VizThink Challenge: What the words tell us

by Christine Martell on March 3, 2008
in VizThink

The VizThink Challenge offered Artrain a chance to have three facilitators using three different visual techniques work on an organizational challenge as part of the VizThink 08 conference. Forty table groups using the VisualSpeak ImageSet each created an image and wrote a description in response to the question:

How can we visualize the power of the Artrain experience to engage individual and corporate sponsors?

For the first level, we looked at the frequency of image use. We then invited our colleague Dr Rene-Marc Mangin to bring his perspective as a marketing communications consultant to analyze the narrative used by each table to describe their images.

Level Two Content Analysis

VisualsSpeak Level Two analysis features a content analysis of the language participants used to describe the selected images.
Ordinarily the VisualsSpeak process involves analyzing a recording of the participant’s description. In the VizThink challenge, tables compiled their results into a single report written by volunteer participants. The latter process introduces potential translation errors as the writer(s) may accidentally or intentionally change wording thereby altering the data obtained. Additionally, speaking about ideas encourages more fluid translation of images into words and is more likely to produce the deeper revelations that make VisualsSpeak outcomes different from outcomes obtained using different methods.

Recording speech yields richer information from a discourse analytic perspective. Speech is not consciously restricted by the linearity of the writing process (syntax, digressions, etc.), and therefore facilitates the emergence of deeper thoughts. It’s just easier to translate visual images into spoken rather than written language. In a way, this may be analogous to the difference between typing and writing in longhand. Many celebrated authors still choose to write in longhand, and then have their manuscripts typed. We suspect this preference reflects the ease and flow of translating mental imagery to words while writing in longhand compared to typing.

The objective at the start of this analysis was to identify the main themes in the written language of the participants. We found that several words were used more frequently than others. For example, path/journey, connection, and community metaphors were among the most frequently used.

VisualsSpeak and metaphor

The VisualsSpeak tool is a metaphor elicitation tool. Metaphors, used here, includes similes, allegories, and proverbs. Put simply, it is a user-friendly strategy for exploring and elucidating people’s experiences. It is particularly useful for examining customer experiences—an activity that is at the core of experiential marketing.

The VisualsSpeak strategy induces people to think metaphorically. By inducing people to use metaphors to talk about a product or service, researchers bring the client’s unconscious thoughts and feelings to a level of awareness where both parties can explore them more openly together. Prominent researchers in the area of cognition estimate that 95 percent of all cognition occurs below awareness while, only 5 percent occurs in high-order consciousness. Most marketing and problem solving strategies focus on conscious processes and neglect unconscious processes, but we now know that the conscious mind typically attempts to explain actions produced by unconscious processes.

Metaphors allow marketers to see beyond what customers can readily articulate. Metaphors are a powerful tool for unearthing the hidden thoughts and feelings that profoundly influence consumer decision making. That said, researchers have to be careful not to contaminate their search by framing (or discussing) situations in ways that inadvertently implant metaphors—something that appears to have happened in the Vizthink Challenge.

Grid/Group model

The second phase of narrative content analysis is based on a classification scheme and content analysis technique developed by Rene-Marc in his doctoral research. The classification system is based on a modified version of grid/group theory.

The grid/group model, while commonly presented as a risk analysis model, is really a way to organize cultural information according to ways of life. We think this analytical framework is applicable to this problem because of the importance of relationships and values inherent to the VizChallenge.

Information about culture is particularly relevant because culture incorporates values, hidden assumptions, perceptual patterns and behaviors. We identified cultural preferences from the language of the participants.

The following four cultural patterns were evident in the analyzed responses: hierarchical, egalitarian, individualist, and fatalist. The large majority of the language fit the first three patterns, but it is important not to discount the minority view. The “minority” view typically represents a significant portion of the population. We have provided a sample of each group’s perspectives below.

Hierarchists – This view is reflective of people associated with museums, art schools and other major institutions. From this perspective, art is a product that is produced by talented people. The more talented, the more the artist is recognized to be in the upper echelons of the art world. Hierarchists might be induced to invest in Artrain to bolster the standing of their respective institution.

Egalitarian – This view tends to reflect communal interests.
Art is seen as a process for strengthening and bringing people together. Artistic endeavors and outcomes are about communal interaction. There is little interest in the assessment of the “value” of a piece of art, or the level of talent of the artist.

