I’ve spent most of this year wrestling with a notion that challenges a lot of what is considered accepted wisdom in the heart of marketing.
It’s about The Dialogic Brand, a way of thinking about brands that doesn’t demand certainty, compression and repetition, but instead looks to use the internet for what it’s good at, rather than forcing it to do what it’s bad at.
After using the idea often over the last eight months as an interesting thrust for talks, and evolving it as the discussions afterwards drew out new angles, I’ve finally arrived to a place where I can present a written version.
But here’s where things get a little more interesting, hopefully.
The very notion of the dialogic theme is that it is an interplay, not a transmission. The difference between dialectic and dialogic conversation, as outlined in Richard Sennett’s Together, is that whilst dialectic conversation seeks precise resolution in consensus, dialogic conversation seeks understanding through discussion.
What we’re doing is putting the original idea up first, which you can find here, and then bringing in a wealth of brilliant minds who’ve been asked to respond.
And, if you read it and feel compelled to respond in some way, we’ll collect up all posts and the like we can, and link to them.
What we’re trying to do is form a map of the territory around what brand might be today; we’re not interested in finding a consensus, but in exploring the diversity, and learning more about our own views through understanding others.
Without further ado, then, head over to Contagious to read about The Dialogic Brand…