3 years ago, I wrote about the amazing story of Sriracha sauce.
How it is a testimony to belief, standards and stubbornness.
If you didn’t read it, you should – especially as the brand, right now, is suffering badly.
Now you may think this is where I say I was wrong …
That I mistook a moment of success for a story of sustainable excellence.
But you’d be wrong … because while the brand is suffering, it’s more to do with values versus ingredients.
You see at some point, the founder – David Tran – asked his son to take a bigger role in the company operations.
While William – and his sister, Tassie – grew up with the company their father founded, William had worked at a management consultancy and as such, thought he could modernize the approach that his father had built his business on.
Was this by investing in better machinery? No.
Was this by buying some of the suppliers they relied upon? No.
Was this by producing new products founded on Sriracha principles? No.
It was by trying to re-negotiate the contracts of their long-term partners and by replacing the ingredients used with cheaper alternatives.
That’s right … rather than make choices that could add to the potential of the business, he chose to exploit what the business already did.
Or said another way, he wanted to squeeze every possible penny of profit he could out of every possible inch of the business.
And the result of this?
Well, their long-term suppliers walked away.
Their product quality fell away.
And their customers walked all the way to their competitors.
So, what’s the point of this?
Well, it’s that we’re deep in the cult of optimsation. The common consensus success is defined by how much you can squeeze out of what you’ve got rather than grow to what you can become. Where standards are deemed as optional when offered the opportunity to make a teeny bit more money by lowering them.
And it’s this bullshit viewpoint that is at the root of so much bad in brands and business..
Of course, you have to manage costs.
Of course, business is hard and challenging.
And of course, you want to be open to new possibilities and opportunities.
But doing it in isolation, delusion or arrogance of any possible implication is bordering on psychotic … just like the fact that despite all the data and research they invest in, less and less companies seem to have a real appreciation or understanding of who their actual customers are, what’s going on in their lives, what they actually need, want and expect from them and what business they’re actually in.
Oh, they will say they do.
And they’ll use numbers to explain or justify choices and decisions.
But too often, there’s an underbelly of arrogance that customers will blindly accept – or take – whatever they want them to have. That they know more than the people they serve, so are free to do whatever they want that serves their own best interests and goals.
So, they start using lower standards of ingredients.
Or they make pack sizes smaller, while keeping prices the same.
Or they remove features and claim they’re doing it for ‘environmental’ reasons.
Or they find underhand ways to increase usage, like widening the bottle nozzle pour.
Or they claim their product is ‘healthy’ simply by changing pack design and/or serving sizes.
Always looking to shortcut or shortchange … justified and underpinned by an attitude that in business, success is awarded to those who can stretch or squeeze their customers and suppliers, regardless of what it destroys or costs.
That’s where we are folks.
That’s where the school of business is increasingly taking us too.
Optimise, Optimise. Optimise.
Nothing … absolutely nothing matters more than the quarterly result. Except maybe the corporate ego, which is why we end up with research done by bots … innovation designed by spreadsheets … marketing created by systems, rules and AI and decisions evaluated by the ability to optimize not liberate.
Or as my friend told me, “optimise yourself to commodification”.
As I’ve said for far too long… the only thing that differentiates business from competitors are the values you hold.
And when you allow them to be sold for a quick, temporary gain, then you don’t become the same as everyone else, you become worse. Because contrary to popular opinion – people don’t choose you simply because of your price, habit or convenience … but because of something the world of business consultant loves to dismiss as an unnecessary cost …
Standards.
Just ask Srircha, or any of the countless household companies/brands who have turned-to consultants to find ‘clever’ ways to boost business, even if it ends up being at the cost of everyone, except the C-Suite and Wall Street.
Comments Off on How Business Consultants Think Money Can Mask The Taste Of Shit …
When I was growing up there was a newspaper cartoon called ‘Andy Capp’.
Andy was a cliche of the working-class – albeit he never actually works – and lives in Hartlepool in the North East of England.
