Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, America, Clothes, Creativity, Culture, Curiosity, Jill, LaLaLand, Otis, Planners, Planning, Relevance, Research, Respect, School
I appreciate the title of that post may be misleading because – let’s face it – my posts are pants everyday, except this time I’m literally talking about pants.
These pants …
I saw them on Sunday morning while going on my daily walk.
They were near the library … and given I do this walk everyday and they weren’t there the day before, it would suggest they appeared in the last 24 hours.
And while I could say they symbolise someone having a great – or terrible – Saturday night/Sunday morning … the reality is I have no idea and without wanting to sound a perv, I’m kind-of fascinated to know more about them.
The story that led to them appearing there.
The choice of that particular pattern and design.
The feelings of having ‘lost them’.
It’s a bit like the painting I bought at Otis’ LA hippy kindergarten ‘fund raiser’ back in 2017.
The Al Pacino meets Chuck Noris thing with out-of-proportion arms.
The painting the organisers couldn’t believe someone would pay for because it’s awful.
I bloody love that painting.
I love that someone did it and I wish I knew who and why.
Given it’s 40 years old, I doubt I’ll ever know … but I’ve tried.
And while it is more a burglar deterrent than a gallery star, there’s something about it ‘everyday, anybodyness’ that is like a beacon to me.
Like those pants.
Because there’s a story there.
May be funny … may be lovely … may be tragedy.
And while I would not take them – let alone pay for them and then hang them up in my house, like my piece of ‘art’ – there’s a story there.
Which serves as a great reminder than for all the curiosity our discipline has, the fact we spend more time talking about systems and processes rather than the stories that literally surrounds us highlights the tool we should be embracing more than others.
Opening our eyes.
___________________________________________________________
I’m off to Australia tomorrow for work, so there’s no posts till Friday. But I’m quite excited about that post, so even though no one cares – let alone will read it – I can satisfy my ego by writing this and pretending there’ll be a clamour to read it on Friday morning. Even though there won’t be. Ignorance is bliss. Self-awareness is a killer.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Creative Development, Creativity, Marketing Fail, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Point Of View, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect
This kind-of carries on from yesterday’s post because I’m seeing a lot of strategists asking ‘is strategy a joke’.
I get why they’re asking it and some have some excellent takes on it but I can’t help but feel we’re all missing the point.
Because at the end of the day, there’s only one question to ask in relation to our discipline.
Is the work better?
That’s it.
That’s all we have to ask.
And if it’s not … it doesn’t really matter what we’re doing or how we’re doing it, we’re failing.
What absolutely bothers the fuck out of me is we continually avoid talking about the work.
Processes. Yes.
Ecosystems. Yes.
Frameworks. Yes.
But the actual work?
Not much … which is rather bonkers given our entire job is about enabling it.
Put simply, if there’s no work that is born from our strategy – and I mean that in the broadest sense of the word – then it’s utterly meaningless and potentially intellectually indulgent as fuck. And this is why I can’t help but feel if my old man was alive [who wasn’t a strategist or in advertising but – as a human rights QC/Barrister – knew a fuckload about strategy and was arguably a damn sight better at it than most of us] he would likely say strategy isn’t failing, we’re failing strategy.
And I think we are.
More obsessed with gaining personal notoriety than doing work that is notorious.
As I wrote yesterday, I kinda get why given the industry is increasingly rewarding popularity over creativity and actual change … but adopting that approach doesn’t make you a great strategist, it just makes you an opportunist.
There are some amazing creative thinkers out there.
People who push to make exciting change happen.
But there’s seemingly more people focused on doing anything but … preferring to talk up their models and techniques than letting the work speak for itself.
Edward Cotton – from yesterday’s post – wrote something recently that I found really interesting which was that in this hybrid world, there’s less chance for strategist to informally meet up and natter with creatives. Meaning a vital – but often invisible – part of the process is getting lost.
And while that is not the entire reason for where strategy finds itself at the moment – which ironically, is more in demand while being less demanding less of the work it helps create – it may explain where creativity finds itself.
I love my discipline.
I think it can play an important role in making exciting change happen.
It’s a role I fundamentally believe is creative in nature.
