Autor: Jörg Hoewner

Das Trendforschungsnetzwerk Trendwatching.com hat ein interessantes, 20-seitiges Papier zum Thema “Customer made” veröffentlicht, also “Customer made”-Produkte, -Inhalte, -Marketing, usw..

Darin wird “Customer made” definiert als:

“The phenomenon of corporations creating goods, services and experiences in close cooperation with experienced and creative consumers, tapping into their intellectual capital, and in exchange giving them a direct say in (and rewarding them for) what actually gets produced, manufactured, developed, designed, serviced, or processed.”

Gezeigt werden Beispiele aus dem Bereich DIY-Werbung, Produktentwicklung, Kommunikation und Vertrieb.

Die Frage, warum Kunden so etwas tun sollten (also, Energie aufzuwenden, eigentlich den Job anderer, gut bezahlter Menschen zu machen), beantworten die Trendforscher so:

• “Status: people love to be seen, love to show off their creative skills and thinking.
• Bespoke lifestyle: something consumers have been personally involved in should guarantee goods, services and experiences that are tailored to their needs.
• Cold hard cash: getting a well deserved reward or even a profit cut for helping a company develop The Next Big Thing is irresistible.
• Employment: in an almost ironic twist, CUSTOMER-MADE is turning out to be a great vehicle for finding employment, as it helps companies recruit their next in-house designer, guerrilla advertising agency or brilliant strategist.
• Fun and involvement: there’s pleasure and satisfaction to be derived from making and creating, especially if co-creating with brands one loves, likes or at least feels empathy for?”

Gut finde ich diesen Absatz so ziemlich am Ende des Dokuments:

“Bloggers, journalists, editors: Feel free to publish part or all of these trends at your convenience. As long as you properly name, credit and link the source, www.trendwatching.com, we’re happy.”

Hiermit geschehen.

Verwandte Beiträge dazu:
>>Wie belastbar ist das Einbinden von Kunden ins Marketing?
>>“Brand Democratisation” oder “Stakeholder involvement? Oder doch eher “Markendemokratisierung”