Articles about the power of storytelling are popping up in the media constantly these days. From Forbesto Fast Company, it seems everyone is suddenly singing the gospel of storytelling, praising its effectiveness in the communications world. The fact that storytelling is now officially en vogue in the business community is no surprise to us. Storytelling is, and always has been, at the core of everything we do here at Greenough.
We recognize that stories are not only an essential component of branding, but they are also the most powerful means of conveying a message and connecting with people. How do we know? We’ve put the idea to the test. In summer 2012, we conducted our second “Prevailing Storylines Study,” poring over 10 of the most widely read publications, including Forbes, Fortune, New York Times, Time, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal. Unlike the last study (conducted in 2008), this time we included a few online-only publications including GigaOm, a leading tech outlet and two prominent blogs, the Green and Tech (Bits) blogs on nytimes.com.
We reviewed more than 1,000 articles over three months, looking for archetypal stories that appear regularly in mainstream media. Once again, we found that most articles fit into at least one of the 10 classic archetypes – or narratives. Here they are in the order of prevalence, along with more background on the study:
Greenough 2012 Prevailing Storylines Study – Click to view/download
Why should this matter to businesses? It shows that business storytelling isn’t just art; there is clearly some science to it as well. Companies looking to tell better stories will be more successful if they understand the prevailing archetypes that seem to resonate with journalists. If media are drawn to similar narratives over and over again, recognizing where your brand fits, and where you want it to fit, is key. That’s precisely the direction we take our clients.
These 10 prevailing storylines are only part of the larger brand storytelling process, but they serve as an umbrella under which we assemble other necessary elements of business storytelling, from news to feature pieces and much more. Great storytelling is far from easy, but it’s much less daunting when you understand that not all stories are created equal. Some resonate more with readers, so naturally journalists return to these narratives as well.
Video: Greenough Puts Storytelling to the Test
Your brand’s story undoubtedly fits into one or more of these prevailing storylines. Whether you think it is a “Best Kept Secret” or “David and Goliath” or anything in between, our “2012 Prevailing Storylines Study” can serve as a guide to help you develop a rich, powerful and compelling brand story to share.
So what’s your brand story?
Andrea LePain is Vice President, Media Relations at Greenough. Follower her on Twitter: @alepain
While Big Bird’s fate – along with that of PBS – has been much discussed in the wake of last week’s presidential debate, a Romney presidency promises many other programs will find their way to the chopping block. One likely victim is the emerging renewable energy sector.
As he promises a path to energy independence that relies on increased gas and oil exploration, former Governor Romney will take an axe to the estimated $90 billion in grants, incentives, etc. designed to bolster the nascent renewables sector. Romney says the country can no longer afford that outlay. Whether or not handouts given to the oil and gas industries for almost 100 years will meet the same fate as clean technology in the Romney regime is still unclear. What is clear now, however, is that Romney’s strong performance (or Obama’s listless effort) has the renewables sector contemplating a new world order in 2013 and beyond.
Are we facing the ‘end of days’ for clean energy after the halcyon years of the Obama administration? Hardly: in just a short few years, we now have rising stars and established players in biogas (see Harvest Power), wind (see Cape Wind), solar (see Next Step Living), energy efficiency (see FirstFuel), electricity storage (see Ambri) electric vehicles (see GM) on so on. There will be casualties undoubtedly as government support is eliminated under Romney’s stewardship. But will we face a wasteland? Is there a path forward in a world where the deck is stacked for entrenched forces? The answer, of course, remains to be seen: clearly, the private sector needs to play a larger role in terms of its investment in clean energy research and market development. Active involvement in lobbying is needed to change the calculus so that externalities – the well-documented impact on health and the environment among others – are included in the costs of carbon-based energy. Easier said than done, I know, but such is the nature of a dynamic market system that even Romney acknowledges needs regulations, albeit far less than the current administration advocates.
We can also take solace in the fact that the prices of fundamental renewable technologies are dropping, a key to survival should all clean tech government funding be dropped. A 2012 white paper by McKinsey & Company highlighted the increasingly competitive solar industry, where the price of solar-PV modules has dropped from $4 per watt in 2008 to less than $1 today.
The report went on to read: “Prices paid for solar are likely to continue to fall, but sales should rise as solar power becomes economically viable for an increasing number of customers. Additionally, because prices for solar-based power are likely to be set by prices for fossil fuels instead of subsidies (which have been falling annually), margins for leading solar players should increase as their costs continue to decline.”
Out of this potential solar wasteland, well-managed companies like GT Advanced Technologies with strong balance sheets are continuously adopting new models and technologies to seize opportunities in solar and other emerging market sectors.