Andy is married to his long suffering wife, Flo – and despite her working – they are almost on the verge of poverty because apart from Andy being unemployed, he lacks any motivation and thinks he can ‘beat the system’ because of his smarts.
By that, think early stage manosphere but replacing the sexualization of women with more pure sexism.
Anyway, the reason I say this is because I remember one cartoon where Flo told Andy that they were in debt to the tune of £1000.
To which Andy replied something like:
“I told you Flo, if you owe £100 you’re a failure. If you owe £1000 you’re an entrepreneur. If you owe a £10,000 you’re a businessman and if you owe £1,000,000 you’re a government. So what this means Flo, is we’re on the way up!”
I don’t know why I remember that cartoon among the millions of things I’ve seen over the years – but it has always left a lasting impression on me, which may explain why I’ve tended to only seek – or listen to – the advice I’ve got from people who either failed trying or succeeded by doing. Sounds obvious doesn’t it? Yet everyday I read/hear/watch people spouting unsolicited advice about subjects they have almost zero right or credibility to do – mistaking opinion as fact, interest as knowledge, knowledge as expertise or ego as cleverness.No wonder a famous football manager once told me to always learn from winners, not players.
Look, I get we all do this to some degree, but there’s a big difference between spouting an opinion or perspective and acting like you’re the indisputable, all-knowing, God-of-all.
The point is, regardless what Andy Capp says, we would not take his proclamations as fact.
We might accept it’s what he thinks is fact, but not what is true for all.
And yet, more and more, I’m witnessing business blindly follow the statements and proclamations of people who are the real-life, modern version of Andy Capp.
Kinda.
Because while they DO have jobs … and while they have even been successful in them … they are now telling people how to succeed in areas they have absolutely no right to talk about.
Not just because many have never worked in those areas, but they have a track record of making terrible choices when developing ideas outside of their core area of knowledge.
Enter Mark Zuckerberg.
I’m not doubting he’s smart.
I’m not doubting he loves technology.
I’m not even doubting his successes.
However, why are so many people listening [and investing] in his version of the future when not only is it designed around his ego and need for power and control – not to mention his desperation to be talked about in the same breath as Steve Jobs – this is a person who spent/blew/lost US$80 BILLION on the Metaverse??
EIGHTY. FUCKING. BILLION. DOLLARS.
I get innovation is expensive.
I appreciate all technology needs time to evolve.
I acknowledge that I have two of their Quest headsets.
But 80 billion?
To put it in context, the iPhone is said to have cost anywhere between $150 million and $3.2 billion. The creation of Google Maps is said to have cost around $1 billion to initially develop. Even the A380 aircraft – the biggest passenger aircraft in the history of aviation – ‘only’ cost around $25-35 billion to build.
And to add even more context …
80 billion dollars is the equivalent of being the 90th placed country in the World by GDP.
OK, so Zuck’s 80 billion was spent over a long period of time compared to how GFP figures are calculated, but still …
In fact, this suggests Zuck is someone who stubbornly believes he is always right.
Or at the very least, refuses to acknowledge where things aren’t working or where things need improving.
Sadly, we see this same sort of arrogance in our industry …
Where someone is successful in a particular disciple or with a particular agency or with a particular piece of work or with a particular promotion… and then suddenly, they believe they are more knowledgable, more successful and more authoritative than every other person in every other industry regardless of their actual level of experience and expertise.
And what is worse is they get away with it …
Because like Zuck, too many people hang onto their words like gospel, even though in many ways they’re speaking the same delusional clap-trap as Andy Capp, which suggests 2 uncomfortable truths.
1. The real problem with ego is not the person spouting the nonsense, but the people who choose to believe loud confidence over real experience.
2. Andy Capp may have been right because it does seem in business. ‘the more you lose, the more people believe you’re a success’.
Over the 20 years of writing this blog, I’ve written a bunch of posts about corporate stupidity.
