Brand DNA

The Brands creative [R]evolution

Autores:
GOMEZ, Luiz Salomão Ribas Gomez, Dr.Eng.
MATEUS, Américo da Conceição, Mphil.

ABSTRACT
The year of 2009 is a very important moment in what the evolution of the species says respect. In this year
Charles Darwin it would be making 200 years of age and its more important publication, `the origin of the
complete species' 150 years of first edition. Perhaps the light natural evolution the human being, in some
thousands of years, to arrive at the 200 years of life enjoying of excellent physical form and with total
control of our mental facultieses. However, with human beings this not yet is possible but with the
companies this can be obtained will have ability in management and devotion to the processes and concepts
that are part of its `DNA' of mark. As it describes NOWRAH (2006), the DNA of a mark can be understood
as of the human being, a time that the DNA of the mark will go to load all the characteristics of the entity,
reflecting each position, concept, reaction, or same the image that is transmitted to the society. This article
intends to present the application of the construction technique and/or validation of DNA of the mark in the
context of an innovation project that can be implanted in organizations of any transport or time of life,
wants they has or not lucrative ends. The project `Brands [R] evolution' developed in the UNIDCOM-
IADE in partnership with diverse researchers and companies looks for to develop, supported in the DNA of
the mark of the companies, the organizacional culture of on innovation to the aspects of participation in
action, colaborativa creativity and experimentation. The DNA of mark differently of the mission and vision
of the company must contain the essence of it and not only to limit itself to the internal public and yes to be
perceived by the consumer, the partners, the suppliers and all the people whom some envolvement with
they has. The DNA of the mark must be present in the products, the visual identity, the packings, the
communication of the company, the attendance, the training of collaborators, the politics of prices, the
relationship with the suppliers and, currently, more than what never in the responsible attitudes that the
company takes. A theoretical boarding of the technique of creation and/or validation of DNA of mark is
presented where it is looked scientifically to validate a concept very explored in the market and little
divulged in the academy. This article is concluded inside presenting the developed steps of the
methodology `Brands [R] evolutions' for construction and/or validation of a DNA of mark from the
constitution of you equip inside creative of the universe of the companies where all stakeholders are
represented and where the work is developed in environments of creative induction with the resource the
techniques and creative processes of scientific root.

Key-words: Brand DNA, Methods, Innovation, Creativity

1- Framing
In a global economy and of intense competition, where they emerge and if they affirm new agents as China,
India, Brazil and Russia, exists essential factors for the sustainable economic growth, the education, science
and technology, design, the creativity and the innovation where all have its responsibility. Our society is to
form a revolutionary system of “wealth” in a time of after modernity, if to thus to want to call it where
“wealth” acquires a new concept, of the monetary economies that only linking with the money does not
have and the not monetary ones that we will have to transform, not in amount, but in the form as she is
servant, distributed, transmitted, spend, saved and onslaught, that is, “wealth” assumes the synonymous one
of knowledge here (Toffler, 2006). In a global way the activity human being as factor of the economy, the
enterprise administration, human relationships, storage and looks for of the knowledge and of the proper
process of distribution of this knowledge it enters the members of the society already it is not newness, and
it is acceptance for all the society that contributes with development of new instruments of capital, then,
“agrees to reserve at least a minimum amount of mental space to think about the impensável “(Toffler,
2006). The intensification of the competition and the globalization of the markets compel the companies to
redefine its strategies. In a competitive context, where it offers of far exceeds the search, the adoption of a
strategy of creativity and innovation is an essential condition for the survival and the competitiveness of the
organizations. Design, especially branding promotes the approach between the consumer and the
technology, through the mark and is assumed as a critical tool of competitiveness. The creativity, the
innovation and the personalization of the products and services are the key of the competitiveness of the
developed economies.

To construct knowledge alone is possible through the exchange and information that, necessarily, happen in
our brain. The human being has evolved intellectually basically why the process if has given from the
evolution of our brain, Punset (2008) affirms that “our brain is a device produced for the natural election
and is the service of an alive organism: we. ”

Throughout History, a set of philosophical, social theories and until spirituals (e.g. hageliana philosophy,
marxism, taoísmo) had been based on dialécticas and generativas relations between the opposites and on
the paradoxical tension (Smith & Berg, 1987): order versus clutter, differentiation versus integration,
divergence versus convergence, individuality versus conformity, change versus stability, newness versus
confirmation, intuition versus rationality, competition versus cooperation, revolution versus evolution,
reason versus emotion, ying versus yang. The discontinuities and the logic of the contradiction are, thus, in
the origin of the evolution and the progress (Caraça, 2002). The fact of génese of all these processes to be
in the individual or the societies where this if to inser, results in the ciclicidade of the weight that all we
give to each one of the perspectives of the knowledge.

