Think

We know, we know.  Things have been a little bit slow here at Think as we've moved into 2010, but one of our resolutions for the year is to change that.  Things have been busier than ever, but we're eager to commit more time to sharing our thoughts, ideas and observations -- and, selfishly, even more eager to learn from the wide range of experts, innovators and generally thoughtful, opinionated and diverse readers who take the time to join us and share their comments.

Since we're more interested in conversation than monologue, we wanted to take a moment to introduce -- or re-introduce -- the diverse group of people behind the blog.  Below, a quick self-introduction from each of our contributors... and if you follow this blog, we'd love for you to introduce yourself in the comments.

This post was originally shared on Adobe XD's INSPIRE, who were kind enough to ask me to blog for them last week. You can find many a great post from those in the user experience and design fields there. Please check it out.

We at Big Spaceship are always looking to incorporate new perspectives that will inform our thinking in projects, helping us shape insights that ultimately lead to ideas and execution. As we roll into 2010, there are a few disciplines we’ve been dipping our collective toes into that I think will have a big impact on the way we approach the experiences we design.

This post was originally shared on Adobe XD's INSPIRE, who were kind enough to ask me to blog for them this week. You can find many a great post from those in the user experience and design fields there. Please check it out.

On top of looking for ways to grab attention, brands should be thinking about how they can engage their audiences in conversation. Discussing the needs and values of your audience with your audience can help you find better ways to solve for their problems. Carrying on a conversation also shows that you care about what your audience wants. And if you as a brand can demonstrate that you care, well, maybe they’ll care about you too. Brands that don’t engage in a discussion end up doing a lot of talking before earning the permission needed to speak in any meaningful way.

As many Think readers already know, Big Spaceship was one of the founding agencies in a non-profit association called the Society of Digital Agencies (SoDA).  SoDA brings together a range of amazing digital agencies (41, at current count) from around the world, all of whom share a common desire to advance the field of digital marketing. This year, that shared desire led to the publication of The SoDA 2010 Digital Marketing Outlook, a fantastic collection of articles and thought pieces from SoDA members.

On Big Spaceship's behalf, I contributed a piece entitled "Stop Spreading Viruses and Start Giving Gifts," in hopes that 2010 might finally be the year when the marketing community moves past the generally flawed, frequently counter-productive, and fundamentally arrogant idea that "viral" is a specific type of work that marketers can choose to create, rather than the resulting pattern when people choose to share something with each other.

A brand’s vanishing act risks being seen as oddly plucky or, worse, patronizing. This is particularly true if the reasoning behind it is rooted in a short-sighted quick fix or a publicity stunt. You might as well slap a Band-Aid onto an ulcer. In Parts I and II of this series, I looked at Muji, Starbucks, McDonald’s, Freshjive and, briefly, Al Green. Their changes in behavior imply not “brandlessness” but a desire to define a new brand or reinvent an existing one.

In Part I of this series, I looked at the idea of an established brand crafting a new identity and what that meant for Starbucks' experimental café. When compared to Muji, it became clear that—regardless of name or logo—product and design are central to communications. Some of Muji's products are created by known designers. While their names are absent from the work, they are associated with and, thus, represent the brand. Such behavior is sustainable.

If a product has any sort of defined presence in the marketplace, going “brandless” may seem impossible—or potentially foolish. Intrigued by the logo-less café that Starbucks opened in Seattle this summer, I set out to explore that and other intentional moves to drop, disassociate or reinvent a brand. In comparing these efforts to Muji—a brand built on being brandless (sort of)—I looked at what value there is in seeking symbiosis and adopting a long-term perspective when experimenting with a brand.

The internet is largely a global space. Even considering irregularities in hardware and software, coupled with regional variations in access to certain content, one must assume that anything online can be experienced across the globe. This can create unexpected consequences when content meant for a local audience attracts the attention of those beyond that region. A parody-filled reaction to an Israeli cell phone commercial about soccer and the separation wall is a case in point.

How do you measure an app’s success? The common answer would be in the number of downloads or the average star count in the ratings. Emoji—one of my favorite iPhone apps—was in part responsible for my choice to up the number of texts in my iPhone plan. That’s a tremendous success metric for AT&T, anyway.

In Vacation (the original one, where the family truckster heads to Wally World) Clark Griswold turns to Ellen and says, "Why aren’t we flying? Because getting there is half the fun. You know that."

He’s talking about serendipity—making fortunate discoveries by accident. While plenty of Griswold’s road trip discoveries were less than opportune (e.g., cousin Eddie’s Hamburger Helper), his point is that serendipity is inherent to the journey. And thanks to technology, it’s under attack. Wait...what?