{"id":8121,"date":"2018-09-11T19:24:51","date_gmt":"2018-09-11T22:24:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.mindthegraph.com\/?p=8121"},"modified":"2024-08-01T09:43:27","modified_gmt":"2024-08-01T12:43:27","slug":"digital-branding-strategies-mind-the-graph","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mindthegraph.com\/blog\/nb\/digital-branding-strategies-mind-the-graph\/","title":{"rendered":"Digitale merkevarestrategier: Mind the Graph Produktutvikling"},"content":{"rendered":"

Til v\u00e5r store overraskelse,\u00a0Mind the Graph<\/a> har nylig blitt omtalt i et innlegg om meningsfulle strategier for digital merkevarebygging. Det er verdt \u00e5 merke seg ordene til medgrunnleggeren Fabricio Pamplona<\/a>\u00a0understreker det empatiske aspektet bak plattformen (se nedenfor).<\/p>\n

Empathy is a crucial point in mindthegraph product development since the beginning. This was not a deliberate strategy on digital branding, but rather, a legitimate strategy to create a product that is meaningful for our dear users.<\/p>\n

\"foto.001\"<\/p>\n

Understanding the market (deeply) is crucial to create a meaningful product. And that came naturally, as one of the co-founders is a scientist himself. Fabricio had been following initiatives like the “Article of the Future” by Elsevier and knew that scientist struggles to create figures and presentations to represent their work.<\/p>\n

A scientific paper depicts research where one spent, on average, 30K to 100K USD, and all this insightful (and expensive) information is hidden behind a literal wall of words. Nobody reads, nobody cites, nobody cares. Sad, isn’t it?<\/p>\n

En fersk unders\u00f8kelse utf\u00f8rt av Economist<\/a> viser at en vanlig artikkel f\u00e5r mindre enn to siteringer... Hvorfor er det viktig? Fordi det \u00e5 bli sitert betyr \"relevans\" i forskersamfunnet. Det er med andre ord den valutaen forskere bruker for \u00e5 kompensere hverandre for innsatsen.<\/p>\n

Se p\u00e5 det: Hvis du bruker figurer og infografikk, blir siteringsfrekvensen mer enn dobbelt s\u00e5 h\u00f8y!<\/p>\n

\"Mind<\/p>\n

Det er nettopp dette vi tror p\u00e5 i Mind the Graph: at infografikk skaper flyt og skj\u00f8nnhet ut av kompleks informasjon. De gj\u00f8r usmakelige vitenskapelige data om til noe hyggelig \u00e5 lese, sitere og dele.<\/h3>\n

Folk forst\u00e5r faktisk mer, husker mer og har st\u00f8rre glede av \u00e5 studere med infografikk. Se for eksempel figuren er laget for en av v\u00e5re kunder, professor Prediger.<\/a> for \u00e5 oppsummere modellen for Parkinsons sykdom. Du forklarer mye i bare \u00e9n figur, og det lokker leseren til \u00e5 dykke ned i det mer omfattende innholdet.<\/p>\n

\"Mind<\/p>\n

Before beginning the business, we already understood the need – visual communication for scientists – but we were not sure on how to delivery it.\u00a0Therefore, we started by doing what is called \"concierge-validering\" i produktdesignprosessen<\/a>Vi pleide \u00e5 m\u00f8te brukernes behov ved \u00e5 levere en tjeneste for \u00e5 forst\u00e5 hvordan de tenker og hva de faktisk vil ha. P\u00e5 produktdesignsjargong: \u00e5 f\u00f8le hvor det gj\u00f8r vondt.<\/p>\n

Figuren nedenfor viser det n\u00f8yaktige Eureka-\u00f8yeblikket for opprettelsen av Mind the Graph-plattform<\/a>. Der ser du den faktiske tilbakemeldingen fra en bruker p\u00e5 en figur opprettet av oss p\u00e5 foresp\u00f8rsel. Han likte tilsynelatende, men tok seg tid til \u00e5 skrive den ut og markere noen deler i gult, \u00e5 skrive legender og til og med inkludere nye tegninger.<\/p>\n

We realize the client was saying: I like what you do, but please, do it this way. Do it MY WAY. That was the click that Mind the Graph should be a do-it-yourself platform, where we enabled the creative force of the people on the other side.<\/p>\n

\"c\u00f3pia<\/p>\n

At this very moment, we decided to empower scientists and make THEM BECOME DESIGNERS. Our value proposition is to untangle science through visual and creative links and fundamentally, to provide the tools, not the answers.\u00a0 Is like teaching to fish, instead of providing the fish. How do you feel about it, have we done right? \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n