For us the paradigm where we live implies a deeper look for the radical theories or revolutionary, it are of
normality, stops later transforming them with creativity into models of enterprise application, as the model
Brands (R)evolution that we start to present.
2 -Brands [R]evolution – Bases of the methodology
“The best innovators are not solitary genius,
are people who obtain to remove an idea that is obvious
in a context and to apply it of forms not so obvious in
a different context. The best companies had learned
systemize this process” Harper & Becker (2004).

As we saw the creativity is, nowadays, a central question for the organizations or companies. Mintzberg
(2004) affirmed that the management is one practical one that it combines Art, Experience and Science
(Art, Craft and Science). The art encourages to the development of the creativity, giving origin insights and
vision; whereas science allows the order, through systematic analyses and the experience makes possible
the existence of relations, constructed from practical tangible. Thus, while science is deductive, the art is
inductive and the experience is interactiva. What if it can confirm for the form as each one carries through
its approach to the strategy, considering this a simultaneously visionary process (in the art), of planning (in
science) and of venturing (in the experience). Mintzberg, (ibid), in counterpoint to the styles of
management for itself assigned of unbalanced, such as the narcisista style (focused exclusively in the art),
the monotonous style tedious (focused in the experience) or the calculating style (with exclusive approach
in science), suggest three styles eclectic, more functional:
• The visionary style;
• The style resolution of problems;
• The style guided for the people or engaging;
The act to manage is, thus, the result of a combination of mental states (Mindsets), that they consider the
Individual (Self), the Relationships, the Context and the Change.

The model Brands (R) evolution is born inside of this new paradigm of management, as a form to inside
generate a creative culture of the companies so that these can be more competitive in the market and
colaborativas in its internal organization. With the model Brands (R) evolution the company is with a tool
for the sistêmica search of “next Big Think”, being also prepared for the work in equips for the solution of
problems, thus with becomes tangible a style of management guided for the people. Of this form the model
Brands (R) evolution acts on all the aspects mentioned for Mintezberg (2004), acts on the Mindset of the
collaborators of the company preparing, motivating and adjusted the people for the creative work, works
the dynamic of equips and the processes of collaborative creativity (Leadbeater, 2006) and prepares the
necessary environment to the process and creative work based on the Design Thinking (Brown, 2008) so
that the Company can be focused in the search of the innovation and to be suitable the contexts of constant
change.

Prahalad (2004) discloses the importance to recognize the new paper of the consumer and the necessity of
co-creation of value with the consumers, which had left to be isolated, passive and not informed, to be
“on”, to be active and informed. The impact of these active consumers, informed and in manifest net it
some levels. The interacção appears as the base of value creation. The company must stimulate the
development of environments of innovative experiences and flexible linkings in net that leaves the
consumer co-to construct and to personalize its experiences. In the perspective of the company, the
experience of the co-creation allows to a bigger learning and feedback of the part of the consumers,
benefiting of the exchanges and new ideas for the mark, the products and the company.

Segundo Ridderstrale and Nordströn (2000, 2004), each mark and each company represent a tribe or
thematic community of consumers. The direction of belongs is voluntary and dumb if to emerge a new
emotion. Seth Godin (2007), says the ones that, currently, the power of the companies is in its capacity to
generate tribes or communities of people who if relate strong with the Company. The best companies will
be then those that are capable to generate creative ideas that allow to create a tribe of fans of the company
or the Mark, are the proper consumers who looks a bigger relationship with the Brands (Solomon, 2008),
wants to believe thematic as the sustentabilidade, the “Think Green”, for example, fit then to the
Companies know how to “listen to them”.

The model Brands (R) evolution has also this source of value co-creation therefore considers that the
several stakeholders (internal and external) of the company are of this of the beginning of the process and
creative work to partilhar its experiences and to participate of the conception of the product of the service
or the communication (Leadbeater, 2006). In the emotional and tribal source, this model when defending
that, the participation of the customers white of the company, it must happen of this the beginning of the
creative process is in the deep one to create the conditions for the generation of a tribe that will go to feel
its strong belongs therefore is proper they, actores of the creative and innovative dynamics of the company.

