Communities Contexulalize Brands

This review of our book - (always great that someone is reading us). Mean't a great deal to Tomi and I, as its diamond drilling down into our theories was so well done.

Rob Kleine at Digito Society says

I finished reading Ahonen & Moore’s book Communities Dominate Brands the other day. Most intriguing to me is that Ahonen and Moore are exploring the same question I have for the last decade ( here and here ). Striking to me is that they approach the relationship of stuff (brands) and people from a technology perspective. Ahonen & Moore’s book is, at one level, an extended meditation on why the ubiquitious cell phone will be the ultimate tool for connecting individuals (via SMS, voice, IM, and for internet access).

At another level, Ahonen and Moore build the case that —as they parse it—communities dominate brands. My preferred parsing is that communities contextualize brands. Communities—whether you care to call them sub-cultures, social networks, or whatever—provide the context in in which consumption generally, and brands specifically, are contextualized; communities provide a context in which brands do (or don’t) make sense. The reflected appraisal process appears central to connecting communities, stuff (brands), and individuals

Rob gives some of his own highlghts of our book. But I suggest you go and read his blog. But he sums up

There’s much more to this book; I’ve but scratched the surface here. But these are the elements that resonated most powerfully with me. More gems are buried in the book. Give it a read. Find them yourself.

Thanks Rob. We really appreciate such critical appraisal.

Comments

[JC Allen]

Hi Alan,

Thanks for your message before. Going to buy the book next week and intend to quote it for a presentation about the importance of communities (if that's ok). Hopefully it'll go ahead in the next month or so- i'll let you know how it goes.

Regarding this post I think it's is right to point out that communities lend context to brands... but it seems to be a chicken and egg and egg problem. If you look at all major traditional brands, it strikes me that they would never have succeeded had it not been for recognising the community in the first place. The community then responded to the brand rather than the latter adapting to fit into the community. In fact rebrands generally occur at points where they recognise that they have lost touch with the modus operandi of their community. To see communities as contextualising brands is still an entrenched "us and them" attitude, that takes their position in the market place/relationship to their audience as a priori. That's an illusion! Brand owners have to think in terms of "them and us" and admit that their position in the marketplace is rug that can easily be pulled from under them.

If there is one thing Google (the biggest brand in the world) is doing right in their PR storm at the moment is recognising that despite being the largest, fastest growing company in the world, they are in an incredible precarious position - and can admit that vulnerability. It's not going to be PR that kills them- it's going to be the DIY 'brand values' of the internet itself - free flowing, customised, and relevant information on demand. They seem to recognise that when the wind does change (there's no question of may or may not) they may well be left with a rictus grin.

So in my opinion, you're back to square one, which is that communities dominate brands from concept, inception and deployment, whether you try to avoid it or simply submit!

Kind regards,

JC

[alan moore]

Dear JC.

Thanks for the comment. I wonder whether its more an industrial mindset for legacy companies. Seeing that as marketeers your job is not to engage but to extract - cash. To drive people to the poiint of purchase. That's all very well when your marketing costs are 1:3 but when they become 1:1 its economically untenable, so you are forced to rethink as P&G are currently doing. Though that will be a huge supertanker to turn round. Though as someone ponted out to me in Barcelona last week. IBM managed it.

I agree that it is a very foward thinking company who is prepared to engage in a debate, particuarly the one that engulfs google at theis present time. Be it the China issue or the book scanning one. they demonstrate they are prepared to listen and debate.

At least everybody gets to have their say.

Or think about Jonathan Schwartz and his 1000 bloggers at Sun Micosystems, who say "My 1000 bloggers have done more this company that a $billion Ad campaign could ever do.

And of course a conversation always, or, should always constantly flow. Just think of IM. we liek to think its a bit like grooming haha :-)

also it comes down to value and how to create, co-create and release value in todays world. And how organisations are constructed and operate.

Please feel free to quote us.

[propecia]

To see communities as contextualising brands is still an entrenched "us and them" attitude, that takes their position in the market place/relationship to their audience as a priori.

Please feel free to quote us.

[ノースフェイス]

文体のスキルを把握する非常に一般的な概念です。私のユニットは、偉大な愛のチェスを持っており、低レベルの下に人を保持するための機会を持っている、と彼はLETS半分は勝つために応じて移動する子を上げて逃しません。

[グッチ]

もともと店舗前の道路は数十年前に決まった都市計画に基づく拡幅計画の対象。同商店街では約１０メートルの道路幅を１６～１７メートルに広げるが、震災前に着工の見通しは立っていなかった。しかし市は昨年１２月になって「道路拡幅は災害に強いまちづくりに必要」と計画を進める意向を示し、住民説明会を始めた。