Tag Archives: communications
For the fifth year running, ANZ has trusted Floate with its Shareholder Review.
Since 2010, Floate Design Partners has worked with Australian icon ANZ bank to produce the comprehensive online version of the ANZ Shareholder Review. Starting in 2013, we’ve been working together with the dedicated investor relations team at the bank to conceive, develop, and produce the Shareholder Reviews from start to finish—from initial strategy through narrative, art direction to print, wireframes to website deployment.
This year, we worked extraordinarily closely with the bank to ensure that a strong narrative flowed through both the print and online version of the review, and that the way the narrative was presented was right for the format.The print version looks like it was designed to be read on paper and the digital versions (mobile first, naturally) look like the document was always meant to be read online. Importantly though, the different media work together and present as a cohesive suite.
Are you looking to meaningfully communicate with Shareholders in the digital and traditional space? Are you ready to move your reporting online and better inform your stakeholders? If the answer is ‘yes’ then we want to help.
Now that we’ve posted our second (or third depending on how you count these things) episode, it’s time to tell you about our podcast, The Nudge. Way back when we started The Nudge events, we wanted to be able to share the ideas behind them with more than just those people who were able to attend on the nights.
So we recorded the events.
And then we started thinking about a podcast where we talked about being a better designer (and making the world a better place). And the result is the Nudge Podcast. On our podcasts Josh Kinal, Jerome Lebel-Jones, and Ross Floate grapple with the issues related to being a better designer, and we ask special guests from around the world for their perspective as well. What kind of issues? Issues like inspiration, trust, being wrong, and the nature of responsibility.
As we continue to present our events, we’ll keep including the audio from the live interviews as special episodes to our podcast – you can hear Elise Peyronnet from Melbourne Music Week on Episode 0.
Future episodes of the podcast (yes, they’re already recorded and in the can) include Ned Dwyer from Tweaky.com, Chris Clarke (now of Black Pixel), Brad Ellis of Pacific Helm, Jayne Lewis of Two Birds Brewing, and Associate Professor Peter McGraw of the Humor Code. You can listen to the podcast at the website, follow via rss or you can subscribe on iTunes.
Are you interested in being a guest on The Nudge? Do you have something you’d like to hear discussed? We’re all ears. Drop us an email, or let us know in the comments.
There’s been a lot of attention to Jack Dorsey’s recent realisation that ‘users’ is a terrible term and that Square (but not Twitter it seems) should change the way it describes the people who use its products and services.
Great. I mean it. This is great.
‘Users’ is a terrible term. Designers and developers employ the word ‘users’ when they’re thinking of the idiots they have to pre-empt, work around, and otherwise fix things for. ‘Users’ is a hostile label, spat out by people who don’t shave below their jawline. I’m happy to see it go.
Replacing it with ‘customers’ is a step in the right direction, and I have to applaud Dorsey for taking that step. But it still doesn’t go far enough for designers. See, ‘customer’ is still primarily a commerce-based designation. Think of people as customers (it is better than consumers) and you’re thinking of their wallet first, and everything else a distant second.
Over the years, you start to notice patterns when working with different types of organisations. You notice the similarities and differences between organisations in different markets, in varying sectors, and with different personalities.
The Australian not-for-profit sector (and in this I include charities, foundations, as well as public-sector hospitals) is a very strange beast indeed. A large number of organisations compete for both funding (private donations and government allocations) and attention in what is a very small marketplace. Additionally, a large number of organisations compete in the same general areas. Breast Cancer is a prime example of a cause that has a large number of organisations dedicated to it.
From a communications perspective, this is a challenge unlike that faced by most businesses. Businesses generally have a product or service to sell, and that product or service can be in some way market tested. People can work out which vendor is the best through purchase, or trial and error. They can talk to other buyers with good or bad experiences. They can find out about results. I’m not saying that communications in the corporate sector is an easy game — it isn’t — but at least marketers and communicators have something concrete to work with. The same cannot be said for much of the not-for-profit sector.
That means if you want to succeed –– I mean really succeed — in the not for profit sector, your communications need to be exceptional. In Australia, charities need to establish as quickly as possible why they are the best and only choice for money and attention in that particular sector. Charities need to focus a large part of their messaging to establishing both their raison d’etre and their (obvious) primacy in their niche.
The short way of putting this is simple: if you’re asking for money, you have to establish exactly why you’re worth it, and why you’re patently the best. If you don’t, someone more aggressive is going to do it. And there’s not enough money or attention to go around.