But it is also capable of being full of shit … which is why the answer to ‘is strategy a joke’, is it can be.
But only because the discipline is increasingly becoming its own punchline.
Filed under: Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Creativity, Culture, Experience, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Point Of View, Purpose, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Wieden+Kennedy
Let me start by saying this post may sound harsh as fuck – especially if you’re relatively young, but hang in there.
If you can be bothered.
So a few weeks ago, I saw a chart by Edward Cotton that was designed to help planners identify their ‘super power’ to enable them to better identify their strengths and be more focused in their professional development.
It’s a generous thing to do from a generous person and yet I decided to question it.
Like a prick.
And why did I decide to do this?
Because I don’t know if people can self-define their ‘super power’.
I don’t know if people have the objectivity to be able to identify that.
More than that … I find the term ‘super power’ both misleading and potentially dangerous because what he was really helping people identify was ‘where they felt the most comfortable’.
Now I appreciate there is value in identifying – and validating – that, however it doesn’t necessarily mean that makes you good at what you do.
Which is why I challenged his chart … because as much as I appreciate it was done for absoluely good reasons, the entire industry seems to be moving further and further away from what strategy is supposed to be about.
Moving away from enabling change and creation to being a discipline that celebrates ‘self-serving, personal intelligence’.
It blows my mind how many people are writing how to do stuff without having actually ever done stuff.
Or at least, stuff of note.
To use a shit analogy, anyone can kick a ball, but few have won a European Cup.
And while everyone is entitled to an opinion, you don’t get to express it with the confidence of God when you have neither the experience or the objectivity to make an informed judgement.
But that’s where we’re at these days.
Everyone is an expert.
Everyone has ideas, opinions and viewpoints expressed as fact, law or established protocol.
Hell, even the acknowledged experts often lack the experience of making something great. Oh they’ve made stuff … but few have achieved something with gamechanging significance, and yet somehow they are positioned as commercial rockets when in reality they’re insurance salesman.
There’s nothing wrong with that except when you don’t admit that. But even then, they’re still waaaaaay better than the self-defined god.
On one level I get it.
The industry is rewarding popularity and ‘thought leadership’ [ahem!] over those who actually make stuff and so there’s a massive incentive to say/repeat interesting stuff rather than do interesting stuff … and nothing highlights how fucked our industry has become than that.
Just to be clear, I know not everyone is like this and contrary to what it may sound like, I am cool with anyone expressing their opinions and ideas.
I’m excited about it actually.
My issue is when it’s expressed with an attitude of self-righteousness.
Where any other opinion is a lesser, incorrect opinion.
Strategy is in danger of losing clarity on what it’s here to do and how we should be evaluating it.
We’re more obsessed with writing theories than doing stuff … resulting in us being in danger of becoming a discipline of paper pushers. Producers of endless digital landfill consisting of decks and newsletters that – in many cases – are not fit for purpose or usage. A back-slapping group of co-dependency … with a focus on achieving industry status rather than making work of note and change.
Now it has to be said that while it’s easy to blame the discipline, the reality is the lack of training that is being invested by agencies and companies that is a big driver of this situation.
Rather than invest in the knowledge, skills and quality of their people, they are – at best – outsourcing to 3rd parties or – at worst – leaving their people to find and fund their own development.
Seeking standardised approaches rather than valuing independent thinking.
What rubs salt into this already ugly wound is that many agencies either give away the strategy they do for their clients – preferring to make money on time and production rather than expertise and value – or acting like shit consultancies/corporate lawyers, creating endless ‘process loops’ so they can profit from keeping the problem alive rather than helping them move forward to a better place.
What the hell?!
Add to that the people agencies are outsourcing training to are often ‘teaching’ methodologies that are both generic and self-serving. And don’t get me started on the planners selling their ‘training’ when many never achieved a standard that justifies their right to teach … demonstrated by them constantly using examples they never made, post-rationalised or simply copied from those who actually did the work.
I get that sounds harsh, I get any training has some value … but this is serious stuff.
Standards matter.
Experiences matters.
Truth over harmony matters.
