Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Consultants, Culture, England, Finance, Government, Money
So I saw this job ad doing the rounds …
Now I appreciate, £66,500 is a lot of money.
Especially at a time when the world is facing economic pressures.
But this is for the Head of Digital Currency.
At the Central Bank of England.
On behalf of the Government’s Treasury Department.
Maybe I’m mad, but shouldn’t this position require someone of such economic and political standing … understanding and experience … that they can command a much, much higher salary than this?
I mean, I earn more than that and I got 2% in Mrs Kirk’s maths class.
Who is going to take this job?
Why are they going to take this job?
Who is going to decide who gets this job?
It’s just laughable.
Laughable … because this is coming from a Tory Government who claim to be the economical responsible party but have put the country into financial oblivion with delusional lies like Brexit.
Laughable … because the government is led by a PM who wants to kill the arts in favour of more maths classes, because he feels that will drive more earning potential for people.
Laughable … because an important financial position is hiring down to a price, rather than paying up to a standard.
As I said, I get almost 70 thousand pounds is a lot of money.
But for what we need, I doubt it’s anywhere near enough.
And here’s the thing … if we get someone who can actively help ensure our kids have a better chance of a better future than their parents – which currently is widely acknowledged as not being the case – then I’d be more than happy to see more of my taxes going to them. Because being fiscally responsible is not about how cheap you go, but how much value they offer.
That said, the bigger question is whether I trust whoever is responsible to hire this person … because not only did they decide what salary to offer, but they may also be as under-qualified as the person they want to hire or – more likely – another blinkered, arrogant and ignorant Tory who helped get us in this mess in the first place.
And politicians wonder why the public don’t trust them anymore …
Filed under: Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Creativity, Culture, Planners, Planning, Strategy
Saw this. Saw this insta and laughed.
Seemed perfect to use for a Monday.
When we all get back to work and talk about our weekends.
Even if it consisted of ordering a pizza and watching endless YouTube.
Though it’s also a perfect encapsulation of the state of planning these days.
A lot of talk. Not much listening. Or reading. Or discovering. Or exploring.
Part of this is because too many clients think the job of their agencies is do as they’re told.
Part of this is because agencies have sold the value of creativity so far down the river, that speed is the only way to achieve profit.
Part of this is because procurement have demanded agencies only get paid for ‘doing’, not thinking … or even researching. [That’s what free pitches are for]
Part of this is because the strategic discipline has become a place of ego not curiorsity.
Hence the art of conversation and constructive debate has been lost to a game of spotlight inflation. Thank god for the strategists who want to show their smarts through the work they help create rather the voice they want everyone to listen to.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Crap Campaigns In History, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity
It’s easy to look at the past with rose-tinted glasses.
There’s few who do this better than the ad industry.
So many saying everything was better then. More interesting. More creative.
And while there’s an argument more culturally iconic work was produced in the past than the present – driven by factors such as marketing having a greater influence in the C-Suite right through to a lack of alternative options for driving business – we can’t forget the past also produced things like this …
Look at it.
LOOK AT IT.
On the positive, it shows the flex of the material in ways you won’t forget, but on the negative …. errrrrm, where shall we start?
Elton John recently said something that I really liked about looking back.
In essence, he said if you always look at the past as the time where everything great happened, you may as well give up.
He didn’t say those exact words, but it was kinda-like that.
His point was desire, context and openness change everything.
And while that shouldn’t mean just because you do new work – or have the ambition to do it – it’s automatically better than everything that went before, neither does it mean something from the past is automatically better than whatever came after it …
What people forget is it takes hard work to be good.
Even for the most gifted and talented, it requires real effort and graft.
Doesn’t matter if it’s past or present … doing something of note means putting yourself out there and waiting to be judged.
That’s an incredibly vulnerable position to put yourself in.
To choose to put yourself in.
To be forced to put yourself in.
And while there are ways to increase the odds of a positive outcome, there’s no guarantee it will work which is why there’s two things worth remembering …
First is whether creating something for yourself or others, make sure you enjoy [and be allowed to enjoy] what you’re doing and what you’ve done because – as Rick Rubin said – if you don’t, then it’s pretty certain others won’t either.
