A1 31 March 2008

1 Item:

Concept Note

Subject:

Intellectual Property for Carrot Communication

Reference:

A1- 31/03/2008

Author:

Ishraq Dhaly

Objective To create an ownable platform that can be identified and established as an ‘intellectual property’ for the advertising concern of Carrot Communication

Premise In the global context, no advertising process, whether creative or strategic, has been ever sufficient for the ever increasing complexities of the market scenario. Whether it is the 360° Brand Stewardship1 or InteGreytion2 or Disruption3 of the big shot groups or the Brand Evolution4 and Brandscaping5, they all seem to give very detailed approaches to solving the same fundamental issues of marketing. What is interesting to observe is that all intellectual property in terms of advertising that have been developed so far have the similarities: 1. None of them are future-proof. 2. None of them are truly global but mostly local. 3. Most of them lack functional use in the current rapidly-changing market scenario. 4. While all the above may be true, none of them are really ‘wrong’

1 2 3 4 5

Proprietary to Ogilvy & Mather Proprietary to Grey Worldwide Proprietary to TBWA Registered by Kolbrener, a US-based consultancy firm Registered by Plunkett Communication Inc., a Toronto-based advertising agency

2 This premise shapes our thought through the following flow: Flow of Thought Geological Surveys - Mining - Elements – Core – Value Extraction – Fuel – Energy – Consumption - Innovations Towards Sustainable Development – Engineering – Architecture – DNA - Evolution – Life – Nature – Species – Environment - Procreation

Deductions If we simply reinstate the brand as ‘species’ and the value extraction methodology as the ‘advertising process,’ in this big picture, we can deduce the following: 1. Other IP processes have covered this scenario with different expressions, yet we can maintain a synergy with others while making a niche position for ourselves by identifying with what is already out there (i.e. brand seed, brand DNA, brand evolution, 360°etc.) 2. Our already developed and in-use processes will only fit in to the big picture if the big picture is identified in similarity with the flow of thought mentioned above (i.e. the simile has to be a balanced fit not a force-fit) Identification of a Single Proposition Platform “Living organisms interact with the environment around them and always strive to evolve themselves towards a better standard of adaptability making sure that their future is extended through successful procreation.” Expression into a Brand Perspective “Brands (living organisms) interact with the market (environment) around them and always strive to extend their brand cycle and perception (evolve) themselves towards

3 a competitive positioning (better standard of adaptability) making sure their future is extended through successful brand experiences (procreation).” Expression of this IP in a Single Word

BLOOM Expression of this IP in a Single Statement “Only those brands that can bloom will ensure their part in the entire brand ecology system and will thereby move towards the future.”

Realities

It will be our objective to incorporate the ‘GTD’ model with the client servicing/strategy, creative, media processes by listing out each tool that will used in conjunction with BLOOM (i.e. templates of minutes, estimates, work orders, bills, media plans, tracking and mapping, campaign plan, memo, misc business communication, creative brief, creative message development plan, creative design

4 development plan, engineered evolution plans, PR kits and strategies, etc). This can be attempted and completed with only the following in mind: 1. Listing of Required Tools 2. Content Development 3. IPR Legalities 4. Implementation Roadmap 5. PR Plan Theoretically, this complete IP with content and identification can be launched within 30 days since most material mentioned above is already in the usage pipeline.

Measurement of the Strength of the Proposition Separate discussions conducted at IBA with 15 3rd year students, 5 advertising personnel, and 5 unbiased individuals revealed the following litmus test results: •

When asked the question “is this idea/simile between ecology and brands understandable?” with a raw score of 1-5 attached to their answers (1=did not understand at all, 5=understood perfectly) 100% scored 5.

•

When asked the question “can you think of an example of this relationship in a brand perspective?” with a raw score of 1-5 attached to their answers (1=did not understand at all, 5=understood perfectly) 100% scored 4 (unaided), 5 (aided)6

Words of Warning Intellectual property development is a key word that has already caught on and we are late in the game. Developers and consultants worldwide have already thought on these topics extensively and it is very probable that if we do not patent our IP now, 6

Respondents were asked about ‘mining’ the Aarong values to aid their understanding of the question. They were also reminded about the global IP formats that are similar to this.

5 someone else will soon. Below is the only reference I could find with this topic and Ms. Rice seems to start on one topic and lead into another, but in any case, this was part of www.blog/futurelab.net, and who knows maybe she’ll patent it and call it her idea! The warning is: ACT NOW! Brand as Ecosystem By: Jennifer Rice Business has gone through so many fads: TQM, push marketing, viral marketing, CRM… now we’re all about customer centricity: if we can make the customer central to the organization, well, that’s the key to success. Yes, I confess that I’ve been on that bandwagon myself, so what I’m about to say may shock you: Stop focusing on the customer. Stop focusing on your product. Stop focusing on your sales techniques. We all want to categorize everything. We want to put each element of business into neat little boxes. Then we can point to one element and say, “this is the key to all our problems.” It’s just like fad diets: first, calories were the problem. Then, fat was the problem. Now it’s carbs. Finally, consumers are starting to figure out that it’s more complex than that; it’s more about balance. And just as there is no fast fix for dieting, there’s no fast fix for business. Right now we’re focusing so much on the customer that we’ve lost sight of the big picture. When we focus on the customer, we see a person out there – separate from “us” – that we need to identify, label and categorize. Companies like Best Buy are segmenting groups and assigning names. Sure, it’s resulting in sales. Yes, it’s better than trying to sell the wrong product to the wrong person. It's a step in the right direction, but it's not the answer. It’s just part of yet another fad that won't deliver on everyone's expectations, and then we’ll all go rushing off to figure out the next piece of the puzzle to fix. And that is the fundamental problem: focusing on the puzzle pieces and not the puzzle itself. We are artificially creating separation between the company and customers – and between different departments within the same company – when in fact we are all part of the same system. The customer is simply a component of that system; no piece is more or less important. It’s what I call the ecology of business. We need to switch our focus from components to connections. A brand is an ecosystem. The strength of the brand is directly proportional to the number and strength of the connections within the system. Connections, not components, are the brand drivers. It starts with the ecosystem's foundation: the company and its employees. We need to move beyond a focus on a specific department (silo mentality) to a focus on the interconnections between individuals (system mentality). What are the most critical connections in your company? Why not have VPs over key connections instead of components? What about giving more power and compensation to the individuals who are directly responsible for customer connections? The individuals working your store or call center are the puzzle pieces that connect directly to your customers. They are equally as important as the CEO; perhaps more so. And of course, how could we have a conversation about connections without mentioning weblogs? I stumbled across this long but very good post on the subject by Colin Henderson. He quotes Ray Ozzie of Groove Networks: “Weblogs can help us achieve a greater ‘return on connection’ from employee, customer, and partner relationships.” So by extending the role of ‘connection creation’ deeper into the company, the overall system is strengthened. (UPDATE) Finally, we should consider the connection between the brand system and the larger social ecosystem in which it operates. We could call it "social responsibility" (component view) or simply see it as yet another connection that must be monitored and strengthened. Common values provide additional points of connection between all individuals within and between systems. It's why companies like The Body Shop have strong brands; they see themselves in context of the larger social system, and the additional 'value connections' between individuals serve as reinforcements. "A cord of 3 strands is not quickly broken." I’m trying to figure out how to post a holistic system view I developed using a visualization tool from TheBrain. It’s very cool… stay tuned. Original Post: http://brand.blogs.com/mantra/2004/11/brand_as_ecosys.html