At this years PSFK Conference NYC, I moderated the panel ‘Brand New Rules’, a discussion about whether new rules are needed to govern the behavior of brands in a world increasingly defined by changing social, cultural, technological and economic forces.
Which got me thinking. Hasn’t it always been the role of brands to break rules and create new ones?
And doesn’t that come from brand strategy ideas that create change in culture?
Is ‘new’ just another way of saying ‘good’?
I think we’d all agree that there’s no shortage of good creative thinking in our industry. So why is it often difficult to make good ideas happen?
The role of a brand is to invent new possibilities, so setting rules might seem counter-intuitive, but perhaps there are new practices we need to put in place to put more creativity into ‘creative strategy’.
With our panelists Paul Worthington, (Wolff Ollins), Paul M Taylor (Diageo), Maria Vrachnos (Peep Insights), and Doug Jaeger (thehappycorp/Art Directors Club), we started to debate what these brand new rules might be, and now we’d like to hear what you think.
Everyday this week, for 4 days we’ll be posting a new question for you to debate. Rupert Newton, (the other half of The Joneses) and myself will be weighing in and guiding the discussions, until we have 4 ‘Brand New Rules’.
(Catch up with the conversation around question 1 here.)
In a recent interview David Attenborough, the broadcaster and naturalist, talked about why he gave up on his earlier anthropological work. He said, “…human’s are unique in that when people know they are being observed they change their behavior and if they don’t know you’re spying on them”.
Why do we continue to invest millions of dollars in market research based on claimed behavior and how do we develop deep insights into actual human behavior?
Share your ideas in the comments section below.