back to Blog

Three stages of the communication.

by Piotr Dominik

From our perspective, we can see three stages of the communication on the brand-consumer level.

First one is just a bad communication. Frequently with mistakes, poor slogans, cheap photos, poor colours, poor composition. Apart from poor execution, there are often also poor ideas, poor brand positioning, no reasons for competitive advantages or even poor strategies (if there are any). This is mass communication, often common. Most of the cases are leaned on the mass as total, the approach is to reach that and contact made with it is just a miserable experience for the consumer. When giving a little closer look to it you could have said that it’s rather slovenly information than communication.

Second level is correctness. For sure sometimes you think that something is right, but not sexy. No mistakes, not irritating, but nothing more is included in it. Neat, well-defined information. On this level, you look more careful for the photos, you have brand books, more CSR, more PR, even more cooking together, more bloggers. Often at this point mistakes are done when a client is attempting to do something controversial, brave, viral. Then brands which are quite fine start to make strange actions, film wrong video materials, cooperate even more intensive with wrong bloggers, create a thing based on ideas without insights. However, on this level lots of things that are just fine happen. You do not fall in love, you are not irritated – fair enough.

The third level are usually brands from abroad, let’s say something like 98%. So called cool brands, which you like or simply love. All of them have emerged from the second level. Everything was fine but they were looking for something more in communication. Just think about some big employers, those decent ones. Think about their Employer Branding campaigns, about perception as working place – all right? Yes, great. But the problem is that you cannot build on that foundation. Of course most brands rate it as significant advantage over the first level, which makes them correctness benchmark, but that correctness doesn’t build supremacy among their competitors. The third level it’s that moment when you can say about your brand - God, they are awesome. Being awesome as the term is quite wide, but the first problem that you can notice is a fact that you cannot learn that. It demands bravery, continuous searching, looking and tasting. Think about sport brand from Poland and any well-known brand from across the ocean. Compare their activities, way of approaching and thinking. That’s the point when the diversity shows up, the subject which is quite ignored or adapted just in points to their programs by most of the brands. Most of native brands or Western ones that are serviced in Poland have one and the same message. That message must be of wide range so that their goals can be achieved. The message must be flattened to the non-emotional information. Because of this, brands gain safety of the wide range and do not risk wrong communication. But as an effect, they don’t target anymore anyone different than people as flat as this communication. Love brands, real ones, not those who gave themselves that badge among business circle of admiration, have extremely various target groups communications. That diverseness doesn’t means messages incoherence but it means that communication is addressed to different groups via different tools, solutions and it is adjusted to the target group communication language. The message is not flattened or squeezed into correctness uniform. And now, when you hit that kind of message addressed to your values, you say – Jesus, I love them, have you seen what they have just done? This video, this application, this social action?

We try to cooperate with clients who are aware of their values and looking for full message diversification to love message. Mass normalisation absolutely destroys authenticity and when you look deeper you will see that’s the effect of work of most of the agencies. Good working site (level 2, as it was before level 1), nice photo session (the same - from 1 to 2 level), application working just fine, internship program which is fine, logging to bank which works, properly shown information, etc. All of that is fine and it’s good that new pitches are won by companies which order things. On the other hand, the minus will always be that most of the agencies assume lack of diversity in the communication targets giving general standards which consumer takes. Sure, money must match, we understand that. But Marshall didn’t built his legend on RWD and normalisation. Communication diversity in brand affection has different, crucial thought – when creating game change strategy do not look at it through your eyes. Just check how other see it. Those, you don’t know. Yes – now the problem of the definition appears. As you need to lose exclusivity in world perception and take more from others into your world, not just enforce others with your own.

Ready for the journey?



Please, take me to the::