Comments on: expressive capital http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/ "cartoons drawn on the back of business cards" Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:55:13 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Vy Blog http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2678 Vy Blog Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:52:42 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2678 <strong>A whole lotta right</strong> Great stuff out there today for good marcom learning (all emphases mine):People are the value, tech is the conduit Mitch Ratcliffe in Red Herring in context of investment success, but with marcom application: A whole lotta right

Great stuff out there today for good marcom learning (all emphases mine):People are the value, tech is the conduit Mitch Ratcliffe in Red Herring in context of investment success, but with marcom application:

]]> By: Case http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2677 Case Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:43:21 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2677 Social capital? Very popular concept at the moment re: social enterprises: "The term social capital emphasizes not just warm and cuddly feelings, but a wide variety of quite specific benefits that flow from the trust, reciprocity, information, and cooperation associated with social networks. Social capital creates value for the people who are connected and - at least sometimes - for bystanders as well." From (first on the google list, but as a brief a description as fits the post): <a href="http://www.bowlingalone.com/socialcapital.php3" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://www.bowlingalone.com/socialcapital.php3" rel="nofollow">http://www.bowlingalone.com/socialcapital.php3</a></a> Social capital? Very popular concept at the moment re: social enterprises:
“The term social capital emphasizes not just warm and cuddly feelings, but a wide variety of quite specific benefits that flow from the trust, reciprocity, information, and cooperation associated with social networks. Social capital creates value for the people who are connected and — at least sometimes — for bystanders as well.”
From (first on the google list, but as a brief a description as fits the post):
http://www.bowlingalone.com/socialcapital.php3

]]> By: hugh macleod http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2676 hugh macleod Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:03:46 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2676 Dan, liked your letter a lot! <a href="http://www.livejournal.com/users/dannybradbury/29166.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.livejournal.com/users/dannybradbury/29166.html</a> In the context of the "closer to God" cartoon, God is a metaphor, regardless of your belief system. Brands, too are metaphors... Gods and brands have much in common. Dan, liked your letter a lot!
http://www.livejournal.com/users/dannybradbury/29166.html
In the context of the “closer to God” cartoon, God is a metaphor, regardless of your belief system.
Brands, too are metaphors… Gods and brands have much in common.

]]> By: hugh macleod http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2675 hugh macleod Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:49:15 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2675 Dan, the key word here is "empathise", not "enabling". Dan, the key word here is “empathise”, not “enabling”.

]]> By: Danny Bradbury http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2674 Danny Bradbury Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:02:52 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2674 Hugh, I wrote a sort of letter-in-a-post to you on my blog (www.itjournalist.com). It's long so I won't post it here. I love your cartoons but I think you're way out of line on the 'branding the struggle to get closer to god' cartoon, for various reasons (and I'm not coming at it from a religious perspective)! Anyway, keep up the good work - I love your cartoons, in general, they always leave me laughing, or thinking, but generally both. Dan Hugh, I wrote a sort of letter-in-a-post to you on my blog (www.itjournalist.com). It’s long so I won’t post it here. I love your cartoons but I think you’re way out of line on the ‘branding the struggle to get closer to god’ cartoon, for various reasons (and I’m not coming at it from a religious perspective)! Anyway, keep up the good work — I love your cartoons, in general, they always leave me laughing, or thinking, but generally both.
Dan

]]> By: hugh macleod http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2673 hugh macleod Thu, 25 Nov 2004 03:17:37 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2673 Bill, yes, it does count. Expression might have desirable outcomes which could later be deemed valuable, whether it had an audience or not. At least in theory... Of course, the higher you go up the food chain with "Capital", the more vague it gets. What, it took companies how long? 20-30 years? before they started taking Emotional Capital seriously. I'm waiting for "The Love Mark Backlash" to begin. Heh. Bill, yes, it does count. Expression might have desirable outcomes which could later be deemed valuable, whether it had an audience or not. At least in theory…
Of course, the higher you go up the food chain with “Capital”, the more vague it gets.
What, it took companies how long? 20–30 years? before they started taking Emotional Capital seriously.
I’m waiting for “The Love Mark Backlash” to begin. Heh.

]]> By: Bill Seitz http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2672 Bill Seitz Thu, 25 Nov 2004 02:38:37 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2672 Hmm, does this circle back to the AttentionEconomy concept? Does it count as Expression if nobody else perceives it? <a href="http://webseitz.fluxent.com/wiki/AttentionEconomy" rel="nofollow">http://webseitz.fluxent.com/wiki/AttentionEconomy</a> Hmm, does this circle back to the AttentionEconomy concept? Does it count as Expression if nobody else perceives it?
http://webseitz.fluxent.com/wiki/AttentionEconomy

]]> By: hugh macleod http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2671 hugh macleod Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:18:15 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2671 "7. Spiritual Capital." Yeah, I thought of that. But it's too loaded a word, it's too vague a concept to really aid my cause. “7. Spiritual Capital.”
Yeah, I thought of that. But it’s too loaded a word, it’s too vague a concept to really aid my cause.

