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


When A Joke Is A Truth In Disguise …

Back in Jan 2021, I wrote a post about the ridiculousness of ‘unlimited leave’ policies.

By that, I mean companies pretending they mean it when we all know that they would lose their shit if someone said they wanted 4 weeks off, let alone 4 months!

Which is why I found this post I saw on Twitter/X recently, so funny.

Because while it’s taking the piss, it’s also never been so serious in its life:

Comments Off on When A Joke Is A Truth In Disguise …


Welcome To The Absolute Idiot Age …

I appreciate the commercial benefits of being associated with technology – especially technology that’s at the forefront of change – but I’m getting fed up of companies shoving the letters A and I ahead of everything they do in a desperate attempt to look cutting edge.

Do they realise they’re not fooling anyone – except, maybe themselves?

Have they forgotten what happened to WeWork when they persisted in their claims to be a tech company when even Stevie Wonder could see they were nothing more than an office space rental firm.

But it’s happening everywhere with everyone claiming everything they do is now ‘AI shaped/influenced/enabled.

AI project management systems
AI consultancy services.
AI home theatre systems.
AI photocopiers.
AI toilets.
AI. Ai. AI.

And even if I accept all these things now have some element of AI in their process and product, how come so much of them operate exactly as they did before?

All that advanced tech and everything still operates the same way as it always has.

That can’t be very good can it?

Surely that means the people behind it are either idiots, attempting to gaslight their customers or they have used AI to remove employees roles so they can squeeze out the last remnants of profit before they scraper and enjoy sitting on their millions.

While I’m at it …

Why is it the worst offenders of this sort of behavior tend to be the most conservative and traditional companies and industries?

[You can tell who they are as they tend to use images like the one at the top of this post because they think that proves they’re all about the ‘future’, haha]

On one hand I appreciate their desire to modernize, but the problem is – if the only thing that changes is the speed they can do things or the price they can do them for … then arguably, they’re proving they haven’t got the faintest idea what AI could do for them if they’re limiting its use to efficiency and productivity.

So to all brands jumping on the AI bandwagon …

Using Claude to speed up your manufacturing process doesn’t mean you’re an AI company.
Using ChatGPT to write articles about your products does not mean you make AI tech.
And positioning any form of automation as AI does not mean you’re a cutting-edge tech company.

Am I exaggerating?

Yes. But not nearly as much as you may imagine …

Every day I see ads and articles from companies claiming AI is at the centre of all they do.

Products.
Service.
Systems.
Manufacturing.
Marketing.

You name it, someone is saying it … which is why the best way to tell ‘who is trying’ versus ‘who is claiming’ is to embrace the same evaluation criteria as used to judge strategy, which is:

Can customers, employees and competitors notice a fundamental difference between how things were and how things now operate and behave?

If they can’t, it’s hype or self-serving commerciality. You’re welcome.

Comments Off on Welcome To The Absolute Idiot Age …


Stop Treating Humans As Data Points …

Before I start, I want to acknowledge David, Dave and Andy because today is the 25th anniversary of 9/11.

And while I know that terrible, terrible day resides deeply in their everyday … it’s a significant anniversary and so the memories, pain and loss may feel even deeper to them today.

So know I’m thinking of you.
It was special seeing all of you.
I send big hugs to each of you.

Love you.

OK, let’s get on with the rant …

Years ago, I – and, ironically, David, Dave and Andy – worked for the founder of a very successful company who was obsessed with how his customers and lowest level employees felt, experienced and interacted with the brand.

He had seen far too many organisations manage senior leadership through pandering, toxic positivity and managing-up and was determined that was not going to happen to his company.

His view was the only way to keep improving was to know what’s going on … and the only way to know what’s going on is to ensure the people with the authority to change stuff, saw life from the perspective of the coalface.

Not occasionally.
Not via carefully orchestrated engagement.
But shoulder-to-shoulder and eye-to-eye with their people and customers.

It’s why his C-Suite were mandated to always travel economy, rather than business. Not because he didn’t care about the comfort of his most senior executives, but because he cared even more about the experience of his people abd customers as well as the standards and behaviour of his brand.

It’s part of the reason he saw the generous salaries he – and his C-Suite – were paid was about responsibility.

Not to the shareholders, but to their customers and employees.