The new competitive enclosure for bullfighting has for base the intangible ones for what the organization
needs being renewed and to develop the “necessary daily pay-conditions” for a continuous flow of
creativity, agility and speed. It matters, therefore to develop a Strategical Management capable to make to
emerge and to keep, in permanence, these “précondições” so that the innovation can happen of course and
with frequency. The Methodology Brands (R)evolution in set with its tools and model is fit exactamente in
the such “daily pay-conditions”, therefore when acting on the mentality, the attitude, the motivation, the
knowledge, the creative techniques and when appealing to a etnográfica and participativa base it is to inside
create a creative culture of the Companies that will have to generate the necessary dynamics and radical
ideas to the growth and sustentabilidade of the Companies.

Creativity has been rightly recognized the a key you economic growth and social transformation in the
well- document analysis by Richard Florida (2002, 2005), makes the marries even to stronger, positing
global future shaped by communities that lure creative people by emphasizing the 3 T' s: Technology,
Talent and Tolerance. That is spirit of Brands (R) evolution, people and communities that work to together
in creative enviroment
2.1 O que é - Brands (R)evolution
Brands (R)evolution, is a revolutionary methodology of strategical construction of Brands and a model of
creative work with the objective to create a creative culture in the Companies, through a set of workshops
that they look for to carry through an initial diagnosis, the personalized conception of the formation, the
creative trainings of techniques and processes, the implementation in the Company and the conception of a
tool auto-evaluation of the application of the model in the Company/Brand. This Methodology has in
account, the organization, the collaborators, the processes, stakeholders and its target customers.

Brands(R)evolution research model

Proper elaboration on the basis of the participative research of social sciences.

This Methodology of creative research for the construction of marks, I included:

2.1.1 - A generating organizacional tool of a guided creative culture for the innovation, with a sistêmica
source (Mateus, 2006) and a motivacional source (Kelly, 2007).

Sistemic source - the four daily pre-models of organizacional structure for the Brands (R) evolution
 Proper elaboration on the basis of the organizacionais systems for the radical innovation, Mateus (2006)

Motivacional source - Profiles of motivation for the creativity of the model Brands (R) evolution

Proper elaboration on the basis of the ten faces of innovation of Kelley (2007).

2.1.1 - A tool of generation and management of the cycle of the ideas, of this the co-creation of the
ideas until its implementation in the Market, passing for the processes of filter and selecção of the
ideas.

Tool of generation and management of ideas of the Brands (R) evolution

Proper elaboration IDEAS CYCLE on the basis of the model innovation gate of the' Connor (2005)

2.1.2 - An implementation logic that passes for an initial evaluation, for the accomplishment of
techniques of trainings for the creativity, education and implementation of processes and
techniques of creative work in a group dynamics, having in account the individual motivacionais
factors and the creation of an environment I propitiate to the creativity.
 Module of creative work with cognitiva Base of the Brands (R) evolution

Elaboração própria

2.1.4. - The implementation of a culture model and creative work that is with the customer: Creative Lab.

O Creative Lab do Brands(R)evolution

Proper elaboration CREATIVE LAB on the basis of the previous phases of evaluation.

In the deep one it is an integrated tool of the Hardware and software for the creativity and the management
of the ideas.
2.2. Workshops

In the fan methodology Brands (R) evolution is constituted by seven moments/workshops, namely
synthetically:
Evalution - phase of diagnosis of the company
Creative Minds - phase of creation of an environment I propitiate to the amusement and “playfulness
Creative Training - phase of trainings of creative techniques
Creative Branding - phase of construction of the DNA of the mark and the identity of the mark
Creative emerges - phase of incubation with the application of the science and the processes of design
Creative culture - phase of the one Of the It, that is, the finishing of the implementation of the Creative Lab
Creative Results - phase of evaluation of the results in the company

3. Scientific base of the model

The authors and models of reference to the scientific sustentation of the model are several, since Teresa
Amabile (2002, 2006, 2009) and Edward de Bono (1999), Sutton (2001), Tim Brown (2008), Tom Kelley
(2006), David Kelley (2007), Bob Mccain (1963), Alex Osborn (1953), Torrance (1988), Leadbeater
(2006), for example in on questions to the creativity and the creativity in the companies, passing for the
etnográficas and participativas techniques of research with gênese in social sciences and authors as
Blomberg et al (2003), Fetterman (1998), Lewin (1965). In what it says respect to the process and science
of the Design, applied to the universe of the companies, we base the model in authors as Manzini (2002),
Zurlo et al (2003), Verganti & Dell' Age (2004), Vinyets (2003), Deganello (2003), as well as in process of
companies with on products to the creativity successfully such as the IDEO design (deep dive) and the
ZIBA design (Brand Camp).