But of all the things I’ve seen or been exposed to, one act stands above all: when they try to gaslight their customers into believing the removal of a product and/or service, is a demonstration of how much they value and care about their customers.
Yep … Microsoft are saying that to prove they’re always IMPROVING their Microsoft 365 service – a service millions pay a monthly subscription for – they are going to remove a feature that many people use.
That’s right, contrary to popular interpretation, they have decided improvement means deletion, which begs the question – whose ‘improvement’ are they talking about? Something tells me it’s their bank account.
OK, so they say that many – but not all – of the features are available in other products that you get as part of your subscription, but this is just bullshit.
They don’t tell people what those products are.
They don’t tell people how to use them in a way that will give them what they were using Microsoft Publisher for.
They don’t even fucking help you transfer all your existing Microsoft Publisher documents and files into something you can use – or turn to – later.
Nope … all they do is say, “we’re going to stop putting money into this product, you better save them as pdf’s or you’ll lose them and – while we’re at it – you better learn how to educate yourself and adapt your products so they fit with what we’ve decided you need, even though we never asked you and keep charging you an increased subscription fee.
Surely they know this is the opposite of good service?
Surely they realise this is not ‘improving’ their product?
Surely they understand customers can see through this bullshit?
In some ways I hope they don’t, because while it would mean they’re thick-as-shit, it would also mean they’re at least not trying to gaslight us.
But I am afraid it might be both …
Because Microsoft’s ability to fuck themselves – and their customers – thanks to terrible decisions is legendary.
Windows Phones.
Bing Search.
The killing of Office.
The shit that is Teams.
Skype.
Nokia.
Co-Pilot.
And basically 99% of the UI of 99% of their products.
This is a company that wants us to believe their vision of AI is one that is good for humanity and yet their behavior is more Dictatorship than democracy.
But as I pointed out at the top of this post, they’re not alone. We’re constantly seeing companies attempting to gaslight their customers with claims that by deleting a service, they’re offering a better service … even though they don’t offer an alternative and if they do, it’s either not as good or costs even more.
Which demonstrates 4 things:
Many companies care more about maxing money than doing good things that earn them money.
Many companies are gaslighting themselves more than customers because we sure-as-shit aren’t falling for this rubbish.
Most companies demonstrate the corporate culture is all about managing up rather than doing what is actually right for their customers.
Most companies hire consultancies because they validate their bad behaviour rather than hold them to standards and expectations of customers.
Which is why when a company goes on about how good their NPS score is, remember – it’s coming from a faceless data point, based on an average of other players in their category – rather than the voice of customers and how they evaluate the service in terms of anything and everything they experience and endure in their day.
More proof that there’s lies, damn lies and not just statistics but customer data.
While this post is coming out in May, I am writing it on Sunday, April 10th.
Over the past few weeks, we’ve witnessed President Trump start a totally unnecessary war that has resulted in incredible loss [in terms of human life and economic hardship], the destruction of international relationships, and threats to undertake acts of unspeakable and illegal evil [wiping out a civilization] all so he can satisfy his delusion of being a leader who can ‘get things done’ and – bizarrely – be about peace.
And if all that wasn’t mad enough, we got to witness the sycophantic behaviour of his followers who suggest that rather than the World being on the brink of WW3, Trump was playing a game of chess us common mortals can’t understand, let alone play.
If they genuinely believe that, then maybe that’s even scarier than if they were simply too frightened to speak up because of fear of his reprisals … but maybe the real reason why so few challenged his actions is because they think that’s what loyalty means.
That regardless what Trump says or does, you agree with him, by nature of the fact he said it or did it.
But the thing is, that’s not loyalty, that’s surrender.
The dismissal of own opinion and/or consideration in favor of the whims, will and wants of another.
That’s cult shit … which is probably reinforced by the maxim ‘Democrats want to be right, but Republican’s want to win’.
And whether I like it or not, Republican’s – at least in America – are winning, so the attitude among them is probably, if we question it, we could lose it all.
