After a few months of absence I'm now back as a member of the STAGIS crew. In the past few months I have amongst other things been working on finishing my degree in "communication and media". But I have decited that why not do both? And I have to say: I'm delighted to be back in the stable. I'm looking forward to work with existing and of course new clients. And as always looking forward to work and socialize with my colleagues here at STAGIS ;-)

What the f... is the difference? You might ask. The question was also raised this weekend in Oslo at the 11.th International Conference on Corporate Reputation, Brand, Identity and Competitiveness by Dr. Kevin Money. More specifically he asked: Where does Brand end and Reputation begin? In short Dr. Moneys answer was that the Brand is what the company wishes to be experienced as by the costumers and stakeholders - and Reputation is what the costumers and stakeholders in fact experience the company to be. Dr. Money stated that you can own your Brand but you can't own what people feel about it (Reputation). As some of the listeners pointed out you could argue that it is not relevant to distinguish between what is Brand and what is Reputation - it's two sides of the same coin. But the reason why I think Dr. Money raised the question and the reason why it is important to distinguish between the two concepts become clear when you work with these concepts in practice. The clients want to know if the brand management activities work or not. Which brand activities are effective in the sense of having a positive impact on the Reputation of the company.
This is just a brief of one of many interesting discussions which took place at the conference in Oslo this weekend. Feel free to write a comment about your understanding on Brand vs. Reputation. Or maybe you think the differentiation is irrelevant? If so I would love to be let in on your reasoning.

Historie om Specialekontoret nu også nu DRs online nyheder

Yesterday I read an article in Politiken which stated that 50 % of your identity is available to the rest of us online. Abelone Glahn states in the article that if you don't exist online then you nearly don't exist at all. We have previously discussed the importance of corporate blogging. But the article in Politiken states the importance of having a personal blog or to participate in some sort of social media like kommunikationsforum or Linkedin. Some people are terrified by the thought that they can't control the personal information which are available about them online. But Abelone Glahn points out to use this strategically. Though blogs and other social media you have the perfect means to control and mould your virtual/online identity. She calls it: Your virtual handshake" - and she just wrote a book about the subject with the surprising title "Your virtual handshake" (Dit virtuelle håndtryk). If you have a profile on LinkedIn or Kommunikationsforum you have the perfect means to show future employers what a great networker you are. Then some might ask: Isn't there a chance that a profile online can affect me in a negative way in a future job-situation. Oh yes! If you point out in your application that you are a fab networker and your profile shows otherwise. It's important that the online you is authentic. But does all this mean that I shouldn't present my self as a person with extraordinary networking skills? The virtual me doesn't have that many contacts! This raises an interesting question: Is my online identity more "real" to a future employer than my offline identity?

In my previous post I asked the question: Is it really that simple that brands win when they help others to win? This morning I came across John Dodds blog and he actually answers my question in some way. He says the following about why marketing (or communication) works: It matters simply because being remarkable isn't enough, people have to realise you are remarkable.

In my opinion this also answers my question from yesterday. Brand wise it isn't enough just helping others to win (being remarkable isn't enough). You also have to communicate that that's what you're brand are doing. So maybe brands win when they help others to win AND succeeds in communicating this as well. Do you agree?

Surfing the Internet this morning I stumbled over this blog, What's your brand mantra?. Not a frequently updated blog since the latest post in from January! But nevertheless I find the following quote from this post very interesting: Brands win when they help others win. I find this very true - but is it really that simple?

Springtime in Copenhagen. Can't help loving it!

Souvenirs photografed in their real locations. That is surely authentic. Photographer Michael Hughes has photographed a selection of travel souvenirs in their real locations. See the entire selection in the gallery.

What’s the deal with the new postal service CityMail? It’s clearly a good initiative and Post Danmark also need the competition. But their campaign with acrobatic - almost flying delivery service. I really don’t get it. Shouldn’t they compete on the pricing? And not on how high they can jump and how well they’re able to do a headstand. And then there’s a hole other issue. I thought that the number one rule in the business world was – differentiation! You have to differentiate your business on the market in order to legitimize your products and your business altogether. Isn’t that correct? Post Danmark have and are still using the classic yellow bike (and car) when delivering the mail to the Danish people. Therefore an easy way for CityMail to differentiate their business is to choose another colour for their bikes. Need I say more? Anyway the delivery boys are very friendly and they visit us here at Stagis almost everyday - although they seldom have any mail for us....

As you probably already know it’s finally spring in Copenhagen - and therefore also in the Stagis Office. Liva bought a bucket of lilys yesterday - and this morning there is nice atmosphere of spring here at the office.