Damn current industry trends. They make a mockery of important steps in marketing and important partnerships. Every brand and “person” partnership is now being tagged as a “collaboration”. Every interaction that a brand has with a “celebrity” is a “collaborative and creative partnership”. So how do you cut through the difference between collaboration and simply a sponsorship or partnership?
For me, and I’m always happy to be shot down if someone has a better idea, collaboration isn’t necessarily about who you partner with, but what you can get that partner to do. What output are they going to create on your behalf? If a collaborator is simply a face in a photo, or a name on a golf club, or a name on a sneaker/trainer/tennis shoe, then it isn’t a collaboration.
A collaboration should be defined by two parties working cohesively together to create something new, something fresh and exciting. From Intel’s Creators Project partnership with United Visual Artists to Threadless’s ongoing commitment to produce the greatest crowdsourced tshirts, these types of collaboration are all about a visual creative output.
And as we have discussed previously in the post on The Visual Economy, this creative output is going to become more important in the eyes of the consumer in establishing how you value a brand.
Some great collaborations:
- Intel and United Visual Artists (Link here)
- Gap and CoolHunting (Link here)
- Range Rover Evoque and City Shapers (Link here) (See OKGO Collaboration with Range Rover’s GPS tool below)
Some non-collaborations:
- Eminem, Dr.Dre and Chrysler (great ads, but not what I would define as collaborations)
- Anything Tiger Woods and Nike or EA (great endorsements, but now what I see to be collaborations)
Would love to hear your experiences