Hence Trump gets away with everything … helped by his endless ability to reframe whatever he says or does as an act of genius and intelligence.
Which reminds me of something my Dad always told me:
“If someone needs to tell everyone how intelligent they are, they’re not”.
As the title of this post states: we should always look both ways.
Because nothing shows loyalty than disagreeing with someone you respect, when their decisions suggest they’ve lost objectivity at a moment where it’s key they keep it – as the first scene in this clip from the true story, The Insider, perfectly demonstrates. [If you’ve not seen it, watch the whole movie. It isn’t just good, it’s important]
Comments Off on Why The Best Way To Prove Loyalty Is Looking Both Ways …
But neither of those things are as incredible as this …
You see, on Sunday, it will be 20 years since I started this blog.
TWENTY BLOODY YEARS!
That’s before the iPhone.
And Android.
And Facebook.
And the Kindle.
And the financial crisis.
And before Pluto lost its planet creds.
AND BEFORE WI-FI WAS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE … so a very long time ago.
I still remember why I started it …
It wasn’t for any attempt for notoriety or popularity, it was more to do with survival.
You see I’d got a job that – frankly – I was woefully under-qualified for, and because it demanded so much of my time and energy to make sure I didn’t completely fuck it up, I needed an outlet for all the ideas and thoughts that were going around my head that I just didn’t feel were right for what I needed to do at that time.
Not because I was sure I was going to use them later … more because I needed to feel I was still connected to the stuff I loved while also believing that if I didn’t find a way to get them out of my head, they’d maybe be no more space left for anything new to enter my head.
And so this blog was born.
Reading through the first few posts not only reveals the times we were living in, but also the headspace I was in.
Trying to balance making sense of stuff happening around me while also needing an outlet for stuff I was feeling or thinking … which, in many ways, set the tone for how this blog has been for over 2 decades.
Which George recently described as, “the blog version of TK Maxx”.
He’s not wrong … and in some ways, I really like that.
Sure, among the almost 5000 posts I’ve written, there’s a lot of [to keep the TK Maxx analogy going] cheap and nasty shit in there … but there’s also a few ‘designer label’ gems hidden amongst it all.
At least for me.
Stuff that made me think, challenge or question stuff in ways that I had not imagined or considered before.
Stuff that ended up impacting how I did things and how I still do things.
Stuff that forced me to articulate what I believe, not just what I feel.
Maybe those posts meant nothing to anyone but me. Hell, maybe no one even read them. But while every post I’ve written reflects something about who I was – or am – those ‘self-defined gems’ have a special place in my heart because they represent a moment where I felt I was growing and learning.
It’s why I always enjoyed the comment section, because for all the overwhelming piss-taking I received, the vast majority always ‘encouraged’ me to look deeper, wider or longer at issues I’d written about. And I loved that. I loved how the people who commented always kept me on my toes … which is why one of the unexpected pleasures of writing this blog for so long has been seeing how my opinion on certain subjects has changed or evolved over the years. It’s served as a great reminder about the importance of always exposing yourself to others perspectives, opinions, experiences and standards, even if the goal of it is simply to be really sure about what you think or believe.
In many ways, that’s the biggest surprise of 20 years writing this blog.
I never expected anyone to comment on anything I wrote, because I started it just for me.
A private place to express my thoughts and idiocy.
But then Andy discovered it and he sent an email to everyone at Cynic and some of our clients announcing it and then the mayhem started.
At that point, blogging had become a big thing. A good thing. A community of people who wanted to help and contribute to what others were doing. A lot of this was down to the great Russell Davies and his iconic blog … a place that not only brought people from all over the world together, but inspired others to start writing their own as well.
It was a place that not only exposed me to a lot of brilliant people I’d never have known about without his blog – people like Gareth Kay, Paul Colman, Northern Planner, Rob Mortimer, Marcus, John Dodds, Lauren, Age to name but a few – it also brought people to my blog who helped add to the texture, lessons and perspectives I was writing about.
