards campus police after the incident…seriously, who knew that was illegal?
2. Recent evidence suggests that brand values have declined across the board in the last 8 years. Brands that have energy, however, have been the one exception. If you are in a class of products that doesn’t have energy, attach yourself to things with energy (e.g., Avon and breast cancer walks)
3. Spanning Silos – silos inhibit cross-silo brand coordination, programs, offerings, and resource allocation. Spanning silos argues that improved cooperation and coordination is required (centralization is not the goal, but may occur as a by-product of increased coordination). CMO can play important roles as facilitator, consultant, and service provider. Also want to focus on leveraging best ideas across the silos

Top 100 Brands (2008) and the methodology of how the value of these brands are determined:

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/08/09/0918_best_brands/index.htm

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_39/b4101056103890.htm?

http://www.interbrand.com/best_global_brands.aspx

Dr. Aaker’s remedy for brand decline is to energize by allying yourself with something of interest that embodies energy. He cited the example of Avon’s Walk for Breast Cancer. What stands out?–the next color of lipstick or the fight against cancer.

“Don’t aim at success – the more you aim at it and make it a target, the more you are going to miss it. For success, like happiness, cannot be pursued; it must ensue, and it only does so as the unintended side effect of one’s personal dedication to a cause greater than oneself or as the by-product of one’s surrender to a person other than oneself.”

In this class, it was refreshing to hear about a story that hadn’t yet ended.  As Sep mentioned, we so often read cases that are in the past.  The story’s events and the lessons learned (whether successes or failures) have been so neatly tied up into an 11-page package that it is often hard to picture what actually happened.

This quote is a good reminder to think about the bigger picture; think more about the why. And then think about if that why holds enough meaning for you.  Personally, I tend to make decisions for nice & rational reasons, and question myself later (and often when it’s too late!)  Not sure I can promise Sep’s talk will change that, but I am hoping it will stick with me as I am figuring out my next steps.

- Lisa

Start with a mission, build a deep connection. Distilled didn’t start with a mission, a story.  While “geek chic” found an initial following, it wasn’t authentic.  The company didn’t tell its own story, rather the story was told for them.  As a result, the company began to question its direction and strategy.  Not only does the mission, story, brand, and product need to have a deep connection with the consumer, but it also needs to resonate with the company and its people.

Just do it, keep doing stuff. Would it have been easier if Distilled (and its v.1 Monarch) researched the market, developed a story, and fleshed out a complete strategy before investing time and capital?  Coming from the VC industry, I’m used to seeing business ideas after they’ve been iterated many times over.  It’s much easier to identify mistakes / lessons as an observer or in hindsight.  But without the experience / mistake, nothing would be learned.  Google and Facebook are prime examples of iteration and the successes of learning algorithms.

Bottom line: Sep said it best, “Business is the vehicle to bring value to the world.”  You can’t just build a succesful business.  You have to a mission, a story, AND you just gotta do it!

Oren Jacob expanded on the power of a title, in the context of a job title.  Examples included “Chief Anthropologist at Intel, Imagineer at Disney, Dean of Pixar University at Pixar.” 

I personally reflect back to professor Chip Heath’s class, “Making Ideas Stick,” and recall an important guideline for journalists, which involves not burying the lead.  I find this guideline useful, and combined with Oren and Justine’s advice on the importance of choosing a title, I have become more aware of the titles I use to communicate in emails, presentations, blog postings (see above).

Tips for an Intrapreneur:

don’t ask permission

break free from traditional processes, but align with strategy

make size an advantage, but fly under the radar

inspire your internal champions

discover pioneers

Tips for an Entrepreneur:

think big

find a partner with shared values

stay authentic-your promise must rely on your core values

disruption is uncomfortable but vital to progress & innovati0n

• For startups, blogs can often drive business to websites more than traditional magazines
• Useful to have a hook (i.e. “geek chic”; Distilled Clothing)
• How to rethink the value proposition.  Pose the question: What is the value you can bring to others?
•  How do you “show” quality
• Free garment repair for life
  • Make a new product every 2 weeks (reduce overstock and increase innovation) 
  • Local manufacturing
• When you reposition, the core associations (e.g., Geek Chic) can become the extended associations.
• “The more you aim for success, the more you are going to miss it”
• Marc Andreason on the NYTimes: 95% of your time is often spent on 95% of the revenues. When it is time to change the business (and your revenue model), you need to change how you spend your time. 
•  “Business is a vehicle to bring some value to the world.” Victor Frankel

• Make a story a conversation with your audience.
• Know when to stop.
• The belief that the audience loves you changes the nature of a conversation.
• Think of a story not only as a beginning and an end, but as an invitation to explore a topic, a subject, an area.
• Certain components of a story make it different from a situation, for example, in a story there is the presence of conflict.
• Don’t say you’re in China; say that you’re eating noodles and let your audience figure it out.

Recalled Insights: How to Do Social Good and Make a Profit

• You can do social good and make a profit by shifting dialogue from a functional discussion to a larger discussion.
• Important for a brand to stand for something because that is what brings the customer to the brand. Good exercise: forget the target market, reflect on why you do what you do, and the people will come.
• We are still in an era where companies are grappling with how to merge social good with making a profit. The best way to stay ahead of the curve on how to best merge social good with profitability is to keep a sharp eye on companies, certifications and people that you trust.
• “Socially conscious when convenient” is a large segment of the population.
• Consider reversing the rules in order to broaden ideas and to differentiate.

In Friday’s class we saw a perfect example of combining the two. The exceptional take-home lesson was not that it is possible to do both simultaneously within a single project but that actually doing so can be more beneficial to one’s career than not doing so.

We saw an example of someone taking the risk to combine social good with business good and thus differentiating himself within his firm. He acted outside the normal corporate behavior flowchart, took a risk, and regardless of whether he is successful, he has put himself on the map.

He has branded himself, a social intrapreneur. I love that term.

Now, not everyone will be lucky enough to be in a firm with the resources to take such a commercial risk. But if there is anything we learned in Econ, it is that the true cost of something is the opportunity cost. What company can afford NOT to incorporate a program of social good? Unless you are a manufacturer of WMDs there has to be some social program you can implement without being totally fake. The key is to be genuine about it. The key to being genuine is to do social good in line with the business good: to leverage your business strengths to do social good.

The opportunity to be an intrapreneur may be limited, but the point is you don’t need to take care of yourself before taking care of others. You can do it at the same time. You can even do it inside a big firm.

You may say most people already think this way, but I doubt most people act this way. Go out and spread the word. Go out and “change the world.”

* Successful B.o.P (Base of the Pyramid) approaches require self- sustaining models

* Don’t just:
Stop into “insert exotic locale here”
Drop boatloads of “insert well-intentioned donation here” ($, computers, health equipment)
Roll back home and wait for the magic

*Will this work AFTER you are gone? not involved? never check in?

You’re not at Clorox anymore, Dorothy.

Understanding your consumer: still key. Oompa Loompa’s love rainbow spiral lollipops. Let’s not deny it.

But,
* Think about how to improve the lives of your customer not by selling TO them, but by leveraging them as producers.

* If the social return isn’t enough motivation for you, think of it this way:
Empowered Rural Artisan →

Increased Income→

Greater Discretionary Spending→

Buys more widgets

Increasing your Bottom Line =

When you help the Base of the Pyramid, you also help your shareholders.

Look for Love in Unexpected Places

In Zero Sum Games, the Base of the Pyramid usually loses. So change the game!

Tree-hugging mission-driven organization

with Super Lofty Values seeks ….

Intimidating Corporation for

friendship, partnership, and good conversation.

Sound unlikely? Not if you want to get to scale and gain leverage

So get to it!  Love is waiting for you. . .

Beware! Traps ahead!

So, you did it! You’re a Social Intrapreneur! Congrats!

Now, before you get too comfy, watch out for some of seemingly obvious strategies that might undermine your success. Like what, you say? Well…

Blending into Existing Business Units
You: But this would be so logical. This is the way my company operates.
Robert Chatwani: Oh, but no. If only life was only this simple. You lack things these other units have.
You: Like what, oh Social Intrapreneurship guru?
Robert Chatwani: Well, revenue for starters. But also, reputation, history, proven value.
You: Oh, I see. No worries, I’ll just…

Isolate myself within a New Ventures Team
Robert Chatwani: No, please don’t do that!
You: But why? I don’t want rumple feathers.
Robert Chatwani: But you need to be REVELANT.
You: So how do I do that?
Robert Chatwani: Easy. Find ways to make your product VALUABLE to the other business units.
You: Oh, I see… What else?
Robert Chatwani: Break the rules. You have to innovate and iterate quickly. In a big business, this might mean having to do things differently to work at pace that will allow you to compete.
You: Okay, so I’ll just build everything my way.
Robert Chatwani: You don’t need to reinvent the wheel. Find ways to leverage your organization. For example, it was hard to get Eng time on the Product Roadmap, so we built World of Good off the API.
You: How clever! And then what?
Robert Chatwani: Find supporters at the top of your organization. You want them to want you to succeed.
You: A ha! So, I should tell everyone, everything about my initiative?
Robert Chatwani: No. Work under the radar until you have a product that is creating value. Then, when you pop up, you’re actually talking about something real.
You: Sweetness. This is great stuff, Roberto. You don’t mind if I call you that, do you?
Robert Chatwani: Actually, not at all. That plays perfectly into my last tip.
You: What’s that?
Robert Chatwani: Embrace your Inner Deviant. Social Entrepreneurship requires DISRUPTION!

