on Eco-Research: World 2.0.
In that issue we talked about re-design, re-cycle, re-act & more.
We have 10 ways to create a better world, as I posted here.
I' m trying to think beyond the plain eco-message. Looking back at the different projects we have been doing with Addictlab, be it on our own, or for third parties, there is something that is popping up: there is a clear wish to create sustainable concepts. Sometimes, this is even an extra to the requested or commissioned deliverables. An extra filter and task we give ourselves, adding to the client's briefing.
I know that this might be a personal thing, a result of my personal drive. But what if this comes naturally with the process of sourcing and the methodology behind Addictlab? What if bringing people together in collaborative processes results in interaction, in surprising or out-of-the-box ideas, but also brings forward a clear wish to create 'for the community'?
Could social awareness be one of the outcomes of an addictlab-sourced project? Then maybe that is the most remarkable thing to be studied. Because that would mean that we play less 'individually' when creating in and as a group. So the methodology itself steers the result in a certain direction. We create differently in a group, and we add an extra 'social' layer to the filters we use to generate our concepts. Am I making sense? Let me make a quick sketch here.
1. a conventional creative process.
There will normally be a client, a company, most probably, that is spending some of its budget to start a creative process. This process should create changes for that company. That can be new products, a communication strategy, brand reflection, revenue, a new building, and more. What if we could quantify those 'changes', be it economical, brand-related or more.
• The blue part then shows the 'amount of changes' that are the result for the client.
• The red part shows the other party that will be involved in this process: the agency/designer/consultant. Changes as a result of this process for the agency will be primarily income, but one could also add field experience, for instance, or added value. (We did THIS for THAT client)
• Next to that, we can/should expect more income (or added value) for external and even internal creative resources. That's the yellow part.
• The Green part, is the social part: the PR value, the story to tell that can be picked up by journalists & media. Probably, and most of the time, this will be limited to the peer group of both agency & client. Both agency as client will probably get press in BTB media.
2. Addictlab process.
Now. Let's look at what I believe should be an ideal Addictlab project.
• The blue part stays pretty important: a client - any client - should get the changes they are paying for, and more.
• The red part then, is about quantifying the beneficial changes and/or income (but not necessarily only money) for Addictlab, as facilitator & methodology to create.
• The yellow part here, shows you the income/added value for Labmembers involved. These are how I call the creative resources, registered on Addictlab. Mark: the sizes of client/addictlab/labmembers are equal. Important, as we want to do anything but abuse the creative resources. This sometimes is completely opposed to how creative minds are treated/neglected by the agencies.
• The green part is for the lab's partners & sponsors. Addictlab's labpartners should be benefiting too. Labpartners can step in & tap into certain research fields. Addictlab's proactive way of working & global research fields demand research partners. The partners/sponsors should receive added value for any process done by the lab.
• Next to that, we are looking at changes for society. Why? I believe we shouldn't only create to earn money, or a company shouldn't pay us just to get added value for its board of directors. We have a moral duty when creating. This section is quantifying the social implication of the creative process. The result for our society, the people. Changes here could be heritage, regional branding, respect for social groups & more. the list is long.
• The orange field - I've called it 'Credibility Independent Lab' - is the authenticity factor. It's as important as the benefits for society, and it's what changes we are creating to remain true to the lab's independency and authenticity. If the lab is not authentic, the previous parts are simply just not possible. (This is why some political decisions to sustain the creative industries simply don't work. Politics is all from top down. Creative process is from bottom up.)
• If all those last elements are ok, we have come to the last part, the brown part on the chart, being the PR value of the project. The size is the same as the ones in the beginning. As important, because the story we now can tell, is a story that is authentic and very credible in view of sustainable changes. A broad selection of media should be interested in bringing the results of the process, generating PR for the company and the labmembers.
Now tell me. Addictlab has been a start-up company for the last 10-12 years (Or so it seems). It seems difficult to control, set up, steer in the direction wanted. Maybe it's just to naive an approach?
Jan Van Mol
