• Design, triggering emotions and movements.

    Posted on April 11th, 2011 by and currently 4 commenting.


    Left, classic poster from Jenny Morla, 2010 AIGA Gold Medalist winner. Right, soap as art and complete category change, Method. AIGA Corporate Leadership winner.


    Above, John Maeda, 2010 AIGA Gold Medalist winner. Isn’t that just beautiful? Looks kinda of like some of the visualizations of community I’ve seen floating around lately.

    Last week I got a kind offer and a last minute chance to attend the AIGA Bright Lights Awards in NY. Hanging with some amazing design talent (see above).

    As I walked back to hail a cab after the event, two things hit me:

    1. The design world at that level is just so ROMANTIC. Full or stories and heroes. Think Herman Miller and Tiffany.
    2. Design is a talk-able trait. Always has been. Think Method and Apple. It moves us. Stirs us to talk and to share. Even if we don’t quite understand why.

    Okay, a little side story:

    I have a degree in art. And even now I consider myself an artist.

    I can still remember the very first time that I got my hands on a CA magazine. I think it was a design annual. It was as if a whole other side of my head and my heart flew wide open. Having grown up in a world filled with really bad design, to hold so much amazingly brilliant design in my hands at one time was a gift that is hard for me to describe.

    As a struggling art student, I found a way to pay the 40 dollars (a small fortune back then) for a real subscription.

    My next design hero wasn’t in a magazine — he was a real person. And the lead creative director at a small southern ad agency. It was the first real job I had in the advertising world. I remember following this guy around and I am not lying, if he dropped something in a trash can, I quietly picked it up. And took it home and traced it. Trying to get a “feeling” for how and why he but things together on a piece of paper.

    Makes me laugh now to think of it.

    Okay. Here’s the point of sharing that silly story.

    In our work and in our world of igniting community and sparking word of mouth movements, design is still a very big part of the work we do at Brains on Fire. Here is what we know to be true:

    That “feeling” you get when you see something that moves you — can in fact inspire you to take action.

    Now, more than ever, design is helping us to unite and connect people emotionally. Human being to human being. We are helping kindred spirits express their shared feelings, beliefs and passions. And in some cases, the community literally becomes the total inspiration for design as we simply help execute their ideas, their passion.

    I love this “designism” from designer Jenny Morala:

    “Design is not solely a marketing device that supports consumerism. It can be a communicator of dissent. It can market ideology. It can effect change.”

    Design connects. Design stirs our emotions. Design can bring people together for a common cause or purpose.

    In a social world where everyone is talking and taking up space with content, are we losing sight of the critical role design is playing to connect and spark action?

    Just thinking out loud on a beautiful Tuesday morning in Greenvegas.

    What is the best example of design supporting or igniting a movement you have ever seen? Past or present…Let’s get a discussion going. You know I love it when you share.

    ***Design examples inspired from burning settlers cabin

  • We are what we repeatedly do.

    Posted on March 7th, 2011 by and currently 7 commenting.


    This photo from Patrick.Hocker’s via flickr is kinda creepy. But it struck me as an interesting visual for this post. (And I do know this is his “to do” list. But still, you get it.)

    Yup. Aristotle said it and we love it around here. Apparently it struck a chord with the author of this article who committed — hold on –Facebook Suicide.

    After reading Aristotle’s words “We are what we repeatedly do”, this is how Carmen Joy King felt:

    I became despondent. What, then, was I? If my time was spent changing my profile picture on Facebook, thinking of a clever status update for Facebook, checking my profile again to see if anyone had commented on my page, Is this what I am? A person who re-visits her own thoughts and images for hours each day? And so what do I amount to? An egotist? A voyeur?

    Whatever the label, I was unhappy and feeling empty. The amount of time I spent on Facebook had pushed me into an existential crisis. It wasn’t the time-wasting, per se, that bothered me. It was the nature of the obsession – namely self-obsession. Enough was enough. I left Facebook.

    Hmmm.

    That article prompted me to think (a good thing) and to write this post about Alone Together (also inspired by a book by that name).

