 Good afternoon everybody and welcome to today's webinar Express. Strong brands have multiple personalities. How do you identify yours? With our guest speaker Richard Gillingwater, and which has been organized by the CIM Southwest Group. If you are a university student attending today's webinar then you may want to sign up to the CIM Marketing Club. It will keep you up state with the latest trends, innovations and concepts in the marketing industry. So I'd never like to hand over to Richard Gillingwater, the founder and creative director of emotional branding who is our guest speaker today. Over to you Richard. Thank you Phil and welcome everybody. I'm really excited to be sharing for the first time this new research into archetypes and this new brand mapping tool Raddenby. To set the scene let me start with a short story. A sage, hero and lover walk into a bar but only order one drink. Why? The answer is because they are the same person and just like interesting people, interesting brands are not one personality. The sage, hero and lover each conjure up within us all a set of thoughts, feelings and needs that help us tell a story either as the storyteller or as a character. Brands just like movie directors use multiple archetypes and characters to help them tell interesting and complex stories through the way they complement each other or through the tension between them. There's a reason why it's the two Ronnies, more common wise, Ant and Deck, because great stories, great storytellers require tension between characters. And whilst there are two of them, each with their own internal different personality traits, they come together as one. So the question is how do you identify what's your right blend of archetypes to tell your story? Just over two years ago and with the help of people like Imperial College London we started building Raddenby to answer that very question. Raddenby looks to understand archetypes, how they're expressed visually through a design language, how this is used to tell a narrative and how that supports a brand strategy. Today we've mapped almost 2,000 brands through the lens of 60 archetypes. We wanted to be able to map every type of brand, not just a few famous consumer brands, we wanted to map the good and the bad, the B2Bs, the global and the local. Those whose budgets were big and those whose budgets weren't, to build a true picture of how brands really use archetypes. To our knowledge, mapping brands through the lens of 60 archetypes has never been done before. We did this because we wanted to see in more detail than ever before how brands use archetypes to tell their story. We wanted to identify what each archetype really looked and felt like through their visual language. Raddenby is creating a dataset of brands and a common language of archetypes. It will create a language for researchers, consultants, marketers and creatives alike and you'll be able to see an archetypes visual language, you'll be able to access each brand's map and see where they're set against the competitors. You'll be able to play with different types of archetypes and see how they combine visually to help tell a story and you'll also be able to map your own brands to help you define your strategy and this will be available live later this year. So in the next 30 minutes what will we cover? Well firstly, there is a skill to be able to tune into the nuance of 60 archetypes just like a master perfumer is called the Ney, a French for nose, for good reason. You have to develop your Ney, your ability to feel emotions with design imagery and words, to tune into the different subtle notes within a brand's perfume, its visual language. By quieting the mind you can become aware of the physical emotions evoked in the body through a piece of communication. Does it make you feel like smiling, make you feel like open to new possibilities or closed and strong and determined? Otherwise you're probably not tuned in to that piece of communication, a little bit like watching a TV program while reading a book, you're not fully present. What we learned when we tuned in is that nearly all brands are not one character, not one emotional feeling, they're complex stories. Multiple stories layer together, each potentially using different combinations of archetypes to help tell their story. Building the right narrative at the right time and place allows audiences to find those archetypes, those stories that are most relevant to them and their needs. Archetypes can work together to communicate stories more powerfully and they do this best of all when they create tension in a narrative. Working with multiple archetypes can be a challenge so understanding when there's too many or not the right ones is important in order to manage the collective whole, the overall identity of the brand. The main factor sitting behind all of this is technology, the internet, social media, the never-ending demand for content means brands can now tell much richer, more complex narratives, making them more adaptable, able to speak to multiple audiences and helping them achieve a sustainable advantage over time. First, let's take a step back. Brands have things they want to say, that they're innovative, that they have the right solution or that you can feel confident with them. Stories as we know are a great way to connect random elements and put them together in a way that helps us learn to learn how to thrive and survive. It's how our brains are hardwired to remember and share knowledge. Once a brand has identified what it wants to say, it can then identify how it wants