]]> By: j david http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2670 j david Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:50:33 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2670 OK, now you've done it... ...you've made me think. Stream-of-conciousness rant to follow- First a working definition. "Capital: something that makes raw material more valuable." The first five items on your list capture a rough chronology of the "buzz" around (mostly) recent labels for capital. The sixth item is a place-holder for the next one. In my view, these six items collapse to three: human-emotional, physical-tangible, and intellectual-intangible. Human-emotional capital is the abiltiy to make human behavior more valuable by creating expectations of reward or punishment. This includes the unstated emotional blackmail of "leadership" and the ways products can "make it easier...to express meaning, narrative, purpose..." Some religious values (those that are grounded in the individual) are found here. Physical-tangible capital is land, factories, PPE, and other "hard" assets that have the capacity to create physical things with higher value than the sum of their parts. Parts can be put in, with the expectation that higher value product will be created. Intellectual-intangible capital is the knowledge to create value. This includes the processes employed in the factories above, the supply chain they are embedded in, the "brand", patents, specific knowledge, and worker skills. This, in my view includes the entire market for financial capital- which is simply the ability to promise to return investments with a premium to compenstate the investors for the risk they assume (in other words, they're an idea). Some religious values (those grounded in external heirarchies) are found here. A capital-based marketing scheme would design, position, and promote products in the space created by these three dimensions. Our product is not a consumable thing, it is a value producer. The trick is, as always, to find the value sweet-spots for the target market. Note that all are expectation-based. Some see this an element of faith or trust, while others see it as a time-shifting/saving strategy. Invest now, benefit later. Borrow now, repay later. Behave now, or pay later. Raw material now, higher value finished product later. etc. etc. Anyway, have at it! I look forward to reaction. OK, now you’ve done it…
…you’ve made me think. Stream-of-conciousness rant to follow–
First a working definition. “Capital: something that makes raw material more valuable.”
The first five items on your list capture a rough chronology of the “buzz” around (mostly) recent labels for capital. The sixth item is a place-holder for the next one.
In my view, these six items collapse to three: human-emotional, physical-tangible, and intellectual-intangible.
Human-emotional capital is the abiltiy to make human behavior more valuable by creating expectations of reward or punishment. This includes the unstated emotional blackmail of “leadership” and the ways products can “make it easier…to express meaning, narrative, purpose…” Some religious values (those that are grounded in the individual) are found here.
Physical-tangible capital is land, factories, PPE, and other “hard” assets that have the capacity to create physical things with higher value than the sum of their parts. Parts can be put in, with the expectation that higher value product will be created.
Intellectual-intangible capital is the knowledge to create value. This includes the processes employed in the factories above, the supply chain they are embedded in, the “brand”, patents, specific knowledge, and worker skills. This, in my view includes the entire market for financial capital– which is simply the ability to promise to return investments with a premium to compenstate the investors for the risk they assume (in other words, they’re an idea). Some religious values (those grounded in external heirarchies) are found here.
A capital-based marketing scheme would design, position, and promote products in the space created by these three dimensions. Our product is not a consumable thing, it is a value producer. The trick is, as always, to find the value sweet-spots for the target market.
Note that all are expectation-based. Some see this an element of faith or trust, while others see it as a time-shifting/saving strategy. Invest now, benefit later. Borrow now, repay later. Behave now, or pay later. Raw material now, higher value finished product later. etc. etc.
Anyway, have at it! I look forward to reaction.

]]> By: snowchyld http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2669 snowchyld Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:24:07 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2669 you missed one, 2) diet coke and fucking lime also: glad to see STEP THREE is PROFIT! ;) you missed one,
2) diet coke and fucking lime
also: glad to see STEP THREE is PROFIT! ;)

]]> By: Peter Meddick http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2668 Peter Meddick Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:06:21 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2668 Hello. I've been thinking about this topic for a couple of weeks. The thought seems to boil down to the brand that can inspire faith is powerful. Whereas faith is loyalty beyond reason (unconditional? parental?) - the deep trust a consumer places upon the brand that it's governed by a moral compass. Didn't Chris Locke write something along this line in Gonzo Marketing? That brands that attempt socially relevant/responsible strategies are ultimately in it for profit? I think it is dangerous and provocative to attach divinity to this, but I might be misinterpreting this entire conversation. That would be par for the course. Hello.
I’ve been thinking about this topic for a couple of weeks. The thought seems to boil down to the brand that can inspire faith is powerful. Whereas faith is loyalty beyond reason (unconditional? parental?) — the deep trust a consumer places upon the brand that it’s governed by a moral compass. Didn’t Chris Locke write something along this line in Gonzo Marketing? That brands that attempt socially relevant/responsible strategies are ultimately in it for profit?
I think it is dangerous and provocative to attach divinity to this, but I might be misinterpreting this entire conversation. That would be par for the course.

]]> By: John http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2667 John Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:53:02 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2667 Brands that help express meaning. Not sure what you mean, but it sounds like it's close to the mark. I think that successful brands can trigger an experience that we identify as meaningful, and that we want to express. A movie franchise, or a can of coke, or even a decent blog posting does this. Of course this gives people who contribute to the prominence of a successful brand a big big head. Because they are successfully toying with people's confusion. A sense of meaning is derived from reflecting on relationship between ourselves and other things/beings. This seanse is copnsidered GOD by some, it's a nice exhanlted state. But I think it's overrated because once we "have got" an experience that "means" something, the relationship is officially shattered - the realization effectively takes us out of relationship. Oh no - maybe another shot of that meaning-inducing brand will do the trick...http://www.gapingvoid.com... oh no, diminishing returns... It's all us baby. At each point in our lives relationship is rewarding. But for the most part, "brands" as such are just concepts stamped on things that take is into a sense of "big meaning" and away from real relationship. Screw brands, anyway. Brands that help express meaning. Not sure what you mean, but it sounds like it’s close to the mark.
I think that successful brands can trigger an experience that we identify as meaningful, and that we want to express. A movie franchise, or a can of coke, or even a decent blog posting does this.
Of course this gives people who contribute to the prominence of a successful brand a big big head. Because they are successfully toying with people’s confusion.
A sense of meaning is derived from reflecting on relationship between ourselves and other things/beings. This seanse is copnsidered GOD by some, it’s a nice exhanlted state. But I think it’s overrated because once we “have got” an experience that “means” something, the relationship is officially shattered — the realization effectively takes us out of relationship. Oh no — maybe another shot of that meaning-inducing brand will do the trick…http://www.gapingvoid.com… oh no, diminishing returns…
It’s all us baby. At each point in our lives relationship is rewarding. But for the most part, “brands” as such are just concepts stamped on things that take is into a sense of “big meaning” and away from real relationship. Screw brands, anyway.

]]> By: jbr http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2666 jbr Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:28:38 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2666 to me, metaphorical capital doesn't quite connect with the times we live in. the term should reflect the inflection point we are experiencing. i read through the hughtrain again and the vibe seems to be more about "getting" or understanding the customer in order to succeed with them. the best method to "get" anyone is to develop a relationship and relationships are formed via conversations. so, i lean more toward cluetrain and the "market is a conversation". based on this, i believe customers will respond to and embrace the company that listens to them. i am not a psych type, but don't people better respond to someone who listens to them? it doesn't seem that much of a stretch to believe we would embrace the company that listens better. based on these assumptions and the assumption that blogs will continue to expand the premise of cluetrain, i believe that conversational capital is the key for thriving in today's market. conversation capital is the ability to rapidly gather, assess and respond to the voices in the marketplace. or something like that...... to me, metaphorical capital doesn’t quite connect with the times we live in. the term should reflect the inflection point we are experiencing. i read through the hughtrain again and the vibe seems to be more about “getting” or understanding the customer in order to succeed with them. the best method to “get” anyone is to develop a relationship and relationships are formed via conversations.
so, i lean more toward cluetrain and the “market is a conversation”. based on this, i believe customers will respond to and embrace the company that listens to them. i am not a psych type, but don’t people better respond to someone who listens to them? it doesn’t seem that much of a stretch to believe we would embrace the company that listens better.
based on these assumptions and the assumption that blogs will continue to expand the premise of cluetrain, i believe that conversational capital is the key for thriving in today’s market. conversation capital is the ability to rapidly gather, assess and respond to the voices in the marketplace. or something like that.…..

]]> By: Drew Nelson http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2665 Drew Nelson Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:45:57 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2665 Evelyn/Jack.. people have always been possessive and always will be in some way. Materialism is one way to express ourselves (like Tony G/Chris C said) whether it's how many wives you have designers you wear or books you own, we're all susceptible in some area. But,I'm too harried and literal-minded to have a well-developed creative self. Sell me something with a nice design that I could never think of, that lets me do cool things/look stylish/show a new face to the world and doesn't make me feel dumb trying to do it, and I'm sold. Evelyn/Jack.. people have always been possessive and always will be in some way. Materialism is one way to express ourselves (like Tony G/Chris C said) whether it’s how many wives you have designers you wear or books you own, we’re all susceptible in some area.
But,I’m too harried and literal-minded to have a well-developed creative self. Sell me something with a nice design that I could never think of, that lets me do cool things/look stylish/show a new face to the world and doesn’t make me feel dumb trying to do it, and I’m sold.

]]> By: aleah sato http://gapingvoid.com/2004/11/22/expressive-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-2664 aleah sato Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:28:59 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=1032#comment-2664 Spiritual Captital - This product gives you a sense of belonging to the "bigger picture," or provides you with moral guidelines much broader in scope than simple emotional comfort. This fills in "the void." By far the scariest. Spiritual Captital — This product gives you a sense of belonging to the “bigger picture,” or provides you with moral guidelines much broader in scope than simple emotional comfort. This fills in “the void.”
By far the scariest.

]]>