    Which then lead to a challenge from my email pal @danholm. Seems his church challenged their members to give up something they are addicted to– smoking, over-eating, whatever. And his heart led him to FACEBOOK.

    Here’s just two of a long list of the things Dan shared with me about his addiction:

    • I would check Facebook on my phone in the MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT when I would wake up randomly at 3am.
    • My wife and I would sit in bed at night and talk about stuff and people we saw on Facebook….something wrong with this picture? We would go to restaurants to eat and both have our heads buried in our phones (trust me, we still like each other).

    Sound familiar?

    I am not quite so addicted as Dan, but Facebook is VERY addicting. You know it. And puzzling. I have always had a love-hate relationship with facebook and most social media. Several years back in fact, I was close to someone that had such a constant need to connect and tweet, I was frightened for him. I truly believe it changed who he was, how he saw himself and what he came to value. It change his identity.

    It was a bit of a constant riff between us.

    So a week into Dan’s “fast”, I decided to join him on a Facebook fast of my own. I jumped in when there were 17 days left. And we agreed to update each other on how it felt, then share with you the three lessons we learned while taking a break.

    I need to tell you I actually felt a little jittery when I wrote these words. “I am going on a Facebook Fast until Feb. 18th. Bye. Bye. OXOXOXO”

    What if something earth shattering happened? Could I stick to it?

    BTW, I did fall off the wagon once and posted a promotion for a webinar I where I was the presenter. My “off the wagon moment” did not go unnoticed. Hey, who wants to do a webinar if people aren’t listening?

    So for what it’s worth, my three lessons:

    1. I am not my Facebook status. This is my favorite line from Carmen’s article and sums up how I feel: “Is this what I am? A person who re-visits her own thoughts and images for hours each day?” I think the happiest people and the best leaders for that matter have this “outward attitude”. An ability to take themselves out of the equation. A self-forgetfulness. Facebooking forces you to focus on you. And that is not really me. Make sense?

    2. I missed the photos most. Facebook is like an online scrapbook and better yet, it’s like a collection of scrapbooks from the folks I love. Like my kids and friends and family. I really do like to capture and share my life’s best moments. A sunny day. An amazing view. A flower found on a walk. I realized that visual sharing is what I truly DO love and in fact missed most when I gave up Facebook. Maybe it’s because photos capture what’s real.

    3. I felt calmer. Maybe it was one less thing to do. Maybe it was just letting go of a habit. But maybe, just maybe… I was truly more outwardly focused. Listening to my kids stories a little deeper. Asking folks at work about their weekend instead of reading about it. Maybe I truly was less focused on me.

    Okay. Dan — your turn:

    1. We don’t need Facebook. Facebook Needs Us. I never thought of Facebook needing us. Lately it seems that everyone and everything tells us we need Facebook. We need to create an account, we need to update our profile picture and have witty statuses and sign on to get discounts from brands. What I found during my 21 day fast was that Facebook relies on me (and all of you) to keep their site interesting. If we don’t share, post and connect then Facebook dies. We should never forget that we own Facebook, Facebook doesn’t own us.

    2. Life is only exciting if you’re engaging. I have 500 friends (impressive right? Not really). Guess how many of them noticed I went missing for three weeks? Not. A. Single. One. No one asked where I was, what I was up to or wondered where I went. I was shocked when I logged back in after my absence and only had 5 notifications. Only 5!?! How can this be possible? It’s so simple…..if we’re not engaging, generating dialogue and having a conversation….no one is going to talk back with us. The same principle goes for life in general: we must engage with our personal communities in order stay relevant. This applies to your brand as well…

    3. Real connections live on without Facebook. We don’t need Facebook to connect. It just makes it a whole lot easier to connect. During my absence, I still was in contact with “my real friends”. We still hung out and guess what? I had the opportunity to ASK them about their lives and hear what they were up to in REAL LIFE. In past instances I asked them, and then already knew everything because I had stalked them on Facebook. There is something to be said about hearing people’s stories, looking them in the eyes and having a genuine conversation vs reading several status updates and attempting to piece the story together on your own. How many of my friends on Facebook are my real friends? Good question….probably a handful (please don’t tell my other “friends” they’re not my real friends). Check out this article on how many friends your brain can hold.