to say it. Choosing an archetype or a blend of archetypes, either as a storyteller or as a character loads the story as we said with more meaning. For example, by telling this narrative to the voice of the creative, we can tell the story one way. We can emphasise certain values and behaviours as each archetype carries with it specific feelings. Or we could add the voice of the rebel to tell aspects of the story in a different way with a different feeling. Each archetype has its own narrative, its own emotions and needs that help you tell a story more powerfully. And we calibrated and built the model. We talked to marketeers from around the world to get their feedback. While we did this, we learned that many avoided or were reluctant to use archetypes directly, at least overtly as labels or at board level because of a lack of credibility. If you have to choose from one of 12, and here we see the 12 primary archetypes, this can be seen both limiting and crude. Consumers also find it hard to tune into all but a few of the classic archetypes like the hero and the lover. Many other archetypes, although felt, are not easily recognised. Within the industry itself, definitions are varied and vague and open to individual interpretation. I can remember on several occasions marketing directors saying there's no way the chief executive is going to sign up to us being the magician. We're not Paul Daniels. Who, by the way, isn't the magician archetype? He's part of the Jester family. It's these fears of these comments like this that means marketeers avoid using archetypes as much as they could. If you Google or try to learn about archetypes, you'll often find the same few famous brands used all the time. After you'll get one or two examples per archetypes, and then they start quoting movie characters because they're running out of examples, meaning that for many marketeers, especially in a B2B world, archetypes feel irrelevant, not professional, and so don't know how to use them effectively. Even with a brand like Apple, you can find as one archetype online and then later as another. One B2C brand that I'm sure you'll have come across is Harley Davidson, and if you Google them, they come up as the iconic Rebel archetype. Yet clearly, neither of these home pages feel like a Rebel brand. There is a reality gap between the headlines and how brands really communicate. So which archetypes exist in Harley? What archetypes are used by Barbara to tell their story? What can we each brand learn from the other? Do they have one dominant archetype, or do they blend several, each coming to the front at different times? How differentiated are they from others in their sector? Before we start exploring these two brands and others in more detail, let us see how good your archetypal nose is. How many archetypes can you see or feel in this corporate video from Telefonica? Have a good look at the images and the words. Can you recognize which images feel the same? What archetypes have been communicated in each frame? Which ones jump out? Which take a while to tune into? Do you know what you're looking for? Do you have a list in your mind to check against? If I say the caregiver, the explorer, the futurist, the athlete, do these now appear where before you couldn't label them? What about the liberator? What other ones could there be? How different would the images of the cyclist and the runners feel if they were just by themselves? Is there an aspect of the companion within the athlete? How does the couple dancing change how you may feel about the two cyclists above looking at the sunset? How do these different archetypes work together to tell the story? What about the more subtle images, like those in the bottom left? Can you tune into them? Which images caught your eye immediately? How much does your personality, how your feeling right now, influence what you look at and what you ignore? If you like sports or you like family or more family orientated, do those archetypes jump out for you? Do you recognize them over others? So overall, what do you feel when you look at all of these images? Is this a video for you about caring? Or is this video about success? Because a video uses multiple archetypes, we can experience this story in a way that's more relevant to you because of its use of archetypes relating to you. Until we can better understand what each archetype looks like, feels like it's hard to identify them. It's hard to understand how they work together. We can easily be blind to their use, especially the more subtle ones. The ones pointed out, however, they're easier to find. Regardless of whether you see them immediately or not, they are there and they are there for a reason. Phonica, like many brands, has many stories to tell. They want to talk about being more human, a global player, ability to anticipate the future, glow down climate change, committed to equality. They want to say we're open, bold and trusted, all of these things. So brands are not one character, but a blend for a reason. The Beers is not just the lover, as is often quoted, but the creative and the sovereign. It's also a blend of the guardian, seeker, provider and shaman. Through the imagery, the photographs, the styling, the tone, when they want to talk about certainty for future generations, ethical sourcing and conservation. So how do we measure all of this? How do we map a brand's personality? Because brands feel different, they have different personalities. Currently, you can choose from your own set of values, or you can choose from one of the 12 primary archetypes or