And there you have it.

Robert Chatwani from eBay, discussed how his team is pioneering the idea of “socially good shopping”. I liked how he used analogical approach and said “Whole foods of online shopping”. It set the tone for his presentation. Just like the water on his shirt disappeared, I was getting more excited about the idea. He also mentioned about the core mission of eBay in two very meaningful words – “economic democracy”.

There were a number of interesting comments and questions which were raised by the class:

1. Who determines good versus bad about the products sold: This could be a subject of a long debate but someone has to start somewhere. Currently, Worldofgood.com is using associations for seller verification and product verification. The key thing to note is that the sellers are typically based out of US but they source goods from let’s say Africa/ India. Therefore, very less data is available about the sellers or the products.
2. Scale issues: How would you scale such a business requiring so much audit about the sellers and the products ? The question was valid especially because it is an entrapreneurship case within eBay. Abscence of scale will kill the initiative inside the multi-billion dollar eBay. Maintaing credibility of the marketplace would be one of the key metrics to watch while achieving scale.

Apart from some insights about the experiements at eBay, Robert mentioned how worldofgood has a very tight community. About 11% of the customers buy 50% of the slaes. Most of them were the initial on invitation seed customers.

“Shifting the dialogye from functional discussion to a social impact discussion” would be the key to how worldofgood emeges and eventually drives the entire online marketplace

• Have a critical tension/struggle that forces the protagonist to permanently change from the experience. This tension creates an “arc” or crescendo in the story. It pulls the audience into the story as well as creates an emotional reaction to make the story stickier.
• Play off the character of the storyteller either by being congruent or incongruent with their projected personality. The storyteller should be aware of the perceptions and attributes that she projects so that she can realize what stories or words will create intrigue, surprise, and humor.
• Use visual details instead of descriptive language. The details should evoke one of the five senses instead of merely describing the experience (i.e., “go back and forth from fryer to bed…”  versus “worked at McDonalds”)
• Provide enough details so that the audience does not need to make up the intention of the storyteller (i.e., why did he make this decision).
• Should not hand-hold the audience by giving them too much or redundant information and not letting the audience infer the middle steps

Stories are incredibly important in both personal and corporate branding because they are what people remember and pass on. It’s the seemingly small stories that build upon each other and reinforce a reputation, characteristic, and value of an entity. More than advertising or PR campaigns, stories (such as the one about Nordstrom’s tire refund) is what sticks in people’s minds and perpetuates brand. As much as positive stories can help support a brand, negative stories can just as easily detract from it, especially if they undermine a core brand promise or value.

That’s one way to spin it … SNL took on the same personal brand attributes with a different spin here:

I wouldn’t  have thought Ripa’s association with the Electrolux brand would be really influential to me – and it’s not…well I didn’t think so, but why then did I keep coming back to that brand? I felt duped.  

So I’m left wondering, will Kelly Ripa ultimately sell me a wine refrigerator? Stay tuned ….

- Shal

So, if you follow your instincts, what are the ingredients of a good story?

• Know when to stop and let other people think
• Put your character under extreme pressure and force him/her to make a choice
• Don’t forget the power of one particular word: the title
• Be specifics and “on the nose”. Being real and concrete helps people stay inside the story
• Analyzing keeps you out of story

I will try with humility to give my view on story telling.

First, it is amazing to tell stories because you make people unplug their brains and focus on their hearts. No more worries, no more problems, no more job issues… just pure adventure.

It is 15 years since I tell stories. I wrote books, novels, short stories, articles and plays. I also took pictures and sketched cartoons. Each activity is my leap of faith. Each activity is my way to build bridge with people. I don’t share but tell. This is my only secret. I always try to make people forget about myself. I try to ring some universal bells so that the audience can own the story. This is when the audience put itself into the story that people smile, laugh, or cry. This moment is incredible and unique. This fraction of second when people laugh is worth a million.

I agree with what was said in class. It is far better to say less than too much. Often people try to say a lot because they want to be global. They want to touch the most and think they have to describe and analyze to create a global situation, a situation that will be taken the same way everywhere on earth. This is a mistake. The purpose is to be universal. By universal, I mean to give the minimum clues to invite the audience in your home but to let it choose where it wants to have dinner: in the living room, in the kitchen, in the bedroom, on the patio and even in the toilets. Telling the story about a father and a son is universal. Everybody has a father. Afterwards, each individual has a specific and singular story as a father or with his/her father. This is where as a storyteller you let people go on their own path… But not too much because periodically you give other clues that will guide the audience, partly on your path and partly on its.

Finally, I would say that storytelling is not about sharing but giving. Often when you write and go on stage or make a movie, it is all about your ego. As a storyteller, you need to make the balance between listening to yourself and giving to others. When you find the right balance, the magic goes on.

So, stop reading this post and tell stories!

“Storytelling reveals meaning without committing the error of defining it.” – Hannah Arendt

Here are 3 very easy, short reads for your students, all of which are gems.

http://www.amazon.com/Directing-Film-David-Mamet/dp/0140127224

http://www.amazon.com/Blink-Eye-Revised-2nd/dp/1879505622/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241633596&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Making-Movies-Sidney-Lumet/dp/0679756604/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b

You can buy all 3 together from amazon for about $35… I found the 3-for deal on the OnDirectingFilm page.  Oren Jacob

http://www.cosmeticsdesign-europe.com/Products-Markets/Businesses-should-go-ethical-despite-downturn-says-guide

http://www.marketingcharts.com/topics/behavioral-marketing/confused-teens-choose-less-expensive-over-green-8820/

• Words associated with the green movement: responsible, smart, cool, reality
• 63% of 21-29 years old and 65% of 18-21 years old would purchase a more expensive brand that gives 5% back to an environmental cause; HOWEVER, only 29% of 13-17 years old would choose the more expensive brand
• “The top three biggest hurdles this generation faces when embracing the green movement are cost (41%), proof that they’re making a difference (24%), and ease of use ( 12%)”
• “76% of Millennials feel it’s very important or important for brands to get involved in the green movement”
• “Interestingly, the majority of Millennials surveyed found it confusing as to why products that are better for the environment are more expensive. Generate Insight noted that the extra cost – without consistent explanation – discourages the majority of shoppers from embracing and contributing to the green movement.”

The last bullet presents an interesting marketing issue: how does a brandeffectively communicate / justify a price premium?

• Measure both sides of the Brand Pyramid
  • Consumer Questions
  • Ideal Outcomes
  • Don’t break the bank
    • Measuring brand value can be done cost-effectively, with small sample sizes
      • Surveys (n=25+)
      • Focus Groups (n=6)
      • One on one in depth interviews (2-3)
      • Choose Respondents Wisely
        • Best feedback comes from a balance of love/hate respondents
        • Use Quantitative and Qualitative Research
          • Qualitative Tools – Interviews, Focus Groups
            • Ask questions about: Open-ended, “Think back,” Make a list, Creating associations, Sorting pictures, complete a sentence, personification, drawings
• Quantitative Tools – Surveys
  • Ask questions about: Awareness, Recall, Recognition, Associations, Brand Attributes, Brand Personality, Attitudes, Judgments, Feelings, Attachment (relationship)
  • Reputable Brand Valuation Sources:
    • Interbrand, Brand X, Landor
    • 2009 Brand Valuations (Interbrand)

Google – $100B, Microsoft – $76B, Coke – $67B, IBM – $67B, McDonald’s $67B, Apple – $66B, China Mobile – $61B, GE – $60B, Vodafone – $54B

• Interbrand Valuation Method:
  • Assess income due to brand (e.g., $100B)
  • Back out value of tangibles (e.g., 6%)
  • Adjust for last two years (operating income)
  • Subtract income tax (e.g., 40%)
  • Determine multiplier (price/earnings ratio – e.g., 15) *
  • Brand value (e.g., $750B)
    • *Each firm has its own way of determining multiplier
    • Brand is an intangible asset
      • Many companies are shifting accounting practices away from categorizing money spent on brand as an expense (e.g. software engineering)
      • Brand Extensions
        • Many brands transition over time
          • E.g. LEVI’S dockers…Dockers by Levi’s…DOCKERS
• When to extend brand
  • Minimum Rule – “Do no harm”
  • Make sure the extension fits with the parent
  • Test purchase intent and quality perception on extension alone, e.g. Dockers, then on parent + extension, e.g. Levi’s Dockers
  • BMW Case Study
    • BMW Z3
      • BMW getting boring
      • Introduce Z3
      • Loses money, but builds brand (based on survey of big 5 dimensions of brand personality – sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication, ruggedness)
      • Made exciting through: BMW Films, James Bond
      • Mediation Analysis used to determine effect on sales

1) Arcs: good stories move beyond just describing a situation.  There is a climax at which point the main character makes a crucial decision under pressure and moves to a point of no return.

