Just finished reading a really useful book called The Open Brand by Kelly Mooney and Nita Rollins which I thoroughly recommend. The main argument is that old mass marketing push tactics are being superseded by the pull of an online population prolifically creating, sharing and influencing each other. The authors argue that it is now imperative that businesses open up to consumer involvement in their brand's messages and offerings.
According to the authors there are now closed brands and open brands which have different worldviews and characteristics:
Target consumers (closed brand worldview)
Fostering communities of consumers (open brand worldview)
Monologue (closed)
Dialogue (open)
Awareness (closed)
Engagement (open)
Push (closed)
Pull (open)
Created by marketers (closed)
Co-created with consumers (open)
Brand management (closed)
Brand Stewardship (open)
Apply that quick test to your clients. Using the above criteria, are they open or closed brands? Are they dialogue brands or monologue brands? Do they just aim to raise awareness of their brands or do they engage?
There are so many so-called progressive companies who still refuse to accept this new model. They see social media as just another thing to deal with at the right time. Brand marketing is being re-written and many brands are going to be left behind. There are of course plenty of exceptions. Take Innocent for example. They are streets ahead of many brands in terms of how they are immersing themselves in social media, engaging with their customers. They realise the power of networks of influence and the fact that it is through social media that consumers are now going as they make their purchasing decisions and form their views of brands.
It's probably worth pointing out that the social media strategy consultancy I set up is called ItsOpen (www.itsopen.co.uk).