I will forever be grateful to Russell for that … especially as most of the people he inadvertently introduced me to, not only still exist in my life but I have met them all IN THE FLESH.
Alas the blogging community, like most things in life, has moved on with maybe only Martin and I still churning stuff out via that platform. [Well, he curates, I churn] And while technologies advances allows strategists to be even more connected in even more ways, the energy of the community is not the same as it was back in the early days of blogging.
Now it feels more aggressive.
More sharp elbows and self publicizing.
Wanting the spotlight on them rather than the work they do.
But then, the industry seems to value those who talk about the work more than those who actually make it … which kind-of highlights why the industry is in the state it finds itself in but refuses to acknowledge.
Emperor’s New Clothes anyone?!
Screenshot
That this blog is 20 years old blows my mind. I never thought it would last that long, mainly because I never gave much thought about how long I’d be writing the thing. It’s not always been fun – when I was receiving a lot of anonymous hate that resulted in me deciding to stop allowing comments was definitely a low point – but all in all, the whole experience has been pretty glorious.
In many ways, this is one of the longest committed relationships I’ve ever had.
And one of the most successful, hahaha.
The fact there are some people who have been reading it for almost as long as I have been writing it, is madness.
Have they no taste?
Have they got nothing better to do?
Or maybe they’re stuck in prison and this is part of their ‘sentence’.
The good news for them is there’s no way this will still be a ‘going concern’ in another 20 years … at least not in terms of how regular I’ve been writing posts for the past 2 decades. Not because I am running out of things to say [albeit Andy said I have only ever written 3 posts and just keep re-writing them in different ways] but because I’ll be – hopefully – doing other things with my life.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ll always be grateful to advertising … it has given me a life I never could have dared to imagine … but I am increasingly spending more and more of my time working and collaborating with artists and I feel that’s where my future may be. Not because I don’t love what I do, but because I find their definition and expression of creativity even more interesting, challenging, open, provocative and progressive than where our industry is choosing to head.
But that’s not going to happen yet. Hell, it may not happen at all – I could get fired by all the artists tomorrow for all I know – which is why for the time being, I’ll keep happily juggling my two ‘lives’ while churning out daily blog posts at the same time.
Sorry, hahaha.
That said, the point of continuing this blog is different to what you may think and why I originally started it.
Because while it has helped me grow, learn, make new friends and even help build my professional reputation [which is hilarious when you read some of the stuff I’ve churned out, like this!] … it delivers something that is even more important to me.
Connection to my family.
I know … I know … that sounds weird-as-fuck, but what I mean is this:
A few years ago, Jill said that while she rarely ever reads my blog, when she does – she can hear my voice because of the way I write.
Put simply, how I write is how I talk … so when she reads my posts, it feels like I’m with her.
And she liked that.
Add to this that I’ve shared deeply personal and important moments in my life – from getting engaged to getting married, to Mum dying, to becoming a Dad, to getting Rosie – and Bonnie – to saying a tearful goodbye to Rosie, to moving from Singapore to HK to China to America to London to New Zealand [so far] … which means moving from cynic/WPP to Sunshine to Wieden+Kennedy to Deutsch to R/GA to Colenso [not to mention all the other highs and lows that have impacted or been introduced to my life over this period, be it death, covid, friends, family, health, books, chaos, and/or multitudes of weird, wild, crazy shit] … and this blog is no longer just a place where I rant rubbish, it’s a place my family can have me close even when I’m no longer here.
That means a lot to me.
Not because I want them to need me, but because I like knowing they can access me should they ever need me.
Or if Otis ever wants to introduce me to whoever becomes important in his life.
It’s why I’m going to keep writing it and why I’m going to move it to a free domain again, to make sure it always stay up … because what originally was a place just for me, has become a place that offers connection to the most important people to me.
And with that, I want to say a big thank you to everyone who has ever visited or commented.
Whether you meant it or not, you’ve given me far more than I ever imagined or hoped for.
Thank you. Love you. Grateful for you.
