Filed under: Digital Strategy
I’m presenting at the interactive boot camp over the next couple of weeks, the first one on Wednesday, and have been tasked with giving a bit of a 101: “How to plan great interactive media campaigns”.
My process is this, used to create ‘digital connections’ between consumers and brands:
It’s a continuation of my thoughts on Loveocracy and another post and some bouncing back and forward with Sean and Gavin.
The centre of the diagram is brought to life with this kind of voice over:
“digital connections opportunities present themselves when we look for an overlap between the Brand Position and Consumer Interests, what Position unites the two and what Promise can be tactically expressed? Aiming to be inside this area makes great sense. It’s the point at which all the vectors unite”
I surround this with robust research (insights), consumer experience design (context) and evaluation modelling (building actionable intelligence) processes.
I’d love to hear your thoughts and get your examples on great interactive media planning.
After I’ve finished the bootcamp I’ll compile it all together and post the presentation for all to share.
11 Comments so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
What happened? Scare everybody off?
Comment by Gavin Heaton May 22, 2007 @ 12:16 amLove this!!!
One of the notes I had on my last version of the model was the lack of insight…
Gah. I already posted today. You are SO tomorrows post. Stealing the model, btw.
Hey. Would LOVE to hear more about how you go about “building actionable intelligence”.
Comment by Sean Howard May 22, 2007 @ 3:06 amThe model has an eery resemblance to the “triality” mentioned by some commentators on Taoism: yin, yang, and the Void. And it has the same significance, depending on your degree of enlightenment: everything, or nothing. For a Taoist, this is a perfect situation. For a brand manager, probably not.
Comment by Bob Jacobson May 22, 2007 @ 6:43 amGavin: well go on then…
Sean: that actionable intelligence is a doozy isn’t it. To taunt you with some more it’s balance between Digital Brand Insurance (buy the policy now!)and building Single Customer Views. It’s about designing for outputs, not just attention.
Bob: that’s fab- I’ll have to remember that when I’m presenting this next!
Comment by katiechatfield May 22, 2007 @ 9:11 amobviously my take on this may be a little different. I strongly believe in a sense of play and experimentation. I also believe in a sense of pace – or what comedians call timing. I find and found it quite frustrating that 2.0 efforts are regarded within the scope of long term adventures and I have been playing with the idea of short term “episodes” or, if you wish “seasons” that actually end.
While the projects are running I use things like YouTube or twitter to enhance or carry the pace of the story along; and the 12:00hrs tweet from Sacrum saying “I eat soup” was just as important as any of his brand theory and his first YouTube was carefully timed as well. The Dead Artist will end too, and maybe It Could Get Worse will come back again.
This format, seems to be rather effective because it keeps people guessing and wanting more but as I have said before it only really works for me – because I allow it to happen. And I really don’t see that I will earn any money from it and I would question whether it be useful as a business or marketing platform. But there are lessons that can be learned from my “season model” I think. And maybe, one day (and if you ask nicely) I’ll put them into writing.
Hope that was interesting.
Comment by Marcus May 22, 2007 @ 12:26 pmIf a brand is not “established” say doesn’t have the authority such as Persil/Dove but they have a strong brand position and believe in all other areas, do they have the right to be part of/facilitate/create that community?
Comment by Laura May 22, 2007 @ 11:44 pmG’day Marcus: I’m liking the notion of planning anticipation- a ’scarlet pimpernel’ marketing technique with snack-i-sode delivery.
Laura: I’m not convinced that the brand itself needs authority to create connection with it’s consumers- I think it does need a ‘brand truth’ however. I like to think that the role of a brand in the digital space is to host a party for it’s friends. You don’t need to be given ‘a right’ to throw a great bash, but there certainly are a number of elements that need to be in place before it takes off.
Comment by katiechatfield May 24, 2007 @ 9:32 amGAHHH!!
I had no idea you were SUCH a big tease!
I’ve spent that past 15 minutes contemplating your response and your post. And going back to it now.
Comment by Sean Howard May 27, 2007 @ 3:05 amThe Strategy Love-In Continues
Shouts out to Katie, Gavin and Sacrum who together have been keeping this thread on strategic models alive and kicking. My last model was of the infamous lego variety. And it generated some really neat feedback. My purpose in creating it was to define …
Trackback by CrapHammer May 27, 2007 @ 3:59 amKatie, I love your MAP. I would like to know if you would like to add it to the just launched collection of Great Maps on the Internet. I’m still working on a title for the collection.
Comment by Roger Anderson June 5, 2007 @ 7:15 pmSo far I have received a few contributions, most notable is the map from Drew McLellan, which he calls “A brand love affair in the round” even though there is nothing round on it.
[...] Marcus’ new blog, the new Ford site and “short term episodes” [...]
Pingback by Get Shouty July 1, 2007 @ 4:29 am