    BTW, thanks to @thebrandbuilder for sharing this article with me (via Facebook I might add) in the first place and to Dan for inspiring me to take a little break and time to reflect.

    And now your turn. Do you have a social media fasting story to share?

  • Do we really need names?

    Posted on March 4th, 2011 by and currently 6 commenting.


    This photo via Flickr via Leo Reynolds.

    We help name things.

    Names can tell a great story. Like love146.

    Names can unite a community. Like the Fiskateers.

    Names can evoke emotion like the name the kids in South Carolina found for their youth powered tobacco free movement. Rage Against the Haze.

    Names can ignite fasciniation, like Wonderopolis.

    I could go on. But it’s Friday. So let’s chat.

    Today’s chat pack question is fun.

    Suppose instead of having a name, you had a letter. and people would always refer to you as that letter. What letter would you want to replace your name?

    Mine is easy.

    B

    I have spent my whole life explaining the extra B in my name (After staring at me for 11 days, my folks finally named me RoBBIn with two B’s. I am kinda fond of that extra B. It was worth the wait.)

    So how about you? Come on. Share.

  • Gap. Again. Or is Buzz the Social Media Ding Dong Ditch.

    Posted on October 14th, 2010 by and currently 3 commenting.


    I was cruising Flickr looking for a photo of a baby wearing something with GAP on it and well, I could not resist sharing this. Pretend it has something to do with GAP. cc lusciousnis

    Sorry. I can’t hold my opinion in.

    So at the risk of joining a seriously over baked conversation, I’ll give you my two cents on the whole “Gap’s Changed It’s Logo” after school drama.

    Our roots as a company are in the naming and identity business. So — I feel somewhat qualified to comment.

    I don’t like the newly suggested Gap logo. It’s very silly.

    GAP has been around a long, long while. They are on every street corner and mall in America. Why mess with a good thing? Or put another way, if you are going to do it — do it big and with feeling. And PURPOSE. The proposed change was not subtle like a new black jacket with a tiny adjustment in the collar or length to be more fashionable, nor is it meaningful. In my humble opinion.

    When BP changed it’s logo it symbolized (whether you believe it or not) a VALUE change. Same with Wachovia when they pulled away from traditional bank branding identities and moved to a more organic mark. They were making a statement. If GAP was making a change that reflected a need or a value change, let’s just say for jollies that they believe with all their hearts their customers hunger to dress with more color and so they added color to the logo mark, that would be meaningful. A simplistic example, but you get my point.

    But this change to their mark is just — different. For the sake of being different. Or so it seems from what I have read so far.

    Not better or worse. And it appears from what am gathering in the press statements (yes, that is in italics for a reason) that it was mostly internally driven over a period of about two years. My admiration. I have never stuck with one decision for that long. Ever.

    Hmmmm.

    Perhaps they should take a cue from Nabisco…

    Nabisco has given “slow baked logo transition” a whole new meaning. It’s fascinating. I like to think each subtle change was done without much thought. Certainly not two years worth of it. Geez.

    Wait. That is so interesting isn’t it? Iconic brands have subtly been changing and updating their marks for many, many years. Without much fanfare. Now social media and the voice of the customer has made it really hard to be subtle about change. Large or small. We are a reactive bunch – we humans. We just can’t help ourselves from joining in on the discussion.

    Especially on the topic of change.

    And last but not least, I will say this one last thing:

    If this is buzz stunt, I am sorry for you GAP.

    Like Ding Dong Ditch – that would be really annoying. IF it’s a stunt I would have to ask: Don’t you have more meaningful ways to engage sustainable support for your iconic brand? Like the momentary confusion of a ringing of a doorbell at 2am, all this chatter (if a stunt) will be forgotten in the morning. Or at least by cocktails the next evening.

    Hey, but like the rest of the observers and ranters, they didn’t ask me. I’m just an ordinary, longtime advocate of their simple white tees.