Comments Off on In Blog Years, We Are Officially 10487492367 Years Old On Sunday.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Business, Comment, Consultants, Corporate Evil, Corporate Gaslighting, Culture, Data, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Marketing Science, Money, Reputation, Research, Respect, Srircha
3 years ago, I wrote about the amazing story of Sriracha sauce.
How it is a testimony to belief, standards and stubbornness.
If you didn’t read it, you should – especially as the brand, right now, is suffering badly.
Now you may think this is where I say I was wrong …
That I mistook a moment of success for a story of sustainable excellence.
But you’d be wrong … because while the brand is suffering, it’s more to do with values versus ingredients.
You see at some point, the founder – David Tran – asked his son to take a bigger role in the company operations.
While William – and his sister, Tassie – grew up with the company their father founded, William had worked at a management consultancy and as such, thought he could modernize the approach that his father had built his business on.
Was this by investing in better machinery? No.
Was this by buying some of the suppliers they relied upon? No.
Was this by producing new products founded on Sriracha principles? No.
It was by trying to re-negotiate the contracts of their long-term partners and by replacing the ingredients used with cheaper alternatives.
That’s right … rather than make choices that could add to the potential of the business, he chose to exploit what the business already did.
Or said another way, he wanted to squeeze every possible penny of profit he could out of every possible inch of the business.
And the result of this?
Well, their long-term suppliers walked away.
Their product quality fell away.
And their customers walked all the way to their competitors.
So, what’s the point of this?
Well, it’s that we’re deep in the cult of optimsation. The common consensus success is defined by how much you can squeeze out of what you’ve got rather than grow to what you can become. Where standards are deemed as optional when offered the opportunity to make a teeny bit more money by lowering them.
And it’s this bullshit viewpoint that is at the root of so much bad in brands and business..
Of course, you have to manage costs.
Of course, business is hard and challenging.
And of course, you want to be open to new possibilities and opportunities.
But doing it in isolation, delusion or arrogance of any possible implication is bordering on psychotic … just like the fact that despite all the data and research they invest in, less and less companies seem to have a real appreciation or understanding of who their actual customers are, what’s going on in their lives, what they actually need, want and expect from them and what business they’re actually in.
Oh, they will say they do.
And they’ll use numbers to explain or justify choices and decisions.
But too often, there’s an underbelly of arrogance that customers will blindly accept – or take – whatever they want them to have. That they know more than the people they serve, so are free to do whatever they want that serves their own best interests and goals.
So, they start using lower standards of ingredients.
Or they make pack sizes smaller, while keeping prices the same.
Or they remove features and claim they’re doing it for ‘environmental’ reasons.
Or they find underhand ways to increase usage, like widening the bottle nozzle pour.
Or they claim their product is ‘healthy’ simply by changing pack design and/or serving sizes.
Always looking to shortcut or shortchange … justified and underpinned by an attitude that in business, success is awarded to those who can stretch or squeeze their customers and suppliers, regardless of what it destroys or costs.
That’s where we are folks.
That’s where the school of business is increasingly taking us too.
Optimise, Optimise. Optimise.
Nothing … absolutely nothing matters more than the quarterly result. Except maybe the corporate ego, which is why we end up with research done by bots … innovation designed by spreadsheets … marketing created by systems, rules and AI and decisions evaluated by the ability to optimize not liberate.
Or as my friend told me, “optimise yourself to commodification”.
As I’ve said for far too long… the only thing that differentiates business from competitors are the values you hold.
And when you allow them to be sold for a quick, temporary gain, then you don’t become the same as everyone else, you become worse. Because contrary to popular opinion – people don’t choose you simply because of your price, habit or convenience … but because of something the world of business consultant loves to dismiss as an unnecessary cost …
Standards.
Just ask Srircha, or any of the countless household companies/brands who have turned-to consultants to find ‘clever’ ways to boost business, even if it ends up being at the cost of everyone, except the C-Suite and Wall Street.