[ photo courtesy ]
John’s been using the metaphor of fireworks and bonfires for traditional advertising and social communication, which I love, as I think it’s a really helpful way of visualising both the differences and how they complement each other. He’s extended this further with a series of conversations with ‘bonfire builders‘ – people who believe passionately in working together to create successful, conversational communications.
A bonfire is an incredibly rich and seductive image, because it’s bright, vibrant and draws people in.
So it’s particularly appropriate that it should be equally symbolic and descriptive in another context – in this case, it’s just not referencing communication, but brands themselves.
The wonderfully-named Duke Stamp talks about bonfire brands – brands with soul, that draw people in like a bonfire, which encourage people to sit round that fire together, talking about their shared experiences, values and desire – brands which value community:
What ignites a greater sense of possibility and emotion – building a brand, or building a bonfire brand? A bonfire brand is something that galvanizes and mobilizes your evangelists. So ask yourself the following: Are folks gathering to talk about your brand? Do they defend your brand? Does your brand have evangelists that tell your story for you? … If your brand is not a bonfire brand, then you need to be concerned, incredibly concerned. You are in essence replaceable.
John’s excellent presentation highlights one of the most important things about bonfire-building: it takes time and effort – if you try to cut corners, you’re unlikely to end up with a bonfire that will burn brightly and draw people in. And as Duke so rightly points out, the best thing about bonfires is when people join in to keep the fire burning:
If you are as good as you say you are then people will be drawn to you. They will in essence bring the wood for the bonfire and stoke the flames. You will become a beacon and folks will engage in the bonfire. So for Christ’s sake stop watering down your story to make it mainstream. Let them come to you versus chasing them. You’ll stay true to your core and chances are, you’ll be stronger because of it.
You can’t fake this. Bonfire brands are built from the inside out. They have passionate internal cultures united around a single vision and purpose. They build relationships with people, rather than just trying to sell to them.
I love the point that Duke makes about bonfire brands who “embrace glorious mistakes” – because you have to fail to innovate, and it’s only by failing that you move forward. When you’re afraid to fail, you stagnate. Bonfire brands live in fear of standing still. And recognise that failing to try is trying to fail.
His 2009 Do Lecture is now up for the world to see, so I’d strongly recommend checking out the below (as well as the other awesome Big Do’s) for some bonfire branding inspiration:
As much as I also LOVE Johns metaphor for being so rich and resonates so well with what we’re trying to do, I think it ignores (well, not ignores just underplays) two important things:
1. The fact that people don’t need brands to build bonfires. So very very few brands can build humans-like bonfire for anyone to give a damn.
2. That bonfire is always an activity that starts as a social group initiative so you need to have the minimal social context for it to happen.
OK, that deserves a blog post ;-)
TBC
x
That definitely deserves a blog post! And I completely agree that brand-built bonfires can’t ever really compete with human-built bonfires. But that as brands go, which is better – big lazy brands (most!) or brands with soul who have a point of view, like Howies, Method, Patagonia etc? Human bonfire > bonfire brand > lazy brands IMHO. And yes, you do need a social context – but if method can develop a social POV around household cleaning products, I think that shows the big lazy brands that it really IS possible. But def please blog – love to hear more of your thoughts :)
Earned value and burning panties post got me here…but spent more time reading about bonfires brands. Quality stuff! Off to dolectures.co.uk to read more. Good posts, good links, thanks!
Cheers David -glad you liked! nice to balance the vitriol with something a bit more uplifting…:)
Asi and Katy
Regarding brands not being good at building bonfires, I wrote a build on John’s bonfire analogy, with which John totally agrees :)
http://danielgoodall.com/2009/08/25/dont-just-build-bonfires-take-part-in-them/
It’s an analogy that really has set the imagination of folk alight, if you’ll pardon the pun…
All of these points are great, and help build upon what was initially resonant but needed more pushing around.
I started at it from the point of thinking like an agency; if you’re being asked to do create by a client, then build a bonfire.
Dan’s view is a great client insight… you don’t always need to make something in the first place, go and join in some other stuff that’s going on. And bring some treats to the party.
I’m off to read Asi’s whole post now, but from what’s up here I’m guessing it’s ‘not about the bonfire, it’s about the builders’, which is bang on (the bonfire is just the social object…)
Thanks for spreading the fire, Katy… you were right, loving the Duke Stamp stuff :)
Hey man… just come across here from Katy’s post which started you off on this I think?
You’ve made lots of great points around the marketing issues with social, and I’m increasingly a believer that the expectation of social doesn’t work wedded to a ‘firework’ style mass production model… or at least rarely works, and even then no-one can really work out why.
I do think the thing ‘in-between’ is actually bonfires that start around the production of the goods/services; change what is being sold to be social, not try and socialise what exists already. But as your final point rightly highlights, there’s a short-termism issue with a lot of clients on that.
Keynes said ‘in the long run we’re all dead’, meaning that it was too far off to worry about. In this age, if we don’t change things in the short run, then in the medium run we’re screwed…
This comment was originally posted on No Man’s Blog
Agree with the point about short-termism (http://is.gd/5f7iH) – yet it’s so hard to justify something that won’t see immediate returns, especially in this economy.
Also, people who work for Brands always want to build a nice big bonfire to show how productive they have been. I would love to do lots of smaller projects, each one adding value to a specific community (that’s the basis of what some of us at Nokia call Neighbourhood marketing: http://is.gd/5f7K0) but I find myself unable to argue against the need for at least a Digital/Engagement Hub; the alternative vision of value-adding projects feels a bit random and sparse when compared to the “guarantee” delivered by building a specific website, even if that website brings little additional value.
But, anyways, great post as always
This comment was originally posted on No Man’s Blog