2) Start wide & cull before cutting: keep asking what is superfluous to the story

3) To put it simply, know when to shut up!  There is power in not telling everything and letting your audience take steps in their minds to reach conclusions on their own.

When the class shared 6 word personal stories, we noticed some key differences amongst them.  Some had an air of mystery, making you curious to learn more.  Others sparked visceral reactions (often humor) which helped engage the audience.  We noted that the phrasing of the story was important to its overall feel – whether the story was a strand of words with no obvious connection with each other, or if it was one sentence that captured a specific feeling, or if it was multiple mini-phrases.  Beyond this, word choice was crucial (the feeling conveyed by “blizzard” vs. “snowed in”)

The examples that Oren and Justine shared in class really brought to life the concepts they were discussing.  When Oren quoted the preview for the new Star Trek movie, it was obvious how carefully crafted the phrases were, how they were drawing you in to want to learn more.  Also, he used the great example of Darth Vader saying “Luke, I am your father” to show how one moment can change everything the audience has previously experienced with a story (in this case, multiple Star Wars movies) and send them reeling emotionally back through time with reflections and forward with questions.

The takeaways that I found sticky from feedback on 1-minute stories were:

• Specificity always wins over generality — specifics can lead to general conclusions, but speaking in general always stays in the abstract.  That said, including the right specifics is a big challenge.
• Avoid anecdotal phrases that take your audience out of the moment.  Any doubt portrayed by the storyteller about an aspect of the story will be taken on by the audience.  In contrast, look to include turns of phrase that are evocative and relevant, which will stick with the audience
• The ending of a story is crucial: you don’t need to explain everything.  Leave your audience to figure out the conclusion on their own, but also try to leave them wanting more (e.g. open ended sentences)
• Emphasize the main character’s crucial decision
• Show instead of tell.  This concept can be applied in a couple of ways.  First, don’t tell people what your story is going to be about, just show them the story.  Second, the use of metaphors can be powerful (e.g. food as a metaphor for wealth)
• Know who you’re pitching to and make the pitch feel like a conversation

•  Marketing is an invitation to find out more
• Learn when to be quiet—don’t talk too much

I think we saw these reflected in the feedback on the personal stories we heard today. A good story doesn’t leave you completely full; it leaves you with a bit of hunger remaining, hunger to hear/see more. A good brand story does the same.

Key Reflections on Storytelling from Today’s Class

•  An arc, not a situation. Creating an arc means showing a character on both sides of a cusp of change. A situation might be a snapshot of points on one side or the other of a cusp—but not both—and therefore does not convey character transformation. Strive for the arc.
• Conciseness. Picasso said, “Art is the elimination of the unnecessary.” This holds true for a story.
• Don’t worry too much about chronology, as long as the story makes sense. The filmmaker Godard said, “A story should have a beginning, a middle, and an end… but not necessarily in that order.”
• Twists & Reversals. Good stories often change course suddenly and unexpectedly, though some setup is always necessary to foster the perception of plausibility.

 Implications of storytelling techniques for branding and personal branding:

 The core of a branding story is the value proposition.

 The arc of the brand story might therefore be what you are with the product vs. what you are without the product. For example, if Microsoft’s value proposition is the ability to be more efficient, then the brand story might be centered on the super efficient person you are because you use Office versus the less efficient person you would be without it. The value prop should be concise and clear, like a story.

Value propositions can be functional, emotional, and self-expressive. Similarly, these could also be said to be the three dimensions on which stories engage audiences. I think we saw that in the personal stories people told today. For instance, the story about one student’s childhood experience with his parents tapped into the emotional dimension of storytelling. The story about the suit-wearing man following a young woman into the desert to propose marriage leveraged the self-expressive dimension because it engaged us by getting us to identify with its humorous voice. My own could arguably have been described as more functional.

Similarly, I think we could see how the 6-word stories could also be comprehensively described by these three approaches. Those that were direct descriptions were functional; the feeling-oriented strings of words emotional; and the distinctive or funny voices self-expressive.

In particular, I thought it was interesting that many people used their stories to call attention to part of their identity that seemed like it might not be part of their image. (The inverse pattern of a gap analysis?) Without singling people out (myself included!) it seemed like this might have been a common thread in many stories. 

And finally, a book I recommend that is often utilized by those writing for film and TV:

“The Writer’s Journey: Mythic Structure for Storytellers and Screenwriters.”

• They have 3 kids, both make movies, Justine is going to go back to being a lawyer for a bit to subsidize her “hobby”
• There is a lot of power in titles (“Cancer” vs. “Birth”)
• There is a lot of power in people’s titles too (Being an Imagineer at Disney tells a story in and of itself; there is  Dean of Pixar Universtiy; would have been cool if Genevieve from Intel really was the Chief Anthropologist)
• Stories need a “twist“, like in 30 Rock
• Think arcs - tell stories, not situations (Casablanca, not Jurassic Park)
• Be laconic
• Editing yourself is absurdly hard.  Good story-telling is absurdly  hard.  So don’t beat yourself up if you don’t get it right the first time around.

Notes that came as a result of Class Pitches:

• You can make your story sticky by playing on your character(David is a cross between the Stapler Guy from Office Space and Kramer – that’s pretty unique!)
• Letting the audience come to an internal emotional conclusion on its own, by telling them the facts rather than telling them how you felt, is much more powerful
• Think hard about how much of it you have to tell versus how much you should let the audience infer and imagine for itself.  Every sentence you utter better be necessary – take a machete to your story, and only leave the diamonds, get rid of the rough.
• BUT, control for the important facts.  Be aware that whatever you do leave out will be open to interpretation, so if there are things you would rather the audience not be ambiguous about, stick them in.  This is especially important when details make something unique and specific, as opposed to a “trope” that evokes cliches, evoking a been-there-done-that boredom in the audience.
• You can relay blunt information through creative means - instead of saying “he got better”, you can say “5 years later, we were back to wrestling again.”

Research firm Millward Brown recently published their 4^th consecutive BrandZ report, ranking the top 100 most valuable global brands.  BrandZ claims to be the world’s largest study of consumers and business-to-business users’ brand preferences, ran this study, marking the 4^th consecutive year.

How does Millward Brown calculate brand value?

The three variables that make up Brand Value include Branded “intangible” earnings, Brand contribution, and a Brand Multiple.  Brand value is the product of these three variables:

1. Intangible Earnings: Branded earnings are identified and capital charges are subtracted. This ensures only value above and beyond what investors would require any investment in the brand to earn is captured.
2. Brand Contribution: The degree to which brand plays a role in generating earnings. This is established through analysis of country-, market-, and brand–specific consumer research from the BrandZ database.
3. Brand Multiple: Includes both an analysis of financial projections (earnings multiple) and consumer data (brand specific growth opportunities and barriers).  This multiple is then indexed on a 1 to 10 scale (10 being the highest)

What are the Results?

The report lists the top 100 global brands, ranked by brand value.  The clear leader this year is Google with an estimate brand value of $100 billion dollars, with Microsoft coming in second with a brand value of $76 billion.

Any interesting trends in the data?

• With the economic downturn, people are retreating to their homes to enjoy the small pleasures, often with loved ones.  As a result, gaming companies, the coffee category, and online shopping all experienced significant growth year-over-year.
• Additionally, frugality is replacing conspicuous consumption across most categories. For example, people are drinking less bottled water, and are opting for tap water.
• Finally, technology companies occupied 7 of the top 10 most valuable brands, with the mobile operators experiencing the highest growth of all the categories. 

Click here to access the full report

People who are able to build a brand from their own name seem to manage everything. They decide everything, they master everything, and they choose what is said about them or not. I believe that this is partly true. No matter your power, you always have stronger people who allow your brand to exist and even boost you to succeed. These same people can decide to kill you just like that.

