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: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Context, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Effectiveness, Egovertising, Fashion
After the heaviness of yesterday’s post, I’ve decided to lighten it with today’s.
By ‘lighten’ I mean, go even more superficial than normal.
So recently, I saw a guy wearing this shirt …
… and I couldn’t help wondering if it was an animal sanctuary or a Donald Trump ‘alternative truths’ factory.
On the positive, I paid more attention to it than I do most of the ‘dot-to-dot, cookie cutter, social landfill’ marketing-practice advertising that floods our every channel [and – ironically – ends-up triggering our internal firewalls more than our emotional desires or interest] because not only do all of them look, say, sound and behave the same as everyone else, they annoy the fuck out of us with their desperate attempt to shove their ‘brand asset’ down our throats when they’re not even a feature let alone an asset.
God, someone got out of bed the wrong side this morning didn’t they.
On the positive, this shirt should be a shoe-in for the Grand Prix Effie.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Anniversary, Attitude & Aptitude, Birthday, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creativity, Culture
Bloody hell, it’s the 1st September. Already.
This year has gone so quickly, which takes me back to this post I wrote about ‘the speed our kids grow up‘ and I am close to begrudging September before it’s even begun.
But hey, it’s Monday and no one needs more shit to deal with than that, so instead I’m going to swiftly move on before we all reach for the kitchen drawer and look for the sharpest knife.
Or maybe that’s just me.
So this post is about birthday cards.
No … it’s not April Fools, it really is.
I swear there have only been 2 sorts of birthday cards ever created: The sincere ones and the ‘sarcastic’ ones.
The former is an expression of how much someone means to you and the best wishes you have for their special day. The latter basically takes the piss about how fucking old you are.
That’s it.
A tried and tested formula through the ages.
Which is why I was pretty surprised when I saw this:
Sure, it’s funny.
Sure, it’s original.
But it’s also something else …
Validation.
Validation for the members of society who are saying the economy is bad while too many politicians try to claim it isn’t.
It may seem a small thing, but it’s also big … because the only reason the card industry would step away from their tried and tested birthday formula is when they see a big enough commercial reason to do it.
And it appears that the harshness of the economy is – apparently – a big enough reason.
So while I wouldn’t base all my argument on this fact, sometimes its the circumstantial evidence that is the most damning.
__________________________________________________________________________________
One last thing:
Today is my 18th wedding anniversary and I GUARANTEE my wife has – consciously or subconsciously – forgotten about it.
So … as she never reads this blog, I will show her this post to prove I remembered and she didn’t, allowing me to ‘lord it’ over her in a rare moment of triumph and glee.
Oh who am I kidding, but it’s worth a try … it can’t be any more stupid than when we decided to have a ‘Diet Coke’ fountain at our wedding that turned into one giant, bubble of stupidity – as captured in the photo below, with my wonderful Mum peering over, ready to capture the idiocy with her camera.
Happy anniversary Jill. At least its important enough for one of us to remember ; )
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brands, Cliches, Collegues, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Consultants, Corporate Evil, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Delusion, Distinction, Effectiveness, Leadership, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect, Standards, Success
It’s been a while since I’ve had an all-out rant, but here we go.
So recently, I saw a quote recently I loved.
It was by Arnold Glasgow, the American businessman and satirist who said:
“Consider how hard it is to change yourself and you’ll understand what little chance you have trying to change others”.
I say this because too many brands – and agencies – think they can.
Worse, they think they can with an ad … an ad that either tells people specifically what to do/what they should do and/or a list of product attributes that they believe will make someone immediately stop whatever it is they have been doing for decades and change tact because they’ve suddenly been ‘enlightened’.
Of course, this is not entirely the fault of agencies and clients.
Too often, it is backed up by some for-profit research group who has said their findings prove – without any possible doubt – this is what people will do and, even more importantly, want to do.
Now this is not an anti-research stance. Or an anti-agency or client diatribe.
The reality is we need some sort of foundation of information to make choices and decisions and research – when done well, like everything in life – is a universally established way to achieve that BUT … and it’s a big but … the definitive and delusional nature of how our industry talks borders on bonkers.
I get we don’t like risk.
I get what we do is bloody expensive.
I get there are big implications on getting things wrong.
But nothing – and I mean nothing – can be guaranteed and yet so much of the business acts like it can be, conveniently choosing to ignore the landfill of failings from organisations who have researched every part of everything they do for in every aspect of their life.
Sure, it can increase the odds of success … like advertising.
Sure, it is better than not doing anything at all … like advertising.