Ethnographic research model - Brands(R)evolution

Proper elaboration etnográfica research on the basis of user centered design model of Vineyts (2004)
 3.1 DNA
All the life forms possess the nucléicos acid calls. These acid ones have this name for having been
discovered in first place in the nucleus of the cells. It has two identified types of acid nucléicos, that are:
The DNA and the RNA. The acid nucléicos originally had been discovered in 1868 for Friedrich Meischer,
a Swiss biologist, who isolated the DNA of the cells of put it in bandages. Although Meischer suspected
that the acid nucléicos could contain genetic information, it did not have as to confirm its idea.

After having unmasked good part of the acid mysteries and the mechanism of this, in particular the DNA,
the scientists they had been able then to start to understand the functioning of the life and the perpetuation
of the species. The DNA (acid desoxirribonucléico) is the part most important of each cell. It contains vital
information that pass of a generation to the other. The DNA co-ordinates its manufacture, as well as the one
of other components of the cells, as proteins. Small alterations of the DNA can have serious consequences,
and its destruction leads to the cellular death.

The DNA contains the information to form the proteins, that carry through all the functions and determine
characteristics of the organisms livings creature.

The gene, the DNA molecule, by chance is the more common replicadora entity in our
planet. It will be able to have others. If it will have, since that certain other conditions
they are satisfied, them almost inevitably will tend to become it base of a evolutivo
process. (Dawkins, 2003).
Dawkins (2003) suggests in its theories that already another type of replicador exists becoming vacant in
`current broth' and that we do not need in dislocating them from our planet stops to find the new processing
evolutivo. It calls it `meme' (for, according to it, to sound next to gene) and as example of `memes' it cites
“melodies, ideas, “slogans”, fashions of clothes, ways to make pots or to construct arcs.” He stats:

In the same way as the genes if they propagate in the “deep one” jumping of body for
body through the spermatozoa or of the óvulos, in the same way memes they spread in
the “deep one” of memes jumping of brain for brain by means of a process that can be
called, in the ample direction, of imitation.
Considering that the theories of Dawkins have been led in very it counts for scientists of the entire world
and that, each time more, the globalizado world if has transformed into `broth' that imeditamente transmits
the information between the human beings is easily possíval to affirm that memes is, as well as the genes in
the beings livings creature, the components of the DNA of the elements `not livings creature' of the society.

3.2 Model Creative techniques

The Brands (R) evolution has as base techniques of research, inquiry and creative work such as:

Creative Thinking e Brainstroming - individual or group process for generating alternative ideas or
solutions for a specific topic (Osborn, 1963).
Ethnographic research - The process of gathering information about users and tasks directly from users in
their normal work, home or leisure environment (Spradley, 1979).
Mind Mapping - developed by Tony Buzan (2003) are an effective method of note-taking and useful for the
generation of ideas by associations. Key features are: Organization, Key Words, Association, Clustering,
Visual Memory, Outstandingness, Conscious involvement.
Focus Group .- is a focused discussion where a moderator leads a group of participants often used in the
early stages of product planning and requirements gathering to obtain feedback about users, products,
concepts, prototypes, general tasks, strategies, and environments (Merton, 1967).

3.3 Human thought

The neurociência has very advanced in the last times and thanks to this a little has been understood more
than and of its importance for form and the human brain interpretation daily to act of of the men women
and children. The Error of Discardings, book of Antonio Damásio (2007), presents a new version for
celebrates phrase “Thinks soon exists”. Through studies in patients with physical riots in the Damásio brain
it analyzes the cerebral activity and it also concludes that the emotions and `mind' are closely on to all
`decisions' of the human being, suggesting that the reason this subordinate it and considers a new version
for the phrase of Discardings: “I exist soon I think! ”

Punset (2008) affirms that “to live it is much more easy if it will have emotions and feelings”, clearly
leaving that if the emotion will have a paper important inside of the human brain the process to think and to
take decisions is much more pleasant and not only takes care of the cerebral activities but also all the
necessities of the individual, are physical they or not. To learn is much more easy and amused when
folloied of emotions. Being thus, to construct the intelligence inside of the human brain a task of two ways
can be considered where the rational and the emotional one if complete through an interactive process that
becomes them interdependent.

According to majority of the neurocientistas (Zaltman, 2003) the human thoughts emerge what they call
images. These images are neural representations that if they form in the brain of the individuals
topographical located in the first sensorial córtices where or very next, according to Damásio (2007), must
be situated the emotional managers of the human being. Zaltman still affirms that although not to perceive
“most of the brain passes almost all the time talking I obtain exactly.” Emotion and reason all argue the
time on the decisions to be taken to carry through this or that definitive task, to acquire this or that
definitive product, to get passionate themselves for this or that determined person.