The reality is anything is easy for people who haven’t done it or don’t have to do it which is why I’m so enamoured with talent like Maya Thompson, Joel Goodhall, Priscilla Britton, Ayo Fagbemi, Tarik Fontenelle and Carina Huang – to name but a few – because where so many choose outlets that reinforce what they want to feel about themselves, they’re about putting themselves in situations where they’re pushed to push the work they want to create.
As I mentioned, the biggest problem here is the attitude companies and agencies have towards training and development. No one – especially junior planners – should ever have to pay for this and the fact many have to, or feel they have to, is outrageous. Almost as outrageous as those planners and experts who exploit them for personal gain.
[Which is why I must reiterate what Edward did was for entirely good reasons because he gives a shit, even if I disagree with what he did on this occasion]
However I cannot stress enough that if you want to grow, follow the advice I was given recently by a very successful football manager that I found myself interviewing.
He said: Learn from winners, not players.
I wrote about it here.
Just to be clear, this is not about age. It’s about people who have done stuff.
Who have tried, failed, explored, experimented and ultimately achieved.
At the highest level. Preferably more than once.
Now I’m not saying it’s easy.
And I know for a fact it’s not comfortable.
But it is most definitely worth it.
Because rather than feeling good about who you are and how you think, you’ll discover what you can do and who you can become.
May.
Already.
That’s bonkers … before I know it we’ll be living wherever we’ll be living and waving goodbye to Otis who’ll be doing whatever he wants to be doing when he hits 18. For gods sake time, slow the fuck down.
I say that, but this month is going to be a mad one for me with trips to Australia – twice – two cities in China and two in America, so I’ll be happy when we hit June and I can prepare for being underwhelmed with my 54th birthday present, ha.
Anyway, now that’s over, let’s get on with things shall we?
So despite having written this blog for almost 2 decades, I often forget anyone reads it.
Even more so, since I stopped the comments.
But over the years, I have had moments where it’s been impossible to ignore.
Not just in terms of trolls and insults but the time Business Insider wrote about it.
And Business Week magazine.
And Campaign.
But the biggest shocks have been when I’ve had comments from people I never imagined would visit.
Rosenberg from Google.
Mensch from Q-Prime.
Richard bloody Branson.
And then, the best of the best, my Mum.
Of course, most of them never made the same mistake again … but it’s a real source of pride.
The reason I say this is because a few weeks ago I wrote about a famous person who sent me flowers to thank me for my contribution to their work which resulted in them winning a massive international music/entertainment award.
As I wrote at the time, it was ridiculously generous because [1] it was a long time ago and [2] in the big scheme of things, my involvement was smaller than a grain of sand and they should really be thinking nothing other than how talented and brilliant they are.
Well, the individual in question only bloody read that post didn’t they!
And how do I know that? Because they sent me this.
WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK?!
Yes, I know I am not saying who it is but what I can tell you is that as shocked as you would be – and you would – it still wouldn’t be as shocked as I was when I realised that after almost 20 years of writing this rubbish, this blog has finally got me some work.
[Acknowledging the last bit of work I did for this person was paid for by another person, so maybe I’m just being offered the chance to work for them for free, ha]
OK, I accept taking almost 2 decades to get 1 piece of work is hardly Effie worthy, but it’s more effective than Linkedin has ever been for me.
Or anyone else I know on that platform.
Which means – using the power of ‘WeWork maths’ – this blog should be worth more than Linkedin, so I’m off to get my billion bucks from Softbank.
[I know, I know … I’ve gone a bit loopy, but all this happened in the last 24 hours, which means this is also the most topical post to ever appeared on this blog as well]
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Business, Comment, Corporate Evil, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Dad, Effectiveness, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Professionalism, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Respect, Stupid
One of the things I find fascinating is how everything these days is ‘a sprint’.
The urgent need for an immediate solution to enable a brand or business to move forward.
Except it’s not true is it? Not really.
I mean – I get that there are occasions where circumstances demand an extremely quick response.
A terrible event.
A moment of opportunity.
An act forced by an aggressive client.
But in the main, these ‘sprints’ have nothing to do with that.
They’re for a new product launch.
A brand campaign.
An annual event.