But everyone acting like whatever they are going to do is ‘a dead cert’ is an act of commercial complicity and co-dependency that borders on Comms Stockholm Syndrome.
A long time ago, when I was maybe a bit more of a menace, a media agency told a client – with me in the room – that they could guarantee they’d HIT their sales target if a particular amount was invested.
I asked, “but you don’t know what the idea is yet and surely that has a role in the level of impact and/or investment that needs to be made?” … to which they said their ‘proprietary data’ gave them the commercial insight that helped their clients achieve their goals.
So back at the office – pissed off – I sent them an email saying this was the work.
Obviously, it did not go down well, but then neither did their ‘strategy’ of just throwing money at the wall until they hit the magic number.
Again, I appreciate we all need information to base choices and decisions on, but we’re getting way too generalistic, simplistic and egotistic in our approaches and methodologies – which is why the sooner we remember how hard it is for us to change any part of who we are, the sooner we may start accepting it takes far more than a business goal … a focus group commentary … a marketing methodology or an ad to get people to even consider doing what you want them to do and so maybe – just maybe – it will encourage us all to start playing up to a new standards rather than down to complicit convenience.
But I wouldn’t hold your breath, which is why I finish this rant with a post that I saw recently I also loved – albeit with ‘paraphrased interpretation’.
Thankfully not everyone is like this.
As proven by the fact, they tend to be the ones behind the stuff we all wish we were behind.
Or as my friend said recently, ‘they’re the ones who play to create change, not communicate everything exactly the same’.
Oh, I feel better for that. Thank you for [not] reading, hahaha.
Filed under: Advertising, Agency Culture, Ambition, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Cars, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Consultants, Context, Corporate Evil, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Egovertising, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Focus Groups, Grifting, Logic, Love, Luck, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Planning, Point Of View, Process, Relevance, Research, Resonance, Respect, Standards, Status, Stupid
We’re surrounded by processes and systems.
Each and everyone proclaiming to be ‘the right way’ to do something.
A way that claims effectiveness … efficiency … accuracy and performance are all but guaranteed.
And while it is true that in many cases, they increase the odds of good things happening … that’s all they do.
Sure, many have a ton amount of data accompanying them to back things what they say … but as we all know about data, when used right [or wrong] you can make it say or prove anything you want it to.
The reality is our industry, pretty much all these systems are less a shortcut to wealth and prosperity, and more an insurance policy against failure and destruction.
Nothing wrong with that other that it does the opposite of what many claim and instead, champions conformity more than liberation. But then what do you expect when many of the people doing the spouting of systems and processes have a vested interest in everyone using those very systems and processes.
Again, I’m not suggesting you ignore all these things. As I said, many play an important role in developing products and brands … however when someone suggests they’re ‘the secret to success’ and must be embraced to the letter – then you need to think about whose success are they really talking about.
It’s why I bloody loved this interview with Marc Andreessen – the businessman, venture capitalist, and [former] software engineer. Specifically the bit about ‘why hyperlinks are blue’.
OK, so he tries to rationalize it at the end, but fundamentally what he says is: “blue is my favorite colour”.
That’s right … the colour of our hyperlinks were chosen.
By a human.
Because he liked that colour.
Kind of reminds me of the ‘wings’ on a Cadillac.
There was absolutely no functional reason for them to exist other than the fact the designers just thought it looked better with them.
That’s it.
And with that, they turned a car into an icon. And here lies a key lesson …
Sometimes, the things we like are simply because we like them.
There may be many alternatives.
There may be other possibilities.
But at the end of the day, some choose things for no other reason than it works for them.
And at a time where everything needs to be justified … rationalised … reviewed and tested … I think those people deserve credit for backing their belief, judgement, vision and preference.
It’s easy to do what a system tells you to do.
It’s easy to follow what others tell you is right.
But it takes confidence to embrace what you believe is the right thing to do. And while I acknowledge some will suggest this approach is an act of ego and arrogance … when you consider how many of these ‘dot-to-dot logic™ systems and ‘researched-to-within-an-inch-of-their-life’ campaigns/brands/products fail to perform [often because the impact or output they create is deemed secondary in importance to the adherence of every step of whatever system or logic process you have committed to using] you could argue the person who backs their judgement is no less an idiot than the person who outsources all their responsibility to someone else?
Whether we like it or not, sometimes the best things are a product of someone doing something they preferred.
They will justify it.
They will rationalize it.
But underpinning it all, is their acknowledgment that before they can think about satisfying others, they need to satisfy themselves … and frankly I find that a pretty honourable act.