We can infer that this `cerebral colloquy' constructs the human knowledge and transforms these mental
images into symbols that guide our power to decide process all. René Alleau (2001), already in 1976,
affirmed that the man is a “simbolizante being” and this if of the one for the fact of the symbolic function to
be much more including and to be able each one to conclude the representation of it in accordance with its
particular process of knowledge generation that we can also define as intelligence. Intelligence, minimum
speaking, is a process of input, treatment and output of information that if carried through of combined
form enters the images (symbols) formed in the reason and the proportional emotion the basic balance for
one better conviviality I obtain exactly and with the people in its return.

Segundo Wurman (1995), the human being today receives more information per day that a man of the
average age received in 35 years of life. Thanks to this, the development of the brain has been each
demanded day more and the society has charged that the faster and necessary decisions are each time. “In
this direction, it can be said that the multiplication of offers still more becomes necessary the presences of
the marks” (Semprini, 2006).

4 - Brands

Even though radical authors against the domain of the marks as Naomi Klein (2002, p.29) affirm that “…
the companies can manufacture products, but what the consumers buy they are marks.” Also Baudrillard,
critical philosopher of the after-modern society, already in 1970 in its book Society of Consumption (2008,
p.197) says “… all these contents if reduce the overlapped signs, culminating in the super-sign that is the
mark; that is, the true and only message. ”

We cannot confuse mark with `soon'. Therefore, although `soon' to be closely on the perception that we
have of a mark, it is not the only representation that one marks has with its stakeholders. The mark is
basically a concept that must be transmitted with intelligence and coherence to the consumer to get the
return of perception waited for its detainers. The current success of the marks, according to Semprini
(2006), “… inhabits, essentially, in the capacity of the marks to create possible worlds that have a direction
for the individuals. This fact, it the incessant search of felt that contributes to take a reply the modern
individual characterizes.”

What it is intended already is not to vender a product, but over all a life way, an
imaginary one, values capable to unchain an emotion: the objective of the
communication is each time more to create an affective relation with the mark. The
purpose of the commercial persuasion moved: already it is not enough to inspire
confidence, to divulge and to make to memorize a product - she is necessary to mitificar
a mark and to make the consumer to get passionate itself for it. (Lipovetsky, 2007)

The origin of the marks can influence the value of the mark and directamente is related with the positioning
of the mark, a time that “Marketing battles take place in the mind of consummates it or prospect. That' s
where you win. That' s where you lose” (Ries & Trout, 2001: 2). In this way, objectivo main of marks is to
conquer mind of consumer, more than what to conquer market, since he is the consumer who decides, on
the basis of categories and not in markets. For consequência, the chances of construction of the mark do not
inhabit in the existing markets already, but yes in the creation of new categories and new markets. Ries &
Ries (2004: 15) consider eventually then that, in the origin of the marks, it is the divergence, therefore “, all
the categories will go to divergir and to become in two or more categories, being created infinite chances
for brand building”. These authors make an analogy enter the origin of the marks and the origin of the
species of Darwin (2009), mentioning the existence of a “tree of products and services”, in which the
categories appear from preexisting categories. The divergence to the level of the categories can occur from
the technological and cultural changes, considering that a chance for a new mark appears, eventually, from
each category, therefore the dimension of equal market the zero is most good in terms of branding, since it
presents the hypothesis to create a new and powerful mark, being the first mark in emergent category e, of
this form, to relatively lead the mental perception in the consumers to the category in question. Having in
account this necessity of differentiation the Brands (R) evolution looks for to introduce a logic of
participation of all the interested parties in the mark in the creative work for form to better generate ideas
and more radical ideas capable to divergir and to create new categories.

4.1 Brand DNA

One marks can be compared with an alive being, with the particularitity of that well it will have been
managed, it can be perenizar. Marks of success had created its history and its reputation during years and
with the support of a well managed team. Its creation and its use throughout the time are the factors that
confer it authenticity and generate feeling of belonging in its consumers.

If to search in concepts of Dawkins, where it affirms that `memes' can be considered the individual units of
representative codes of beings not livings creature, can consider, established in the concept of that one
marks inside transmits information processed of the mind human being, who one marks possesss a DNA.

