Are you really as unique as you wish to be?

I find it fascinating how elements of identity spread over time. For example, how do company values spread through not just an organisation, but also to other organisations? Is this a case of replication? Of actually appearing the same, in some respects, as other companies? Which would mean on some level, there is a lack of differentiation.

Looking at this replication idea, are some elements easier to replicate than others? For example, is visual branding more imitable than the values of an organisation. Is the corporate brand more readily mimicked than the corporate identity?

Branding seems relatively easy to mimic (albeit as much inside the law as possible), for example chocolate bar package design. A colleague I was speaking to gave the example of many slogans in one industry being quite similar. Everyone pursuing a ‘why’ that is largely similar. How many ‘want to make the world a great place’ mission statements have you read? Exactly…hardly setting the world alight in a blaze of differentiation.

This can also happen when companies start mimicking each others features. For example many social media apps are always copying features. I guess this fires a bullet at the values/purpose-led ‘Why’ fans out there. What happens when your purpose is easily replicated? Do your loyal fans go elsewhere?

It’s a case of “Oh you started looking at your ‘why’? Brilliant, I shall do the same. Oh you use a hamburger menu in your design? Great, that’s me too.” Identity it appears is often about replication. Or maybe is it interpretation? Are we intepreting those around and not quite replicating, but putting our own spin on things. In this sense, it is probably how trends develop. A little mix of interpretation and replication.

How many organisation’s started following Simon Sinek’s advice? Did they find their why? We are largely not unique in these elements. So is identity just an interpration of similar base material? Or an attempt at replicating those around us? A bit like John Carpenter’s The Thing…or even the 2011 remake.

But bringing this back to organisations. Can we simply be eroded in time by someone mimicking us in everything they legally can. Do we all read the latest issue of Campaign, Marketing Week etc and set about mimicking strategies and case studies that we see and read? Replicating what we like around us? This can even be the same for more science-based articles. For example if we discover a generalisation across marketing, is it still effective if we all do it? This does then lead us to the whole zig and zag argument.

That is not to say lot of this negative. Behind learning processes is any form of mimicry I guess. It is only natural to be learning from examples based around in. In fact there is a whole aspect of pedagogy that is all about example based learning. And isn’t that what we are doing really, just learning how to be better at the things we want to do?

It is also part of an organisation building up its social identity. Is aligning oneself with a particular trend signalling things about your identity? We ultimately all have to share some similarities.

Ultimately, difference does seem to be a powerful thing for companies (however lets not forget about the importance of distinctiveness). And arguably for individuals as well. However it does seem to be harder to achieve than first thought (and it wasn’t easy to begin with). A truly inimitable identity may be something that is even impossible. And actually, replication may just be part of the learning curve as to what it means to be a company, or indeed a person.