    P.S. I wrote this yesterday, so who knows. There could be new overnight developments (smiling).

  • A Salute to Companies Sticking to Their Guns

    Posted on August 11th, 2010 by and currently 5 commenting.

    I’d like to share a few thoughts that have been floating around in my head – I might re-visit them in more depth later, but I think a little discussion could be a good thing – even if they’re in rough form.

    The fact that voices of customers are online and discoverable is quite amazing – companies everywhere are learning more about how which people view, use and talk about their brand, products, experiences, etc.

    I think, though, that this ‘power of voice’ is a double-edged sword. One reason is because, as Joshua Blankenship points out (1), the ability to comment on the internet can reveal just how mean people are. Another reason, though, is that I think the knowledge that a company can hear your voice has also given people the ability to complain like they’ve never complained before. Complaining can be good; the ability to discover a customer’s bad experience and mend a relationship is invaluable, and the internet has allowed companies to meet needs in incredible ways. But it also seems that some customers have hijacked the idea that “the customer is always right” as an excuse to complain about or demand unreasonable things en masse, using the information swarm of the internet as the vehicle for their voices.

    A few examples:

    Salute 1: MG Siegler wrote an interesting article (2) related to feature demand – his discussion of the iPhone ‘copy and paste’ outcry is an interesting example of a company sticking to their guns despite negative outcry from their customers. (Side note, this is not a discussion of details about Apple’s feature release or the iPhone as a device, it is a reflection on their devotion to user experience):

    Jobs cited the iPhone’s cut, copy, & paste functionality as one example of Apple getting a feature right. I have to agree. For two years, everyone complained (myself included) that Apple didn’t have this functionality. Could Apple have done it sooner? Of course. But would it have been half-baked? Probably. Just look at how it works on other devices — or maybe I should say: look at how poorly it works on other devices compared to the iPhone.

    Release details, timelines, opinions on devices, and even outcome aside, Apple’s devotion to user experience should be saluted. Customers complained and demanded the feature, but Apple didn’t give in to public opinion (have they ever?) – they stuck to their guns and released the functionality when it was consistent with the user experience that is their brand.

    Salute 2: I first heard about Intelligentsia Coffee after Geno and Heather had visited on a trip to Los Angeles. Geno’s description was so interesting to me – “When I ordered, they made it the way they think a latte should be made, and that’s what I got.”

    After a little bit more digging, I found out that the company’s founder, Doug Zell, has an intense devotion to “providing coffee in the way it tastes best.” (3) His devotion has led to the removal of the 20oz. drink size form their menu – a move that will allow users to experience coffee in an amount that doesn’t allow for unbalanced ratios (like the larger sizes do).

    In a market where major coffee brands are marketing all sorts of options (more variety of flavors, consistent introduction of new types of drinks, etc.), Intelligentsia deserves a salute for their commitment to providing the best coffee experience possible, even if that means decreasing options for customers.

    Salute 3: Google offeres several phone features (phone number, voicemail, SMS) through a service called Google Voice. All of the features are used through an internet browser and, following suit with most of Google’s offerings, it’s free.

    Not so long ago, there were rumors in the techno-sphere that Google was going to release an actual desktop application for Google Voice, and potential users rejoiced. The project came to a halt, though, when Google’s founders questioned whether a desktop application was consistent for a company who developed browser-only technology.

    Blogs ranted about the injustice of halting the project and a petition to continue development circulated.

    But Google’s internal struggle to continually evaluate their brand and clearly define which types of technology they want to develop should be saluted.

    What do you think? Have customers always complained and demanded as much as they do today, or has the visibility of their voices on the internet just made us more aware of it? Any other good examples of a company staying true to their brand despite complaining and demanding customers?

    • (1) – Joshua Blankenship’s article, “On the State of Comments on the Internet,” can be found here.
    • (2) -  MG Seigler’s feature-demand example can be found in his article, “What’s Missing From iPhone 4 Is Part Of What Makes It Great,” here.
    • (3) – Read The Chicago Tribune’s coverage of Intelligentsia’s decision to decrease options here.
« Older Entries