Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Consultants, Crap Campaigns In History, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, Empathy, Honesty, Imposter Syndrome, Innovation, Insight, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Money, Perspective, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Point Of View, Positioning, Pretentious Rubbish, Purpose, Relevance, Resonance, Social Media, Stubborness, Unfair Life
Of all the blog posts I’ve written over the years – and let’s face it. there’s been loads – there’s been a few I have constantly referred to.
One is Harrison Ford’s the value of value.
The other is Michael Keaton’s if you’re an employee, you’re still a business owner.
If you hadn’t worked it out by now, both are about ensuring you are not just paid for your creativity, but paid fairly.
You’d think that was obvious, but so many people seem to have forgotten that … including the creative industry, who have decided their value is better placed on the process of what they do rather than what they actually create and change.
Insanity.
But underpinning this is the creative person’s insecurity.
Somewhere in our psyche is the belief that if we charge money for what we create, we’re not being truly creative.
That we’ve sold out.
That we are imposters … capitalists in creative clothing.
Now there is an element of truth in all of this – because the moment you are working for someone else’s dollar, that someone has some influence over what you create. But that’s not unique to the creative industry. Nor does it mean you are selling out on your creative integrity by accepting payment for what you do.
Please note I said ‘payment for what you do’.
That does not mean we should be ignoring the needs, ambitions and goals that our clients want us to help them achieve, but it is acknowledging we should also be paid well for the creativity, craft, experience – and unique way of looking at the World – that goes into creating the work that allows us to achieve their needs in ways others can’t.
The reality is as much as many – especially in the creative industry – like to suggest money is the enemy of creativity, it’s not.
It can allow us to do amazing things.
Break new ground.
Explore new possibilities.
But more than that, while it may be differing amounts, we all need money.
And – to a certain extent – we all want money.
There is nothing wrong with that, just like there’s nothing wrong with being paid for what we do.
The real question should be how did we earn it and what did we do with it when we got it.
That’s how you can judge a persons integrity, not the fact you got paid for what you did and the talent you invested in it.
Sure, struggling may sound romantic in a Hollywood movie, but few of us want a lifetime of that and who can blame them!?
I still remember when Lars Ulrich of Metallica copped all manner of shit because he was the face for recording artists fighting against the role of Napster on the recording industry.
The insults he copped.
The distain he was thrown.
And all he was doing was trying to protect the value of his – and millions of other bands – creativity.
Why was that wrong?
Was it because, at that stage, he was already wealthy?
Is there some sort of rule to say that there is only so much you’re allowed to make before creative people need to shut up and be grateful for what they’ve got?
And what is that amount? No doubt, somewhere between ‘enough to live but not more than the rest of us’.
However somewhere along the line, society has decided to reposition creatively minded people as idealists … naive or even weak. Ignoring reality so they can wank-off on some self indulgent project that only interests them.
Which is total bollocks.
Apart from the fact I’ve never met a creative who isn’t insanely focused on the challenge they’ve been given – even if they have a very different opinion on how to get there to the client or the rest of the agency – the fact is we’ve now surrounded them with 10,000 different types of ‘strategist’, with 10,000 different opinions and agendas … which forces the conversations to be more about the importance of a discipline than the actual potential of the work.
And don’t get me even started on the fact a lot of these new forms of strategy are either [1] not really new or [2] not doing actual strategy, but executional management!
However all that aside, the reality is in all this, creative people have to take a responsibility for the situation they find themselves in.
Or, potentially even more specifically, the people who are training and developing them.
Because they are complicit in maintaining the belief your creative value and integrity is somehow linked to not being ‘diluted’ by payment. Which, when you think of it, is utterly ridiculous given value is created by what others will pay for it.
Schools … universities … agencies … everyone has an obligation to change this.
Not just for the future of their students or employees, but also for their own value.
Appreciating the economic value of what you create and what that creates is not dirty … it is the opposite of that.
It’s purity.
It means you have power in the conversation.
A right to fight for what you believe rather than what is convenient.
Creativity comes in many forms but right now, the form of ‘engineering’ is winning.
Where it’s less about what could be created and more about how you create something that has already been defined. Worse, something that has already been done.
So if you’re in the creative industry or thinking about it or know someone already in it.
Or, alternately, if you’re a teacher involved in the arts – or any subject for that matter – or careers advisor or a parent of someone who is in, or wanting to be in, the creative industry … then please read this article by Alec Dudson [the founder of Intern] because in it, he explains why ‘the economic value of creativity’ skill still remains largely absent from creative education … the impacts of that omission and, most usefully, how you can change it.
Creativity can change outcomes, possibilities and culture.
It has played a pivotal role in every great brand, product, idea and invention.
But not as insane as the people capable of creating it, also being complicit in it.
Know your worth. Charge your worth. Build your worth.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Audio Visual, Authenticity, Brand, Brand Suicide, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Content, Context, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, Empathy, Fake Attitude, Focus Groups, Honesty, Imagination, Innovation, Insight, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Martin Weigel, Planners, Planning, Point Of View, Positioning, Relevance, Resonance, WeigelCampbell, Wieden+Kennedy
This is a topic that I’ve been bothered by for a very long time.
I touched on it last week in the post about my recent webinar for WARC.
It also formed part of the presentation I did with the amazing Martin Weigel at Cannes in 2019 … also for WARC.
Frankly, I’m seeing far too much work that is literal.
Literal in the problem.
Literal in the strategy.
Literal in the execution.
It’s like all the work is repackaging the client brief and just adding some fancy words, a bit of a gloss and that’s it.
No real understanding of the culture around the category.
No real distinctive expression of the brand behind the work.
No real lateral leaps in the creativity to make people give a shit.
It’s dot-to-dot communication based on lowest common denominator logic … and while I get it will pass research processes and client stakeholders without much pushback … what’s it actually doing for anyone?
Few will remember it.
Even fewer will respond to it.
And no one feels good at the end of it.
Don’t get me wrong, we have to make work that makes a difference for our clients.
I get that.
But that means finding out the real problem we need to solve rather than the solution we want to sell. Means finding out what how the subculture really uses the category in their life versus how the client would like them to use it. Means allowing the creatives to solve the problem we’ve identified rather than dictating the answer. Means being resonant, not relevant. Means having a point of view. Means dreaming of what it could be rather than what it already is. And – most of all – means letting people feel rather than just be told.
It’s why you remember Dancing Pony over that Vodafone spot.
Because while I’m sure both overcame all manner of research obstacles and client stakeholders requirements, there is one thing one campaign remembered, and it’s what Martin once said:
“You can be as relevant as hell and still be boring as fuck”.
Filed under: Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Audio Visual, Authenticity, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creativity, Culture, Diversity, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Honesty, Imagination, Insight, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Packaging, Pepsi, Perspective, Positioning, Premium
One of the things I have always found fascinating is hearing how agencies explain their work.
It’s always so brilliantly detailed.
So articulate and precise.
So different to how any of the work I’ve been a part of came about.
In my personal experience, the process to the creative work has looked like this …
That’s right. A bloody mess.
Chaos rather than clarity.
Back and forth rather than a clear line.
Exploration and rabbit holes rather a smooth and efficient act of precision.
Got to be honest, I prefer it that way.
The idea of everything being so pure that you know the answer before you get to the answer scares the hell out of me.
Maybe that’s why I like giving creatives the best problem rather than a good solution.
Let them work out a way to solve it rather than expect them to just execute my answers.
The reason I say all this is because I recently saw this colour chart …
Putting aside that some of the brand/colour associations they’ve suggested make no fucking sense at all [ie: Nike = neutral/calm balance] it is interesting and frightening how much brands align with a colour stereotype.
Or should I say, a suggested colour stereotype.
OK … I’m being a dick, I know there is a lot of research in this field, but that doesn’t mean that just because your brand logo is in a character defined colour, you automatically convey that character.
But of course, this is what a branding company would say in their pitch …
“We chose orange as orange is a colour that conveys friendliness and we believe this makes you even more accessible”
But the reality is colour theory is the driving force behind logo colour recommendations, I would say it’s because of 2 reasons:
1. It’s how the brand wants to be perceived. [Ego]
2. It’s to hide how the brand is really perceived. [Fear]
Am I being a prick?
Probably. But as they say in the movie Dangerous Liaisons … people don’t answer questions with the truth, they answer questions in ways that protect their truth.
This is why I’ve always talked about ‘dirty little secrets’ … because often insights end up being about ‘convenient explanations’ of actions/behaviours/beliefs whereas the real driving force is something more personal. More conflicting. More interesting.
It’s why I find it far more interesting BP are in the green colour – nature, health and growth – than Animal Planet.
It’s also why I find BP far more differentiated than the friendly, orange colour of Gulf Petroleum.
Because while colour choice for logo design is important, anyone who tries to claim it defines what the brand is and/or how it is perceived in culture is either a fucking bubble-dwelling idiot, a ‘category convention’ sheep or someone who believes the Pepsi logo design strategy is up there with Leonardo Da Vinci.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Audio Visual, Authenticity, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Content, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Honesty, Insight, Management, Marketing, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Point Of View, Presenting, Relevance, Resonance, Stubborness
For reasons I am unsure of, I have been asked to do a lot of presentations over the last few weeks.