select from hundreds more. You can use AI or crowdsourcing to scrape content against preset terminology resulting in spider diagrams that show your brand's score, and you can map archetypes relative to different polarities. Raddenby hopes to take this to the next level, to give you greater clarity through the visual dataset of 60 archetypes. Raddenby is built around opposing emotion needs. Emotions are critical in changing behaviors and guiding behaviors, so they are a fundamental part of any brand and the role that archetypes play. We all experience daily tension between six core opposing needs within ourselves. For example, to varying degrees, we all have a need for variety. We all want to go somewhere different for a change, but we also have an opposing need for certainty. We like the bus to run on time. We like to know things are going to be there. The tension between these forces creates is a critical component within any narrative and an important part within a brand's DNA. So we started by positioning each primary archetype based on their emotional need between the six primary needs. For example, out of all the primary archetypes, the sage has the greatest need for certainty, while the jester has the greatest need for variety. By placing these archetypes on the map, you are starting to explore the spectrum of human emotional needs they represent. But as we implied, 12 does not give us enough detail. So we identified where to position each of the four subfamily members within the map. Now each archetype has these four family members and they themselves are positioned relative to the six needs. So if we look at the sage out of its family, the one that has the highest need for certainty is the strategist. And we can look across the whole board and see how they're all related to each other. There's a transition between one place and another, which creates the map feel. There's a blend between them. So the closest to the alchemist, for example, is the maverick, the ambassador, the advocate, the reformer and the rebel. And so their sisters and brothers sit close to them. And this is how the map works. Behind each of these archetypes is a visual data set of real brand images that helps you to bring to life the emotional needs and feelings of the archetypes. For the first time, we can look and say, this is what an adventurer feels like. This is what a shapeshifter or a visionary or a muse feels like. And all the images have been calibrated so there's a distinct look and feel that matches the archetype. But images are really just one archetype. Most of these images are in themselves a blend of archetypes. So through Raddenby, we are able to identify what certain combinations of different archetypes look and feel like. So once we have a data set, we can start seeing more clearly how brands use archetypes. So let's go back to Harleen Barber. How similar do you think they are? They certainly feel similar here. When we see sample videos, sales, websites, literature together, you start to feel how similar these two brands are. In fact, Barber's recent video campaign here on the right feels far more like a rebel than Harleen's video on the far left. When we look at the map and where the brands are positioned, we can see which archetypes they use. We see the similarities and where they're different. And through the connecting lines that join each individual image, we can see the dynamic relationship between the archetypes as they tell their story. With both Harleen Barber, the patriarch is in fact the strongest archetype, more than the rebel. Although one patriarch may be on a bike and the other walking on an estate, they feel the same. Both tell a story of seeking a close connection, a position of status within their community, while also having a sense of independence and exploration. Both blend the patriarch, rebel, companion, seeker, and hero to tell this story. By comparing these patterns, we can see how well the archetypes align to a narrative, which archetypes are potentially surplus and which archetypes could be employed to tell the story in a better way. If you want to be in a position of status amongst your community, there is no point in being the scientist. So the patriarch, the companion, the seeker, these are the best archetypes to talk about those things. We look at lots of maps and from these, we've been able to see patterns. Patterns that reflect what we call the three dimensions of a narrative. The first dimension is the about me story. When a brand wants to stand out or fit in by telling you what they do, this is their language. The second dimension is when a brand is more focused on the customer and making them feel something in that moment. And the third dimension is when a brand looks to empower you like a coach and help you grow and change your behaviors in the long term. Each of these are all different in the way that they approach their use of archetypes. The ones on the right-hand side of the three dimensions use them in a more sophisticated way. Whereas the one dimensions don't need to do that. They can be more direct. And here, when we look at three business schools with Harvard on the left, we see just a few archetypes from their mapping. This is partly because they have a simple message, but usually they want to simply talk about one thing themselves. And that's fine for certain brands in certain positions. And by using the map, we can identify those strategies. With London Business School in the middle, we see a more expansive pattern. London Business School still wants to talk about themselves from a