Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brands, Creative Development, Creativity, Differentiation, Distinction, ECommerce, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Point Of View, R/GA
When I worked at R/GA, they got very excited about D2C brands.
Part of this is because they got a lot of business from brands who wanted their help to design the infrastructure for their D2C ambitions. Part of it was because they loved to talk about transformation and saw this as a major shift in brand development. And part of it is because a lot of their work – especially with NIKE – revolved around this type of thinking.
[Though I did laugh when a couple of their senior people in NY tried to convince me ‘Fuel Band’ was more valuable and important to NIKE than ‘Just Do It’ … and hated the fact I refused to buy their logic]
Look, I really liked R/GA – specifically the first year I was there – but I always felt the whole D2C approach was flawed. Didn’t have to be, but the way people/brands/companies saw it, made it that way.
When I at Wieden, P&G asked our opinion on the Amazon dash button.
They were massively excited by it as they saw it as a way to drive sales while being able to massively cut their marketing costs.
For those who don’t know what the dash button was, it was a piece of tech – connected to a specific item – that allowed customers to order from Amazon at the press of a button.
So if you spotted you were running out of washing powder, you could press the dash and within a day or so, you would get a new box delivered.
All good in theory except the only real winner would be Amazon.
And we told them that. Because the moment you let your brand become a commodity, your value is destroyed as is all the work you’ve put in to get into that position.
But that didn’t stop every man and their dog seemingly bang on about the virtues of D2C.
Nor did that make companies who had previously talked about the importance of brand, jump on the bandwagon.
And while some went on to achieve great success with this strategy – albeit, having to spend millions on building the brand value of their D2C org – the vast majority crashed and burned after, at best, a small moment in the spotlight.
That’s not to say new ideas are wrong – far from it – it’s to say that too much of the industry, despite what they may claim, are obsessed with the quick wins and short-term gains.
Worse, the reason for this is often less commercial and more egotistical.
A desperate need to look like they’re ‘in the know’ to those around them. A desire to be part of the cultural clique rather than risk being left behind by those who are skeptical, cynical or closed-minded.
I get it … no one wants to look slow or old or out-of-date and everyone wants a shot to elevate themselves up in collapsed time.
But as much as new ideas require a leap of faith – and that leap often takes a degree of courage – when it also requires you to let go of all you know and believe, then it says more about what you want to be than who you are.
Now of course, we all have our egos and ambitions – and that’s natural – but when your strategy to get where you want to go is chasing trends rather than following your values, that’s when you can find yourself in a whole heap of trouble.
Because following the pack without objectivity, values or context doesn’t make you an entrepreneur – it makes you an ambulance chaser – and once you have that reputation, you end up doing to yourself what D2C did to many companies … and that’s a position no one who claims to be ‘an expert in brands and brand building’ should ever find themselves in.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Design, Differentiation, Innovation, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Packaging, Perspective, Positioning, Pride, Purpose, Reputation, Respect, Steve Jobs, Technology, Values
I’ve written a lot about the bullshit of brand purpose.
Or should I say the hijacking of purpose by marketing departments and agencies.
Far too often, we see companies where their ‘purpose’ has no day-to-day impact on the operations or decisions they make beyond pushing their marketing messages and promotions. For these orgs, purpose is positioned simply as ‘something we hope might change’ rather than actively doing stuff that actively pushes it.
As they say in the UK, “the truth of the pudding is in the eating”, and a lot of corporate brand purpose tastes like bullshit.
That doesn’t mean the concept of purpose is entirely wrong.
Oh no.
However the reality is true brand purpose is born rather than manufactured – especially by a marketing department – so for every Patagonia, there’s a Unilever … which is why I find the easiest way to see who is talking truth versus shite is simply by exploring how much inconvenience they’ll accept and embrace.
Recently I saw an interesting example of a brand who not just embraced inconvenience, but demanded it.
An example which I imagine caused all manner of friction and tension throughout the company.
And yet, when you think about who the company were and – more importantly – who they wanted to become, you see it as absolute commitment to their beliefs and ambitions.
