Filed under: Comment
For years I’ve heard people and companies talk about the importance and power of collaboration.
And so they should, because when it’s done right, it can be amazingly beneficial … except in my experience, the amount of people and companies who are doing it right is smaller than Ronnie Corbett’s midget twin brother.
[I know many of you won’t know who Ronnie Corbett is, but you’ll just have to accept he is an appropriate metaphor]
What do I mean?
Well there seems to be this attitude that collaboration simply means having people from 2 or more different companies, in the same meeting, working on the same problem.
Now on first impression, that might sound like the perfect example of collaboration, however unless the companies present have an appreciation of what the others can bring to the table – and openly and willingly invite that to happen – its nothing more than a room crammed with a bunch of people.
Too often I’ve seen what has been deemed as collaboration turn into nothing more than a war of pettiness – with companies either [1] trying to fuck over every other company present in the meeting or [2] waiting for one agency to stop talking so they can say whatever they want to rant about, which more often than not, either has sly digs at the other agencies present or nothing to do with what has just been said.
There are many reasons for this – from financial to ego – which is why true collaboration can only occur when the people in involved appreciate a broader spectrum of disciplines than just their own.
In short, only when they know what they can’t do can the whole process move forward with the potential it can offer which is why agencies have an obligation to their staff to teach them breadth as well as depth and clients need to appreciate in the dog-eat-dog environment they’ve actively created, they’re not going to get the best results until they treat all their partners with the respect, openness and remuneration they deserve.
36 Comments so far
Leave a comment
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
fine campbell, youve got a point but ive seen you take great fucking glee destroying other companies in meetings so where the fuck was your nice collaborative attitude then.
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 6:29 amIt was your influence.
Comment by Rob July 14, 2011 @ 9:31 amthen they were mainly media twats so its underfuckingstandable.
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 6:30 amOnly time I think I agreed with a planner.
Comment by Billy Whizz July 14, 2011 @ 6:49 amif no fucker knows what a planner does, is it ok to not give a shit about collaborating with them?
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 6:35 amReally enjoyed reading this Rob. Some great points typified by organisations need to train their people beyond the singular discipline view or propriety tool approach and ensure all parties are respected and recompensed fairly.
Shame it won’t happen.
Comment by Pete July 14, 2011 @ 6:45 amI’m going to regret this, but why?
Comment by Billy Whizz July 14, 2011 @ 6:50 amwhat the fuck are you doing?
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 6:53 amPleasure to help Billy.
It doesn’t happen because profit beats quality and the evaluation of quality is too often judged by a committee of middle management who view these exercises as a fun day out rather than an opportunity to create something powerful and meaningful to all internal and external audiences.
Comment by Pete July 14, 2011 @ 6:57 amRegretted it.
Comment by Billy Whizz July 14, 2011 @ 7:00 amthanks pete. like one of those parents who catches their kid having a fag and makes them smoke the pack to put them off, youve just made sure billy boy never asks such a fucking stupid question again. good man.
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 7:35 amWanna bet?
Comment by john July 14, 2011 @ 7:44 amNow that’s a lesson I’ll never forget.
Comment by Billy Whizz July 14, 2011 @ 8:41 amVery impressed with Billy’s attempt to better himself. Shame it ended up as I expected it to.
Comment by Rob July 14, 2011 @ 9:32 amI’m going to be trying to collaborate with a hot chick tonight and I know exactly what she can bring to the bedside table.
I’m the collaborating king.
Comment by Billy Whizz July 14, 2011 @ 6:47 amits not collaboration when only one party gets something out of the whole fucking interaction.
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 6:54 amI’m guessing she’ll bring a look of pity and an air of despondency.
Comment by john July 14, 2011 @ 7:09 amsympathy is his only strategy.
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 7:38 amEvil. Genius. Comment.
Comment by Rob July 14, 2011 @ 9:33 amDidn’t they used to shoot collaborators?
Comment by john July 14, 2011 @ 7:11 amIt helps if you all start out knowing why you’re collaborating.
Comment by john July 14, 2011 @ 7:17 amand what youre trying to fucking get to.