A recurrent debate focuses on journalists and the balance between on and off. Why does a reporter break the “off” rule to reveal something to the world? This question is particularly important in the case of personal brands like politicians or stars. Do you have to reveal that a president has a mistress or secret children? Do you have to reveal that an important person with crucial functions is sick? It goes beyond purely ethical issues. It is not just about what is right or wrong.

I think that everybody focuses too much on journalists. It is not a matter of function but a matter of power. Professor Aaker gave a really important insight in class. We have to interpret facts with the perspective of extreme users. By monitoring extreme users and by understanding why, when and how their opinions and behaviors change, we can understand why there is a general move towards the same direction. The media and branding system is not linear. Changes occur by sudden breaks. There are thresholds enabling the switch from adulation to abhorrence.

These thresholds are important because they set up the level of listening. When a star becomes a target, it seems that no critics occurred before a certain point. On the contrary, after this point, everybody is always hounding that star. This is often a wrong impression. In fact, some people try to reveal things at any time. The impact that their voices have depends on audiences’ ability to listen. The number of extreme users and their behavior reflect this ability. There is always a time when the echo of extreme users voice is heard and listened by the mass. Fans are listened during the adulation period. Detractors’ voice resonates during the prosecution. Journalists are the catalyst of such a phenomenon.

People with power use extreme users to manipulate situations. The person trying to build his or her brand does not have the keys forever. There are always stakeholders involved and lots of money at stake, which justify to create a star or to kill her.

What is the role of new technologies? More power for people against the powers that be? No more manipulation? Fairness? Democracy? Internet amplifies any phenomenon. It gives more power to weak people. But in the end, the issue is the same. There always some people that can decide to make you fall or to make you shine. Internet is even slyer. The danger comes from anywhere. As a brand, you not only have powerful stakeholders that could try to destroy your reputation, but you can have any individual person worldwide. Everything is more extreme with Internet. A viral video can make you a star immediately (ask Susan Boyle) or kill your brand in a couple of hours. Maybe the way deal with it is to use Internet as a monitoring tool for extreme users.

“Power is my mistress. I have worked too hard at her conquest to allow anyone to take her away from me.” – Napoleon Bonaparte

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/93/fasttalk.html

Let’s take an example that is a big question mark for me. I encourage you to give me your opinion by commenting this post.

Why does Subway offer burritos and pizzas?

For me, Subway is first and foremost a sandwich brand that allows you to choose your healthy food. It is a fast food chain (Quick Service Restaurant as a category) by the choice of the product (sandwich). But it is healthy. I go to Subway but not to MacDonald’s. The firm seems to build the brand on the healthy reputation (you lose weight by eating only Subways….).

My questions are simple. Why do they try to escape the sandwich segment? Why do they expand their product line with pizzas and burritos that have a “fat” and “unhealthy” image?

The subway brand is of course linked to this way of taking the line and ordering each ingredient to add in the sandwich. The purpose is to do the same with the pizza. Pizzas become healthy because you compose it. But the opposition of contradictory images is strong and can become expensive to fight.

Why do they choose this strategy? Increasing traffic and gaining market share is a matter of survival. The crisis is an opportunity for the QSR market. It is more expensive to expand organically the Starbucks way than by adding products in the menu. These are some of the reasons they choose this strategy. But it is still very dangerous for the brand. Personally, I am confused to find pizzas at Subway.

Martha’s Name:

Pros:

• Differentiate
• Extendable
• Emotional benefit
• Name has story

Cons:

• Traditional name
• Risk during Crisis/Uncontrollable situation
• Relate to brand as person and vice versa
• Puts personal life in focus/on pedestal 

Why was there such a backlash after crisis?

• Value judgments she was placing on others makes her a target
• Uncertainty behind bars (who takes over when she retires?)
• Media: fall from grace story
  • America’s fascination with a train wreck (and comeback story)
  • She promised perfection – bigger target if anything went wrong

Importance of self-parody: (inability hurt Martha early on, ability later helped her)

• Can eliminate desire to knock off pedestal

KEY TAKEAWAY OF CLASS: When you go to jail, it doesn’t have to be a bad thing! 

Rest of class:

Authenticity: if you’re home alone at 3am – what comes to mind?

Per Deb Gruenfeld: Everyone is acting all the time.  We are always wearing a mask – at home, at work.

To be authentic – try to feel authentic, natural, close to flow

For personal brand:

Stand for something

Be different (POV)

• People don’t judge you as badly as you think they will if you do things differently

 Favorite quote of class:  No one will remember what you said, they will remember how you made them feel.

Building Your Brand

By ALEXANDRA LEVIT (WSJ 4/28/09)

It used to be enough to walk into a job search with an impressive résumé. If you were really enterprising, maybe you’d have a portfolio to showcase your best work. Now, though, people want a better way to stand out, and that has resulted in the very 21st-century concept of personal branding.

If you’ve been in the workplace longer than 10 years, you might be thinking that personal branding was actually born in 1997, when management guru Tom Peters wrote about “the brand called you.”

But never before has personal branding been so mainstream. The Internet makes it possible for everyone to establish a brand, and if you don’t know what yours is, now is the time to find out.

Experts such as Dan Schawbel, the author of “Me 2.0: Build a Powerful Brand to Achieve Career Success,” define personal branding as how we market ourselves to other people. Your brand should be strong and memorable enough to set you apart and to make a positive impression on people you don’t know.

Show You Can Do the Job

“Personal branding serves as career protection in uncertain times,” says Mr. Schawbel. “It’s also a critical tool for reinventing yourself because you can leverage the reputation and skill set you already have to prove you have the ability to do the job you want.”

A veteran of the recruitment research field, 41-year-old Jim Stroud developed an early interest in social media. Hoping to launch a new career in the field, Mr. Stroud built an online brand as “The Searchologist.”

“A searchologist is … someone who is proficient in searching the Internet” for people who aren’t actively seeking new jobs, he explains. His presence in search engines and networks such as Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn, as well as a podcast series and blog, led Mr. Stroud to his job as social-media development manager for EnglishCafe, an English learning community for global professionals.

So how do you create a personal brand? Start by understanding where you are in your career and where you’re going.

How Are You Perceived?

“The personal brand is, first and foremost, about the person,” says Mr. Schawbel. “The clearer you are about your destination, the easier it will be to communicate why others should pay attention.”

In addition to showcasing your own blend of expertise and experience, your personal brand should communicate the qualities and values you want to be known for — for example, being cutting-edge, helpful, provocative, approachable or honest.

If you need some help, do an informal focus group with personal and professional contacts to get their feedback on how you are perceived. Ask if they see you as the type to thrive under high-pressure situations, or if you’re more comfortable knowing exactly what to expect and having time to prepare for it.

Mr. Schawbel recommends taking a course in Web development or graphic design so you can translate your brand visually.

Become familiar with the tools, including online communities, of your industry, and make sure your presence on all of them is always updated to consistently and accurately reflect your brand — you.

As Jennifer promised, Geoff really did make great use of an organizing framework (Tech Adoption Lifecycle/Market Development Model) to explain how he views the world:

Tech Adoption Lifecycle (from Everett Rogers):

1. Innovators (Techies)
2. Early Adopters (Visionaries)
3. Early Majority (Pragmatists)
4. Late Majority (Conservatives)
5. Laggards (Skeptics)

Geoff is most well-known for his “Crossing the Chasm” concept (made into a book by the same name).  This notion is predicated on the idea that there is an important gap (‘chasm’) between Early Adopters (Visionaries) and the Early Majority (Pragmatists).  Brands/companies that successfully ‘cross the chasm’ are well-positioned for market share capture through the ‘tornado.’  But, getting viability ‘at the bowling alley’ is a tough accomplishment and a (most often) necessary prerequisite to market share capture in the tornado.  The big driver of success is winning over the pragmatists in the early majority.

The five steps in Geoff’s model that line up with the lifecycle framework are as follows:

1. Early Market (innovators and early adopters) à Get Visibility

• Brand the Technology

1. Crossing the Chasm à Get Viability (Bowling Alley)

• Brand the Problem

1. Early Majority à Get Market Share (Tornado)

• now, Brand the Company

1. Early Main Street à Profitable Growth

• Work with the brand you have

1. Late Main Street à Profitable Relationships (traditional marketing firms (P&G) are experts here)

• Take your brand private

o How to execute this step was the most unclear part of the day’s lecture, in my mind

Geoff’s consistent ‘reliance’ on this framework was commendable, and I was surprised how infrequently I felt the framework references were a stretch.  (So often, these frameworks break down, in my mind.  And, this one really seemed to hold up…or Geoff is just really compelling as a speaker and is very adept at identifying corroborating evidence/examples.) J

Key takeaway was:

• Adapt your brand to the appropriate stage in the lifecycle of the industry/category.  Or, as he colloquially put it: “different horses for different courses.”

