Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Collaboration, Corporate Evil, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Curiosity
Going through some old photos, I found this from the great Jeff Goodby that he tweeted in 2015 …
Good isn’t it?!
Well I say good, but it’s pretty tragic really … made worse by the fact it still rings true almost a decade later.
What’s even more annoying is that even when told – some refuse to accept it.
For ‘some’, read that as certain clients, procurement departments and the occasional ‘expert’.
So even though they have zero experience in doing anything other than talking about it – or occasionally, commissioning it – they have decided they not only know how to make it better than people who literally do it every day of their life … but how to make it more successful.
And what happens when it all goes to shit?
Then they blame the people they pushed/bullied/blackmailed into satisfying their ego.
Now to be honest, the people who enabled this behaviour do have to share some of the blame – or at least the leaders of the company who agreed to it, do – but it blows my mind how the craft of creativity, communication and advertising is consistently misunderstood, mistreated and misused and yet the blame is consistently aimed at the people who actually know how to do it.
Sure, I accept just because you work in an industry doesn’t mean you’re great at what you do, but this happens too often to be limited to moments where an average ad person is dealing with a great and informed client.
Great and informed clients are amazing.
When you deal with them, their questions always have a purpose. They’re interested in what is going on, they want to understand where people see things going and they actively want to help contribute to making something great.
But when it is someone who isn’t great, their questions are often badly disguised dismissal of others perspective and point of view. Regardless how good or experienced the presenter is.
So I wondered if that tweet was completely right.
Is this something only the ad industry faces or do all industries experience it?
I get with creativity and advertising, ‘great’ is more subjective than – say, building a house – but is it just us?
I mean, if I was asking an architect to design my home, I sure as shit would ask a lot of questions … but underpinning the conversation would be the acknowledgement they know more than me so would not challenge their view on gravity, despite having lived in buildings all my life, ha.
Of course what this all is saying is we are a society of mistrust and arrogance.
Or more specifically, a society where companies believe money gives them ultimate power. To dictate. To deny. To question. To challenge. To dismiss.
And while it is important all professionals are held to account and don’t take things for granted, it’s also important the people doing the questioning – in professional situations – have the experience and knowledge of the subject they’re challenging.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Collaboration, Colleagues, Communication Strategy, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture
My friend James sent me this pic a while back.
To say I feel seen is an understatement.
While I am a big believer in collaboration, the reality is it only works when you’re working with people who share the same level of experience, exposure and standards.
Or put more specifically, share HIGH levels of experience, exposure and standards.
That doesn’t mean they all have to come from the same discipline … or see the same outcome … but it does means they’re working up to the greatest opportunity rather than down to the lowest common denominator.
But that happens less and less.
One of the big problems is because companies think all their ‘partners’ are equal.
I get it, we all like to think we’re dealing with ‘the best of the best’ … but that’s sadly, rarely the case. Procurement … heritage … global alliances all contribute to who gets to be part of the ‘network’ and so the range of quality and experience in these situations is often vast.
That doesn’t mean they won’t offer something, but it does mean their frames-of-reference will be much smaller than everyone else and when this happens, they tend to pull everyone back down to their level rather than push everyone further up.
Or it gets even worse.
The people with the highest levels of experience [proper experience, not ego or delusion] get accused of trying to ‘own’ the situation when all they’re trying to do is create the best possible outcome from the situation.
The reality is experience should be seen and respected as a competitive advantage. Whether we like it or not, people who play at the highest level, tend to play at a higher level. It’s why I love the comment from one of the greatest football managers of all time when he said, ‘learn from winners, not players‘.
Put simply, winners take us to places we didn’t even know, whereas players only can go where they know.
And while the concept of ‘team’ is everyone progresses together, it still needs someone to lead them to the promised land which is why I think the biggest reason collaboration ends up underwhelming is not because there’s a lack of desire to work with others, but because there’s a lack of reality of who needs to be there and what collaboration needs to truly work.
Filed under: Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Collaboration, Colleagues, Comment, Complicity, Context, Corporate Evil, Culture, Differentiation, Diversity, Equality
Yes, I’m back. Kinda.
A storm in New York meant I missed my connecting flight to Auckland so ended up in Houston.
But if that wasn’t a big enough come down, maybe the hotel I found to spend the night was …
Because in NYC, I stayed in the utterly swank Crosby Street Hotel in Soho, in a room that – as a friend described – as “main character, intimidating-as-fuck, energy”.
Look at it!
How bloody New York awesome it is?
I got to spend 4 nights in that bloody gorgeous room and while I should have left on a cloud of joy and happiness, I found myself – just 12 hours later – in a room that I described to Jill as “the sort of place that could double as a crime scene in an episode of CSI. Houston Airport edition.”
There are 2 especially amazing things about that room.
The first is it wasn’t exactly cheap.
Sure, it was a lot cheaper than the Crosby Street Hotel, but when you take into account the city it was in and the location in the city that it was in … then the proportional difference in cost between the two, wasn’t much at all.
Or said another way, certainly not enough difference, hahaha.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m fine with dodgy hotels – hell, I’ve stayed in enough of them in my time and they’re my ‘go-to’ when I’m footing the bill, but this was dodgy but at a premium[ish] price.
What’s funny is that when I saw it advertised – basically as the only hotel available at 11pm at night, when I got in, it was labelled as ****.
Naturally I assumed **** was its hotel rating, but as soon as I walked in, I realised it was actually just blanking out the word ‘SHIT’, hahaha.
Anyway, I survived and got back to NZ at 5am this morning – so this is the most up to date post I’ve ever written.
But it will also be the last post till Thursday as I now have to fly to Australia for a couple of days – so with that in mind, I’m going to leave you with the post I originally wrote to be shown today, mainly because I’m already tired of this post and I can’t be bothered to type anymore.
So until Thursday, let me ‘welcome you back’ with the first of my ‘piss and vinegar’ posts for this week.
The photo above is from a trip to Memphis – or more specifically, Memphis – way back in 2006 … and while it is both alarming and amusing that the local council seem to hate anything on wheels or 4 legs … I can’t help but feel this is a perfect metaphor for how many companies hire these days.
For all the conversations about diversity … conformity prevails.
Not just in terms of heritage, but backgrounds, interests, education.
A production line of parity.
But the really fucked-up bit is I believe many companies do want to ‘evolve’. They just can’t.
Or should I say, they just can’t help themselves stopping themselves from doing it.
So what happens is they do hire people who are different to everyone else in the company, however – if they then don’t conform to how the majority behave – they get let go for “not being the right cultural fit”.
In essence, they’re fired for being exactly who they were hired to be.
In nature, there’s this thing called ‘the edge effect’. It’s basically where different eco-systems – often found at the ‘edge’ of natural habitats – merge together and create something new. New possibilities created by new combinations. Evolution created by the acceptance of possibilities rather than the denial of them.
This is basically why we – as in, ‘humans’ – are still around, because despite humans giving it our best shot to kill the planet … nature keeps evolving to find ways to beat our bollocks.
In essence, it is constantly growing, evolving, adapting, and creating.
But in many companies today, they have adopted an opposing view.
More focused on denial, destruction, distain and dismissal.
In Japan there’s an old saying that goes, ‘the nail that sticks out gets hammered down’
Sadly, in a lot of companies, anyone who stands out does not even get viewed as a number anymore. Instead, they’re a nail to be beaten down by a bunch of tools … and when I say ‘tools’, I mean that literally and metaphorically.
See you Thursday, which will be before my family get to see me. You lucky people.
Ahem.