As it describes NOWRAH (2006), the DNA of a mark can be understood as of the human being, a time that
the DNA of the mark will go to load all the characteristics of the entity, reflecting each position, concept,
reaction, or same the image that is transmitted to the society. The author still presents, in summary, that
what describes the DNA of the mark is its distinction, innovation and its attributes. It is this identity that if
it relates to the capacity of the recognized mark to be as only throughout the time, without confusion,
thanks to the elements that individualizam it (CHEVALIER & MAZZALOVO, 2007).

The corporations with or without lucrative ends, localities and even though individual personalities if have
used frequent the concept of DNA of mark to be located in the market and to construirem an affective
relation with the consumers. The DNA is something inherent the mark and must be presented to the
consumer the all instant and all action that it will be to carry through. Different of the mission and the
vision that are more internal concepts the DNA must be transmitted for is of the mark and its `validation'
needs involved support of all stakeholders with it (proprietors, directors, collaborators, suppliers and
consumers, among others.

To construct or to validate the DNA of a mark is not an easy task and needs adequate methodology of a
serious program of branding as considered in Brands inside [R]evolution.

5 - Conclusion
The methodology Brands (R) evolution has as it has supported a focused scientific research in the search
and the transference of the knowledge of the creativity, of the science of design and the processes and
creative techniques for the enterprise universe of the businesses. It is also an alternative to the traditional
processes of mark construction, bringing an innovative process of participation in share of the people to the
work and creative dynamics. We think when introducing this more human element to the process of
construction of the marks, will be possible to quickly create marks with greater potential of being perceived
and valued by its white public and of this form to more efficiently construct to its community or net of fans
of the mark.
The Brands (R) evolution, while organizacional model for a creative culture and while tool of generation
and management of the cycle of the ideas was conceived with two estruturantes principles:
- “To bring all the people for the process and the creative work”, with resource to a methodology of
participativa research in share, this means to place the different actores and agents interested in the mark to
interact and to contribute with its ideas, opinions and attitudes, experiences since the beginning of the
creative process until its participation in the filter processes and selecção of the ideas with innovative
potential.
- As I begin is the capacity of etnográfica comment as main source of information for the creativity, this
means that all can contribute and interact with its personal retraction of information on the target public.

In a first phase we develop the methodology Brands (R) evolution for application in three areas:

The Brands (R) evolution, developed an application of its methodology of research and focused creative
process in the territorial marks. This tool of generation and management of the cycle of the ideas, as well as
the organizacional model are a basic support for lands, urban cities, regions, nets that look in the creativity
the factors of innovation and development of its territories, acting on the people through its envolvement of
the alive forces of lands in the creative process and implementing a creative system to the services of the
territories that can and must generate information and ideas with potential of application in its different
functional areas, cultural, social.

With the Ideas product (R) evolution, posicionamo-in as a support for the companies who believe that the
ideas and the creativity when boarded of one she forms sistémica is a force of change, development and
differentiation. The organizacional model and the tool of management of the ideas of brands revolution had
been thought to create a creative culture in the companies want in environment terms want in terms of
collaborators, of form to allow a free space of ideas opened to all the people of the company, with a
objectivo to improve it offers of the company wants through the capacity to innovate wants through a
capacity to create value with the public white of the company and all the involved agents in its chain of
value.

The Ad product (R) evolution, looks for to democratize the creativity. The creative process cannot be an
exclusive one of the agencies but yes it must be a partilhado process enters the owner of the mark, the
agency and its public white. This model also promotes the participation and the share of the consumers
white in the generation and construction of the creative idea of the marks and in its plan of communication
and promotion. The Ad methodology (R) evolution, transfers to the universe of the mark a creative culture
and a tool of management of the cycle of the ideas in co-creation of value with the involved and interested
people in the mark, in such a way has impact on the capacity of information attainment, in the optimização
of the resources and of the costs of the creativity, in the motivation and performance of it equips
responsible for the communication of the marks and in the value creative servant and communicated by the
mark.

5.1 Creativy Branding

PETRELLI et all (2007), present a proposal for accomplishment of a corporative action called “Creative
Event”, where stakeholders if congregates at one definitive moment of enterprise diagnosis to determine
basic concepts of marks. This proposal is based on the one in the concepts of Gobé (2002) where it
develops the methodology SENSE®.
Sense® it is a visual process that helps to identify the profile of the
products and of the customers, it analyzes the competition and it
develops a multidimensional vocabulary, emotionally visual and
sensual, that serves of base for the process of design (GOBE, 2002)