Take a look at this …
Now I appreciate some would read that and only see the problems … the costs … the disruptions … the impact on productivity … the C-Suite ‘bullying’. But they’re probably the same people who think purpose is about ‘wrapping paper’ rather than beliefs and actions … which is why I kinda-love this.
I love how much they were pushing it and how they pushed it.
It was important to them.
Not for virtue signaling, not for corporate complicity – though I accept there’s a bit of that – but mainly because a company can’t talk about technology, creativity and the future while asking your very own colleagues to embrace the cheap, the convenient and the conformist.
Just to be clear, this is VERY different to companies who mandate processes.
That’s about control and adherence.
A desire to keep things as they are rather than what they could be.
And to me, that’s the difference between those who ‘talk’ purpose and those whose actions are a byproduct of it.
Every day in every way.
Because as the old trope goes, it’s only a principal if it costs you something and the reality is – like strategy – too many talk a good game but will flip the moment they think they could make/save a bit more cash.
Apple may have a lot of problems, but fundamentally, they mean what they say and show it in their actions – both in the spotlight, but also in the shadows … where very few people will ever see – as exemplified by Jobs famous ‘paint behind the fence‘ quote.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Audacious, Authenticity, Bands, Brands, Business, Comment, Confidence, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Imagination, Individuality, Innovation, Leadership, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Metallica, Music, Provocative, Relationships, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Talent
Recently I watched a documentary on a band.
A household name. Not just in America, but around the World.
It was pretty good … but the most interesting part of it was the interview with the manager.
Specifically how he described what he was there to do:
He said: “My job is to do one or two things that change your life. Not ‘good moves’ but change your life”.
And while they turned out to be arguably more focused on their own fortune than the artists they represent, it cannot be denied they achieved exactly what they said for the band in question … helping turn them into the biggest band in the world for a period of time. An accolade they have managed to forge into a long-lasting career that sees them continue to be at the top end of their industry.
Now of course, there’s a lot of things that go into achieving success like that.
Songs.
Talent.
Drive.
Concerts.
Fans.
Distribution.
Copyright ownership.
But a good manager has a huge influence and role to play in all of this … which got me thinking.
What if clients saw their agency partners as people whose role was to do the same as this manager?
To help them fundamentally change the trajectory of where their business is rather than continually communicating – and reinforcing – where they are.
Dramatic change, not incremental.
OK, there’s some clients who actually do that – and a lot more who think they are, but are doing the opposite – but the reality is for all the talk of ambition and change, so much of it what is done is about keeping things exactly where they are.
Part of this is because of the influence of ‘industry guru’s’ who have positioned themselves as business liberators when really they’re more insurance salesmen [made even more hilarious by the fact the vast majority have never created any actual creative work or built a brand of note] … and part of it is because of a narrative that’s been going around that suggests agencies care more about taking clients cash through excessive timelines and pricing.
As I’ve written before, this attitude is more bullshit than fact … shaped by a procurement process that doesn’t value quality of work – just the price of it – and a corporate attitude where the expectation is complicity not challenge.
Of course that doesn’t ignore the fact some agencies have also played their part in creating this situation by devaluing creativity, devaluing training and agreeing to whatever gets them the revenue – regardless of the consequences – which just reinforces what a mess we’re in.
It’s why I loved that managers quote so much …
The goal being to create the conditions to be ‘the exception’ by being exceptional..
Not ‘a little bit better than before.
Not ‘a little bit better than those around them’.
But to fundamentally change the context and rules of the game.
Champions, not just players.
Of course, it’s easier said than done … but I’ve had the pleasure of seeing it in action up-close-and-personal through Metallica’s management, which is why I know it can be done and I know you can increase the odds of it being able to be done.
Because in their case, what they’ve helped achieve is remarkable.
Put aside the fact they have worked with the band for almost 4 decades. Put aside they’re the most successful music management duo in music history. And think about how they’ve enabled 4 old men – who write what can best be described as ‘mass niche’ music – not just continue to live at the forefront of popular culture, but do it in a way where their creativity is deeply respected by all.
Hell, they’ve become the second most successful American group of all time.
OF. ALL. TIME.