position of status, but also to weave in their narrative the student story. One that in their case is about a supportive community, a narrative designed to make you feel important and to feel you would be happy there. If we look at IE Business School, we again see similar areas indicative of the sector. But like busy bees, they appear to be working harder to talk about their story through the use of more archetypes. In IE's case, their narrative talks about their new approach to teaching in a virtual world and how their student experience will be an empowering one. This requires more archetypes. This is a more complex story to bring to life. In this case, they use the visionary and the magician to help tell their story in a way that makes it feel amazing and future focused. Things that London Business School or Harvard don't need. So no one strategy is necessarily better than the other. Through the map, each brand can consider and reflect upon the use of archetypes to see if it fits with their strategy. It also helps to be able to map out and see this. So people across the whole organization can be aligned to that story, manage it better and help deliver the strategy. So can you overdo it? Clearly you can. If your narratives and archetypes don't match, don't blend properly, there is a possibility of disconnect to the story, confusion as to who you are, and an overload that makes people believe you're not authentic. Here we see a classic B2B page, promoting product in a very clean, neutral way. But even this contains some subtle blends of archetypes, to its use of colors, to the layout and styling. But when we expand on this page, on this website, we can see even more archetypes introduced through the visionary product style shots used and the see ahead change tomorrow campaign created in a more futuristic archetypal style. And then when you actually dive in to that video itself and look at the actual slides, you see more archetypes appear like the caregiver. Then you explore other pages on the website and the product pages and introduces even more archetypes. They'll use a different archetype like the family, the healthier life, the optimist and the way that all is built together, the status, the direction, the way the angle of the buildings all lead to influence and imply certain archetypes. When we look at then the whole of their map, we can see there is a potential for a narrative to flow. We can see how we can move and tell a story using the advocate, the judge, the sage, the visionary, even up to the entertainer. But when you look at the layout, there is no focus. Each story is not given the time to build momentum or debt. So while a lot of the map is covered, it is in a random way. That means that the potential for stories to connect, to be delivered and to build an emotional connection is reduced. In contrast, if we look at Peloton, we can see an equally diverse portfolio of archetypes, but they are more centered, more clustered around archetypes that align well to their story. At the heart is the athlete and hero. When we look at different campaigns, we often see this is repeated, but around that other archetypes are introduced, like the headless guardian and advocate, helping the brand say something in a slightly different way to a slightly different audience, therefore potentially reaching a wider audience base. Another example, too good to go and innocent. Both brands feel similar. Both use the innocent archetypes as part of their mix, but the different blends of archetypes they use is different, which means that people can actually interpret a single piece of communication quite differently, even though that piece feels the same. So mapping too good to go is communication. We see their innocent archetype in the bottom left-hand corner expressed through the idealist and muse archetypes more. Then it goes up through the activist, the reformer, up to the sage and the solution provider that is the detective. We can also see an equal balance between the need for self-growth and the provided on the bottom left and the need for contribution to others expressed through the healer bottom right, plus the splash of humour as a provocateur in the top right. With innocent, we see them firmly grounded in the innocent archetype, but with a shift to the right-hand side of the map towards the most heroic archetype that is the rescuer. Here we see two pieces of communication, one from each brand, both trying to communicate similar messages and both having a very similar feel. However, the overall feel of the archetypes used by each brand can impact and I would suggest do impact how people respond and feel about that. So because of too good to go archetypes and more about actively campaigning for a better solution and use a detective and activist to complement the innocent family, their campaigns can feel that they are about providing real solutions. The activist has room and has a role to play within the blend of other archetypes. The innocent archetype wants you to feel good, the innocent brand wants you to feel good, but in their case, more like a hero and they're bringing in that hero archetype. Now they use the activist, but it can get overpowered by the other archetypes. So whilst it's there, it's just not coming through as well, meaning that whilst innocent is trying to drive social change with this campaign and use the activist archetypes at times, too good's use of its archetypes are potentially more effective in influencing change. A review of archetypes wouldn't be complete without looking at Apple and how their narrative