From the application of this proposal of Petrelli et all, the Laboratory of Graphical Orientation
Organizacional (LOGO) of the Federal University of Santa Catarina constructs to a method of construction
and/or validation of the based DNA of `mark' in 8 stages.
1 - Relaxation
2 - Integration
3 - Application SENSE®
4 - Quarrel of qualitative metaphors (Zaltman, 2003)
5 - Definition of Brand DNA - descriptive
6 - Election of visual metaphors (Zaltman, 2003)
7 - Construction of Semantic Panel (Baxter, 2001)
8 - Validation - LOGO
This method comes being applied in diverse corporations for validation and posterior publication.
Bibliography:

OSBORN, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem-solving

(Third Revised Edition). New York, NY : Charles Scribner’s Sons.
LEADBEATER, C. (2006). The user innovation revolution: How business can unlock the value of
customer’s ideas. London : The Nacional Consumer Council.
____________ (1953) Applied Imagination. New York: Charles Scribner.
FLORIDA, R, The Rise of the Creative Class and How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community
and Everyday Life, Basic Books, New York (2002).
___________ The Flight of the Creative Class, HarperCollings, New York (2005).
TORRANCE, E. P. (1988). The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.).
The Nature of Creativity. (pp. 43-75). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
PARNES, SJ (1992) Sourcebook for Creative Problem Solving. Buffalo, NY: Creative Education
Foundation Press. (Back)
BROWN, T (2008) Design Thinking. In Harvard Business Review, June
PERKINS, DN (1981) The Mind's Best Work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Back)
ROSSMAN, J (1931) The Psychology of the Inventor. Washington DC: Inventor's Publishing. (Back)
SIMONTON, DK (1988) "Creativity, leadership, and chance," in Sternberg, RJ (ed) The Nature of
Creativity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ. Press. (Back)
TORRANCE, EP (1988) "The Nature Of Creativity As Manifest In Its Testing," in Sternberg, RJ (ed)
The Nature of Creativity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ. Press. (Back)
PAULUS, P. B., &NIKSTAD, B. A. (Eds.) (2003) Group Creativity: Innovation Through
Collaboration (pp. 110-136). Oxford, : Oxford University Press.
DENZIN, N.K., & LINCOLN, Y.S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage.
BLOMBERG, J., BURRELL, M., & GUEST, G. (2003). An ethnographic approach to design. In J. A.
Jacko and A. Sears (Eds.). The Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamental,
Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 964-986.
FETTERMAN, D. M. (1998). Ethnography: Step by step, Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
NARDI, B. (1997). The use of ethnographic methods in design and evaluation. In M. Helander, T. K.
Landauer, & P. Prabhu (Eds.). Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (Second Edition). Amsterdam:
Elsevier. 361-366.
LEWIN,. K. Teoria de campo em Ciência Social. São Paulo: Pioneira, 1965.
ZURLO, F. (1999), “Un modelo di lettura per il Design stategico. La relacione tra design e stategia
nell’impresa comtemporeana”, Dottorato di ricerca in disegno industriale, Politécnico di Milano,
Milão
ZURLO, F; COVA, B; MORACE, F. (2002), “Diseño estratégico”, Magazine experimenta diseño,
Spain
VINYETS, J. (2002), “Power for Users”, Magazine for project culture Experimenta, Spain, Vol 41,
pp 38-42
VERGANTI, R., DELL’ERA, C. (2004), “Radical design-driven innovation The secret of Italian
design”, European Design Forum.
SUTTON, R. I. (2001), “Weird Ideas That Work: 11 1 / 2 Practices for Promoting , Managing and
Sustaining Innovation”, Free Press, Outubro
RIDDERSTRÄLE, J.; NORDSTRÖM, K. (2004), “Karaoke Capitalism”, Management for
Mankind, Book House Publishing, Suécia
RIES, AL., TROUT, J. (1993), “The 22 immutable laws of Marketing”, HarperBusiness, Lenders
RIES, AL; RIES, L. (2004), “ A origem das marcas: As leis de Darwin aplicadas à inovação de
produtos e à sobrevivência do seu negócio”, Casa das letras, Lisboa
PRAHALAD, C. K.; RAMASWAMY, V. (2004), “The future of competition: Co-creating unique
value with costumers”, Harvard Business School Press, Massachusetts.
O’CONNOR, G.; AYERS, A. (2005), “Building a radical innovation competency”, Research
Technology Management, vol. 48, nº. 1, Jan. /Feb.
MINTZBERG, H. (2004),”Managers nor MBAS”, Pearson Education, London
MERTON, R. (1967), “On theoretical sociology: Five essays, old and new”, The Freepress, New
York
LEWIS, D., BRIDGES, D. (2004), “A alma do consumidor”, M. Books do Brazil Editora Ltda., 1.ª
edição, São Paulo.
KELLEY, T., LITTMAN, J., PETERS, T. (2001), “The Art of Innovation: Lessons in Creativity
from Ideo, America’s Leading Design Firm”, Doubleday, Jan.
GUILFORD, J.P (1986), “Creative talents: their nature, uses and development”, Bearly Limited,
New York
DEGANELLO, P. (2003), “From the Project Poin of View”, Magazine for project culture
Experimenta, Vol 43, pp 106-110, Spain
DE BONO, E. (1970), “El pensamiento Lateral, manual de creatividad”, Paidós Plural, Barcelona
DE BONO, E. (1999), “El pensamiento creativo, el poder del pensamiento lateral para la creation de
nuevas ideas”, Paidós Plural, Barcelona
CARAÇA, J (2002), “A alteração da ciência Mediterrânea” Jornal de letras, artes e ideias, 26 Junho
AMABILE, T. (2004),"The six myths of creativity”, Fast Company, December.
AMABILE, T. (2009)," Sharpening Your Skills: Managing Teams”, Academy of Management Journal,
May 14.
AMABILE, T., CONTI'S, R. (1999), "Changes in the Work Environment for Creativity during
MATEUS, A., SOUSA, S. (2004), “The strategic role of Design on radical innovation stratagies:
comparative case study between new technologoly and tradicional industries in Portugal”, Cumulus
Internacional Design conference, Oslo.
MANZINI, E. (2002), “Technical Power and Cultural Demand the Decline of the Age of
Mechanisation and the discovery of complexity”, Politécnica de Milano, Milão.
SPRADLEY, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Use Your Head by
Tony Buzan (Paperback - May 8, 2003
Thought-Forms by Annie Wood Besant and Charles Webster Leadbeater (Hardcover - Aug 18, 2008)
ZALTMAN, Gerald. Afinal, o que os clientes querem? O que os consumidores não contam e os
concorrentes não sabem. Rio de Janeiro: Campus, 2003.
PUNSET, Eduardo. A alma está no cérebro: Uma radiografia da máquina de pensar. 2ª ed. Alfragide:
Publicações Dom Quixote, 2008.

