Dave Allen
Dave Allen. Director, Interactive Strategy

Anthropology tells us why online communities for brands may not work

posted by , 7 Comments

You can build them but they may not come..

Soccer Fans North AnthropologyI was reading a rather good article the other night by Olivia Knight called Common Cause. It was posted on The Challenger Project web site, which in itself is a free community project web site from the folks at eatbigfish, an English company that describe their activities as so – “We are a consultancy whose unique focus is Challenger behaviour and thinking.” That’s a great one-liner, it sucked me right in.

What struck me most about Olivia’s article is how she cleverly nuanced the idea that the internet brings nothing new when it comes to building “communities.” She looks to anthropologists and city planners who already understand that a “community” is incredibly hard to “create.” As she correctly points out – “..that while the internet may indeed replace the fixed geography of the streets with an open and accessible virtual network, it is not the streets or the network that make a community.” The city planner will tell you that building a new suburb and providing a store, a church and a library does not guarantee community. Olivia again – “To feel part of a community people need to share a sense of purpose, a common set of values and beliefs. And for the community to grow and thrive it needs to draw on collective resource and a culture of support and interdependence to meet common needs and defend against shared risk.”

She goes on to explain that just as real life communities are only a simulacrum of people who live closely together, brand communities are not made up of a number of people who have given you an email address. Then she drops this hilarious observation – “..even in this age when ‘consumerism is the new religion’, no sane person sits down with friends in the pub discussing membership to recent sports, book or speed-dating clubs and proudly declares that they have become part of a new ‘washing machine community’ just because they bought a new fluff filter online and forgot to tick the box that said ‘please don’t contact me’.”

Here’s how Challenger brands work to invite people to become a part of their community:

  • The brands are built upon a clear set of beliefs that guide their entire business


  • They establish a cause and communicate what it is about their category or the wider world that they want to challenge and change


  • They genuinely open up and reach out to their users for insight, ideas and problem solving


  • They gain strength through outside contribution rather than being undermined by it



    • The bottom line for a Challenger brand is the immeasurable value and benefit in harnessing the collective people power of a consumer community who are willing and able to champion the brand’s beliefs and cause.

    More North posts on anthropology and the social web:

    Intelligent cities, hives and human clusters
    Anthropology, technology, the social web and advertising
    We are all soft-wired for social media

    Related Posts

    Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

    Comments

    7 Responses to “Anthropology tells us why online communities for brands may not work”

    1. Tweets that mention Anthropology tells us why online communities for brands may not work : NORTH : brand engagement for the digital and natural worlds -- Topsy.com
      June 23rd, 2010 @ 1:13 pm

      [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Maia Duerr, Dave Allen. Dave Allen said: @thinkbrilliant thanks for the RT re anthropology and online communities http://bit.ly/9G8e7z [...]

    2. Maryann
      June 23rd, 2010 @ 6:24 pm

      good reading and insightful comments for our modern world.

    3. Justin Wehr
      June 24th, 2010 @ 7:42 am

      Lovely post. This is extremely helpful for the start-up I am working on now where the primary question I am trying to answer is “under what conditions does a tribe thrive?”

    4. Dave Allen
      June 24th, 2010 @ 9:15 am

      Justin, I would suggest that the tribe thrives when the results of any action by the tribe result in benefits for everyone in it..

    5. Will Burns
      June 29th, 2010 @ 6:15 am

      Great post. I think the “wow factor” of technology does often blind us to the real story. Just as “online communities” are still just “communities of people” (when done right), so too is any virtually run business. When people ask me about Ideasicle (a virtual idea company), it’s very hard to get them to stop focusing on the virtual techy underbelly part and start focusing on the people who are connected to it as a result. Technology is, and always will be, a means to an end, not an end. Keep up the great work, oh North!

    6. Tricia
      July 12th, 2010 @ 3:22 pm

      Well, what are your thoughts on brand communities versus brands becoming part of existing “human” communities? It seems to me that while social and cultural groups do define themselves with brands, it’s always with a number of different brands. My circle of friends might love the same 20 products, but it never seems like each of us is in 20 distinct communities because of it. Should brands be working to invite at all, or just working to get invited?

      Anyway, those are just some recurring questions I’ve had about the subject. Great post!

    7. Dave Allen
      July 13th, 2010 @ 9:14 am

      Thanks Tricia,

      I believe online that brands have to work to be invited. They also need to create a compelling experience. And you’re right, there is no need for consumers to create a distinct community around the brand.

    Leave a Reply





    KEEN Deschutes BTA Yakima Guayaki Subpop Subaru
    Regence PGE Ann Sacks Solar World Kallista Umpqua Bank Downtown Portland