runs from the engineer, a subset of the magician, through to the reformer, a part of the rebel family down through to the maverick, into the creative artist and storyteller, a beautiful spine that runs through their brand, which other archetypes blend into in various campaigns in different ways to tell that brown story. With Sakoni and Adidas, we can see how unique stories are formed, even within sectors that can often feel very similar, that use similar images, that use almost identical products, while both fit in the hero family. Sakoni is more of a seeker and activist in its archetypes, while Adidas follows a similar route to Apple from reformer to creative, which means their narrative can express like Apple, more the idea of individual creativity. Different patterns, the spacing between archetypes, where archetypes are on the map and the number of archetypes used all help indicate not only the story but also the strategy of the brand. With these six brands, again in a sector that's often hard to differentiate one brand from another, you're able to see the difference, see which brands are more three-dimensional in their narrative, which are trying to tell richer stories and which emotional triggers through their use of archetypes they're trying to use. We can also interrogate this sector. We can look at the sector as a whole and see which archetypes are prominent and from these prominent archetypes like the sage detective visionary guide, we can identify easily because of the nature of their storytelling what the story is for that sector and you can calculate how far a brand is from the mean average of the actual sector. So here the sector narrative for this industry is the knowledge, solutions and certainty to guide you to the future with the underbelly of an empowering a global community. We can also interrogate different sectors and see how they compare and see how they use archetypes differently in different ways across the map. We can also see in this case which uses which are images which are predominant with the sage and the top left what archetypes sit naturally with that partner, what archetypes generally flow and generally come together to help tell that story. So Raddenby helps you tune into a brand's unique blend of archetypes, it gives you a better understanding of what each archetype really looks and feels like, what emotion needs each brand uses within its narrative and how archetypes are used to create tension in a story. Raddenby is building a community of experts that can identify the visual language of 60 archetypes helping us better understand how stories are told through a blend of archetypes. Okay great that's excellent thanks very much really insightful presentation. So we're now going to have a short Q&A session and we'll try and get through as many as we can in the next 10 to 15 minutes. One of the others says I'll be interested to know how you consider diversity in this, diversity in the research team but also in the brands you've analysed and which cultures you think this will apply to. The archetypes must vary so much depending on culture and country. Well the background to archetypes generally has looked into this issue for a long time and our archetypes global in their role and through their visual language. So what we're doing is we are mapping brands from around the world and we've spoken to marketeers from around the world and so what we're doing is we're actually gathering a visual data set for each archetype and that may very well change but the underlying feeling doesn't and so what we're getting in the data set is if you looked at let's say the sage or we looked at the hero whilst they might use different styles and different elements there's an overriding similar feeling and that's what we're mapping the feeling around those and so what we build up for the first time is a full data set that's applicable whether it's in the Far East, whether it's in Europe or South America. Okay there's a question around technical aspects of the mapping I think so do you should we assume it is the business that allocates these archetypes or do these maps show what the consumer and user feel the archetypes are too? Yes so this is we map them because a little bit like the Pthuma having the expertise to be able to tune into those subtle brands we initially map those and then we calibrate them against the data set that we have so you can look at the different combinations you might say this is 20% this and 10% that and then you can look at similar things in the data set and it is all about just having comparative data sets that look and feel or feel the same and whilst it's not perfect and no system is because if you work up one morning and felt in a bad mood compared to a good mood and you interpret things slightly differently it is giving us a far better picture than we currently have so that's so it is definitely based on us at the moment it's definitely based on developing those skills and training people who want to use the system so when the system comes live there will be a training process for doing that because it's a little bit like a wine tester you know you can go around and say well yes we can get the views of customers as to what this wine feels like and that's valid in its own sense but actually if you get some experts who can tune into the very subtleties they can give you a more expert view of that and that's what this is trying to become. Again back to the mapping is the size of the circle in the archetype map the amount of content or importance do the connect the lines denotation or