Future Case

Crossmedia, Social, Mobile, Business Modeling, Marketing, Research and insights

Posts Tagged ‘mentality

6 months of research have led to a list of mentalities

with one comment

Niniane Veldhoen and Matthijs Rotte have finished their research on mentalities. That is, they have delivered their paper before the deadline (Friday, 13 June 2008, 17.00). In believe that 6 months of research have led to a list of mentalities which is a very useful tool for further research. Niniane and Matthijs are among the first to graduate in the readership.

Nininane and Matthijs’s theme is ‘A matter of mentality’ and I am proud to say that the two have done a remarkable job. All that is left for them at this moment is undergo their ‘defense session’, as we call it at the faculty. On July 4th, they will have to defend their writings. An ‘assessor’ will ask them difficult questions after they have presented their case.

I have agreed with Niniane and Matthijs that I will not publish the list – and include an analysis and give some remarks – until they have done their defense (it could influence the assessor as my judgment over the work high that I am very happy).

One thing I can publish here is Nininane and Matthijs’s improvement of the IMAB model. There has been discussion about it with Harry van Vliet questioning whether the current model is depicting a linear system. The outcome of this discussion is that the parts of the system are valid but most certainly not linear; The individual parts – Identity, Mentality, Attitude and Behavior influence each other.

I wish Niniane and Matthijs good luck on the 4th of July and hope to do a lot more work with them.

Written by Kees Winkel

June 14, 2008 at 14:25

Go mental, the workshop

with one comment

Every year there is an intercultural festival called Crossing Cultures. It offered by two faculties, Economy & Society – our neighbors – and our ‘s, Communication and Journalism. Our research group was asked to conduct a workshop and I took the task upon me, along with my graduates Niniane Veldhoen and Matthijs Rotte. They are researching mentalities and are progressing significantly. Although we only had six participants – women only – the feedback was good and we have learned a lot. Our aim was to test our research tools that we will use when we go public and ask approximately 300 people (as a first batch) to participate in our research.

After having introduced the topic ‘Go Mental’, we went to work. First of all, the participants had to rank a list of 25 statements that touch mentalities. Niniane and Matthijs put the results in an Excel sheet. Quite an amazing outcome. The mental attitude of the female colleagues ranked high in the desire to be independent and low on wanting to be rich.

The second exercise focused on the participants’ individual mapping of their mentality(ies) by means of six contradictory statements on a gliding scale. Although the participants enjoyed the exercise, we understood that the contents of the tool needs refinement. No problem. I am happy we have tested it.

The third little exercise went as follows. We used the same gliding scale and statements but now showed three times three brands. The workshoppers now had to determine the ‘mentalities’ of those brands.

If As I said, the feedback right after the workshop was very well. People really liked the topic and were interested in our research. May 22, all students working with the research group will present their work to the regular members of the group. After this meeting, I will post extensively about our mentality project. Meanwhile, I’ll keep you posted with bits of info.

I would really like to thank Niniane and Matthijs for their good work and commitment.

Written by Kees Winkel

April 18, 2008 at 13:13

Mentality research a gogo #1

with one comment

Today I met with my students who deal with tackling mentality issues. The core question was what mentality is. Good question. My IMAB model has been food for thoughts. But surely, it is only version 0.1. The Doves have added content to the model (Matthijs please post your addition to the model. If you cannot post it as a comment then mail me your stuff so I can put it on-line), the Jumpers are looking for ways to continue their research. Before moving back to the comprehensible and, as Harry van Vliet would say: ‘making it small’, we have decided to do a brown paper session, a brain storm on words on what mentality is. Then, we’ll test it with reference groups. Finally we will use the outcomes in our workshop half April during the Crossing Cultures event in Utrecht. The result of this is – hoping – ontology of ‘mentality’ that we can use to conduct straight forward research on this issue.

Written by Kees Winkel

March 3, 2008 at 21:44

IMAB sequence model version 0.1

with 8 comments

I have developed a simple version 0.1 sequential model called IMAB; Identity – Mentality – Attitude – Behaviour. I use it to explain the sequences (steps) that lead to a certain behaviour. I believe it starts with giving meaning to oneself and the world; Identity. Identity is often described as ‘sameness’. Being the same with the outside world (whatever it is: a person, an object, an experience) leads to a certain mentality (the core of my research). In my opinion, mentality can be described as habitual or characteristic mental attitude that determines how you will interpret and respond to situations. Thus mentality is about response to the situation one is in. In the core, mentality is about interpretation, based on the meanings you give to you in relation to the outside world. Perhaps re-reading ‘I’m okay, you’re okay’ may be of use. Mentality at its turn leads to a certain attitude: a mental, feeling or emotional position with/toward a fact or state. So attitude is the result of the former two sequences. It is a position taken that will lead to a certain behaviour. Behaviour is the the manner of conducting oneself and/or the response of an individual, group, or species to its environment. Thus behaviour is the acting of persons based on taken positions (or feelings or emotions). The IMAB model is no more than a visualization of this process.