Whatever the future holds in terms of presidential politics, we know the world is not standing still. I’m an optimist: where there is a need, solutions built on innovation, quality and value will prevail. I also believe common sense will rise to the top of the discussion. PBS, the venerable home of Big Bird, receives only $1.35 per person each year in federal funding. We will find a way in our vast education budget to keep our best early childhood education resource, an eight foot tall yellow bird, in homes every day. Likewise, I believe the benefits of renewables – cleaner, healthier and safer (think national security) are abundantly clear: we just need to keep driving those points home to our fellow citizens. Once the overall population understands the necessity of clean energy, the person who sits in our county’s highest office is bound to follow, regardless of his party affiliation.
If you watched any of the NFL’s opening weekend, you heard a lot of discussion about the league’s big referee strike and saw replacement officials in action on the field. The replacement refs did pretty well – it appeared they didn’t ultimately decide the fate of any games – but that may have been due to good luck more than anything else. An egregious error in the Seattle/Arizona contest could easily have cost the Cardinals a victory if the ball had bounced differently. These officials (most of whom hail from division 2 or 3 college football) will certainly need more than luck to succeed in the coming weeks.
All the officiating talk makes you think: Surely no one tunes in to a football game to watch the referees (except for maybe Ed Hochuli), but now that they’re gone, enforcement of the rules seems pretty darn important. The same can be said for industry regulations, especially in marketing and PR.
People who work in and/or cover marketing don’t necessarily talk glowingly about the FTC, SEC, FDA or other agencies or regulatory bodies that oversee, and sometimes even police, what we do. Remove them, however, and we might be singing a different tune. Imagine if Bureau of Consumer Protection went on strike and the responsibility for enforcing CAN-SPAM suddenly fell to replacement BCP agents who missed some marketing violations and enforced others incorrectly. We wouldn’t be able to get the old regulators back fast enough.
By the same token, marketers – like football players – need to embrace the spirit of regulations rather than just blindly following the rules. If every player on the Jets or Redskins committed a penalty on every play of the game, there’s no way the refs (replacement or otherwise) would be able to call them all, but the game would also become unwatchable. If, on the other hand, players followed the rules to a t, defensive linemen would break through on every pass play and wide receivers would get open with absurd ease. Similarly, regulators can’t monitor every single marketing email, print ad and social media post that goes out, nor should they, but marketers must adhere to the spirit of the rules without sacrificing creativity or edginess.
A thriving marketing industry – like a thriving sports league – functions best when the playing field is level and regulation is balanced with innovation, within reason of course. Taking risks without running afoul of rules (or even industry guidelines) is a fine line to walk in both sports and marketing, but it’s what keeps things interesting, entertaining and engaging (for fans and consumers alike).
Can the replacement refs keep the game fair and entertaining? Let’s hope so (or let’s at least hope for a quick resolution to the labor dispute). Can our industry keep things fair and engaging? I guess that depends on whether we – and the regulators – can stay on top of our respective games.
Jake Navarro is a senior consultant for Greenough. Send him an email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Each year, when the Boston Marathon rolls around, I feel a renewed sense of pride for the city in which I live. On the third Monday of every April, when elite athletes travel to Boston to compete in the world’s oldest annual marathon, this pride certainly grows stronger and I think, “hey, I live in a pretty cool city.”
Last week I read an article written by the Globe’sScott Kirsner that reinforced this sentiment, offering up things the Bay State can and should be proud of; not in terms of athletics and traditions, but in terms of technology and innovation. What made the list? Our leadership in life sciences; fostering entrepreneurship; our top notch colleges and universities; our local hangouts, which allow for the exchange of innovative ideas; contribution from big companies such as Microsoft, Raytheon and iRobot and the accomplishments of Terrafugia, the creators of a flying car.
So what about the areas the Bay State needs to work on? Kirsner argued that Massachusetts isn’t creating enough public, economy-invigorating companies, we ignore potentially lucrative consumer-oriented innovation, we make it hard for talented foreign college graduates to remain stateside and we don’t mint enough “angel” investors, who fund cool startups.
As far as the areas in which the Bay State is doing well, a few other areas could have made the list. What about renewable energy and clean technology? Just yesterday, our client Harvest Power, a Waltham-based startup that turns food scraps into energy, received $110 million in series C funding, a milestone that will undoubtedly propel the organic waste industry forward. Or, how about companies like BigBelly Solar which uses solar power to cut waste collection trips by 80%? And, you can’t forget Boston’s robust information technology and cloud computing industry. In addition to the heavy (IT) hitters like EMC and Akamai, cloud start-ups in the Boston area, such as Cloudant, Sonian and Kinvey, are making quite a splash in the industry.
