I recently read an article in the Guardian about the launch of the X-Box.
Given the brand has been part of gaming culture for the past 20 years, it’s easy to forget what an achievement this has been for Microsoft.
Let’s remember back then, the brand was far more synonymous with office computer programs than gaming … so to come from such a negative space and place to become the powerhouse it is today, is nothing short of incredible.
But it wasn’t all plain sailing.
Sure, their cause was helped by SONY seemingly forgetting everything that had made the original PlayStation launch so successful … but even with that, Microsoft were still coming from pretty much a standing start.
It’s a great article that’s well worth the read, but there was one part that really stood out to me.
This:
Let’s be honest, we’ve all been there …
Where someone chooses to ignore a statement of obviousness and instead, attempts to turn it around so you look like you’re making a potentially dangerous assumption.
Don’t get me wrong, we shouldn’t blindly assume common sense is common sense, and – without doubt – there’s been a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions that have ended up being the backbone of ideas and campaigns all around the World, but this sort of behaviour is nothing but an act of petty cowardice.
However, let’s assume for a moment the person who wanted proof that people did expect DVD quality to be better than the crunched-up shit that was on screen, was right.
Let’s assume that we didn’t know that DVD brands had been communicating ‘improved image quality’ to the general public for years.
Even if all that was true, the real issue was still not being addressed.
And that is facts doesn’t mean standards.
So rather than fall into a ‘fact inflation fight’ that no one was going to come out of well – even though I get why they were triggered – they should have asked Mr Petty if the image on the screen reflected the quality of product and performance he – and the company – wanted to globally be associated with?
Quickly followed up by enquiring whether Microsoft had the technology to dramatically improve the current standard of performance?
By doing this, they not only side-step the pointless barrier being placed in front of them and refocused the conversation to values, standards and ambition.
I’ve seen this situation happen so many times.
Where political point scoring derails ambition, potential and standards.
Where the company starts focusing on the ‘minimum viable product’ rather than what could drive the brands perception.
And while these situations have also seen me lose my shit – A LOT – I always remember my Dad telling me the real way to win these sorts of arguments, which is to elevate the discussion to reputational standards not down to petty point scoring.
He was brilliant at it.
Me? I’m still working on it.