If they need a sprint for those, then surely that means they haven’t [or just as likely, their bosses, bosses haven’t] got their shit together because those things don’t ‘just happen’ do they? It’s not like the Paris authorities are going to wake up on the 1st of July and suddenly realise they have to hold the Olympics in a few weeks time so need construction companies to engage in ‘a sprint’ to knock up a few stadiums in time.
Now if my Dad was alive and found himself in this situation he would say – as I often heard him tell clients who had failed to plan appropriately – “your emergency is not my problem” … however in adland, we tend to jump in and try to help.
Yay us!
Except quite often, when we do this, we’re made to feel like we’re the reason they’re in this mess and so rather than see us as someone trying to help, we’re seen as someone holding them back.
It’s so weird.
Even more so when they then question our hours and fees.
Which is why my attitude is that unless there is a real reason for the urgency – and a respect for what you’re asking people to do – you should probably say no. I get it may be unpopular, but you’re not going to win in this situation.
And don’t get me started when companies brief agencies before a major holiday.
OH MY GOD.
I used to see this in China a lot … and we [as in Wieden Shanghai] would always say no.
Sure, if it was a client of ours who was in a pickle for legit reasons, we’d do all we could to help them … but if it was about ego or mismanagement, we’d politely decline.
And yet, from what I see and hear from others – and occasionally experience – this situation seems to be happening more and more often … the defecto rather than the exception.
What’s even more bizarre is that the supposed urgency for a solution gets more and more delayed as additional contexts, mandatories, and approval processes get added to the list of deliverables … resulting in you wondering how urgent this really was as a supposed ‘sprint’ turns into a marathon.
Of course, the reality of these situations is it’s actually about money and time.
Or said another way, the desire to reduce it.
I get it, developing work can be time-consuming and expensive … but here’s the thing, shortening the time doesn’t automatically mean it makes it the work better.
Cheaper, maybe.
But not better.
In my experience, there are 3 main reasons this situation continually and persistently occurs:
1. The client doesn’t value creativity.
2. The client doesn’t understand creativity.
3. The client doesn’t actually know what they want or need.
For far too many, creativity is seen as expressing what you want people to know about your brand/product before adding ‘some wrapping paper’ around the messaging to make it ‘creative’.
I’ve talked about the folly of this ‘wrapping paper’ analogy before … but that perspective continues to grow. Worse, some agencies actively reinforce it in an attempt to show ‘they get the client’ or they ‘get business’, all the while undermining their single most valuable asset.
Which means that maybe they don’t know business as much as they think.
Don’t get me wrong, it is entirely possible to spend too much time on something. But there sure-as-hell can be too little. And when you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t know what they want – so use creativity to try and work it out and then judge it as if its your fault – then any length of time is too much time.
And yet it feels like ‘quality’ has now become defined by the speed it takes to create rather than the effect it creates … often reinforced, as I said a couple of days ago, by ‘for profit’ research companies and gurus who focus on clarity not interest.
No wonder so many clients are asking agencies about what their AI approach is.
Now as I said at Cannes, I think AI – and tech as a whole – offers a whole world of possibilities and opportunities for brands to evolve, grow and connect. Hell, we just did it with our Pedigree Adoptables campaign that literally wouldn’t be possible without it. But that’s not what a lot of clients mean when they ask that, they’re looking for cheaper and quicker output. Optimising the optimized.
The great irony of this is that when you talk about AI affecting their business – especially if the competition embrace it against them – many react like you’ve just tazered them.
They’ll say there’s no comparison.
That their product price-point is based on the value of their expertise, craft and innovation.
And for some, that’s true. But it’s some … not all.
Which is very similar to the post I wrote a while back about how many brands like to think of themselves as premium, but their actions and values are all about how cheap they can be.
A while back I spoke to someone who is one of the most influential luxury expert in the world.
They own, invest and consult with the best of the best … new and old, classic and innovative.
And they said to me they believe the future of luxury will be about recognizing the value of humanity.
The custom, craft and care.
Because in a world that is increasingly about speed, scale and optimization, the brands who will command the greatest value, influence and price will be the ones who offer their customers the most human interaction, engagement and service experience.
It’s a fascinating thought … one that could separate the real from the wannabes.
Or, said another way, the companies who those who talk about valuing their brand and audience and those who actually do. Because one only cares about the sprint, where others appreciate the jog.