Science. Applied to Life.

Read the campaign story

3M introduced Science. Applied to Life. in 2015 through a digital-led campaign and refreshed visual system. Its launch release describes short videos and a SXSW LifeLab designed by SOFTlab, where materials became part of a physical demonstration. The platform connected the company’s science with situations outside the laboratory.

Creative director Tim Brunelle describes a multi-agency effort and his BBDO office’s responsibility for translating the identity across digital channels. These are specific contributions rather than a claim of sole authorship. The available accounts establish the communication system and launch activity, not an independently measured change in scientific literacy, purchasing behaviour or the environmental performance of the company’s portfolio.

Editorial interpretation: industrial ingredients often disappear inside the finished experience. A useful communication can reveal one hidden contribution without asking the audience to understand an entire technical field first. Starting with something familiar gives the explanation a point of entry. The challenge is to show a meaningful connection rather than simply attaching the brand to desirable moments that would happen with or without its products.

Editorial interpretation: combining films, an installation and owned information creates several levels of explanation. A viewer can notice an application quickly, while someone with a deeper interest can inspect how it works. Those levels should remain consistent about the claim being made. A striking demonstration is not a substitute for product evidence, and scientific imagery should not make an untested benefit appear established merely because it looks technical.

Choose one invisible contribution to reveal

Map the finished experience back to the component or process the business actually supplies. Keep the explanation narrow enough that a viewer can describe it accurately afterward. This avoids the temptation to claim credit for the whole outcome when many contributors are involved. It also helps the team decide which examples belong in the platform and which are attractive but strategically unrelated illustrations.

Design layers of explanation rather than layers of hype

Let the first encounter communicate a simple relationship, then provide optional detail for people who want to investigate. Each layer should answer a new question rather than repeat a larger claim. Include assumptions and limitations where they become relevant. A coherent system can serve casual audiences and technically experienced readers without forcing either group through unnecessary complexity or withholding essential information behind a sales form.

Keep demonstration and validation separate

A demonstration may show a principle under controlled conditions, while a product claim requires evidence appropriate to the real use environment. Label those differences plainly. Do not infer health, safety or sustainability outcomes from the presence of scientists, laboratory equipment or impressive materials. Review what viewers believe they have seen, because a vivid demonstration can create broader expectations than the presenter intended to communicate. A useful follow-up question is what evidence the participant would need before relying on the example in a real purchasing decision.

A small test for another brief

Proposed adaptation: make an illustrated explainer for a fictional packaging component, revealing one ordinary function through a simple diagram and an optional technical note.

Measure whether participants identify the component’s role, distinguish demonstration from proof and locate the stated limitations. Ask about perceived credibility separately from correct understanding, so a scientific visual style cannot conceal unsupported assumptions about performance or environmental benefit.

Stop if the explanation implies unverified safety, health or sustainability benefits, or if a physical demonstration would require specialist controls.

• Use original visuals and no live chemical or medical experiment.
• State the limited function and identify other contributors to the outcome.
• Compare the layered explanation with a conventional product-description card.