Yep, you’re right. Pablo Picasso said it. And it still applies today. Even in the realm of word of mouth marketing.
We’ve seen it happen. A corporate giant wants their “own” Facebook. Or MySpace. Or whatever the flavor of the month is. And so they copy it, trying to emulate some successful online community or face-to-face word of mouth tool. But then it fails. Big time. And they scratch their heads and abandon any non-traditional efforts claiming that they just don’t work.
So what’s the difference between copying and stealing? When you copy, you’re trying to be like something or someone else. When you steal, you make it your own. Did you hear that? You make it your own. And when you make something your own, it becomes part of who you are. You internalize it.
We’ve seen this happen, too. And many times, the program that is “stolen” is improved upon because the company owns it. It becomes part of their DNA. It’s much more than a tactic or a means to an end. It becomes a part of the very brand.
So before you decide to copy whatever social community tools are hot this month, first take a look inside and make sure you’re ready to own it. If it’s right for you and you can improve on it then steal away. You might just create the next thing everyone else will try to copy.
Yup, I’ve been a big thief lately (but don’t wanna state how). Naturally, I made it my own by mixing the elements with my own personal elements, values, in addition to other influential sources. In some areas I like to give prominent attribution; other times it’s more subdued. In obscure situations, I just consider it fair-use.
It comes down to being inspired by what works, and applying it to your own needs and context, while also being mindful of when, if, and how attribution/permission is appropriate – according to law and personal ethics.
Spike,
Nothing I can add. You said it better than I.
Great motivating, thxs! I think I will send this to each and every client I have.
Spike very good points.
As always, it is about the consumer not the company. The problem I have seen with failed Facebook and MySpace, or for that matter Linkedin (b 2 b), is that companies think “if you build it they will come”. And they don’t.
That is generally because they don’t work the accounts and because they are generally all about the company. “We are the best”. Aren’t we cool now that we are on MySpace”. It shoudl be all about the consumer.
I don’t believe it needs to be some unique tool, but rather information that is unique to the audience. I use three words when we help companies build these tools. Relevant, helpful and Interesting.
I think you also have to be willing to NOT do it if you can’t own it. More clearly, if your brand can’t own it.
Facebook, MySpace, etc. are all great, but there are some businesses that a) don’t really need them to be successful, and b) don’t have a brand that fits into that realm, anyway.
The problem with the copy approach is that you often get companies forcing themselves into an arena they simply can’t be successful in. Instead, they should be finding ways in other media to spend that time (and money).
And then there’s that old nugget, “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.” I get the sense that a lot of companies interested in things like social networking don’t want to JOIN MySpace or Facebook, in other words, the places where people are already meeting and conversing online, because they feel that they have to control and own the conversation. Because why would users join an open, spontaneous online conversation when they could be part of some closed, controlled, corporate PR spin zone, right?
Everythings been done…It’s now a matter of how can you make it better?