<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The &#8220;Five Whys&#8221; of branding</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.facade.fi/2008/10/the-five-whys-of-branding/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.facade.fi/2008/10/the-five-whys-of-branding/</link>
	<description>HENRI WEIJO*</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:59:37 +0200</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Henri Weijo</title>
		<link>http://www.facade.fi/2008/10/the-five-whys-of-branding/comment-page-1/#comment-479</link>
		<dc:creator>Henri Weijo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2008 20:07:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.facade.fi/?p=86#comment-479</guid>
		<description>Well, my intention was to show that most brand thinkers&#039; thinking is only on the same level as if you had asked only 3 Whys. I&#039;m sure there&#039;s a better metaphor or thinking model that exemplifies branding as a PRACTICE. Now I just wanted to show that most brand thinkers stop before they&#039;ve really reached the core of the consumer&#039;s problem.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, my intention was to show that most brand thinkers&#39; thinking is only on the same level as if you had asked only 3 Whys. I&#39;m sure there&#39;s a better metaphor or thinking model that exemplifies branding as a PRACTICE. Now I just wanted to show that most brand thinkers stop before they&#39;ve really reached the core of the consumer&#39;s problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henri Weijo</title>
		<link>http://www.facade.fi/2008/10/the-five-whys-of-branding/comment-page-1/#comment-478</link>
		<dc:creator>Henri Weijo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2008 20:07:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.facade.fi/?p=86#comment-478</guid>
		<description>Well, my intention was to show that most brand thinkers&#039; thinking is only on the same level as if you had asked only 3 Whys. I&#039;m sure there&#039;s a better metaphor or thinking model that exemplifies branding as a PRACTICE. Now I just wanted to show that most brand thinkers stop before they&#039;ve really reached the core of the consumer&#039;s problem.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, my intention was to show that most brand thinkers&#39; thinking is only on the same level as if you had asked only 3 Whys. I&#39;m sure there&#39;s a better metaphor or thinking model that exemplifies branding as a PRACTICE. Now I just wanted to show that most brand thinkers stop before they&#39;ve really reached the core of the consumer&#39;s problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JMK</title>
		<link>http://www.facade.fi/2008/10/the-five-whys-of-branding/comment-page-1/#comment-477</link>
		<dc:creator>JMK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2008 20:03:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.facade.fi/?p=86#comment-477</guid>
		<description>Good stuff as always.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I&#039;m a bit feverish right now, so I started thinking: 5 Why&#039;s is just one possible problem-solving technique, might there be any other useful metaphors or thinking models for branding? Like, say, fishbone diagrams?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good stuff as always.</p>
<p>I&#39;m a bit feverish right now, so I started thinking: 5 Why&#39;s is just one possible problem-solving technique, might there be any other useful metaphors or thinking models for branding? Like, say, fishbone diagrams?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