When it comes to innovation, Boston is no Silicon Valley, a sentiment that many Bostonians are probably sick of hearing. But, maybe we don’t want to be Silicon Valley. Massachusetts is a unique area with deep historic roots and is home to many extremely bright individuals. Boston can and should create its own path of innovation, and I would argue that we are already doing this. As Kirsner noted, there are always areas for improvement, but from the work being done to develop breakthrough medical treatments to the conversion of organic waste into energy, we are making great strides just like the marathoners will on Monday.
Jessica Boardman a senior consultant at Greenough. She can be reached via email at email@example.com or follow her on twitter @J_Boardman.
Many of us who work in PR live and die by our smartphones. I know I’m not the only one in my office who keeps mine within arm’s reach 24/7. EMarketer says that 73.3 million Americans now own smartphones. We’re bringing mobile into almost every aspect of our daily lives – we use our phones to shop, make dinner reservations, to date…even our workouts are going mobile.
If you’re one of the countless folks (like me) who’ve sworn to take better care of themselves and stick to an exercise plan in 2012, you could probably use a little motivation right about now. We’re more than a month into the new year, and for many of us, we’ve lost the enthusiasm we set out with on January 1. If you’re already in a rut and need some help to stay focused on your goals, there’s good news – help is as close as your smartphone. You can use your device to force yourself to set a goal, get rid of the excuses and even earn rewards by staying on track.
Here are a handful of apps to help you stay on track to a healthier you in 2012:
Commit to a set number of days per week that you want to exercise…and the monetary price you’ll pay if you don’t. Use the app to check in when you go work out at your gym. If you abide by your pact, you’re rewarded with money, courtesy of the people who didn’t stick to their gym pact.
This advertising-free app uses your smartphone’s GPS to track the stats of your workouts including distance, time, pace, calories, heart rate and path traveled on a map. It also offers audio cues, customized interval workouts and manual entry for treadmills and other cardio equipment.
Having grown up in Boston, I’m hesitant to admit I’m not a huge Patriots fan. So, while I was cheering the team on Sunday night during the Super Bowl, I was not flying off my seat screaming at the television like many of my friends. Instead, throughout the course of the night, I chose to analyze the more important parts of the Super Bowl for me: the halftime show and the advertisements. As far as the halftime show? Here’s the recap: Madonna lip syncs while Ce-Lo Green provides backup vocals and awkwardly dances in a black sequined robe. Overall, it was a valiant effort.
As far as the advertisements, I thought this year’s were fairly average. A few did resonate with me, including the “Etradespeed dating baby” as well as the “Doritos sling baby,” although I don’t think either necessarily created a type of humor or sentiment that hadn’t been done before. This feat was left up to the mighty Coca Cola.
Coke certainly hit the mark with its real-time, social media-optimized campaign. The company’s spots featured two loveable polar bear mascots, one a Pats fan and one a Giants fan in various scenarios including “Catch,” (above) and “Superstition,” both of which were altered in real-time based on how the game was going. The bears were also featured on a microsite CokePolarBowl.com which showed their reactions to the game and even other ads, also in real time. The idea was to drive viewers to the microsite and spur a robust discussion on social media channels such as Twitter and Facebook.
I thought the idea behind this campaign was very creative and well-thought out in that it combined and integrated polar (no pun intended) opposites. By featuring the polar bear mascot, we are brought back to Coke’s roots, its classic feel, consistency and reliability. At the same time, the spot encourages innovative, real-time social media interaction, and we are reminded that Coke is edgy and original; in other words, Coke still knows what’s up. By featuring a Pats polar bear fan and a Giants polar bear fan, the spot played off the intense rivalry felt between the two teams after their last Super Bowl meeting in 2008.
Super Bowl spots from companies like Coke, Acura and the movie Act of Valor were highly effective, and actually, believe it or not, a little too effective. Monday morning it came out that websites from these three companies all crashed during the event due to too much ad-driven traffic. The average 30-second Super Bowl commercial costs $3.5 million plus production costs. So, although these companies certainly hit the mark with their carefully crafted ads, all that work and money poured into the effort could be meaningless when a consumer is unable to access the website for more information.
This situation stresses the importance of not only having a well-thought out campaign, but planning ahead and taking into consideration how essential follow through and reinforcement is. You could spend millions of dollars to develop a really cool, interactive, social-media optimized campaign that no one has done before. But if your website buckles under the pressure, you make a different impression; consumers could walk away with a bad taste in their mouth.
In my view, these companies could have spent a little less on the commercials and instead put a chunk of change into optimizing their websites ahead of time, making sure they would be fast and reliable for the big day, regardless of the number of visitors. Of course this is all in hindsight and it’s certainly hard to predict these sorts of things—but it’s a lesson learned. I’m willing to bet that next year companies will pay a little more attention to website optimization to foster a good user experience, which is equally important, if not more important, than the ad itself.
Jessica Boardman a senior consultant at Greenough. She can be reached via email at firstname.lastname@example.org or follow her on twitter@J_Boardman.