As Geoff talked through the five steps in his model, I also found the following insights interesting:

• Two type of business model paradigms necessitate different brand/company strategies:
  • Complex Systems (part of early market development cycle) are all about reputation
  • Volume Operations (more important in later stages) require strategic brands to help communicate with consumer because realistically a company cannot have high-touch salesforce deployment at purchase location for every consumer
  • Getting visibility in the early market (Stage 1) is key, but defining what is successful visibility is changing today based on shifts in the news industry (Fortune Magazine features are not what they once were)
    • The separation of adoption from purchase has provided challenges (i.e. monetization of ‘successful’ internet businesses has not yet been solved)
    • Proving viability is often about reaching the tipping point with the right audience (pragmatic, but willing prospects)
      • Clear references to Gladwell’s work on the importance of mavens, promoters, and connectors)
      • Gaining market share sometimes is a ‘patience game’ – Apple had to know how to ‘stick around’ while it re-grouped so that it could be re-birthed as a pre-eminent company following ‘darker times’
        • Knowing your niche and how to communicate to it is critical for ‘chimpanzees’

Gotta be true to the market power of your brand (which can change over time)

The real issue with long hours is that it is not just about volume of work. It is a strong culture. And as in any strong culture, it is getting worse and worse because each person tries to be more Catholic than the Pope. If you speak with an analyst that has huge and dark rings under his eyes, he will always deny his awful situation. He will even carry things to extremes. “I like it!” “Pressure is so good!” “Have you seen my car?” Each person hired in investment banking builds and strengthens this culture. How do you expect to change things?

Maybe the crisis will allow revolutionizing the industry. But I have doubts. I tried to do it my way. I was not rejected but I could hope to go real high in the hierarchy. I was different. I was the ugly duckling. My hours? 7am to 6.30pm. Not more, never less. How was I able to perform and achieve my goals? I was the best in my department at my level and at the direct upper level. Was I fairly rewarded for that? Of course not! Many people try to hinder me behind my back. I had to manage many conflicts and to deal with many people hatching vicious plots all the time against me.

That is why I am doubtful about Goldman and the culture of brightness against the culture of volume. Inside the culture of volume, people feel threatened by brightness. Brightness is not the driver of success. You have to spend long hours at work and advertising yourself via this angle. “I spent the weekend working at the office!” “Really?” “Yeah, and it was so hard but so exciting in the same time.”

I do hope these conversations will cease to exist in investment banking and anywhere else. I come from engineering and I used to be a rocket scientist. In this world, the shortest answers and demonstrations are the best and most elegant ones. You are rewarded for your genius and you spend your evenings and weekends with your wife and kids. This is the real life!

“Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black” – Henry Ford

One only needs to glance at tabloid cover pages to see that celebrities often go to great lengths to hide their flaws.   In contrast, Oprah openly shares and even brings attention to her flaws to ensure that her audience does not expect perfection from her:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/24/oprah-defends-her-hair-th_n_191287.html

http://www.oprah.com/article/omagazine/200901_omag_oprah_weight

Perhaps it is her willingness to show her vulnerabilities that makes Oprah endearing to the public.  Her inclination to admit and to show that despite her fame, wealth, and influence, she is not perfect, and she, too, struggles with issues her audience faces, be it losing a puppy, weight gain, medical issues, or bad hair days.  Instead of presenting herself as a perfect image, she strives to present her authentic self to her audience, and encourages others to do so.   In contrast from the image that Martha Stewart presents, by revealing her own flaws and imperfections, Oprah yields even more influence over her audience because they more readily identify with her.

Similarly, during Jon Stewart and Jim Cramer’s “weeklong feud of the century,” journalists and commentators mostly agreed that Stewart won the battle of public opinion. Perhaps it was because Cramer was the purported expert in finance and investment who confidently asserted that Bear Stearns was a safe investment days before its bankruptcy was announced. Perhaps it was because Stewart presented the story of his grandmother as the face of one of millions of average investors who were adversely affected by the advice espoused by such celebrated pundits.  Finally, perhaps it was because the audience expected Cramer to live up to his promise of being a knowledgeable expert and he failed to deliver, while Stewart never promised to be well-versed in the world of finance,  yet came across as the articulate host of a comedy show who represented the voice of the average investor.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=220533

1)  “I understand”

2)  “I apologize”

3)  “Here’s what I’m going to do about it”

N.B.  Authenticity and sincerity are essential for an effective recovery.

- Personal Brand is part of your personal iceberg; it is an extension of who you are rather than a façade that you put on.

- Personal Brand is a reputation, it’s not manipulative.

- If you shiver when you hear a personal story, perhaps it is a defining story.

- Martha Stewart as an example of Personal Branding. Martha promised perfectionism, which set her up for a backlash in case something went wrong. As much as the US loves a train wreck, what the US also loves is a comeback story. One advantage to a person being a brand is that a person can take responsibility for a pitfall. For example, there is data that indicates that if a physician apologizes for an error, the likelihood of a lawsuit plummets in half

A personal brand that is rooted in perfectionism is playing a dangerous game. The strength of the brand is rooted in the likeability of the human that is the living, breathing representation of the brand. By definition, to err ishuman. If your brand is perfection, than it is not human. While everyone may aspire to be perfect at times, at least in some aspect of his life, we tire of perfection. To like a brand that stands for perfection, wears us out after a while. Brands should give us emotional benefits, not baggage.

All of this, has led me to consider other brands that are based on a public figure’s personal brand. Oprah, is the first that comes to mind. Oprah’s brand stands for helping you live your best life; not a perfect life, but the best attainable to you. To support this brand image, Oprah strives to remain a peer of her audience, not their superior. Despite, her billions of dollars and wealth of experiences few people will have, she remains accessible to her audience. She does this bycarving out clear areas of incompetence.

Oprah’s area of incompetence is her weight. Her struggle with her weight, makes all of her other accomplishments seem inspiring, rather than irritating. Because she is human, and recognizes it, we are willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on everything else. It’s not much fun to attack someone who has disarmed you by exposing their own vulnerabilities.

The data supports this theory. ”The ‘media blitz’ dedicated to her weight gain helped her sell 1.1 million copies of O Magazine’s January 2009 edition. It was the best-selling issue of O in 3 years.  Brands matter at the bottom line and the bottom line is, Fat Oprah Sells.

Apologize!

Relationship levels: 1. Friends and family; 2. Interests; 3. Hobbies (in nice concentric circles)

To follow your passion: Jessica Jackley

Her next venture: personality and brand so intertwined people “won’t let her work at for-profit”

Americans love underdogs and repentant sinners

Sharon Meers – Getting to 50-50

Take on big problems to create perception as problem seeker

Every crisis is an opportunity (even going to jail!)

Why so eager to tear Martha down? Perfectionism? Hypocrisy? Lack of humility? Gender?

Authenticity – are we always playing a role?

Reputation – what do you stand for? Or is personal brand really just manipulative?

Transgressions have halo effects (iPhone pricing; Tylenol recall; Mattel lead toys)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yZHveWFvqM

Email from Kodak Gallery:

Do you know that your stored photos may be deleted?

We think your photos are important. So we are writing to let you know that we’ve recently modified the Gallery’s Terms of Service ,* and you do not currently meet the minimum purchase requirement established by our new storage policy. Please be aware that your stored photos may be deleted if you do not act soon.

How our new storage policy works.

It’s long been our policy that Gallery customers make an annual purchase in exchange for unlimited photo storage and sharing. However, without a minimum defined purchase amount, some customers have ended up spending as little as 15¢. The result: Our loyal customers who regularly shop the Gallery have essentially been subsidizing those who don’t.

So, to better balance the scales, we’ve made a simple adjustment to our policy. In order to continue to store photos at the Gallery, members with photo storage of 2 gigabytes (GB) or less must make annual minimum purchases totaling at least $4.99.

What does this mean for you? All you have to do is make purchases of $4.99 or more before 05/16/2009 , and your photos will be stored for one year from the date of that qualifying purchase. Thereafter, just make annual Gallery purchases totaling at least $4.99 to preserve your stored photos.** If you’ve placed an order in the last 5 days that meets the minimum requirement, thank you and please disregard this message.

We look forward to continuing our relationship with you.

The KODAK Gallery

My suggested response to Kodak Gallery:

I, too, think my photos are important. It’s long been my policy to only patronize organizations who value their relationships with customers. Your recent note currently does not meet this minimum standard established by my policy. Please be aware that I now store my photos with Shutterfly. I look forward to discontinuing my relationship with you.

Sincerely,

Former Kodak Gallery User

2) Don’t keep your thoughts to yourself.  Sharing what I was trying to convey actually helped me to refine my brand.

3) Revisions aren’t bad, they are simply refinements that help you get closer to expressing yourself.

4) Be a kid again.  Creativity should be fearless.

