THEME #6 OF POST SERIES ON HUMANIZING BRAND STORYTELLING
This post series has so far explored five different ways in which brand stories have evolved in recent years to become more humanized and people-powered. Many of the themes represent manifestations of internal corporate culture, philosophy of leadership, and systems of management and communication. In contrast, the sixth theme is more granular – pertaining to the origin of the story itself. It’s about how source and sentiment can make the difference in creating either information that merely explains “what” or “how” versus actual stories that engage and communicate purpose and reason for being. So what’s driving this defining difference? There are four key areas of disconnect which fuel or weaken a brand’s story engagement potential.
1. Limited Perspective
There is the commonly held belief within business that “storytelling” is required only of a select few because it is their role or responsibility. Or that it is a creative process whereby a gifted writer magically packages information about product and process into a compelling and meaningful story for a brand. These misconceptions undermine the authenticity and substance of a brand’s story. This is because they absolve the responsibility, and/or opportunity, for areas of business such as sales, R&D, Operations/Supply Chain, IT etc., from contributing to the story-building process. The limited perspective and depth of understanding creates voids and weakens the character and engagement appeal of a story.
When crafting a brand’s story, if the process of information gathering forces a purely rational download of what is already known, then all you will hear are details about product and the process. Such details are essential ingredients for a robust product brochure –but it is not the basis of a story. A brand story begins to take shape only when you can get those with the insight to go beyond explaining what is already known, to sharing what is unknown, felt, or believed as to a brand’s reason for being.
2. Story Definition
Many businesses believe that their history and founder’s story is the same as their brand story. This is like being asked the question “Who are you?” and you respond by talking about your heritage, ancestors and their accomplishments. That doesn’t sound right does it? Origin and accomplishments are only ingredients to a brand’s story. They enrich a story, but they should not define or limit what a brand aspires to become.
Some in business think of story as being literally “a story,” verbal prose with a beginning and an end. But when it comes to building a brand, this is too simplistic and limiting. It may sound like the perfect solution for internal use. But from an execution standpoint, it sets up false expectations. It implies that a brand would have control in the way stories are communicated and interpreted by others. However, the power of social networks is living proof that stories are not weakened, but strengthened, when shared. Sharing usually implies some level of reinterpretation and creative adaptation depending on individual style and use.
A story does not even have to be verbal. Take for example instrumental music that has the capability of telling a story and transporting your emotions – all without the use of a single word.
Timelines are not stories they are milestones. Much like a CV they provide information on where a company has been and their accomplishments – but they cannot answer the question of why people should even care about one brand over another.
Product information such as specifications, features or functionality is information that is meant to serve as a footnote and reference point for a story. Despite what many engineer driven organizations may think – it is not “the story.” Information about manufacturing and process informs people as to the how and logical sequence of production and impressive technology – but detailing process, in and of itself, is not a story.
3. Interest and Share-worthy
I’m of the belief that a brand story is like a diamond – inclusive of many facets enabling it to shine. The facets represent varied perspectives, communication touch-points, actions, experiences, beliefs, and relationships that come together over time. The more facets that are made visible, the more interesting, authentic, and emotionally engaging a brand’s story will be. All too often, brand stories are so one-dimensional not because of the absence of a story. But because of the limited insight provided during the brand-building process. As a result, we may understand for example, the engineering principles used to create a product – but never come to understand why it was created in the first place.
When stories fail to connect or make an impact on others, deliberate or otherwise, they become passive forms of brand communication or just “information.” Passive information (i.e. product collateral brochures) is meant for download and reference, whereas stories are meant to be shared, co-created, and accessible.
Unless a story is activated or capable of generating interest and being share-worthy, then from a brand-building standpoint, it is not a “story.”
4. Language
“If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head.
If you talk to him in his own language, it goes to his heart.” -Nelson Mandela
Sometimes, a brand’s story is hampered by tradition, industry standards, and the limits of language. Some of the most inspiring insights for stories will come from those with responsibilities other than communications. These insights are often more technical, conceptual, and emotional. And as a result, they do not lend themselves easily to traditional concepts, language, and marketing communication processes. The main challenge in obtaining such insights is often in the discovery and translation. Unearthing such insights requires learning a new “language,” (i.e. engineering, finance, or tech) just so you can truly understand the shared perspectives. After establishing a level of empathy, you then need to reverse-engineer what you now have learned into what later becomes the strategy, story, and voice for the brand. Here’ s a great example of this very point.
I once had an aviation client who engaged our help in developing the brand strategy, name and story for a new product launch. In this case, their product was a $40+ million dollar business jet. Not unlike many manufacturing, engineering driven corporations, they believed their product was “the story.” Most members of the client team could recite the product’s technical specifications, the impressive history of aviation “firsts,” and the company’s founding story, in what became overwhelming dissertations of information. I recall being told by a member of communications team that I had to talk about the product in a way that was “consistent with the industry.” This made perfect sense to me at first since I was an aviation newbie. However, I found early on in the process, that such expectations limited the information being shared, and our ability to access the meaningful insights needed to craft their brand strategy and story.
I never thought I would hear myself saying this, but being the aviation and engineering outsider worked to my advantage. I found it easier to get engineers, pilots, technicians, and scientists beyond the rhetoric of sharing “what” they knew about the product and process. They connected emotionally to the questions that asked “why” more than the questions of “what” and ‘”how.” Perhaps this was in part because they felt somewhat responsible for making sure I understood both their response as well as their perspective. Whatever the reason, it inspired many variations of storytelling on their part to help me understand their “language.” This level of information sharing took on different forms of expression from narratives, demonstrations, illustrations, first-hand experience in simulators etc. Everyone had a unique perspective to contribute and expressed it in his/her own way. As a result, I came to understand what they felt but could not articulate through the traditional brief or formal interview process.
I’m proud to say that what resulted was a product launch that exceeded client expectations. It accomplished this not because the brand and story was “consistent with the industry”– but because it was true to the company’s beliefs and aspirations for their brand.
There is no greater agony than bearing an untold story inside you – Maya Angelou
When a brand has a great story to tell, but is unable to unearth or share with others, it is no longer a story – but a secret.
Brands are not defined by what they make, or how they make it – but rather how they make others feel.
People can buy products, and they can learn process. But great stories must be built through empathy and translation, one facet at a time.
by Anneliza Humlen of SocialVoice LLC. / @ADHumlen
Related post recommendations
•Humanizing Storytelling Principle #5 – Leadership: Moving Beyond Authority to Influence
• Humanizing Storytelling Principle #2 – From Mass Media Push to Engaging Relationships
• Humanizing Storytelling Principle #1 – From Corporate Size & Stats to the People Within
• 7 Ways to Humanize Storytelling for Business & Brands