Second is if someone hates something simply because it’s new, then remember that means they probably like the ad above and suddenly their comments mean jack shit and should be treated as such.
That doesn’t mean you can phone any shit in. [See point 1]
But it does mean you can ignore their rose-tinted bullshit too.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, China, Creativity, Culture, Cunning, Devious Strategy, Honesty, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Strategy
I’ve been a huge fan of what I call ‘devious strategy’.
It’s the art of giving people what they want but in a way that delivers what is in your best interests.
I first recognised it in China when I saw how the Government dealt with issues they faced.
Rather than simply dictate rules – which are often almost impossible to enforce – they created systems that looked – and often were – generous, but were also self-serving.
Case in point, collecting taxes.
To ensure small business – especially restaurants – declared the full amount of their earnings, they created a scheme where customers were more likely to ask for a receipt. They chose this method because they knew to provide a receipt, the retailer had to put the bill through the till … and the moment that happened, revenue would be registered and they would know what was the right amount of tax to collect.
And how did they get customers to ask for a receipt?
By making it like a mini lottery card.
Basically receipts have a little part at the top you can scratch off and find out if you’ve won money. Because no one is going to say no to the chance of free cash, they increasingly ask for receipts and – voila – the government increases the amount of taxable revenue they get.
Genius.
There’s so many examples of the Chinese Government using psychology to solve problems in ingenious ways, but another example I love is from the actor Daniel Radcliffe.
I wrote about this a few years ago, but in short, Daniel was fed up his photo was being taken – and sold – by the paparazzi every night as he left the theatre where he was performing.
So to counter them, he were the same clothes every night as he left the venue.
After a few days, the paparazzi realised no one would buy their photos given he looked the same in every one and so – despite giving them what they wanted – Daniel got what he wanted, which was the paparazzi leaving him alone.
Brilliant.
It doesn’t take long to see a ton of other examples from this to this … but the reason for this post is because of what’s going on with Twitter.
Since Evil Elon took over, he has increasingly been making the platform a place of hate.
For all his claims of ‘free speech’, it’s obvious he only cares about what he thinks is right.
Which is why I recently used this slide in a talk I was giving to Elon fanboys.
It was worth it, if only to watch their faces try to work out what I was saying …
Which is why sometimes, the best strategy to take on challenges is not facing them head-on … nor finding ways to navigate around them … but becoming their best friend to mess with the natural order of things.
Filed under: Advertising, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Business, Comment, Communication Strategy, Consultants, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Distinction, Emotion, Imagination, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Planning, Point Of View, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Strategy
Don’t get me wrong, commercial creativity has a job to do.
It needs to create the cultural conditions for people to think/act in ways that benefit your client.
What ‘benefit’ means is both open to debate and individual contexts and needs.
But here’s where the problem lies.
Because for many companies, it’s no longer about creating the cultural conditions … it’s explaining EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT PEOPLE TO THINK, SEE AND DO.
What they think is ‘advertising’ is delusional dictator-ing. If dictatoring is a word.
And there’s 2 reasons why it’s delusional …
The first is people do what is in their best interests, not a companies. And so unless a company lets go of their fragile ego and God-complex, they’re never going to understand or resonate with their audience. Resulting in either being ignored, or forever ever having a utility style relationship.
The second is when your only focus is telling people what you want them to think, see and do … you often discover it’s exactly the same as what everybody else in your category wants people to think, see and do.
So you end up with this.
Brand gets a lot of stick these days.
Its whole role and value is being questioned.
But the irony is the problem isn’t with the value of brand, but the understanding of what some people think a brand is.
Because a brand isn’t contrived wrapping paper placed around a functional product feature … it’s an idea that is as distinctive for how it see’s the world as it appears in it.
That some people will find this shocking not only explains why we are subjected to such ugly noise day after day after day, but how little companies/venture capitalists/consultancies understand, respect and value culture.