5) Don’t just seek adjectives from those you know and trust but seek some from those you know least.  It helps you understand further how others see you.

Firms like Microsoft or Intel hire anthropologists to study customers. How is it possible? How can engineers even have the idea to hire someone so far away from their views on the world? The first lesson is here. Be open-minded and don’t stay in your own universe where everything is easy, smooth and with no surprise. As a future leader and top executive, you must take risks in fields where conservatism is the standard.

The discussion about what “love” means in different cultures made me think of the work of a famous French anthropologist, Claude Lévi-Strauss. He worked on myths and used a structuralist approach to dissect the mechanism behind myths. The main issue was that myths are fantastic and unpredictable stories specific to certain cultures (unique and particular by definition), but all the stories told in myths all over the place and time are very similar (this is where the apparent paradox is). In his Structural Anthropology, he says: “If the content of myth is contingent, how are we to explain the fact that myths throughout the world are so similar?” The answer is given by revealing a common frame in all the myths, sort of universal law that would rule any myth on earth.

I tried to increase the scope of this anthropologist theory to the world of marketing and business. Everybody today focuses on being global. Stanford has a Global Management Program. All multinationals are proud to be global. However many firms failed to succeed globally. Anthropology gave me the answer. The secret is not to be global but to be universal. There is a common frame and a universal law behind each service or each product. The role of marketers and strategists is to find it. They need to find what will ring a bell for each culture. Firms often try to be global by pushing the same product but with a different package proving they are aware of different cultures. The big problem here is that the product is build on a specific and particular frame and not on the universal one. The product does not ring any bell or in the worst cases ring the wrong ones.

For example, there is a local use of Internet as there is a local myth anywhere on the planet. The need is to understand in Internet what the universal law is as Lévi-Strauss did for myths. There is a “brand theme” as there is a “mytheme.” Has Google discovered the law? Have other firms done it? There is a lot to comment here…

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” – George Orwell

The key insights and stories I took away from Genevieve are:

- Ask simple questions and let your consumer do the talking.  Her 3 questions for consumers when she visits homes are 1) who lives here and how are you related?  2) what did you do yesterday?  3) what technology do you have in your home and how do you use it.  These questions are enough to get people talking and you’ll find out a lot about them and their household.

- Different cultures are different.  The word “love” has different implications in different cultures.  As obvious as this sounds, it’s important to think about for the word “love” because it can range from romantic love to erotic love, religious love, love for children, love for one’s own country etc.

- Be creative when asking questions.  Taking the direct approach (what do you love?) might not work because of cultural differences, but also because it may seem like a personal and intimate question.  The opposite question (what do you hate?) might not always work either so be creative and try something like “what don’t you like?”

- Even more creativity is required when asking the hard questions to get to what people don’t really want to talk about (which are the most interesting).  To get at the heart of the consumer, you might need to get the family or friends together so you can piece out info, or ask “what else did I not ask you?”  Either way, let the consumer do the talking.

- Some tips on successful conversations to draw insights from your consumer:

1) Ask lots of open-ended questions.  The fewer the better.

2) Start out by asking questions that they’ve rehearsed answers to.  Eg. Ask “how did you two meet?” to a couple.

3) Be patient.  Some people take a long time to answer.  Don’t try to force the conversation but let it take its course.

4) Get to the level of your consumer.  Women like to talk to other women.  For children, get to their eye level.

5) Reciprocate – if you ask personal questions and they answer them, they might ask you back so be prepared to share your story.

One story I particularly liked that Genevieve referred to is about Wells Fargo where there was one female customer at one branch who kept coming back to check on her money.  Normally, something like that might have gone unnoticed.  But someone at the branch did notice it during a customer survey initiative and actually asked her why she did this.  Only then did Wells Fargo find out that she did this because she had grown up during the depression when a bank statement might mean nothing – there might not be any money in her account at the bank.  That taught them an important lesson: that trust is the non-negotiable at the heart and core of their business.  An obvious insight, maybe, but something that really came through thanks to this one customer.

As Jennifer said at the end of class, what is essential is to be able to fill in this sentence about the brand: “It makes me feel like ______”.   Sounds a little touchy feely too doesn’t it?

Debating about politics is a national sport in France. On TV, in your family or with your friends, you like crying, shouting, and vociferating your political views. There is no politically correct issue there. Maybe this is why French people are seen as cynical and complaining persons. There is no taboo in politics.

The first time I came in the US was a big shock for me. I was working in LA and could not debate with people at work or in bars as I could do it at the terrace of a Café in Saint-Germain-des-Prés. I was really wondering how people do in the US to express their political views. Some form groups to claim something specific. But where is the real and even athletic general debate on politics hidden?

An anthropologist in a marketing class gave me the answer. In brands! American people express their views in the brands they buy, wear and support. Each brand has a story and a background, Each brand sends a message and has a reputation. Each brand means something in the US more than in any other country. Eureka! I won’t see a calamitous dress sense the same way anymore. It will mean something politically. The obvious lack of tastes in the 80s was a political claim about the cold war.

I will interpret things from this political branding perspective from now on. For sure!

“Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.” – Albert Einstein

Genevieve Bell, an Intel anthropologist provided insights on the power of observations and interviews based on her experiences jetting from the homes of the most connected Silicon Valley residents, to those living in the jungles of Southeast Asia.

Initially tasked with representing the ‘Rest of the World’ (ROW) outside the Americas for Intel, a key early insight was how difficult it can be to change the view of those around you who think the world is actually like how they experience it (I’m reminded of several startup entrepreneurs, who tell stories of Silicon Valley-based venture capitalists pushing their company’s to incorporate the latest and greatest technology, regardless of the potential benefits for the business).

Another key theme was how different ‘love’ can be defined, ranging from caring, to romance, to hot and heavy love. In marriage, many Europeans and Americans define it as romance, some aboriginal cultures define it as love of country, while many Indians define it as love of children. In the brand sense, this love can range from a guilty love, to rebellion, to aspiration, to an expression of self. From interviews, a marketing manager realizes how humans have a remarkable capacity to rationalize this love after the fact.

A few other tidbits from Monday’s discussion:

Promiscuity and relationships: Brand loyalty and relationships can differ in intensity. For example, it can be defined by continuity (we know it and always love it) versus a relationship that needs to be replenished on a regular basis with new and exciting experiences and changes.

Kitchen Table: Kitchen tables have a tremendous capacity (and other areas that are in an interviewee’s own setting) to enable people to open up. Often this setting, allows them to feel in charge, comfortable, and able to talk openly.

Ethics, Shmetics: The power of the internet has allowed consumers to become much more discerning when it comes to brand messages (or just connected to other consumers who are). For example, is Dove the image-flouting brand as shown by its ‘Real Beauty’ campaign, or the controversial, push-the-envelope Axe brand.

Different brands are different in different cultures: McDonald’s as the ultimate first date environment in China a few years ago, versus the perception of McDonald’s in the United States.

Do You Remember When: Nostalgia can be an exceptionally powerful driver to create a strong brand relationship, especially when they help us define who we are, where we come from, our who are cultures/families are. With the current economic climate, nostalgia and sincerity are likely to be a strong undercurrent in new advertising.

Thus, Genevieve Bell’s tips/insights were both inspiring, and practical- and, I appreciate the opportunity to practice them in class.

A few of my favorite tips on how to “deeply understand another”:
-Don’t forget your context. Language and emotions can take on very different meanings. Most notably LOVE. The meaning shifts across cultures, individuals, and time (see jennifer’s post)
-Know the right questions to ask (i.e., during her latest work in Australia it was more important to give people space to complain about technology before they were ready to talk about what they liked)
-Sometimes we want to know about the safe side to love (consistency, routine, the familiar)- but don’t forget to ask about the “dangerous” side- (what is the one secret thing you love- the thing you wouldn’t tell anyone else about?)
And some practical tips:
-Find questions that make people feel like they are the expert, not you
-Only ask 3 questions (and talk <20% of the time)
-Your job is to LISTEN (and show you are listening- mirror body language, reflective listening)
-Be reciprocal (be prepared to answer the questions with as much honesty and vulnerable as you are asking for)
-Make sure people feel not only that they have been listened to, but that their words and stories will be useful
-Ask people what their friends are doing (they may not want to ‘reveal’ themselves)
-Ask about yesterday (rather than a typical day- there really is no such thing as a typical day)
-Always a good idea to end with: What else didn’t I ask you?

The key point is that deeply understanding customers’ love allows better brand crafting, and therefore capture of value that comes from branded reputation. Thinking back to Sam’s love for Harleys, one would argue that deep empathy allows good management of brand transgressions too. Surely, for guys, this is Revenge of the SNAGs. Budding CEOs may want to re-think their attitudes. 

