Travel Brilliantly: Make an Innovation Invitation Accountable to the Guest Experience

Read the campaign story

Marriott Hotels launched Travel Brilliantly on 17 June 2013 with Grey New York. The announcement combined advertising, a refreshed identity, property touchpoints and a website inviting ideas about future travel experiences. It described existing innovations alongside work in development. This is the signature hotel brand’s platform, distinct from the separately documented JW Marriott Two Bellmen entertainment campaign.

David Holm’s portfolio documents film work with Grey and Supply&Demand. The announcement establishes the invitation and intended rollout, not that every suggested idea was adopted or every property offered the same features. Contest terms and historical submission routes are not presented as current. Related expressions of the innovation platform remain one family; the case does not treat each service example or later film as a new campaign.

Editorial interpretation: asking people to help shape an experience can make a renewal story more concrete than a statement that the organisation is innovative. The invitation creates an expectation that someone will listen, assess and respond. That expectation is operational. A team should decide what can actually be influenced before asking for ideas, otherwise participation becomes a decorative proof of openness rather than a meaningful route into the organisation’s decisions.

Editorial interpretation: a future-facing platform contains different kinds of statements. Some describe what exists, some explain a pilot and some invite speculation. Mixing them can make an ambitious campaign feel impressive while leaving a guest uncertain about what they can book or use today. The strategic task is to maintain excitement without removing those distinctions. A clear status label can strengthen the invitation by giving people an accurate basis for deciding whether to contribute or investigate further.

Define the decision space before asking for ideas

Identify which parts of the experience are open to change, which are constrained and who will evaluate suggestions. A small venue might ask about the order of information in a visitor guide rather than inviting unlimited redesign of its whole service. Explain what will happen to contributions and what response is realistic. Do not imply that submitting an idea gives the participant control over implementation. A bounded invitation can be more credible than a broad promise because contributors understand the task and the organisation can show how the feedback relates to an actual decision.

Separate available features from experiments and aspirations

Use plain labels that remain visible when an example is shared outside the campaign page. A photograph of a prototype can otherwise be mistaken for a standard service. A small organisation can prepare a simple status sheet showing what is available now, what is being tested and what remains only a concept. Ask readers what they expect to encounter on an ordinary visit. If the answer includes an unlaunched feature, revise the presentation before expanding reach. A brand story should not make customers responsible for discovering the difference between an aspiration and a commitment after they have already acted.

Close the contribution loop without overstating influence

Report what was learned, what changed and what could not be pursued, using an agreed level of attribution. A small team can provide an anonymised explanation of several decisions without publishing private submissions or claiming that every contributor co-created the result. Keep compensation, recognition and rights clear where they apply. Assess whether participants understood the invitation and felt their time was treated respectfully. Submission volume alone does not establish useful participation. A smaller set of well-scoped ideas with a clear response may provide more value than a large collection that the organisation lacks the capacity to review.

A small test for another brief

Proposed adaptation: a fictional reading room could test two invitations to improve one page of its visitor guide. One asks broadly for future ideas; the other identifies a specific navigation question and explains the review process. Ask consenting adults what they believe they can influence and what response they expect. Use only invented examples; collect no original commercial concepts or contact details.

Measure understanding of the decision boundary, feature status and feedback process. Separate willingness to contribute from belief that a suggestion will be adopted, and do not infer innovation quality or business growth.

Stop if the invitation hides rights transfers, suggests guaranteed adoption or presents a prototype as a service currently available to everyone.

• Keep the same guide information available in both versions.
• Label all sample changes as available, pilot or concept.
• Provide a fictional response record and ask readers to interpret it.