(As appeared in CMO.com)
One’s perspective is not always the best indication of reality. As much as we’d like to believe we hold the key to the truth, we remain subjective and irrational beings victim of our own biases. As strategists, acquiring data is necessary to formulate bulletproof strategies.Markets are becoming more fragmented and consumer needs ever more divergent. A proper brand strategy must account for short-lived realities and unpredictable events. Knowledge then forms the basis of good planning: the more data, the better.
However, while data is a prerequisite of an informed strategy, in most cases, it is not enough to carry it through. Research may point to problem areas or gaps such as consumption barriers, negative perceptions, weak employee engagement, or underperforming products. It sometimes identifies opportunities and gives an indication of the solution in the form of an insight, yet it does not spell out the solution. Pursuit of the insight - one of the most abused terms in the industry - can be endless and daunting. An insight is a surprising truth, but without contextualizing it, it loses its value. This is where the role of research stops and that of a good strategist starts.
Immersion into the ecosystem of the brand yields a pool of knowledge. A big pool with plenty of truths, some new, some old, some useful and some not. It’s the resultant findings from studying the competitive set, customer behavior, internal stakeholder motivations, and market trends, all while keeping in mind the short and long-term business objectives of the brand.
Distilling these findings into a simple and clear idea is an exercise in deductive reasoning. It is thus sometimes difficult to refute some of its conclusions. Reaching a differentiated territory for the brand that is both relevant and sustainable is the ultimate goal. Getting to that point, however, requires a certain leap. A solid strategic idea needs to be novel - perhaps out of the box. It is generally hard to justify leaps, especially when there is a certain intuition involved in getting to them.
Quantifying intuition can be a futile endeavor, but if attempted, it would lead us to realize that it is nothing but a consortium of unconscious realizations: they are triggered by experiences, thoughts, and relationships. It is hard to pin down how these contribute to the birth of an idea, yet it would be unrealistic to say they don’t. Within intuition lie undisclosed analyses and brave thoughts, constantly fed by readings and observations around the clock. While intuition is sometimes invaluable, it remains subjective.
But that perhaps is what brands nowadays need: a point of view. Subjectivity alludes to a singular view on matters but singularity is what creates differentiation. Finding relevance for singularity is challenging sometimes, but having a stance and openly expressing it garners respect. A recent study showed that 73% of Millennials believe that businesses should share a point of view about issues and a further 73% think businesses should influence others to get involved in an issue. Meaning something for some people is far better than meaning nothing for everyone. When Apple launched its “Think Different” campaign in 1984, it knew that perhaps its campaign would be polarizing to some. Dove in 2004 also knew it was taking a very bold stance in relation to how beauty is manufactured and promoted to consumers. OMO’s “Dirt is Good” platform as well challenged the status quo of what is socially accepted behavior. These brands built relevance through singularity: they had a very strong point of view, not only on their industry, but on the world as well – and they were quite vocal about it.
The role of research is not to be undermined, certainly. Some “enlightened intuition” is healthy, however. It’s probably difficult to build an absolute argument for embracing subjectivity in its totality, but it would be certainly useful to introduce a degree of well-informed, inclusive subjectivity back into our work – and lives.