Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apathy, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand Suicide, Collaboration, Colleagues, Comment, Communication Strategy, Community, Consultants, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Politics, Professionalism, Respect
I saw the below image recently and it got me thinking about how it is a perfect representation of how most – but not all – ‘multi-agency’ relationships really work.
As I said, it’s not always the case, but it increasingly feels ‘the norm’, often influenced by a procurement process that places more importance on ‘who will do the most for the least’ rather than who is best equipped to lead.
Just for the record, I’m all for collaboration.
Done properly, it is a powerful way to achieve incredible things in collapsed time.
However to stand a chance of achieving this needs a lot of careful thought and pre-planning.
For a start, you need to ensure the people in the room all have similar standards, experience and seniority or you end up only being as good as the least experienced person in attendance.
Or the loudest voice.
Too often there is a view that all you have to do is shove different organisations inside a room and tell them to get on with it.
And while companies do want the best for their clients … they all have their own agendas, definitions, remuneration structures and egos and to expect that to all be put aside because you want them to work together is naive.
It’s why curation, transparency and clarity on the ultimate goal are vital in enabling a strong outcome … but the problem is too often, collaboration is used because of timing pressures rather than seizing opportunity, which is why so much of what comes out of it feels like the worst of ‘committee thinking’.
When it works, everyone wins.
When it doesn’t, everyone – at best – stands still.
Of course, with companies increasingly turning to AI to ‘optimise’ every element of their business, the future of collaboration will be through bots rather than people. And while that may be music-to-the-ears of leaders who view employees as an frustrating expense … the result of this will be even more ‘lowest-common-denominator thinking’ because in the World of AI, everything is a summary of something else – whereas with well-run human collaboration, it doesn’t conform to where we’ve been, it builds to where we can go.
Filed under: 2025, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apathy, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Audacious, Authenticity, Comment, Context, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Emotion, Empathy, Imagination, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Planning, Play, Point Of View, Process, Provocative, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Stupid, Success, Work
So I have good news.
This is the last post for a week.
Yep, I’m away. Again.
Not because of whatever happened with the result I wrote about yesterday – but something else. Though if the result wasn’t good yesterday, the week away for me is going to be very bitter sweet because something that should be full of crazy wonderfulness is going to be infected by sheer fucking panic. But let’s stay positive shall we and ignore the fact I started a company called cynic – hahaha.
[I also, let’s not forget, started a company called Sunshine, which proves I am the living embodiment of a ‘gemini’, haha]
Anyway, I say you have ‘a week’ rest from this blog but I have written a post for next Friday because it’s Halloween and I couldn’t resist posting something truly horrific.
A blast from the past that no one needs seeing again but still makes me laugh.
So apart from that, you’re free from me for one whole week.
What a way to see in the weekend …
So with that, I’m going to leave you with this …
I saw the above recently and it reminded me of a meeting I was in once, where an HR person talked about ‘cultural fit’.
Now I get what they meant – from a theoretical place – but it was what they were trying not to say that bugged me.
Because in essence, they were saying they valued the complicit and consistent over the interesting and challenging.
They didn’t care that people who questioned or pushed were actually doing it because they wanted to help the company be even better … to them, they saw them as ‘problems’ who they could discount or disregard under the guise of being a ‘wrong cultural fit’.
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate good companies have strong cultures … a set of principals, values and behaviours that the people within shapes who they are and how they act. But too many organisations mistake this for control and complicity when in reality, it’s about expression, standards and possibility.
And it’s why I loved that piece But here’s the thing, these people make great shit a possibility.
Sure, I get they often need to be surrounded by those with the skills and abilities to both interpret what they say and action it … but without them, you are forever lost in the middle.
Yes I get for some that is exactly where they want to be … but for those with hunger, ambition, a desire for originality, craft and possibility, that’s literally the worst place you can find yourself positioned.
And yet too often, it’s these ‘big talking companies’ who have embraced protocols and processes that filter these people out immediately … replacing them with an endless stream of plastic and beige puppets. It’s why as much as these sorts of individuals can cause all manner of headaches and mayhem – and I say this both as someone who fits this description as well as someone who seeks out people of this description – they remain the individuals who I love to work with and hire the most.
And there’s a reason for that …
Because not only do you never know what they’ll come up with – and often they don’t know wither – you can be sure it will be smart and impossible to forget.
Or to be more poetic …
They are like comets flying across a night sky. They might not stay around for long, but boy … do they always shine bright.
Which leads to something else.
