The Musings Of An Opinionated Sod [Help Me Grow!]

Good point Swati – but for me, it’s actually less about the individuals who have been put together and more about [1] the people who put them together [2] the philosophy of why they were put together [3] how they manage what happens once they have been put together.

Of course, at the end of the day, the end result is all dependent on how those people interact rather than how the structure exists around them … however the way I handle it is ensure I have a team that shares the same values and beliefs so even though I’ll put people together that have diametrically opposing views on how to approach and achieve their goals, their respect for each other increases the odds of the experience being one of positive conflict, not just conflict.

It doesn’t always work … there have been disasters … but I think it can be achieved in any organisation as long as the reasons – and implications – for doing it are understood [& managed] at a top level.

Does that answer your concerns?

No, I didn’t think so.

Don’t get me wrong, whether it’s with another planner or a suit, creative, cleaner, managing director – it’s all good as long as it’s driving more powerful and provocative thinking.

The guys still have that here, however the reason I like structuring business with two planners on each account is because it [hopefully] encourages positive competitiveness.

Whereas a planner working with, say a suit, can – and does – come up with great ideas, the reality is one of those two people has another job they are being judged by which ultimately means it’s not as ‘life or death’ for them to really push the boundaries.

What I like is having people whose role is the same because by being judged by the same criteria and expectations, it ignites some competitiveness into the mix which can encourage people to go that extra 10% in a bid to ‘beat’ their planning colleague. And competitor.

Doesn’t always work, but it has had a profound affect on me and my belief in how to push better thinking.

I agree and disagree.

While I absolutely believe it is vital you focus as much on the little things as the overall strategy, my view is that if all you ever do is pay attention to those ‘small bets’ a brand has to make every day, then you get lost in the those details and can’t move things forward.

With that in mind, I am a big believe in the big idea, though it has to start with a big strategy and that has to start with knowing what a client actually needs to make happen before you can even touch on what they dream to make happen.

In my experience, the problem is that too many agencies/planners mistake a big idea for basically a small idea with a fancy name and that is when things go wrong because they rarely take into the details that are so important in day-to-day transactions and operations.

As for Mark Earls … well we’ve talked about this and while there are elements we might disagree on, we both are coming from the same place and the reality – whether its based on herd thinking or objective conflict – is to do things that make a difference for both what they achieve and how they achieve it, which in my mind requires a big strategy as well as an acceptance and appreciation of the day-to-day details.