Dual Brains. Wanted.

Read the campaign story

Native Instruments’ Dual Brains. Wanted. recruitment campaign combined a manifesto film, advertising and a careers section. The reproduced release credits M&C Saatchi; the publisher’s archive places the report in April 2012. The campaign’s brain language expressed a desired combination of analytical and creative work. It is treated here as advertising metaphor, not neuroscience.

The release describes employer positioning and open roles, not independently measured hiring quality, employee experience or organisational culture. This study does not endorse brain-based personality categories or use them to evaluate candidates. The useful decision is how an employer translates an abstract identity into understandable work information while avoiding stereotypes, exaggerated cultural promises or selection criteria unrelated to the actual role.

Editorial interpretation: a memorable metaphor can attract interest to an employer that people know mainly through its products. The next communication must explain what the work involves, otherwise the metaphor becomes a substitute for useful information. A person should be able to learn about responsibilities and expectations without identifying with a prescribed personality type or performing enthusiasm for the brand’s creative image.

Editorial interpretation: a careers destination is part of the campaign’s credibility. If the opening message suggests a distinctive way of working, the role descriptions should make that claim inspectable rather than repeat it. The audience needs to distinguish employer aspiration from a concrete job requirement. A paper review can examine that distinction without assessing applicants, collecting employment information or making decisions about anyone’s suitability.

Translate culture language into observable work

For every abstract phrase in the headline, identify a concrete activity that would help explain it. Replace personality labels with examples of tasks, collaboration or decisions where possible. Ask reviewers what they believe the fictional role actually involves. If they mainly describe a type of person rather than the work, the message has not yet provided enough useful information for an informed enquiry.

Do not turn a metaphor into a screening rule

Creative language can be memorable without being a valid account of ability. State that distinction clearly when the metaphor resembles a scientific or psychological category. In a fictional communications test, ask whether reviewers believe the employer requires a particular identity or cognitive type. Remove wording that invites unsupported assumptions, even when it appears clever or consistent with the brand’s existing visual style.

Make the next page answer real questions

A compelling recruitment film should lead to accurate information rather than another layer of inspirational language. Draft a role-information card with responsibilities, limits and questions a prospective applicant might ask. Compare it with the campaign headline and check for contradictions. The communication should help people decide whether to learn more, not promise a universally fulfilling workplace or imply that enthusiasm alone establishes qualification.

A small test for another brief

Proposed adaptation: compare two paper introductions to a fictional design-team role, one using an abstract creative metaphor and one describing concrete collaboration tasks, followed by the same information card.

Measure understanding of the work, recognition of the metaphor’s limits and the questions reviewers still need answered. Do not ask them to judge real candidates or disclose employment history. Compare whether either version suggests an unsupported personality requirement or unrealistic workplace promise. Keep the memorable framing only if it improves orientation while leaving role-specific information, uncertainty and the distinction between aspiration and evidence intact.

Stop if the concept implies scientific personality categories, discriminatory fit tests or unsupported promises about employment outcomes.

• Use a fictional role and no applicants.
• Test communication comprehension only.
• Collect no employment or psychological data.