For the serious-minded business executives in us, Genevieve’s remarkable abilities (and Intel’s genius in employing her) remind us that it is not enough for firm leaders to have deep empathy. Product managers and designers must share that too. Perhaps more accurately, one must pull them from their idiosynchrosies and frames of love, to understand the rest of the world. In that regard, I found Genevieve’s methods – using pictures, colors, stories, data, and an attitude to match – interesting.  

How to interview for love? Besides appreciating cultural differences and the possibility of personal secret loves, searching for “love’s opposition” and dangerous passions are apparently good ways to generate deep empathy. Naturally, Molly wanted to know how to “get there” during the interview, to elicit those confessions. We duly received psychoanalysis tips. (Perhaps the final word should be: don’t try this at home.) 

Overall, this was an enlightening session. Looking forward to translating deep love into brand design.

What does the brand Kanye West mean?

Kanye West: Pop but Luxury. Edgy but Comfortable. I’m about clashing worlds that you think don’t belong together. This is our world and everything belongs together. That’s the ill thing about our president. Our president is black, but our president is white, too. And the original struggle of America is racism, and to have someone in office that represents both of those sides is what I think this world is about. Segregation and snobbery and elitism should be the wack words. That should be what people use to dis people.

http://www.complex.com/CELEBRITIES/Cover-Story/Kanye-West-2009

-          A brand has dimensions similar to people. Brands can be used as extensions of the self. However, a brand does not have to mimic a person’s personality; a brand can shadow a person’s personality  or allow it to express different parts of people’s personality. 

-          While you market a product to ideals, be sure to design the product to practice. For example, Dove bite-sized chocolates are based on the ideal of ‘indulgence in moderation’. However, in reality you may eat more than one bite-sized piece. 

-          “A brand as anticipation.” Anticipation to interact with a brand is just as important as the actual interaction/experience. Simply thinking about a favorite brand influences one biophysically. Another way to define a brand is the anticipation, anticipation that later drives behavior.

Well, for me, right now, Synthesis Seminar is a mean, clumsy, generally-dumb uncle.

The setting and interaction: I’m in Junior High and my parents are forcing us to spend a week of spring break with the extended family. I get stuck listening to hours of this Uncle’s not-quite-true, re-run stories each day of my vacation, and then he breaks my fishing pole and steals my candy bar. He’s impossible to politely avoid, and he dominates the family interactions so I don’t get to spend quality time with the relatives I actually like. 

… not yet a great brand with me. Maybe I’m not the target market, or maybe I’m just a late adopter… 

I remember this day when I was 8. It is weird because I remember only a couple of shimmering flashes and vivid images. But it is there. I see Judy Garland in her best role. I see Dorothy and Toto taken by this tornado and embarked on an amazing adventure toward Emerald City and the Wizard of Oz. I did like this story when I was a child. I did love it naively and innocently. I could not imagine at that time that 23 years later, I would be following the dream to have silver shoes and find my Wizard of Oz, my emerald city and finally my home back again. Geoffrey Moore made me realize it. I want his tornado. I want my tornado.

However, in my story, I am Dorothy, but also Scarecrow, Tin Woodman and Cowardly Lion. How can I be every character at once? Easy. I am in Stanford in search of a brain and develop an entrepreneurial mindset. I try to scare all these damned birds that caw me to give up and have a regular job. But I resist and try also to listen to my heart. Sometimes it feels like needing to find a new one. With the heart goes the courage. Being an entrepreneur and daring to live this his call is mainly a matter of courage. So, I follow my golden road and expect that the Winged Monkeys are gorillas.

Two things stroke me in Geoffrey’s theory. The first one is that I really don’t want to be a chimp in my niche. Chimps are not happy even if they try to accept their condition. They wanted to be gorillas and now their niches are too small. Their niches are cages. I am too claustrophobic to be a chimp. How could I be happy in my niche? I could not. The most worrying thing is that it is almost impossible to escape from this jail. Very few firms did it. Apple is a good example. The company crossed the chasm but Microsoft and the PC became the leaders in the tornado. Apple almost died in its niche, which was more like a crate in this case. The firm needed years and many shocks to be able to finally launch a tornado that made Apple what it is today.

This Apple/Microsoft example leads me to a point that I have discussed with many professors of the GSB and some CEOs as well. Can we be good at two different stages? It seems that it is extremely difficult. The handful of examples are just exceptions that prove the rule. It is overwhelming for me. If I set up a firm today, does it mean that I won’t be able to manage it after the first success? I would like to be optimistic but Geoffrey confirmed what Charles O’Reilly explained me. To get the firm to the next level, people need to change. An outstanding CEO during the early stage of the firm will not be the right leader for the main street. The firms crossing the chasm have almost no chance to be the leaders in the tornado. INVENTION IS NOT EXECUTION.

What should I do then? I could fight to be the exception. Or I could try to focus on the tornado by using the technology that someone else made cross the chasm. I should try to prepare all the climatic conditions to create the precious vortex. And for sure, I should hope to have luck. Right now, I am still a Gorilla in the Mist… But I can still hear the song…

“Somewhere over the rainbow

Way up high,

There’s a land that I heard of

Once in a lullaby

Somewhere over the rainbow

Skies are blue

And the dreams that you dare to dream


Really do come true…”

•  The goals of growing a brand differ at various stages of the brand’s life. 
• When launching new products focus on acceptance, trial of the product, and distribution.
• In early stages of creating a new category, competitors are not the enemy; they are allies. The biggest threat to a start-up is the possibility that customers won’t understand the value of the new technology and won’t buy it. 
• With accepted products, differentiation, advertising, and product benefits matter.  Mass or traditional marketing doesn’t always make sense, especially for a value brand. 

  Once a market self-organizes into pecking order, there are three categories:

• Gorilla: set the price and the trend (Microsoft)
• Monkey: copy and sell at low price (Dell)
• Chimp: those that compete to become a gorilla but do not make it. Typically uses incompatible technology to the Gorilla (Apple)
• Admit your position and customers will value your honesty i.e.Apple admitting to being a chimp rather than trying to pass as agorilla.
• Within a brand, you can play more that one role: Apple is achimp in computers but is a gorilla with its I-POD.
• At the time you get very good at marketing, it’s time to change due to the life-cycle.

a) To get the pragmatists (who end up being the ones who cast the vote as to whether your technology is accepted) on board, it is important to get small herds of consumers to play and then the viral excitement will spurn to other herds (e.g., Blackberry for business, then the Pearl for consumers)

b) If you aren’t a gorilla don’t try to be one. Be the chimp or monkey and play your role (be explosive, make sure to focus on your value prop for niche customers)

c) When it comes to software, it is important to be uninvasive. If you create friction in upgrading (making the user have to be conscious and proactively ask for it) it will cause consumer suffering and aggravation

What struck home with me the most was how Moore explained how billion dollar industries just disappear in matter of a few years. The horse and buggy. Film. Currently the print media industry. Amazing. People are all talking about Clean Tech right now, but I’m wondering what else is out there that is going to be highly explosive.. hmmm

One key insight from the Harley lecture is: Transgressions are not always bad.  The key is to fix them quickly (timeliness is important – another insight) and choose a method of remedy that is authentic to your brand promise.  

So, transgressions are inevitable, they are not always bad, *and*if you can fix the resolve the issue quickly and well they can in fact be opportunities for “consumer-brand” relationship. Seinfeld once again helps illustrate this final point: 

Jerry: Let me take a guess. She cried and you caved. …

George: I got to tell you I felt terrible. …

Jerry: tes, it’s very difficult. Few men have the constitution for it. That’s why breakups take two or three tries. …Well, at least you probably had some, uh, pretty good make-up sex after.

George: I didn’t have any sex.

Jerry: You didn’t have make-up sex? How could you not have make-up sex? I mean that’s the best feature of the heavy relationship.

Source

- Shal

-Brands are about promises, and meeting those promises: (Safeway/Target example) Southwest doesn’t offer food and people think, “Wow, Southwest is saving me money.” United sells food and people think, “Wow, those greedy bastards are trying to make money off of me. Didn’t my ticket cost enough?”

-It’s the little things that matter: Just like the little things matter in a relationship (loading dishes into the dishwasher, buying flowers on a random Friday, that extra hug at the end of a day), so do the little things expected of your brand (e.g., Harley and t-shirts). These small acts signify the underlying connection between two parties.

-Loyalty is not king: I can’t be “in love with” all brands that I use. I found the fact that the average person maintains only 8 relationships of a close, committed nature to be fascinating. It’s okay if your customer isn’t your lover – think about what makes sense for a given brand.

-Be creative and playful to get to the bottom of things: To understand people’s true feelings about a brand, it’s important to get creative – “If Brand X were a person, what would it say to you at a party?”

