Corporations as People

How much of a company’s advantage in a market comes from the private information it has? How much value does Urban Outfitters get from not revealing the new graphic tees it has until the shirts are designed, printed, and in stores, and how much value does Apple get by leaking no secrets about the new iPhone until it can be purchased ?

In some cases, I think companies probably get a lot of value for keeping private information private; investments can be frontrun if they are announced too early, and other market actors generally might be able to outcompete a firm if it makes all it’s plans public.

But there are certain places and certain industries where I don’t think private information has much value (to the corporation). Furthermore, I think that increased openness, if packaged appropriately, might actually generate a lot of value itself.

Think for a second about Casey Neistat (at the time of writing, a fairly non-controversial and extremly popular blogger). He has a massive, loyal audience who watch him just live his life. Sure, it’s a pretty interesting life (as far as they go), but the point stands: pure vlogging (as he presents it) offers an extremly unique way for an audience to feel a real personal connection with the vlogger.

However, whenever he does advertisements for companies like Samsung, this connection his audience feels (I’m projecting here) doesn’t extend to Samsung. There’s Casey: the human. And there’s Samsung: the corporation. Although there are humans from Samsung in the vlog, there isn’t a personal connection with the Samsung Corporation itself.

So, here’s my proposal: in corporations and industries where private information isn’t so valuable, have your employees start vlogging. Sure, not all employees do particularly interesting work, but I would certainly watch Urban Outfitters design vlogs, or Tesla factor design vlogs, etc. And I think if companies opened themselves up in this way, there’s a possibility for the human connection (and following brand loyalty) that has never been seen before.

Transparency can be packaged properly, and become a value-add in ways that I don’t think we’ve previously explored enough. And in places that are already transparent (e.g. research foundations and blockchain companies), it seems like “proper vlogging” is a very reasonable change.

There are a couple major problems with the above idea. First, I imagine that most managers in major companies probably will be terrified of the idea of not-privacy (even if it is much better in the long run). Second, one of the main reasons that Casey’s vlogs lead to a human connection are that they are amateur and unfiltered. As a viewer, you can see that these videos essentially only pass through his hands. I have a feeling this a mildly necessary condition for the human connection we’re looking for, and also almost completely not appropriate for large corporations with any large number of managers and lawyers.

So: I’m putting my bets that we see this new form of connection pop up in upstarts and new companies. And with legistislators as well. And in foundations that value transparency. I’m sure there will be some mess-ups when some people post vlogs that they probably shouldn’t have. I’m also sure that in some ways this progression will be quite negative (there are already too many corporate influences inside my brain). But I do think it’ll happen. And I hope there is some positivity that comes out of it.