Individualist – This is the competitive individualist’s view of art. It actually can have one of two manifestations: 1) a focus on art as an individual endeavor meant to satisfy the artist or increase their skill; or, 2) a focus on the value of art as an investment. Many people with an individualist perspective might support the Artrain as an investment from which they could anticipate some sort of return, or as a vehicle for self-expression and self-development. The former could be expected to see the ROI as enhanced brand recognition, increased direct sales, or an elevated standing in their field of endeavor.

Fatalists – – To fatalists, art may just be something they do, and they may actively resist the evaluations of others. Fatalists are outsiders, rebels or people who feel disenfranchised in some way. They often have a visceral response to the view that art is produced elsewhere and brought to them by others. They also may actively resist the notion of “high art.” This was a minority view, but is not an especially rare view in some of the demographic targets of the Artrain. It might be wise to see those who expressed this view as canaries in the proverbial coalmine, because they may represent the voices of many more than are apparent. It is also important to note that “fatalists are not born; they are made.” They are often reacting to a sense of being disrespected, disenfranchised, or discounted after encounters with people impose their values on them.

One of the most important questions to answer in moving forward is whether there is common ground among these groups? If so, a core message might be developed that engages all the groups, that allows specialized messages to be targeted to specific groups?

How did the VizChallenge fit into this grid?

Below is some language from the written descriptions organized by cultural grouping. Some language may reflect the values or sentiments of more than one cultural group. The values of some cultural groups overlap.

Hierarchists (9 groups)

Communicate to the inner city and rural areas

Learning about art to help create a path in life

Child-rich & art-poor

Bring communities together

Brings people to art & art to people

Egalitarians (23 groups)

Linking people

Community & inspiration

Connection & journey

Bringing communities together, open access

Art is everywhere

Embracing difference through exposure to art

Individualists (21 groups)

innovation, fuel the spark

potential reach, more diverse images, more locations

what and who do we need to make this happen

have art will travel

opportunity to be impacted

Fatalists (1 group)

Artrain message is paternalistic

How can this information be used?

When an organization operates from one cultural perspective yet needs to engage people with other worldviews (values, attitudes, and perceptions), it is very helpful to understand the difference in those values and how they are expressed in language. This can help identify themes and language to use when intersecting with those groups. It can help avoid inadvertently sending unconscious messages to groups of people who may receive them differently than intended.

Artrain presented their current pitch “We bring art to communities” to a group of people primarily composed of one target audience. We have presented data indicating what resonated with these participants. Collaboration and agreement requires shared meaning. Any effort to engage people who have a different cultural orientation is likely to produce confusion and conflict without an appreciation of cultural differences. America is not homogeneous. It is quilt composed of different regional cultures, rural and urban cultures, and a variety of ethnic cultures. Culture embodies values, attitudes, perceptual biases, and behavioral norms. Fortunately, metaphors, imagery, and language give us access to important information about culture that can be used to enhance the quality of interpersonal interactions, as well as, marketing and sales.

Companies and consumers primarily engage each other’s attention and imagination through metaphors. They are now being used to discover consumer’s thinking about services and products, to generate new services and products, and in advertising. They are conspicuous in advertising and are particularly valuable in marketing intangible items such as insurance. For example, what feelings and thoughts are associated with The Rock of Gibraltar, cupped hands, and an umbrella. Not only are metaphors used to present images, but also to shape language in tag lines “you’re in good hands with…” and “the question is when you turn your car on, does it return the favor?”

Representatives of companies doing outreach often mistakenly think that people are interacting with them. But most people are initially interacting with what their company represents to them. They know your company or institution’s image, far before they know you. And decisions about doing business with your company are based less on the representative than what the company represents. Metaphor elicitation makes it possible to know what the consumer (or sponsor in this case) is actually thinking and feeling about your company or product/service, even when they are not consciously aware of it. These thoughts and feelings should affect how you engage them, present and “package” your product or service, and negotiate transactions.

Art and Artrain represent many things to different people. For example, it is viewed by some as an opportunity for interaction and connection; a means of interacting or connecting; a process for self-expression or development; a mark of sophistication and refinement; and possession. Each of these ways of valuing art as a process, object, or commodity influences Artrain’s perceived mission and preferences for interacting with Artrain.

Next up: We’ll look at what else can be seen in the data set.

Other posts on the VizThink Challenge: