I’m gonna run with this concept of community for a while. I’ve touched on something that’s created a bit of a spark. In other words, I value the contributions people have made here and I want to keep the discussion going.
Chris Abraham, in a response to my previous post The Fallacy of Community, gives us a great synopsis of what they’re about. Jeremiah Owyang has another post that’s excellent, What Makes a Successful Marketing Campaign on Social Networks?
What got me thinking about this is an exchange I had with Marco Nunez of Aurelius Maximus and Richard Millington of Fever Bee. The discussion centered on the use and misuse of the word “community”.
I’m starting to think that many mistake great brands with enthusiastic users - users who may even evangelize - are brands with communities. Some manage to attain that status of course, but I’d say that the majority of them don’t. That’s because these brands often don’t have the users, the clients, the customers that CONNECT. What I’m offering is the thought that the relationship between community members, while not as vital a the relationship between member and brand, is still important. Or, if not the direct relationship, the experience one garners with the product brings out a intangible sense of belonging. That status could be based on enjoyment, on status, on a sense of mission.
So the users have to feel some sort of connection with one another. Marco mentioned Apple. Richard noted Harley Davidson. Chris brought up WordPress. I pointed out Red Sox Nation and Blog Her. These are brands with communities, quasi-organized entities whose members have developed a sense of camaraderie. The camaraderie is genuine. It isn’t necessarily corporate created and maintained.
I’ll add that entities such as marketer-created fan pages and groups on the likes of Facebook and MySpace are inherently not communities as well. They may be clever marketing tactics and they may eventually become communities. But a page on a website doesn’t within itself capture the essence of community. The members do.
Real communities are long-term, if not permanent entities that last beyond a three month marketing campaign on Facebook. Especially in this day of quickly created social media networking/marketing groups. That’s because quite often those groups last as long as a campaign lasts and hence, they aren’t communities.
I write all this because the idea of “brand” is one of the most important in marketing. There’s been debates for decades on what makes a great brand. Rob Frankel, one of the best minds in branding says “Branding is not about getting your prospects to choose you over your competition; it’s about getting your prospects to see you as the only solution to their problem.” Building a brand often takes an enormous amount of work, and many attempts fail. (Note to Richard: this supports your point about Guy Kawasaki and his work for Apple).
At this point we’re not even touching on brand evangelism. There are plenty of great brands out there that don’t cause their enthusiasts to evangelize. Someone may be dedicated to using Tide Detergent, but that doesn’t mean they’ll tell friends and coworkers…unless asked. As I mentioned in a previous post, Tropicana No Pulp Orange Juice is my “brand”, but I don’t evangelize about it. I just drink it.
But the concept of community goes beyond a great brand, it goes beyond getting evangelists. It means either organizing those evangelists - or helping them organize themselves. It means enabling the members to connect with both the brand and the community. It then means keeping true to the brand promise so as not to throw off the community members.
That’s what I see is behind an enduring, thriving connected brand community.
No Comments » Posted on July 27th, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn
Loading ...