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 7:37 amYou’re in danger of turning this blog in to a place of learning Robert. Good post. Good points.
Comment by George July 14, 2011 @ 9:51 amnot if i have anything to fucking do with it.
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 10:13 amIt is rather nice, isn’t it.
As for collaboration, I read this thingy about the inverse relationship between democracy and gdp growth over the last 15 years. collabs can work, having a singleminded client (in goal not method), is sadly often the missing ingredient.
Would love to hear from Lee on this issue, as the sole client on the blog.
Comment by niko July 14, 2011 @ 2:59 pmJesus – democracy and GDP growth, are you sure you should be on this blog and not the economist.
I’m sure Lee will respond in good time, but for the record, a client with a clearly articulated, focused goal is always better than a wishy-washy objective, sanitised by process and middle management politics.
That doesn’t mean you make decisions without consulting other influences, it just means someone has to be captain or you try and please 10 people with 10 different objectives that often are either bland or more about self purpose than business benefit.
Comment by Rob July 14, 2011 @ 3:59 pmim wondering how much gdp growth and level of development are related, assuming (‘performed’) democracy is somewhat likely to be prevalent in highly developed countries which are somewhat likely to have a lesser gdp growth than developing or emerging nations anyway…
Comment by peggy July 14, 2011 @ 7:21 pmI have no idea … that thread is all Niko’s fault, ha!
Comment by Rob July 14, 2011 @ 7:30 pmHaving been in client/all agency meetings where the media agency presents this years media plan – and proceeds to show a creative idea and execution… I agree.
Was talking with Northern about this on Monday, how agencies often bicker instead of working together for mutual benefit of themselves and the client.
Comment by Rob Mortimer July 14, 2011 @ 6:49 pmWhat I find interesting is how a media plan is often presented without any true appreciation or understanding of the business objective, audience, insight or brand point-of-view.
It can be argued those elements aren’t strictly necessary, I’d argue otherwise.
Comment by Rob July 14, 2011 @ 7:32 pmOh yes, I love when media agencies want to have conversations about something other than media strategy, some are great. But I hate it when they think they ‘own’ the actuall communications strategy and refuse to genuinely allow for debate – especially when soe twats I could mention think a role for comms is creating ‘awareness and familiarity’.
Comment by northern July 14, 2011 @ 7:57 pmIt could be all so easy, but channel snobbery is rife I’m afraid.
That said, I love it when I get underestimated by big agency, Madison Avenue, Soho types. It’s so easy to give them plenty of rope before gently hanging them.
One thing I have meant to ask Robert is whether he feels the same level of enjoyment since he joined W+K. I ask because like Northern, he used to relish playing with the ignorant preconceptions of adlands big boys where as now he is at an agency where people automatically expect to talk to some of the brightest minds.
Comment by George July 14, 2011 @ 9:15 pmRobert?
thats when campbell was fun to work with, not this sad florence fucking nightingale imitation hes turned into on this piece of shit blog.
lucky for him i hear he can still be a devious little fuck in the real world or hed be facing an interfuckingvention.
Comment by andy@cynic July 14, 2011 @ 10:05 pmDevious Andy? How exactly. I’m all ears (as Prince Charles once said)
Comment by northern July 14, 2011 @ 10:51 pmask his clients, colleagues and every other fucker that has to deal with him when he decides to do his annual 7 minutes of fucking work.
latest devious shit? just say vpn to him. evil. but fucking almost genius.
Comment by andy@cynic July 15, 2011 @ 6:05 am“its nothing more than a room crammed with a bunch of people”
More than that – it’s a room crammed full of people all desperately trying to make the other people look foolish. Just about the least collaborative environment ever…
The interesting thing is where final responsibility lies – with the agencies to train better (and remove the blinkered ‘we can do anything better than you’ approach), or with the client to create a better atmosphere where their agency partners can work together?
My guess would be even with the training, without the client helping out it won’t happen – at least while thinking about disciplines and approaches remains so siloed.
Comment by Sarah July 14, 2011 @ 8:15 pm