relationship when developing the map will you be able to connect the content evidence and the archetype? Yes so there's a lot you can do with the data because sitting behind there is a whole other numbers and in essence the bigger the circle the more strength the archetype is so if it's a small little dot then it's just registering as a small element within that and equally what's quite fascinating within this and the connections is to archetypes might be on opposing sides and often can be on opposing sides of the map and it could be that it's almost 50-50 you can look at it one minute and you can sense the headiness the pleasure or the ruler and it's like you're flipping between these two polarities and so just the fact that they're positioned on a map at the size of them and the relative positioning next to other archetypes gives you more indication gives you a visual representation more than just data itself and when you actually do the mapping and people can map their own things on there as well you create the circles oval space and you can just overlap so it might be for example the healer sits next to the romantic and so it's it could be mainly romantic but it just overlaps and you just draw the overlap so it is the size it's the relationship it's the overlap that are all important as people's needs develop and technology evolves do you think the archetypes will change or are they finite this is relevant to diversity too this is such a lovely question because when we set out one of the interesting things was is there are people using these archetypes that you know there are 12 primary archetypes as these 60 with the archetypes within the families but are people using them are they relevant anymore for example in the data set we can see that the detective is one of the most common used archetypes in the in the out of the whole data set but we can also see that they are used across different areas or there are other archetypes but as we build this data set over time we will be able to see whether or not archetypes increasing strength or there or they actually change in in their visual style so what does a hero look like and as we mentioned before the whole thing about patriarchs it might be that in 10 years ago they were very male dominated and now we're seeing them very much more female dominated in that patriarchal role so it's going to become a great research tool as we map year by year and see actually how archetypes fold that the principle that there are these archetypes that there is a hero that there is a sage are pretty embedded but what they look and feel like and how that evolves and what that relates to can very easily change okay and there's some specifics around different sectors and different brands and I think this question probably covers multiple moditators scenes here so somebody who's actually works for a broke and also somebody else whose company's a lift map motoring and control manufacturer it's not a saying what archetypes would be appropriate but I guess the overall question is is this one say if I'm a brand manager if I haven't explicitly mapped my brand archetypes like this before where do you suggest I start do you start with a template go through old campaigns and try to map them etc do you try to strategically aim your campaign imagery to be a variety moving forward while looking at a map just an example of timeline of how to implement this please so so what you what you do is you first of all look at the sector that you're in and through the maps you can just look at the overall sector and just explore what archetypes they use a little bit like we did in in in the case study where we could see there was an overall narrative there's an overall place where most of the competitors then you sit down and say right what am I trying to say what are the key messages and once you've worked out what you're trying to say you can then work out which archetypes best tell that message so for example if you want to talk about a visionary idea if you want to be talking about guiding people to a new destination a new solution or if you want to be uplifting if you want to let them feel free and liberated there are clearly archetypes like like the angel or the guide that are more suitable for different narratives and then what you can do through the model is just say right show me what it looks like when you combine the guide and the angel and what brands are doing that and are there any brands in my sector doing that and then you can actually calculate how far as a percentage you are away from the average score within that whole sector so I would definitely start with an analysis of the the sector then work out what you want to say and then figure out how you can bring that to life through different blends of archetypes and just play with it and see this is a real data set so these are not made up images they're not just placed in there because they want to feel like that they're actual images and what you can then say is well actually is anybody able to blend the guide and the angel are there any examples like that oh wow yeah that's what we want to look like yeah this brand in this sector exactly reflects and what you realize very quickly when you do this and you start to study is how similar brands are across you know that we think we're all quite unique as in personalities but in fact it's easily replicated so it's quite quick to go oh yeah we're like that that's how we want to be so it becomes very quick to make decisions about the direction of a brand using the model can you look across sectors as well