Recently London School of Economics [LSE] asked me to write a piece for their business management and strategy curriculum.
I don’t know if was because they thought my perspective would educate their students or serve as a warning of what NOT to do, but it was lovely to be asked.
The one thing they wanted me to specifically talk about was how I have been able to build and lead successful teams wherever I’ve worked.
And without blowing my own trumpet, I have.
Whether it’s been at different agencies or different countries, I’m proud I’ve been able to help nurture strategically intriguing, creatively interesting teams. Where every place I’ve been, has enjoyed a period that has come to define the department, the agency, the client, the category, the work we create or – most importantly – the people who are there.
The reason that’s so important to me is that where strategy is concerned, you can never be sure if you’re making a difference or you’re just riding on the coat-tails of the talent that was – and is – already there.
Or said another way, are you good or are you lucky?
And while I’m definitely lucky – both in terms of where I’ve worked and who I’ve got to work with – I do believe I’m pretty good at developing people and gangs – and I choose the word ‘gang’ very deliberate.
You see the word ‘gang’ means you have a motley crew of different people with different talents and outlooks who are united by a common philosophy, enemy and planning identity … whereas a department tends to be a production line of similar people, doing similar things with similar backgrounds and expectations.
Or as Lee Hill, my mentor and friend once said, “you can choose to partner with people who find interesting ways to open possibilities or people who are only focused on keeping things the same”.
And while there is nothing wrong with being boringly expected, it’s not what I value or what drives the greatest commercial growth … which is why – as part of the piece I was asked to write – I wrote this:
[Click on the image above to read it properly]
_________________________________________________________________________
It’s why I always say you should beware of those who offer convenient answers.
Or solutions that are more complicated than the actual problem.
Because you may find they end up costing you far more than the people who challenge or push you in terms of who you are pr who you want – or could – become.
See you properly a week on Monday – via something stupid on Friday.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Conformity, Culture, Customer Service, Effectiveness, Experience, Fake Attitude, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail
NPS – which stands for Net Promoter Score – is a way for companies to evaluate how their customers view them.
The higher the score, the more satisfied they are with the company. Or so they say …
Because while I appreciate there will be a lot of evidence to back up this equation, I find it fascinating that the way they do it is by adding a layer between brand and customer.
More than that, it dimensionalises ‘satisfaction’ into a numerical value … meaning humanity, nuance and individuality is washed over. Now I appreciate when you’re dealing with potentially ‘millions’ of people, it would be almost impossible to achieve this with more texture and intimacy, however I can’t help but feel this methodology also suits the C-Suite in companies because it allows them to be incubated from having to deal with customer issues and simply point to an outsourced number to justify how well they are doing.
Add to the fact that when asked to evaluate a company, most people will just choose a random number – simply because the service they experienced was transactionally efficient rather than something more meaningful or memorable – and the whole NPS score should be taken far more as a guide than a fact.
Of course, we live in a time where everyone sells everything with the confidence of unquestionable authority … which is why I saw two things recently that reminded me what good customer service is, without having t refer to a number between 0 and 10.
First was this:
A young boy was at a baseball game [Philadelphia Phillies] and his father was able to retrieve a ball that had been hit into the stands to give to him. Almost immediately, another fan came up and claimed it was theirs [it wasn’t] and basically intimidated the father into giving it them. Someone in the team saw this and immediately made amends … first sending them a bag of ‘team goodies’ while they were still in the stands, and then following it up by inviting him – and his Dad – to meet the players and receive a signed baseball bat from one of the stars.
It probably cost the team $100 max, but the emotional value was way, way more than that … which was also only increased by the speed of their action.
No processes to go through.
No layers of approval to obtain.
Quick, decisive action from the whole team – rather than just one department.
You can read about it by following these links.
First the incident.
Then the first follow up.
Then the meeting of the team.
Then the positive internet reaction.
The other is much closer to home and involves a courier company I wrote too.
I had got an email saying an item had been delivered to my house. Except it hadn’t.
I wrote to them to tell them that and almost immediately, they responded and told me they’d checked and could confirm delivery. Crucially they were able to tell me what was sent and I realized they were right and had confused their original notification for another product I was waiting for.
I wrote back to apologize and explain they were right and then – again, almost immediately – they sent me this.
Now I appreciate there may be an element of ‘lost in translation’ in this reply … but ‘we wish you a happy life’ is delightful. Even more so given it was my fucking mistake. But the real power of it is that as ridiculously over-the-top as it is … it’s also undeniably human. Not some contrived, often repeated set of words that have been carefully designed to ensure the company does not convey an inch of accountability in any interaction.
