Things can get muddled when defining a brand platform and a campaign idea, leaving even the most seasoned marketers asking what’s the difference between the two? This framework is a brutally simple way to show that brand platforms operate at the marketing level, providing the vision, while the campaign is where marketing ideas come to life as comms.
When creating marketing and experiences, we are often focused on creating emotional responses. That’s when the Wheel of Emotion can come in handy. This is a great framework for pinpointing, understanding and designing for emotional response. The wheel is built around eight primary emotions in the second rung, including joy, trust, fear, surprise, sadness, disgust, anger, and anticipation. Each of these emotions sits opposite from its polar opposite by design i.e. joy and sadness. The framework also shows varying degrees of emotional intensity — as it gets closer to the center the intensity increases, further out intensity wanes.
The OODA loop is a make decision-making process that focuses on filtering available information and understanding the context of a changing environment. It comes from military strategy and is particularly useful when the ability to react to a dynamic environment can create an advantage. It starts with observation, looking both inside and outside, given current circumstances. Then comes observation, where analysis and assessment happen with an intentional level of awareness of biases and history. Through the lens of implicit guidance, a decision is made with scenario plans for possible outcomes. And once the decision is made, action against the plan is set into motion to carry out this decision within the context of the initially observed environment. This process is iterative and can become a rapid-fire way of thinking and working, which is still more considered than gut reactions.
Here is a straightforward visual for showing how not all things we measure during a campaign are created equal. The primary goal of advertising is to change perception or behavior towards a commercial end, therefore commercial goals are the most critical. And when it comes to achieving commercial goals, there is substantial empirical evidence that building a brand is a more effective way of growing a business for the long-term. So brand perception and equity metrics come second in the hierarchy. And finally, there are campaign metrics, these are great for showing campaign-specific impact in the short-term, allowing for pivots, optimizations, and sequencing of campaigns into the future.
This framework captures the profile of a brand in 5 core dimensions, which are then broken down further into more specific facets or traits. This is useful to give structure when describing the existing personality profile of a brand, and what the brand could become in its future state. It may seem counter-intuitive but sometimes can inspire and open things up to start with structured dimensions defining for a brand’s personality.
These framework options for scenario planning have become incredibly valuable lately. Never have I heard the word uncertainty so much. This framework is useful for when you don’t have a single view of the future, and you have enough insight and imperfect information for planning a range of futures. By selecting a style for scenario planning, you can focus your efforts based on what you know and projecting what you do. This helps maximize information with clarity for making decisions and bring teams along the way.
While I’ve never seen this empirically tested, the brand relationship arch shows in plain language how a person moves through different brand levels of awareness, knowledge, and trust in how they perceive and interact with a brand. This comes in handy when showing how people are rarely willing to feel close to a brand they haven’t heard of. It’s also useful when showing people are willing to go to bat for brands they have stronger relationships with.
I learned about this model for the first time from Rory Sutherland, who spoke to the irrational nature of our minds and how biases come into play when we assess products. This model suggests that products in their very design, but also in their marketing, need to push beyond the basics. Those basics are described as threshold attributes, which are table stakes to buy, and performance-based attributes, which may be valued features. In order to elicit a high level of product satisfaction, there needs to be a level of excitement to the product function. The example Rory gave was when…
This is not the first time I’ve shared an uncomplicated narrative arch. But I like this version in particular because it contains the right amount of detail for briefing. This week I‘ve been doing a bit of copywriting (don’t worry it’s only for Cannes) and this arch helped hone the story, allowing me to focus on sentence structure and brevity.
This is a morality matrix of sorts. It comes to us from Nir Eyal, in his attempt to ensure products, especially digital ones, that “hook” people aren’t exploitive. That alone surely will make you think… While morality doesn't need a framework, think of this as a simple, check-in exercise that stretches beyond the product. This can also work well for a brand or marketing effort to determine if an idea is helpful. The goal is to be in the facilitator quadrant, and according to Nir “When you create something that you will use and believe makes the user’s life better, you’re facilitating a healthful habit.” Learn more here http://bit.ly/2VMTaTB
Strategic folks love a good framework. This is a collection of brand, innovation, campaign, experience & design models. Want to contribute? Tweet @JenBonhomme