because I was just referring back to your you know beginning at the beginning you were comparing Harley with Barbara so so using the model you can clearly compare any brand against any other brand and you can also look for brands with similar profiles so you can choose choose a certain set of profiles and then pull up all the brands that have no similar blends of archetypes one of the things that we're doing at the moment and the reason why it's not fully live yet is working out all the possibilities and making sure that the software enables us to do that so one of the things is to actually compare sector for sector has become something that that has been a bit of a request so we're trying to build that into the system it's a slightly different slant on it the archetypes seem to focus on positive on the positive but what about devious negative types like a devil how do these fit yes so each archetype has its negative I mean there's a lot that's why this is like an expert tool yeah this is not um this is not a oh we're just we'll just have a little conversation about archetypes this is trying to be the most advanced tool for building a brand's narrative through archetypes and within each archetype there is a positive and negative so every archetype sage hero that the provocative term they all have a positive side and you all have a negative side and that gets mapped as well yeah I'm sure there are some examples but none come to mind okay um okay here's a slightly um left for your question do you think do you think newspapers use archetypes in their news stories or that portrayal of celebrities or stars of entertainment of the entertainment world if they do can brands learn from this and how totally and the biggest place that brands can learn is through movies about archetypes um because archetypes archetypes don't just exist in isolation that they're around narratives and so there's often formulas to the way these archetypes work together and that's what's quite interesting when you just look at for example the sage as we did as the lead archetype in that what characters generally work with it so there are fundamental patterns that brands can learn about the types of stories that they could tell through the use of these archetypes I mean the classic one is the hero's journeys but there are so many other subset narratives which use certain sets of archetypes and then repeat patterns okay um I've got time for just a couple more questions Richard so how do you persuade the seed suite to take this seriously particularly if you're working on being the B2B so that's why I built this you know I've been working this profession for a long time and that would the number of times I've been in that position where it's credibility because you just go what's this based on so because this is a big data set you literally can go into that data set and you can call it up and you say look these all feel the same don't they and you go yes they do there is a common feeling to that architect yes so regardless of whether you call it the explorer or the adventurer whether you call it the patriarch it doesn't really matter there is a feeling and it meets an emotional need in people and this look and feel which everybody can then see says yes that's how we want to feel like and then you can find the blends so it is because you can visually show a large data set of lots of brands who use this look and feel especially in the B2B world that that's what it's designed for okay great um final question then Richard I think this is a common question from a lot of our viewers today um you said you can map your own brands on the site how do you do that yeah so within the tool what you'll be able to do is you take each individual image so you can take a page from a website a campaign and you create the circle do you create your own database and then what you can do is is look and calibrate that so you might say for example this one image is 20% this and you literally draw it up yourself and then you call up similar images and to see whether they feel the same and what you're doing is you're doing this you're you're tuning your nose to it you're becoming more sensitive you're you're becoming aware of those subtleties so it's a learning process so this whole tool is about developing experts in archetypes okay that's that's great thank you very much Richard we have we have now sort of run out of time for our Q&A although there's several other questions which I haven't had a chance to get around to asking you um we've had some really good questions and um it's a shame that we have run out of time um but thank you very much for answering the ones that you did um some really great advice and hopefully some useful tips that our viewers can take away so sadly that's all the time we have for our webinar today I'd like to say a big thank you to Richard for his excellent presentation and to the CIM Southwest Group for organizing the event we do hope that you've enjoyed the session and found it interesting and worthwhile we'll be back with our next webinar express equity diversity and inclusion at work more than just lip service with Claire Kemsley from Hayes Marketing on Tuesday the 29th of March again at one o'clock you'll find further details listed on the events page on the CIM website where you'll also be able to register for the session so on behalf of CIM that just leaves me to thank Richard once again for a fantastic presentation and to say thank you to you for joining us today take care everyone and we look forward to welcoming you again to our webinars in the future