When looking at strategic communication and organizational life, there are many approaches that one can take. Strategic communication itself is varied in definition and approach, with the goal of making sense and motivating employees and consumers to buy in to values and philosophies that a particular organization espouses.
Integrated marketing communications, marketing in general, awareness campaigns, etc., are various tactics of strategic communication, and should not be confused nor replace the intent or the essence of communication at a strategic level. Strategic communication in its nature relies upon engaging stakeholders at multiple levels as opposed to managing them, is holistic, organic, and draws from both top down and bottom up.
Taking from organizational life, the argument is that living the brand-- where employees live the values of an organization— is be applied to politics, as exemplified by the brand of Al Gore, and consists of a pertinent blend of one way and two way communication-- strategic communication in play.
More below the fold...
Strategic Communication
When looking at the tactics employed to strategically communicate, the ultimate goal is to get buy in at all levels. As opposed to looking at it from an integrated marketing perspective—what different ways a message can be communicated—looking at it from a one way versus two way method of communication is preferred. The differentiating factor here is stakeholder engagement, and one way communication is void of engaging.
- One Way Communication: including but not limited to web sites, mailing pieces, films, press releases, brand books, training manuals, training sessions, posters, articles,
- Two Way Communication: including but not limited to blogs, presentation where the audience is involved, endorsement from a third party, viral marketing,
When carefully drawing between both ways of communication, and favouring heavily upon two way communication and its ability to foster engagement, one can essentially be living the brand. This in turn motivates others, helping them to identify with the brand. By choosing to strategically communicate via living the brand by blending the above, Al Gore is developing as a brand.
Living the Brand—the Marketing and Communications Based Perspective
Albeit a little confusing, this particular definition offered by Esben Karmark* debunks the communication leg as simply getting the message across (as opposed to being strategic in nature). This perspective is requiring the target audience to understand and deliver the brand, as opposed to truly living it. Essentially, it comprises of one way communication and comprises of methods such as manuals, training sessions and brand books. It is also more of a top down approach. However, it consists of one way communication through manuals, books and the like, and should not be ignored as a key ingredient in living the brand. After all, even though marketing communications can be a one way street, together with the definition of living the brand as defined below, it is strategic communication.
Living the Brand—the Norms and Values Based Perspective
Karmark terms this perspective of living the brand as values based, where representing and being the brand is the role of the audience. How this is fostered, according to Karmark, is by "fostering brand identification through culture embedding mechanisms, storytelling and events". Essentially, it requires engagement and hence is two way communication.
Al Gore— Living the Brand as Strategic Communication
A key element, and challenge, when communicating to a particular target audience is creating sense making and sense giving processes, so that the brand value—via the brand message-- that is communicated is bought in (preferably globally, which is a difficult task secondary to diverse cultures). At the individual level, we assign a value to the words, symbols, messages and actions that we perceive, based on our personal interpretations and value system, which are also culturally embedded.
It is perceivably not as favourable to target with words and symbols alone, for knowing how people are processing the information, and whether they find it palatable, is difficult to tell unless the buy in signal is there. Essentially it is a response to the communication that Karmark defines, one wrought of manuals, catch phrases and the like that tend to die down. It takes two—both one way communication (communications and marketing perspective) and two way communication (norms and values based perspective), to effectively communicate at a strategic level.
By bringing in two way communication and the norms and values based perspective, the brand is engaging with others, therefore assessing the buy in can occur at earlier stages.
With a Nobel Peace Prize nomination, Academy Award nomination, Draft Gore communities as the largest make up of meetup.com, a global initiative in the making, a moving film, relentless activism, web sites, blogging, Gore, through his actions, is living his brand by engaging with others, and by the nature of those who are engaged, is becoming an even stronger brand. Reinforced by one way communication, his development of a brand is further affixed.
How we act, or choose not to act communicates something. Our behaviour in itself is culturally embedded—how we react, degree of sense of urgency, body language—and it too can be difficult to reach across multiple cultures to maintain message consistency. Gore has so far been able to do this, and his momentum is only growing. By his living his values, engaging others and using multiple marketing communications, Gore is a brand in himself. The buy in is there, and it indeed would be wonderful to see it taken a few steps further in 2008.
*Karmark, E. (2005). "Living the Brand" in Schultz, M., Antorini, Y.M. and Csaba, F.F.: Corporate Branding-- Purpose/People/Processes. Copenhagen Business School Press: Denmark