At the mercy of tribal culture...

I had lunch yesterday with some very interesting people and we were discussing the output from the Portal To Your Dreams scenario planning workshop on the future of social media.

We then got to talking about co-creation of brands - a hot Marketing 2.0 topic. We've all heard that brands can no longer dictate to consumers rather they must engage and involve them in the co-creation of their brands.

But as was astutely pointed out yesterday, what does that mean for brand direction, brand consistency or brand quality - without any control over your brand, how do you look after your brand? How do you ensure that your brand stays true to itself? Personally I feel that this is with dialogue and brand-consumer partnership. I don't think that marketing 2.0 is about handing over the reins of the brand to consumers so that they can do what they will, but rather riding the brand horse with them. It's about giving them a sense of involvement or ownership of the brand, and when we feel that we have a stake in something, we suddenly become the best promotors.

Yesterday at lunch the conversation turned to a jeans company, how could they involve consumers in their design? Could the even start affiliate lines, if the brand were Levis...(it wasn't) could we have Levis by Isabelle? And could I then become an affiliate seller/marketer of my own line of Levis clothing? If I were successful, would I then gain more of a stake in the brand and even more ownership/involvement?

As I fell asleep last night, I got to thinking of recycling and customization of clothes, and also of tribal identities for example Craft Kids in the UK...



Could we see a move towards tribal re-appropriation of brands. Where powerful, influencer types would co-create or customize brands (with or without permission) to create meaning for the brand which is tribally relevant and tribally constructed? In fact is this the way for brands to survive?

With the natural ebb and flow of tribes, trends and fashion will are already seeing a demise of the mega brand as cult brands such as Jones Soda, who involve their tribal followers and have been small enough to be exclusively relevant to that tribe.

Even Jones Soda are experiencing difficulties as they grow. It's difficult to remain cult if your brand gets too big. Historically marketers have wanted brands to grow, to become mass market - but how can they achieve this without engineering their brand's demise when appealing to the masses in a ever fragmented, tribal culture - means appealing to no-one.

Is the answer to focus on one tribe and involve them such that you co-create meaning and relevance? Should today's brand's seek to downscale in order to survive?

Amsterdam Twestival Viral

I said I'd post it, so I have - better late than never, here's the viral that we created for Twestival Amsterdam.


A birdie told me from Isabelle O'Kane on Vimeo.

Striking the balence in viral branding

Spent my day doing the offline edit of my viral to promote Twestival Amsterdam (which I'll post soon), the conversations we had in the editing room got me to thinking about what makes a great viral and where that balence exists to engage people before revealing the brand...and making both elements work...

I think Greenpeace do an excellent job here in this piece, I was drawn in my this thoughtful piece of, what I call, "film-making" the reveal of Greenpeace was an "a-ha" moment that made the meaning of the viral even more poignant and did a supreme job for both the brand and the artistry/meaing of the film-making..