From the board of directors of the World’s most notorious video game company to Silicon Valley VC’s to the social platform Trump is petrified of and a whole host in-between … I’ve been asked for my POV on all manner of things.
The role of technology in sexual education.
How technology can evolve how we tell stories.
Why the best way to be wanted is to be banned.
How experience design is increasingly built on efficiency not emotion.
How to create the environment where the best creative is allowed to be born.
It’s been so much fun …
Not just because it made me think about things or that I got to meet a bunch of amazing people, but because I could do the presentation entirely as I felt I wanted to.
It’s not that I have felt I couldn’t do what I believe was right, but over the last few years, there’s been a few people who have tried to convey a ‘this is how you should say things’ attitude.
Now don’t get me wrong, it takes an army to make an argument and you should always be open to other people’s thoughts and suggestions … but if you’re made responsible for giving the presentation, then you should get the final call on how you express it.
Having people more obsessed with how you’re saying things rather than what is being said is pretty depressing, but not as depressing when you realise colleagues can be more of an obstacle to great work than your clients.
When that starts happening, you start questioning things.
Often yourself.
Are you good enough?
Are you worthy enough?
And then, before you know it, you’re chipped into complicity by the constant stream of criticism … leaving you with no confidence, no self-belief and not much hope for where you’re heading.
I wrote about this a short while ago which is why I want to just reiterate, when you do the presentation you want, the feeling is infectious.
Not just to you, but to who the audience is.
Here’s some examples of the pages I’ve presented in the last few weeks …
And here’s the thing, they all went down very well.
Sure, some of them made the audience gulp.
But they also loved it because they knew I was saying was to try and help them win better rather than just kick them in the head.
And that’s the key.
Show you really give a shit about them.
However, while some seem to think you do this by pandering to the audience, I believe it is by giving them utter transparency and honesty.
Let’s face it, if you’re willing to do that to a client at a formal presentation – albeit doing it in a way where they understand why you’re doing it – then most of the time they’re going to respect you, even if they don’t agree with you.
I’ve had so many clients come to me/us who initially didn’t.
Because as my old, brilliant head of NIKE marketing said to me once,
“Middle management want to be told they’re right. But senior management want to know how to be better”.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, America, Comment, Emotion, Empathy, Family, Fatherhood, Friendship, Imagination, London, Love, Otis
When we lived in LA, Otis met a little girl called Elodie.
Quickly they became inseparable.
While I didn’t write too much about them – though I did here – anyone who knew us in LA will know how deep their connection was.
To help you understand, here’s some evidence.
It was so beautiful. They protected each other, looked out for each other and – as much as a 3 year old can – loved each other.
In all honesty, the hardest thing for me moving from America was breaking the friendship Otis and Elodie had, so I was utterly thrilled when she and her Mum came to visit us in London in 2018.
While there was a hint of nervousness when they first saw each other, within minutes they were back to their old selves.
Now I don’t mind admitting that what has helped is Elodie’s Mum and Otis’ are best mates – so they stay in touch even if they didn’t want to. But what’s wonderful is it’s not ‘just staying in touch’ … it’s two people who share something special.
The same energy.
The same compassion.
The same – albeit shortly lived – history.
Which leads to the reason for this post.
A couple of weeks ago, Otis was playing Roblox when Elodie’s Mum facetimed Jill.
Now you have to understand Roblox is Otis’ god.
HE LOVES IT.
When he’s in the Roblox world, we basically have lost him to it.
But then he heard Elodie’s voice and immediately put his iPad down, ran to his Mum’s phone and started nattering away.
Talking about what they were doing.
How old they were.
Playing daft games that made them giggle.
Then they showed each other their cats.
Then their feet.
Then Otis showed Elodie around his new house.
His new bedroom.
And Elodie showed him her garden.
And it went on and on and on for ages.
Seeing and hearing 2 kids who have been in different countries for over 2 years – which is half their life – reconnect with the force as if they had never been away was absolutely beautiful.
Life for many people is a bit shit right now.
There’s not much good news out there … especially with insane politicians trying to make it worse for all of us.
So I’m just going to leave you with a photo.
A photo of Otis talking to his beloved Elodie and hopefully that smile on his face … and the back story I’ve just written about … will remind you it’s not all doom and gloom out there.
And while it can’t change your own challenges and situations, it will hopefully put a smile on your face.
Like it did for me.
Have a good weekend.