Inherent to the definition of a “social media” platform, is the creation and management of content by its users. Twitter is nothing without its twitterers. 

Thus, platforms and companies which decide to invite people to create (knowledge, media, personal insight, pictures, video, etc) within their structure will always have to dedicate special attention to their users, including them in the process of creation, or at least authentication, of any changes made in the platform. 

When Facebook changed their terms of service, users expressed themselves against the move, forcing the platform to retreat to it’s former terms. 

Now, it’s the new Facebook homepage that doesn’t  appeal to facebookers. And, again, leveraging their own voices through the tools that the platform offers - like a giant megaphone - users want Facebook’s old homepage back. 

Personally, as a dedicated user of the platform, I’m not a fan of Facebook’s new home page- it seems too glued to Twitter. But the problem that arises here is that of co-creation’s limits. Are the users going to stop the natural evolution of the platform simply because they are resistant to change? 

In co-creation processes, success is achieved by integrating the views of different people into one coherent - and excellent - solution. However, it always requires the presence of a project manager, in order to filter the different parties’ points of view - if not, we will just witness the creation of several power groups (led by the alphas operating within the platform/organization) to try and drive the evolution process according to the values they themselves believe are correct. 

I believe that Facebook, from the very beginning, assumed that the project managers of the platform were its users. It was the ability to customize and change your experience in the platform - by means of applications, privacy, befriending - which lead to its amazing success. However, now that users are really in power, the team behind Facebook - Zuckerberg and company - seems to be losing theirs. And lack of power by the management team eventually leads to loss of reputation and value for the company - if one does not control its destiny, then one’s value reduces dramatically.*

In my personal opinion, there should always be a project manager running the show, even on platforms managed by users. Users inputs on the development of organizations need to be filtered, organized, compiled and sometimes re-oriented by a project manager, as otherwise it risks going into stagnation and chaotic mode.

I am fan of Surowiecki’s Wisdom of Crowds. But, accordingly, when one relies on the crowd to make decisions, only on average will they be correct. And when the goal is to achieve an average consensus, the results will be average as well. And one can never go for anything other than the best.

Co-creation, always. But an assisted one.

What say you?

* As we calculate the value of brands and organizations today. Obviously, Google does not fit this model

Written by Pedro Rocha

(also published - in portuguese - in Buzzófias)

At OAK, we don’t believe in straight forward solutions for brands, as there is no linear way of building or rebuilding them. As a brand is owned by it’s stakeholders - people, staff, clients, media -  there are as many ways of viewing a brand as there are people in its universe.

We do believe in studying brands and the ones who empower them: people. We also believe in integrating people into the branding process, as it allows us to achieve greater knowledge and depth about the challenges of the brand. Co-creation, in branding processes, allows us to build brands with the ones that will ultimately own them - people -  thus achieving a better, less biased result, and adding more value to the brand.

And here’s how we do it:

.1 Comprehension

First, we audit your brand’s needs, tapping into your reality. Studying your stakeholders, your market, the future trends that apply to your sector, your challenges and yourself. Only a correct analysis and comprehension of the brand’s universe can provide the best results. We do respond to briefings - as you have probably already diagnosed your company’s faced challenges - but believe that, in order to excel at working with brands, one must immerse completely in their reality. OAK will become an integrant part of your company.

.2 Strategy & Team

After the diagnosis, we will then be able to sum up some of the world’s best people when it comes to working with your brand. We do so because we are always scanning the globe for the most exciting individuals and knowledge available, inviting them to join us. OAK will, alongside with these hand picked, One of A Kind people, develop the correct strategy to achieve your brand’s goals.

.3 The Works

Market and Trend Analysis, Positioning, Identity, Product & Service Development, Brand Environments, Attitudes and Communications - the works. OAK’s core team of brand and design consultants will be responsible for summing up the precious inputs gathered in the co-creation process and organize them into a custom made brand solution.  

.4 Results

We believe that assisted co-creation is the future for taking better management decisions. So we hope to come up with what we believe is the best solution possible – a One of A Kind Brand, built by One of A Kind people.

.5 Return On Investment

OAK’s work is accountable for. KPI’s must be defined in an early stage, in order to measure the impact of our work in your brand’s goodwill and reputation. So, we encourage you to setup goals for our solutions. We will strive to meet them, achieving a positive Return On Investment and an engaging way for your brand to assume it’s personality, differentiation and will to change the world.

For any questions regarding this and other matters, please contact me at pedro.rocha@oak-brands.com or Skype me at oak.brands

Best Regards,

Pedro Rocha

It is critical that every management tool available disciplines itself in order to achieve and measure the impact of it’s efforts. Marketing and branding are no exception.

Well built brands achieve better results. Good brands improve future and present cash-flows - by boosting sales, prices, motivation within the team and engagement with key stakeholders. Good brands create relevancy and a place in people’s minds, thus generating business. Good brands increase loyalty,reducing the inherent risk of running an organization.

We like to measure our results - it’s the only way you can judge our work, and we can improve our service. So, when creating a brand solution, we encourage and assess you on defining early-on key performance indicators and metrics, with different terms (short, medium and long) to make sure we do it right.

It is crucial that branding be not judged only by result in sales, as the discipline does not simply affect that commercial variable and instead has a broader, long-term effect. Metrics should be varied, and both quantitative and qualitative. Always considering Return On Investment, but never under-judging the power of a brand’s Return On Engagement.

Measuring a brand’s value is always a tough mission, if not at all impossible, as the evolution of it’s weight in an organization’s total value is ever-changing. 

But we refuse to let our branding efforts be judged only by it’s cover.

Everyday, we observe the rise of yet another guru or self-proclaimed specialist, claiming to understand and hold the key to the ultimate marketing secret, the one that makes or breaks a product, campaign or company: a person’s soul.

Everyday, we watch public relations people claiming to generate more goodwill for a brand than advertising. And advertisers fighting back, with words like “notoriety” and “range”. Everyday, we witness marketeers and planners talking about engagement. About co-creation. About leading tribes, about taping into consumers. Everyday, we see people of our trade making brands more about rethoric and less about reality.

Everyday, brand consultants and marketeers fall in love with their own creations, losing track of reality. Everyday we, marketing professionals, question ourselves on how come  no one found our offer to be relevant.

An everyday we forget -at least for five, long, egotistical minutes - that it’s not up to us to build a brand. It’s up to them.

People.

And if it’s up to them to relate, judge, live and build a brand, why not include them in the branding process? Why not make brands about them, and not about us?

Co-creation, and  the art of integrating people into management processes is not new - we are not trying to reinvent the wheel here. But, as many use it as punch-line, only few apply it as a rule to live by. Assisted co-creation, that is - for all personal and professional knowledge must be filtered, corrected and assessed by a core team of branding experts, to deliver a coherent and excellent result. Branding experts which are themselves people.

OAK is human at it’s core - opinionated, transparent, on going, expert and collaborative - as humans are. And if we fail to deliver these promises, please let us know. As the people that we are, we will occasionally fail.

So enough with the talk. It’s time to walk the walk.

Pedro Rocha