CHEVALIER, Michel; MAZZALOVO, Gérald. Pró Logo. Marcas como Fator de Progresso. Tradução:
Roberto Galman. São Paulo: Panda Books, 2007.

BAUDRILLARD, Jean. A Sociedade de Consumo. Reimpressão. Lisboa: Edições 70, 2008.

NOWRAH, U. Decoding a brand’s DNA. Brandchannel, jun. 2006. disponivel em:
http://www.brandchannel.com. Acessado em: 02/02/2008.
DAWKINS, Richard. O Gene Egoísta. 3ª ed. Lisboa: Gradiva Publicações, 2003.
DARWIN, Charles. Origem das Espécies. Lisboa: Lello Editores, 2009.
KLEIN, Naomi. No Logo: O poder das marcas/Naomi Klein; tradução Pedro Miguel Dias. Lisboa: Relógio
d’água editores, 2002.
WURMANN, Richard Saul. Ansiedade de Informação: Como transformar informação em compreensão.
5ª ed. São Paulo: Cultura Editores Associados, 1995.
ALLEAU, René. A Ciência dos Símbolos: Contribuição ao estudo dos princípios e dos métodos da
simbólica geral. Lisboa: Edições 70, 2001
DAMÁSIO, António R. O Erro de Descartes: Emoção, razão e cérebro humano. 25ª ed. Mem Martins:
Publicações Europa-América, 2009.
SEMPRINI, Andrea. A Marca Pós-Moderna: poder e fragilidade da marca na sociedade contemporânea.
São Paulo: Estação das Letras Editora, 2006.
LIPOVETSKY, Gilles. A Felicidade Paradoxal: Ensaio sobre a sociedade do hiperconsumo. Lisboa:
Edições 70, 2007.
BAXTER, Mike. Projeto de Produto: Guia para o design de novos produtos. 2ª edição Ed. Edgar Blucher
Ltda. São Paulo, 2001.
PETRELLI, Marco A., GOMEZ, Luiz S. R., GONÇALVES, Marília M., BEBBER, Bernadete. A
IMPLANTAÇÃO DE UMA FERRAMENTA PARA DETERMINAÇÃO DO CONCEITO DE
MARCA, In: Design & cc: SOS! Design and Commercial Comunications: Seek Optimal Synergies:
Lisboa, 2007.