Admittedly, for years I have badmouthed the “focus group” as an archaic and inefficient tool for understanding human behavior. The focus group, as a fellow workshop member pointed out, is tainted with images of client versus customer – the “owners” of a product or service judging the “user” from the safety of behind-the-glass. I’ve been there, and it isn’t pretty. Even more, it allows a safe distance for the client to criticize and dismiss the experiences of the observed customer as a one-off or rogue. “That woman is just wrong! She doesn’t know anything about our product!” More than that, too often these group settings aren’t interactive – answers are solicited person by person rather than letting the conversation grow between participants. The opportunity for debate and thus problem solving is stifled.

While I do think certain types of information are not best served in a group setting (i.e. “How do you feel as an employee at your company?”), other questions (i.e. “Could you map out the process that you go through to plan a trip?”) can be magical. When individual experiences are shared, empathy forms between participants and a very bright light is shed on similarities and differences, giving us context and stories. We, as moderators, might see these differences from our position in the front of the room, but we cannot know the rich emotional content participants might provide if given the freedom to really interact.

Instead of “focus” we should shift our aim to “gather.” It seems simple and obvious, but it’s not always practiced. Allow the natural course of conversation to occur, allow participants to run the show, and we will find richer information, both broad and deep. Eliminate the glass wall and judgment and take things for what they actually are – human experiences that shape more than just the project at hand.

So, as I am now back on the East Coast and surrounded by winter weather, inches of snow on the ground and no leaves on the trees, I am reminded about the feeling of connection to a place.  Although I am from this area, and have spent the majority of my life in Pennsylvania, I find myself yearning for the place I left just a week ago.  There is a sense of belonging that certain places can make you feel.  I have found that paying close attention to that feeling can help create a language for yourself that helps you communicate better what resonates with you versus what doesn’t.  Listen to the feelings that you feel when you enter a space, or walk down a street, or breath in the air.  They are experiences that will help make you who you are and who you may become.  Emotional resonance is such an important part of life, and by connecting deeper to the experiences around you, it will enable you to an awareness about your life that can only help to you live in a deeper and more meaningful way. Sometimes, if you’re lucky, you just stumble across that exact spot.

Besides a groundbreaking focus on the human aspects of branding that we at fathom still find relevant nearly a decade later (naturally), the new edition of Emotional Branding includes Marc’s thoughts on social media and this age of seemingly limitless connectivity. A must-read for marketers, advertisers, community managers, design researchers… you get the point.

So what is social innovation, you ask? Manzini describes it as capitalizing on the world’s most abundant resource—people—in order to create an environment centered on energy, intelligence, and positive action. Ideally, this environment would not only enable positive decision-making but also the freedom to choose and invent more sustainable ways of living. As Manzini put it:

Social innovation cannot be planned, but it can be made more probable by creating favorable environments and empowering creative people.

So the question becomes: How can we create these favorable environments and empower these creative people? And then: How can these environments and empowerments be sustained over time?

Perhaps one answer lies in Manzini’s discussion of public space. He defines public space as the space “in between work and home,” where creativity might be argued to realize its highest potential. Initiatives for renewal of the “in-between” space might include…

• neighborhood festivals
• urban vitalizations
• maintenance and caretaking
• community gardens

…or anything else that might serve to empower—and hopefully sustain—the community over time.

If we follow this line of thinking, then we might say that creative organizations such as our client’s R&D center ought to cultivate “in-between space”; that is, space suited to collaboration and informal brainstorming.

But if we think larger than this one project—perhaps toward ourselves as a company or toward the general industry of research and design—then we might ask: How do we create this in-between space for ourselves? What qualities of the time between home and work empower us as creative people?

These questions are especially relevant for fathom as we grow in people and in space. We are currently posed with the same issue raised in Manzini’s lecture (on a smaller scale, of course): How do we design for our own social innovation and sustainability? How can fathom capitalize on its most abundant resource—again, its people—to create a favorable environment for creativity?

If we look to the in-between space for inspiration, then we must find out exactly what it is about this space that allows our creativity to flourish. If it’s the challenge of navigating Pittsburgh streets then perhaps our environment should pose complex problems with satisfying solutions. If we get our best ideas while practicing yoga, then maybe our environment could stretch our minds in calm but strength-building ways. Or, if an afternoon walk revitalizes our thinking caps, then perhaps our environment should allow for a connection to the outdoors.

These ideas only begin to skim the surface of the in-between space and its potential richness for creative empowerment. As fathom continues planning for growth, not only will we be learning about our own in-between but also about how to discover the in-betweens of our clients, business partners, and colleagues—a process that can only enrich who we are as designers and researchers. Perhaps this, in turn, will increase our potential for social innovation, which, in its own turn, would surely enhance our sustainability as a company.

Thanks to LeadershipPittsburgh for organizing this wonderful TEDx event!

That “brand experience” extends beyond tangible objects to include thoughts, feelings, and sensory reactions to the designed object, space, or activity. As design researchers, we understand these emotional components to be the essence of brand and the first step in the process of designing communications, products, identities, and environments.

This first step only works because humans are emotional beings who make decisions based on gut feelings and sensory reactions. That’s not to say that we’re gullible, that the emotional branding process is easy, or that speaking effectively to us is a matter of simply raising your voice.

Rather, the branding process emphasizes the point that defining an emotional experience is a key part of gaining the confidence of a core group of consumers. A company can then foster more widespread adoption through careful marketing and creative efforts. Once the emotional experience is established, the company must maintain it through consistent quality and ongoing marketing initiatives.

These endeavors require us to think of the brand holistically, as an emotional experience. Too often, companies think of the brand experience in silos: as an identity, logo, website, advertisement, and so on.

To be successful, a brand has to be experienced whole – emotionally and tangibly – telling a consistent and engaging story at every touchpoint along the way. Otherwise, the emotional bond between consumer and company will break.

(Reprinted with some modification from “The Promise of Space: Branding and Architecture in Theory and in Practice,” by Christine Astorino. Design Intelligence, January/February 2010.)