Put simply, he believed the job of the most senoir management was to actively protect the standards, values and aspiration of the brand for the customers they serve and the people they employee.

His premise for it was simple. If you look after them, they’ll look after the shareholders.

It’s why he didn’t tolerate convenient answers.
It’s why he utterly loathed generalistic perspectives.
It’s why he vehemently rallied against outsourcing blame or responsibility.
And it’s why he demanded people spent time in the coalface, rather than looking down at it.

Over the years, I’ve had a few clients who behaved that way – and, unsuprisingly, they tended to command the greatest love and loyalty from customers and employees alike.

But these days it seems it is becoming less and less common, prefering – instead – to use data points to inform than actual experience.

And while it can be argued there are more ways to measure more things than there has ever been before, there’s 3 fundamental flaws with this approach:

1. It relies on people knowing what they’re measuring.
2. It relies on people knowing why they’re measuring it.
3. It relies on people knowing what the findings are saying and – more importantly – aren’t.

And while you may think this is obvious – which it is or should be – the reality is, it happens less than you think.

There are many reasons for this – from politics to convenience to different interpretations of industry language and definitions – but blindly accepting data-points without the counterbalance of real and raw human knowledge and experience means what you think is clarity ends up being commercial confusion.

A perfect example is from Sir Alex Ferguson, the legendary manager of Manchester United.

Back in 2001, Sir Alex Ferguson decided it was time for the defender, Jaap Stam, to leave Manchester United..

Stam was at his professional peak and considered one of the best defenders in the world, but Ferguson decided it was time for him to go.

The decision was made after Ferguson took look at Stam’s performance data.

On close inspection, Ferguson saw the then 29 year old defender was tackling less and less and concluded he was past his prime and now was the time to move him on. He was subsequently sold to Lazio.

And to be fair, the data was correct, Stam was tackling less … however it was not because he was past his prime, it was because he had got better at defending.

Put simply, Stam’s positioning had got so good he did not need to tackle so much … he was dealing with the opposition attackers before it got to a point where he needed to tackle them as a last-resort kind-of measure.

So while the data was right, it lacked context and Sir Alex Ferguson didn’t think to question it or challenge it.

In essence, he momentarily forgot what the objective of the defender is, because it’s not about tackling, it’s about protecting the goal … but the data had obstructed his view and resulted in him taking the information at face-value, resulting in him viewing the declining amount of tackles as weakness, when it was actually a symbol of strength and progress.

This is not to say data is not important. Of course it is. It helps provide light on issues and subjects that may otherwise pass unseen until far too late. But the problem is it temps us – and is positioned to us as – speaking directly to our needs.

Where the claim is it provides all the information we need to make simple binary choices or decisions.

Forget context.
Forget questioning.
Forget understanding.
And definitely forget anything that challenges or states otherwise.
Simply make your choice and the most effective and efficient outcome is yours.

That’s where we are folks … a cross between Stockholm Syndrome and group Gas Lighting … but at least it helps explains why there’s such reluctance for companies to actually engage and interact with real people.

The people who work for them.
The people who buy from them.
The people who give a shit about who they are and what they do.

The problem with the industry – every industry – is we are subservient to data. We treat it like the second-coming of Christ. We have started to believe it can bestow us with miracles, when half the time we don’t even know where it came from, let alone what it’s actually saying.

Again, I am not anti-data, but I am anti-data blinkeredness.

It’s why I wonder how many corporate leaders spend any meaningful time on the streets of the customers and/or the shop-floors of their employees … rather than spending hours sitting around a boardroom table commenting on sales data and focus group reports that they’ve not actually read, don’t really understood and never question how they were compiled or what they were trying to uncover.

At a time where every conversations around business seems to be about maximising optimisation and performance data points, maybe the most valuable form of AI any C-Suite can engage in, is the promotion and consideration of real Audience Interaction.

______________________________________________________________________________________

PS: I am going to be in the US for most of next week, so enjoy the weekend knowing you won’t have to read my clap-trap until probably Thursday. You’re welcome.

Comments Off on Stop Treating Humans As Data Points …


Why Do You Think They Call It Dumb?

I’m back. I know, how terrible.

Which is why I have some good news for you, because I’m going to be away again in a few weeks. So you only have to endure the pain a little longer before you get ANOTHER reprieve. I know, I’m a Saint.

That said, I had a wonderful time, especially at State of Social in Perth.