Click the picture for a full size and readable jpg.


Written by Kees Winkel

February 26, 2008 at 16:03

Research on mentality approaches. Let the show begin

leave a comment »

The reason for not having published more over the last weeks is because I have had a very tight time schedule. Now, this week, we have a small vacation. I can proudly say that we have officially started the research program on mentality approachesabout three weeks ago. With we, I mean my students Noora Al-Ani (Finland), Heli Kleemola (Finland), Masoud Banbersta (Iran) as team ‘Jumpers’ and Niniane Veldhoen (Netherlands) and Matthijs Rotte (Netherlands) as team ‘Doves’ and me. Of course, the program will be tutored by Harry van Vliet and undoubtedly I will get support from my fellows. So, what do we mean by mentality approach?

My definition of mentality is: A habitual or characteristic mental attitude that determines how you will interpret and respond to situations[1]. If this is true – the Jumpers and Doves are currently conducting desk research on definitions and scopes of mentality – a mentality approach would be business model(s) to target audiences based on the mentality (mentalities) of consumers. So, basically, this research theme is about new target audience segmentation models. 

The Jumpers (don’t ask me why they are called as such but Jump is the name of a special program in the faculty’s ICM, International Communication and Media) focus on cultural differences in mentality approaches of Amnesty International in Finland and The Netherlands. This team will also study the mentality approaches of the Eurovision Song Contest (o lordy lord). The key question is: Do these institutions use mentality approaches and if yes, what are they and can we determine the cultural differences? 

The Doves will research the SoV – Share of Voice – in primarily spontaneous use of the brand name Dove (personal care products by Unilever) and the sentiment of use in social media. Again, we are looking for mentality issues in SoV (see entry about Brand to Community).  I must say that I am proud to conduct this research (as part of a larger research with Saxxion University and various non-educational institutions) and assist the students in their themes.

As always, if you have any suggestions regarding this research, please tell them. So, let the show begin. I’ll keep you posted.

[1] Source: wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Written by Kees Winkel

February 26, 2008 at 13:54

Brand to community by using hubs in social networks

with 8 comments

The days marketers could target audiences through planning, developing products and executing advertising campaigns and smart media strategies are coming to an end. More and more this marketer must share his market control with global production networks, powerful retailers and the Crossmedia industry. And above all, he must share his market control with the empowered consumer who influences his peer group and social network, the so called hub. Hubs provide social networks content, advice, news, opinion and entertainment through social media like Twitter, Myspace, YouTube, Second Life and many others. According to Forrester Research, these social media double their impact and reach every six months. Innovative brands like Dove, Adidas and Tampax have been offering, and will continue increasingly, engaged and influential consumers tailored propositions and images online.Brands increasingly mix user generated content with professional content thus creating integrated platforms where brands and consumers meet. The question for marketers raises how to do this right. Perhaps the solution is publish control. This is the marketer’s control over what is published. This way, the brand becomes a facilitator, not a dictator. Support hubs and reward them through social network tailored reward systems.Also support the development of so called Rapid Response Methods for the value web of the brand, retailers, manufacturers, Crossmedia organisations and other actors in what was formerly known as the value chain. Have these actors participate actively and interactively with all, including of course the consumers.Also develop customer care programs (these are more than CRM) and crossmedial interaction models based on trust and transparency by means of personalized experience possibilities. Traditional marketing tools like reach and frequency and traditional target audience segmentation models (social and wealth classes, gender, geo market profiles, etc.) are becoming less relevant. Consumers are tormented by the overkill of information and will not be dictated any more. Along side, consumers claim more and more power in the process of question and demand. The innovative marketer will have to come up with new measuring tools like share of voice measurements and rankings in social networks (how many times is your brand mentioned and with what sentiment?), NetPromotor and Buzz tracking to measure the effect of marketing investments in social networks. These monitoring systems provide possibilities for all actors to hook into the communication of all actors in order to actualize and keep the relationship alive.  One main issue of attention in this is the mentality of the consumers; what their attitude (philosophy) towards life is in general and the brand specifically. It is in fact the kernel of the marketer’s investment in such value webs. This raises some questions that need further research.

  1. What is the change in consumer behavior and mentality regarding brands, content and interaction?
  2. How have innovative brands tapped in social networks and their dynamics?
  3. What are the dynamics and communication patterns in social networks and how do we tap in?
  4. Under which conditions are consumers prepared to have a social media facilitated relationship with a brand?
  5. What are examples of the mix of UGC and brand content and what is their impact on the behavior of the actors?
  6. How do we develop innovative target audience segmentation models to successfully tap in with social networks?
  7. What are the innovative Crossmedia interaction models and formats (that need to be developed)?
  8. How can we identify hubs in social networks?
  9. What are the requirements in developing interactive Crossmedia platforms?

 I’d apreciate input on these issue.


Written by Kees Winkel

November 19, 2007 at 12:51

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with , , , , ,

%d bloggers like this: