Have you read Scott McLoud’s ‘Understanding Comics’?
I did, a long time ago. It fundamentally changed my view of constructing digital communication.
Look at these two cartoons. What’s going on?
What has your mind ‘filled-in’ between the cartoons?
The ‘gutter’ in Scott McLeod cartoon-speak.
This is Thoughtware in action.
The communication target is required to engage their mind to complete the communication.
It’s more fun, stimulating and likely to be remembered.
Some years ago we conducted an independent usability test on UK and US web sites for a Pharma launch brand.
The UK site was more health education the US a brand focussed ‘pitch’ thereby reflecting the respective regulatory environments.
Fifty disease sufferers in each country found the UK execution significantly more usable, stimulating, useful, empowering and applicable to their lives.
Their appreciation of the brand was complete and they said they would return to the site.
Now let’s not get nationalistic, tempting though it was at the time.
Why did we get this result? Simple, the UK web site required the user to think.
The US site required passive reception because it was an exercise in telling.
As an example let’s consider the web site for the world’s top selling brand www.lipitor.com.......
A Micro Case Study
Lipitor.com has many excellent features. (See Thinking Pharma’s forthcoming: ‘Score Card’ and ‘League Table’ Blogs)
But to what extent does the site make the user think? Where’s the ‘gutter’? Have they missed the opportunity?
.
There’s lots of useful, well organised information: empathy building, assessment tests, questions for your doctor, etc. You can post your video case-study and it appears, get paid to do so – objective independence at work?
But there is also plenty of brand ‘soap box,’ fear based, confront the competition TELLING not a lot of thought provoking, thought organising decision support and empowerment THOUGHTWARE.
The site assumes I already have the questions and that I have the responsibility of organising the information to get the ‘picture’ I want.
Where’s the reflection of my mind-set as a Lipitor taker? Where am I in the Consumer Choice Chain? Where’s the POV consideration? Where’s the help me make a decision about X, Y & Z? Where’s the balance? Where is the building of trust?
I would argue that the balance of communication at Lipitor.com is about telling rather than generating thoughtware.
Do people generally like to be told? “I didn’t come to your site for the ‘hard-sell!’”
Don’t people prefer to engage in communication on their own terms?
Does a telling style of content communication work and is it getting the best from the digital medium?
What is Thoughtware?
Thoughtware definitions are hard to come by.
Thinking Pharma’s viewpoint is that thoughtware , like software and orgware, is a general term used to describe a collection of processes, tools, frameworks and models that facilitate the generation of thoughts that engage and which create knowledge and empowerment.
Thoughtware, like software, has applications, firmware, middleware, systems and testing which can all be part of the digital communicator’s medicine chest.
Thoughtware fundamentally changes how digital communications content is treated.
The Thoughtware Generation
The digital communications media are different.
They allow for interactivity. Comics and kids books like ‘ChooseYour Own Adventure’ pointed the way.
The interactive, digital communication generation requires more than navigation or ‘have your say’ interactivity.
Doesn’t interactivity open up the whole possibility of stimulating and applicable Thoughtware?
Has Pharma Got The Message?
We got the message. We proved a thoughtware based communication strategy that leveraged the power of interactivity works even when the regulatory frameworks allows for the ‘Hard sell’.
Pharma, why not shift your mind into the thoughtware space and create a digital communications content model that compliments the medium and your client needs?
(Tomorrows Blog: Partnering – The New Frontier in Business Relationships)
Comments