Meg – the founder of the conference – has created a truly special event and like StratCon in Berlin, there’s a bunch of stuff other conference organizers could learn from them that would benefit audiences and the industry at large.

Anyway, I’ll be writing about that later, so shall we get the pain of me being back over as quickly as possible?

So as many of you know, I love tech.

Not just the practical stuff, but the ridiculous.

Robot dogs.
Robot rabbits.
Robot balls.
Robot guitars.
Hell, I even bought a, errrrrm, robot mother once.

My house is almost fully automated.
My car is filled with the sort of optional extras the engineers only come up with as a joke.
And don’t get me started on my history with smartphones.

And yet, despite my addiction to stupidity … I totally appreciate there are downsides to technology.

The scrolling,
The timewasting.
The interruption.
The distractions.

And that’s before we get to the blood-pressure inducing annoyance of hearing every fucking company try and claim they’re in the tech/AI space just because they use ChatGPT to write their Linkedin ‘thought leadership’ social landfill bollocks.

So, it’s no surprise we’ve started to see the backlash …

People fighting against companies outsourcing jobs to AI.
Society pushing back on the serving of AI slop.
Companies balking at the prices being charged for AI access.
Investment firms questioning the long-term viability of AI industries.
And then – at a much lower level – shoppers increasingly choosing dumb-tech over high-tech.

You know what I’m talking about …

Products that strip back their functionality to their bare essentials:

Cameras that only allow you to point and click.
Tablets that only allow you to read your books.
And phones that only allow you to make and receive calls and texts.

Will this result in bringing the tech giants down?

Probably not … but as I’ve written before, if the Tech Bros carry on their current path and hoodwink companies into outsourcing their entire operations to AI under the guise of increased profits and efficiency, who the hell will be around to buy the products they make or advertise?

But I’m going off on a tangent because when I was in NYC, I saw this …

Now, I don’t know about you, but a phone that gives you whatsapp, maps, uber ‘and more’ … is the opposite of a dumbphone.

Maybe it could be defined as the ‘night-out phone’.
Or – at a push – the ‘bare essentials’ phone.
But it sure-as-shit isn’t a dumb-phone …

That is unless the term ‘dumb’ is being used to describe the people they want to buy it and then maybe they’re onto something. Except, one look at their website and you realise they really believe what they’re peddling … which suggests whether it’s the tech bros or the idiots, we’re doomed either way.

Have a great day. Hahahaha.

Comments Off on Why Do You Think They Call It Dumb?


There’s A Fine Line Between Maximum Efficiency And Minimum Effort …

Last week was a week of pissy posts, so I thought I’d write something a little less intense.

Recently I was in Nottingham and while on one of my walks, I passed this …

“What is it?” I hear you cry.

Well, it’s a notice about the busses.

Tied with a crappy piece of string to a branch of a nearby shrub because – I assume – the people who had to put it up thought it would take too much effort, cost or complexity to attach it to the actual bus stop.

You know, so passengers could maybe actually see it.

Now I appreciate Nottingham County Council is basically bankrupt so they can’t be spending money willy-nilly … but what the fuck is the point attaching a notice to a shrub that isn’t even next to the actual bus stop???

It all smacks of someone having to hit their KPI’s …

Where the focus is being able to say you did what was asked rather than did what was needed … even though you know what you did wasn’t in the spirit of the original request.

And while you could blame that on the clarity of the brief, it’s still an exercise in deliberate ignorance.

Or arrogance.

Or idiocy.

It reminds me of the toilets I wrote about in Singapore way back in 2006.

Another example of someone ‘executing’ rather than ‘accomplishing’ …

Also known as ‘modern business practice’ … where it increasingly feels like a job well done and well crafted is viewed as an unnecessary cost, when it can just be churned out without any consideration.

Or worse, when someone does that and then tries to hide their laziness behind ambiguous language or claims of cost efficiency.

Which is why I keep going back to the words a father of an old colleague of mine once said:

“If you haven’t got the time to do it right at the start, when will you have the time?”

When will companies realise that if they treat their customers like fools, they’ll value them accordingly?

The older I get, the more I believe the only thing we have are our standards … and while not everyone will appreciate them, you can be sure they will notice them when everyone else shows they don’t have any.

Comments Off on There’s A Fine Line Between Maximum Efficiency And Minimum Effort …