But it’s even more than that … because they’ve also helped the band find new ways to push, explore and expand what they do with their creativity and how they can do it.
Incredible.
Of course, none of this would be possible without the band having the hunger and desire to keep pushing, but their relationship – and trust – of their managers is a key part of what enables it to be possible.
Which is why there’s a couple of things Peter Mensch – one half of their management team – said to me that has had as much impact as the quote that inspired this whole post.
1. “Our job is not to market the band, but to protect their truth”.
2. “We’re not paid to kiss their ass, we’re paid to tell them the truth”.
And maybe that’s a couple of the reasons why Metallica have been able to build a business and a brand [even though they would hate those terms] which is wildly more successful –culturally and commercially – than many brands who spend tens of millions trying to be.
Not just because music connects to people in ways brands rarely can, but because many brands don’t actually know who they are and don’t want to listen to anything that asks questions of them, they don’t want to acknowledge or accept.
So it’s little surprise an agency can change a brands life when brands so often choose to delude themselves with where they currently are … where their version of a relationship is based on how much you cost and how easy you are to deal with, than the quality of the advice and results you help them gain.
For all the systems and processes our industry has latched onto in a bid to prove our credibility and method behind our approaches … how many brands can we say have fundamentally ‘changed their life’.
One?
Ten?
One Hundred?
Certainly not as many as you would expect from the US$87 billion dollars spent on market research in 2023 delivered.
Which is why I leave this post with another music reference … another perspective that had a profound affect on me.
This time it’s from the band – albeit they were more artists than musicians – The KLF, who not only captured what I believe defines a great manager, a great agency and a great brand … but what also creates the chance for someone, anyone, to properly change their life.
“Don’t give them what they want, give them what they’ll never forget”
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.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Audacious, Brands, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Nike, Perspective, Provocative, Relevance, Resonance, Strategy
Take a look at this photo of Bjorn Borg and John McEnroe.
How good is it?
Two icons of tennis …
Hell, for people of a certain age, they’re still icons, despite this pic being taken in 1978.
But this isn’t about them, this is about McEnroe’s shirt.
McEnroe’s NIKE shirt.
Notice anything about it? Anything different at all?
Well let me put you out of your misery, because the answer is there’s absolutely nothing different about it whatsoever.
It’s the same logo as you see today.
It’s the same font as you see today.
It’s the same flawed genius athlete as you see today.
It is a demonstration of a brand who has always known who the fuck it is, what/who it stands for and what it believes.
A brand that made that logo ‘an asset’ through the decisions it makes and the athletes it associates with.
For over 50+ years.
No ‘relaunch’.
No ‘brand purpose’ statement.
No ‘one colour’ brand systems.
No ‘system 2’ decision making.
Hell, they’re even OK with making mistakes because they are focused on fighting, challenging, pushing and provoking athletes and sport rather than chasing popularity and convenience.
In fact, the greatest irony is the reason they’re currently in the shit is because certain people decided their 50+ years of pushing who they are, what/who they stand for and what they believe was now out of date. Irrelevant. Not ‘optimising or maximising’ their commercial value enough. So they turned their back on who they are to embrace what many modern marketing guru’s said they should be … ignoring the fact these people have never done – or achieved – anything close to what NIKE has and does.
Now it is very true there are certain things NIKE have been slow to embrace. Some are mindblowingly ridiculous and stupid. However, I would argue that is more because they shed so many people who loved and live for sport while replacing them with people who love and live for marketing processes and practices.
Because while there is – if done correctly – value in those things, it’s important to remember they never MAKE a brand, they – at best – help empower it. A bit.
That we’ve chosen to forget this to enable us to profit from an increasing number of companies who seek to disguise the fact they don’t know who they fuck they are, what/who they stand for and what they believe, highlights how much marketing has become an industry of platitudes, not provocation.
Which is why I will always remember what a friend of my Dad once told me.
He was a lawyer, but his words were very pertinent for marketing.
Especially a lot of what passes – or is celebrated – in marketing today.
He basically said: “Great companies don’t change who they are but always fight to change where they are”
Sadly, it feels too many have got things the wrong way around these days.