Created from a blog in which people had fun trying to describe themselves through 5 brands, 5brand has revealed itself much greater and much more challenging.
Since then, and now with this APP on Facebook, it has become clear that this simple question carries such complexity in its answer that goes beyond entertainment and into the depths of human psychology. It travels the world of marketing with its branding tools to position and conduct the perception of how those people would like the world to see and to live such brands. It walks around the anthropology which attempts to understand the relation among brands, consumption, and men, not necessarily in this order.
Finally, it tries to find, in a challenging way, questions such as:
• How would I like to be perceived?
• How am I perceived by the world and the people around me?
• How do I perceive people around me?
• Are the images depicted by the brands a result of both image and profile of its customers/fans?
• Or do its customers/fans make use of the images in order to build their own personality?
Together we are going to answer many questions not only with amusement but with a veracity degree rarely experienced by the majority of people in social networks environments. Although people don’t know how to manage their perceptions, they are extremely interested in understanding how it works.
After all, isn’t everybody dying of curiosity to find out how people actually see them? Challenge yourself, try to define yourself through 5 brands. Call up your friends and try to define them through 5 brands.
If we stop and think for a moment, anyone can have a good idea of the amount of theories, plans, methods, procedures and standards that are out there.
MBA courses, Postgraduate, matrices, strategies, information systems, lectures, thinkers, books, encyclopedias and Wikipedia, blogs, movements, research, tactics and software also fall all in one bag. It is an immense mass of information passed and passed there by a single goal: to reduce to the possibility of error.
Have you thought about it?
In addition to enrich psychiatrists and authors, this behavior can generate a demand monstrous theories seeders of new counter-theories in a circle without end. What do you follow? For how long? What are the signs of correction? Does it really suits you?
It's crazy, right? You can not know whether we are on course for success absolute foolproof. We were blind, we grope in interpretations of data that will give us some sign of weak belief.
The worst is that it is right there. We will never be sure of anything. It's that simple. In life and in business.
A healthy part of it, at least in the corporate world is that companies that establish an organizational hierarchy are actually admitting the possibility of error.
Therefore, carefully chosen people occupying certain positions, following the logic that the higher the position in the company increased the complexity of the profile that will make the decisions ... be mistaken.
Do not misunderstand me. I'm not saying that this type of process is a mistake, I just want to make clear that the error is already built into the process. Naive is he who believes strongly that a human will act with 100% certainty of success.
Exempting an asylum than another, these beings do not see much there.
If you hire someone to be a leader, you want him to venture from their experience-to actually change something.
What happens in many companies is that neurosis is the operational base of the control over the decisions of senior risky. The result is recurrent: the same mistakes are repeated for decades.
The power of "right choices", "ever worked" and "arguments sellers" are more comfortable for those who venerate and hides under the infamous control.
Thus there is no new errors and thus, there is a differentiation consolidated.
If you want your leaders to change their business, let them make mistakes. Since adding more value and importance of these errors in the conduct of business.
After all, From whom you buy the error? from professional more strategic (and more expensive) or not?