That’s customer service.
Everything else feels more like being in-service to the company legal department or C-Suite ego.
So while I appreciate we have to have systems and processes in place to deliver a level of consistency … when they take the precedence over ensuring customers comes out of any situation feeling at least seen or heard, then it’s no wonder we’re seeing more and more companies hiding behind NPS scores rather than listening, interacting and enabling their teams to deal with the needs of their customers, rather than the egos of their C-Suite.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Colleagues, Comment, Communication Strategy, Corporate Evil, Corporate Gaslighting, Culture, Management
Just a reminder that anyone who delivers feedback that’s purposefully designed to push you down while actively lifting themselves up, is an asshole.
No ifs. Just butts – so to speak.
Just to be clear, that doesn’t mean people can’t take feedback.
That doesn’t mean people can’t take tough feedback.
That doesn’t mean they’re being ‘woke’.
If anything, it’s how you ensure your feedback is understood rather than just heard.
I say this because far too many people use feedback like a sword and seemingly feel happy about it … which not only means they’re a prick, but that they have deliberately chosen to ignore the recipients feelings as well as where they may be complicit in what’s happened.
Which is why if anyone needs a reminder on why remembering this approach is not good – which is terrifying in itself, but so be it – check out the stories on Corporate Gaslighting.
And don’t think I’m not looking at HR departments for their role in allowing this to happen.
If I need to remind you, your job is to protect the people, not the C-Suite.
Thank god for the good ones out there … the ones who make is a worthy profession rather than the scapegoat department.
Happy Monday, hahaha.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Ambition, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, Brands, Clients, Comment, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Effectiveness, Honesty, Leadership, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Planning, Point Of View, Politics, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect
We’re only a few weeks into 2026 and yet last week, a planner in London reached out to me to ask for some advice because they were already feeling burned out by work.
Obviously I’m not going to give details about who they are or where they work, but what I can tell you is their stress wasn’t because of workload, but because they were working with a client who could not clearly define the business problem they needed addressing, and then was blaming them for not giving them a solution they felt was appropriate.
In many ways, this is one of the most frustrating challenges in advertising today.
Where someone uses rounds and rounds of creative work to try and work out what’s the problem they need/want to solve.
Now there’s many reasons for this …
One is that too many companies have completely undermined, destroyed and devalued the role of marketing within their organizations – resulting in a lack of training, a lack of standards, a lack of C-Suite credibility and an unspoken rule that you are only empowered to say no to proposals and opportunities.
But frankly, the blame for this scenario is shared.
Because too many agencies have also completely undermined, destroyed and devalued the role of creativity within their organizations – resulting in a lack of training, a lack of standards, a lack of backbone and an unspoken rule that yo are only empowered to say ‘yes’ to a lack of clarity on problems and challenges.
What a shitshow.
Worse, what a waste of time.
So what ends up happening is both sides throw shade and blame at each other without realizing their own complicity in what’s going on, which results in ..
+ Everything taking 10 times longer than it needs to.
+ Everything getting more complex, confusing and opaque.
+ Everything being designed for – and decided by – committees.
+ Everything requiring more presentations and rounds of work.
+ Everything getting shaped by internal politics/managing up.
+ Everything being chipped away and diluted to beige.
Now of course, not every company, agency or brief is like this.
But a lot are – increasingly so – which is why it’s not exactly surprising the planner who reached out was feeling so burned out. And I’ve not even mentioned the role of procurement, the toxicity of the ‘sprint‘ or the outsourcing to AI to make things feel even worse.
And while this situation is no good for anyone – literally no one – what really bothered me was the fact this planner felt completely isolated by his boss, the team he worked into and the client he was working for.
Everyone appreciated the issue, but no one wanted to address it.
And there lies the fundamental issue that is killing the industry.
Because as I’ve said many times, the only way you get to make great things is if 3 things are present.
1. Clarity on what problem you are solving.
2. Shared responsibility in how that can be achieved.
3. Trust each other and be transparent with each other.
All three are needed all of the time.
And while that might seem like fantasy, I can tell you, it can – and does – happen, even though I appreciate it is seemingly becoming rarer and rarer.
But it can change, though it needs everyone to take responsibility for it – specifically senior people – because without that, the ‘stress reduction’ system shown at the top of this page will become the next global marketing tool found in every marketing department and ad agency around the World.