—-

-Last takeaway – When Jennifer says that she wants everyone to participate, she means everyone  . I brought a guest to class, remember Paul? He was (inadvertantly) cold called. Luckily, he came up with something!

Kind of a “so what” insight until you think about the implications. The company can mess up on all sorts of random things, and it’s not critical. In fact, I believe the company’s missteps can actually strengthen customer loyalties as riders bond with each other by griping about the company. A great example of this was the Harley-sponsored “Posse Ride” across the U.S. There were a lot of things that the company did wrong, such as not having enough commemorative t-shirts and expecting participants to stand in a number of long lines. But, at the end of the ride, a shocking 100% of riders said that, if they replaced their motorcycle, they would buy another Harley. 100% loyalty?!? Wow; insanely high and increasing from the pre-ride survey results of 89%. And, beyond repeat purchase, 100% would definitely sign up for another long distance Harley Owners’ Group rally (vs. 86% pre-ride). Beaming loyalties, yet most riders didn’t come away feeling like Harley really understood their needs. You see, it wasn’t about Harley getting logistics right or even customers feeling cared for by the company. The customers own the brand and are powerfully united by what it represents.

This slack certainly doesn’t apply to every company. I just used TurboTax to complete my taxes, and their brand promise was to get my taxes done right. I viewed them as a business partner, and I expected them to pay attention to details and deliver. If they mess up, I will be hesitant to return. All the same, I don’t expect them to be exciting. Harley, on the other hand, is a rebellious best friend. Their promise is freedom and independence; far from perfection of details. With business partners and best friends, some areas of incompetence are okay. So, go ahead and mess up…just not with your promise.

The story begins during a Posse Ride. It could be a road trip as we can see in many movies or read in many novels. Actually, it is more than that. A lot more. People are angry. Barbara is furious not to have her t-shirt. Alan makes a big deal of it. Riders cry and complain. What’s going on? Why such a mess for just a t-shirt?

It is not just a t-shirt. It is a Harley Davidson souvenir that symbolizes their participation to the Posse Ride. It is a picture of their adventure. It is the symbol of their dreams. Look at them waiting in two huge lines. Amanda the rider-mom, Alan, Jeff or Richard who left their suits at home to wear their costumes of riders. They look here and there and catch in the eyes of their friends all the hopes and dreams of entire lives. How is it possible? How can a brand create such feelings?

Harley Davidson is no more a firm and not just a brand. It represents the American values and pride. Harleys are not just bikes. They are part of families. Each rider could tell the story of life and love with the world’s best bike. This is the story of “Harley and me.” You cannot really control your Harley but it gives you devotion, love and trust. Harleys are part of each best moment of their owners’ life. In a world where everything is about work and stress, mortgage and disillusion, Harleys give hope, freedom and adventure. Harleys fulfill dreams and make you feel good. Harleys change you.

Indeed, underneath the fearless and debonair riders are sometimes hidden ordinary and humdrum executives. Your boss may be a rider. Your colleague may have large tattoos camouflaged by a white shirt. Harley Davidson is able to change lives. It is not surprising to meet a guy who got his bike from his father and now have a whole family worshipping Harleys. This guy could have two sons called Harley and David of course. His wife would wear leather jackets only. They would have nicknames like Road Runner or Queen of Asphalt. The kids would have removable Hells Angels tattoos. And the whole family would sleep in the dirt, shoot back at thunder and eat bugs.

I am impressed and so much intrigued by this story. As a future entrepreneur, how can I create a brand that would mean so much to customers? I am not even sure that the founders can fully drive this phenomenon. I don’t say that it is pure luck. It comes from the quality of the products and the meaning behind. It appeals to deeper values and roots than just dollars and profit. The legend is built at each hiring and each new customer acquisition. The secret goes around alignment and consistency I guess. But I would be interested by your opinion. Tell me how you would create your own legend beyond your brand.

That’s it. Now brands have personalities. Each person in the U.S. is exposed to more than 3,500 brands each day, on any kind of forms. It is huge and this is only just a minimum. I know, it becomes overwhelming. Now, if brands have personalities, it means that you meet each day more than 3,500 people! It is E-X-H-A-U-S-T-I-N-G!

If you thought that having 500 friends on Facebook or 1,000 contacts on Linkedin was impressive, this piece of news may put you off. 3,500 people. It is like being a rock star and throwing yourself in the audience. 3,500 persons with specific traits. Some are sincere, a little bit down-to-earth or wholesome. Some are exciting with this cool attitude and this unique spirit. Some are sophisticated and charming. Others are rugged and very masculine with of course hairy chests and boots. Finally, others are competent and successful.

How can you deal with this? Obviously you cannot live with so many personalities without having conflicts, falling in love, being attracted, disappointed and sometimes unfaithful. Are you the problem? I picture you, right now, reading this article with beads of sweat standing on your forehead. You’re coming crazy. You can hardly deal with your oppressive family, your hysterical boss and your awkward dog. It costs you thousands of dollars a month in therapy. 3,500 people! HEEEEEELLLPPPP!!!

Don’t worry. You do not have a problem. Firms have. They will have to deal with their brands as parents try to deal with their teenagers. They will ask for help and will consult a therapist. Back in old times when brands were only concepts that firms pretended to manage, CEOs used to hire brilliant consultants to build successful brands. What did successful mean? Purely and simply making money. Now, a new order is in place. CEOs need to find a shrink to “cure” the personality of their brands.

Who are these “brand therapists”? Is it easy to cure a brand? What does the couch look like? Poor CEOs. As theirs, good therapies depend both on the patient and the therapist. The best therapist cannot cure a resistant patient. And a brand “who” would like to be cured at any price might not need a therapist. It seems difficult to make the profile of the perfect “brand shrink.” Will he be Freudian?

Here is a good question. Now that brands have personalities, it means that they may have desires and even a specific form of libido. Rugged brands may be attracted by sophisticated ones. The Marlboro cowboy may have a crush on Coco Chanel. In your world, men come from Mars and women from Venus. In this brand new world, masculine brands come from Harley Davidson and feminine ones from Victoria’s Secret. They cannot understand each other but cannot live without each other. Harley has his Hells Angels and Victoria her angels coming from heaven in thongs and bras. All these angelic symbols have tattoos and wear leather but they use it differently… most of the times.

What would Freud tell about this? Maybe masculine brands need to resolve their Oedipus complex and find their feminine part deep inside. Nike opened stores just for women and Apple used sexy designs to send back the fruit from Adam to Eve. Or Freud would focus on the unconscious mind of brands. The unconscious mind of Google can help understand its behavior. To kill its father Microsoft, Google tries to take the same dominating path while repressing its Big Brother-like attitude deep into its cool and innovative unconscious.

As you can see, if brands have personalities, firms may have to find new ways of managing them. This new way may involve new specialists and rely on new theories and approaches. There is for sure a fascinating new world to discover.

Since the IDEO revolution and the amazing success of firms like Apple, design is the very latest thing. Does it deserve such a good press? I guess so. The obvious reason is that it works. Design allows innovation and out-of-the-box thinking. Without reinventing the wheel, design dares to create and shock.

However, design really deserves its amazing reputation when you have tried the process once. You do not need to do it twice. The first time is enough to make you become a fan. Why? Each person will find a reason. You really work in teams, you really interact and empathize with people, you have fun, you have an impact, you change things and you dream. Everybody is energetic and committed. Of course, each of this reason is enough. But I will find one more.

For me, design is so unique because it is the only business place where you deeply and fully use the “YES AND…” mindset. People who have tried improv’ can understand. For those who have not, you may have watched the Jim Carrey’s movie Yes Man. This is it. In our society, most of people have an individualistic attitude that acts as a roadblock for innovation and true experiences. Everybody wants to say what he thinks and forgets to listen to others. In the movie, Jim Carrey’s character misses a lot by always saying “no”. Daring to say “yes” can open doors to many opportunities. In improv’, to be able to really play, each comedian needs to connect with his partners by building on what the latter have said or done. You play on this escalation process. Too many people pretend to listen but say “yes but…” It is like saying no and erecting a wall between you and others.

The design process makes you forget your traditional mindsets to truly listen to people. This is unique and amazing for this simple reason. I do recommend it to everybody.

It is amazing to discover how what you think you are, what you think you project to the world and what the world perceives can be completely different. Moreover when you know about this phenomenon and you work on it.

One reason is that you can miss your target. You try to be perceived as energetic and funny and people think you are just a hyperactive goof.

You can also fool yourself and see yourself as more awesome than you really are. Not everybody is legendary!

Or you can evolve, progress and change at such a high pace that you are desynchronized. Stanford has been an efficient catalyst of this change. In two years, it is impressive how I changed and became better. I am sure this is the case for each of you.

The image-identity gap exercise was great to show this evolution. I may regularly do it.