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

That’s right, Banana Republic used the pandemic as an opportunity to shame people who were struggling to work from home – while trying to also care for the people in their home, including having to teach their kids their schoolwork – to look better for their work calls.

Oh I know some people will say this was ‘good marketing’ … seizing an opportunity to drive their business at a time where commerce was expected to suffer [when we know the opposite was true] … but it’s not, if anything it’s ambulance-chasing marketing. Where the only consideration is ‘can I make money out of this person, regardless of their situation.

And that’s the thing between good and shit marketing … the knowledge that just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

The fact they literally call these scarves ‘video chat accessories’ is so overt it’s breath-taking.

And sickening.

But to be fair, they weren’t the only one adopting this ‘strategy’.

I remember a UK-based kitchen company that suggested you should go thousands into debt to have your kitchen ‘updated’ so you can do your future work calls in a room that presented you in a more ‘professional, wealthy, successful light’.

The big problem with a lot of our industry is our disregard for customers.

Actually that’s wrong … it’s our ability to pretend we’re doing everything for our customers.

The reality is though many companies don’t know who their customers are or even what industry they’re in … they simply believe that people – all people – are lining up to buy whatever it is they want to sell, whenever they tell people about it.

I once worked at a place that was obsessed with D2C – direct to consumer.

They were heavily pushing ALL their clients to follow suit … claiming it was what customers wanted, how a modern brand behaved, where retail was heading.

And, to be fair, there was a lot of that happening at the time and they were well placed to leverage it … but I, and more than a few others, weren’t convinced. Mainly because the brands who did it well were very clear on who they were, what they did, who they were for and how long they intended to be around whereas they were trying to force it on organizations who were the antithesis of this. Worse, they were the antithesis of this but were being told that didn’t matter … it was what the future was all about.

I kept bringing this up … highlighting this was not a blanket approach for all and there were serious implications on the brand, customers and category over time. Or at the very least, we shouldn’t be advocating clients let go of all they have done and built and stand-for just so they can exploit a new opportunity for cash.

And I was told I was a dinosaur.
Harking back to a time that was no longer relevant.
That technology was changing everything and they were at the forefront of it.

And while they were a good company, they were lost in their own ego and greed … refusing to look beyond the world they had created, because it was a world that positioned them as visionary rather than acknowledging this was a temporary wave where they were well equipped to benefit from.

Don’t get me wrong, we have to continually innovate.
We have to identify the possibilities, opportunities and waves of change.
But it only works if you know who you are, what you do, who you are for and what they value and want.

It also needs self-awareness, objectivity, honesty and transparency and the realization everything and everyone evolves – regardless what you wish people did.

Which may explain why many of the clients they had, are now brands who are a case-study for what not to do.

A warning that when you think the things that define you, guide you and build you are superfluous, then you can – and probably will – fall for everything.

Just ask Wework.
And Nike.
And The Line.