Integration. We all know we should be doing it. Why else would agencies bang on so much about coming up with media neutral ideas? Which is all well and good. But that nagging question still remains. Just what IS this integration thing anyway?
Well, here’s an illustration the most excellent John Griffiths over at Planning Above & Beyond shared with me recently over a cup of coffee. And it all boils down to the difference between mechanical integration and mental integration (John used the example of his children and Croatian t-shirts, but I'll leave that particular story to him). It's not really rocket science. Just one of those things that, when someone says it, you go: "that's just so right".
Mechanical integration is probably what most of us instinctively think of when the I-word comes up: it’s about making sure everything looks the same wherever it appears – same colours, design, logo, ad characters (same whatever). No denying: consistency definitely has a place; it can provide much needed structure to campaigns and a turbo-charge to awareness (I’ve done it…and will do again).
If this is all integration means though, the danger is that you become fixated on what something looks like rather than on what it actually says to people. Saying inconsistent things in a visually consistent way? That’s OK…that’s integration!!
Which is where the concept of mental integration comes in. This turns everything on its head. Rather than being concerned with consistency of look it says consistency of meaning is what’s important. Does it really matter if things look different if they are communicating the same thing?
Have a look at these two, one for 'Britain' and one for 'London'. The first goes for obvious visually consistency, but says very little beyond the superficial.
The second has nothing about it that is visual consistent. And you may not recognise every image (and one of them is French!). But it’s no less clear what it’s about…and arguably leaves much deeper, richer impressions.
This isn’t to say that looking similar has no benefit, but what would you rather have?
Now for some of you, this may seem like so much old news. But I’ve found it strangely eye opening and empowering. Yes, I know it’s not what advertising ‘does’ to people that matters, but what they do with it. But I’d just never really joined the dots on this for integration.
If nothing else it shows that you can always learn new stuff, even when the ‘right’ answers seem really obvious.
