← Reading listSEEK TOGETHER
Text

DEEPER STUDY / Dow / 2019

Seek Together

Turn a corporate relaunch into stories of collaboration, making each partner’s contribution visible.

Materials scienceGlobal5 min read
Published by SNS Media Tech

AI-assisted research and analysis for the SNS Creative Fieldbook

Sources reviewed 7 November 2026

The original campaign creators did not write or endorse this analysis.

Original campaign credits: Dow; Kettle and Landor are credited on The Perfect Fit film, directed by Marc and Melanie Chartrand, with cinematography by Justin Gurnari and editing by JD Smyth. Writer Dan Alvarez documents the short-documentary approach. Film credits are not assigned to every platform execution.
Recognition: No award-level claim is made; sources establish execution, chronology and creator contributions.
Launch / edition: 2019. Award years: No award claim.

The problem. The idea. The experience.

A newly separated business needed a clear identity and reason to engage.

How the idea came to life

Short documentary-style stories expressed collaboration through practical applications.

How it reached people

A 2019 brand-platform introduction and supporting films.

Read the data in context.

The numbers below describe different kinds of outcomes. Their date, scope and reporting source are part of the result.

Sources establish the platform and storytelling approach, not verified social or commercial impact.

Read the campaign story

Dow introduced Seek Together on 1 April 2019 as it separated from DowDuPont. The company described collaboration as central to the new platform while retaining its familiar diamond identity. Writer Dan Alvarez’s portfolio documents a related series of short documentary-style stories that connected materials science with people and practical applications.

The Perfect Fit production listing credits Kettle and Landor, directors Marc and Melanie Chartrand, cinematographer Justin Gurnari and editor JD Smyth. Those roles apply to the named film rather than every expression of the platform. The sources establish a communication approach, not proof that the relaunch achieved the company’s ambitions or that a filmed example represents the full impact of its operations.

Editorial interpretation: a separation creates a need to explain what the company now stands for, but the legal or organisational event is not itself a customer benefit. Stories can translate that change into a more useful invitation. The strongest examples show why cooperation was necessary, who brought which capability and what remained difficult. Without those details, collaboration can become a flattering label that gives the advertiser credit for everyone else’s work.

Editorial interpretation: documentary form invites trust because it appears closer to observation than overt persuasion. That makes attribution and context especially important. A commissioned story can be truthful while still reflecting a sponsor’s selection and framing. A responsible adaptation should disclose sponsorship, preserve contributors’ own roles and distinguish a specific application from a broad claim about the company’s social or environmental performance.

Choose a story that requires more than one contributor

Look for a problem where the participating organisations or people supplied genuinely different capabilities. Explain the dependency between them instead of assembling a series of approving testimonials. The story should remain meaningful if the advertiser’s name is temporarily removed. That test helps reveal whether there is an actual collaboration to understand or simply a brand narrative decorated with other people’s presence.

Write the attribution before the script

List who conceived, funded, designed, manufactured and used the solution, then agree how those roles will be represented. Give contributors an opportunity to correct factual errors without promising them control over an undisclosed promotional message. Clear attribution prevents the strongest or most visible organisation from absorbing all the credit. It also makes the case more useful for an audience trying to understand how a similar collaboration could work.

Keep the example separate from corporate absolution

A positive project does not settle every question about a company’s wider operations. Present the example at its real scale and avoid using it as proof of universal sustainability or social benefit. Include relevant limitations and explain what evidence is available. This allows the story to demonstrate a specific contribution without asking the audience to accept a much broader conclusion than the example can support.

A small test for another brief

Proposed adaptation: commission a short account of two adult community groups sharing an ordinary resource, with a simple diagram of each group’s contribution.

Measure whether viewers correctly attribute the contributions and understand why cooperation mattered. Ask what broader claims they infer about the sponsor, then check whether those inferences exceed the narrow example. Treat trust ratings as perceptions, not proof of organisational performance.

Stop if a partner’s role is misrepresented, sponsorship is obscured or the story implies unsupported social or environmental outcomes.

  • Obtain informed participation and agree credit and reuse terms.
  • Clearly identify the sponsor and avoid confidential commercial information.
  • Include one unresolved constraint rather than editing the story into perfection.

Sources & further reading.

These are educational analyses of external campaigns, not SNS client projects. Source-backed campaign details, editorial interpretation and proposed tests are distinguished. Brand and campaign-entry reports are not independent causal audits.