Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Brand, Brand Suicide, Cars, Context, Creativity, Culture, Design, Experience, Fashion, Ferrari, Italy, Luxury
I saw this billboard for Ferrari’s clothing and apparel lines … known as Ferrari Style.
And while the design of the billboard isn’t great …
[which is a bit weird for a company that has built part of its distinctiveness through design]
And while it’s a bit strange they are only showing their F1 cars …
[when their luxury status has been informed more by their day-to-day supercars]
At least it’s better than the Micro SD cards they produced years ago, which they sold under the guise of ‘really fast data transfer’.
Or the electric Luce they launched months ago.
And – to be fair – with their heritage, lifestyle and status, they do have a legitimate right to play in this area, but my question is who is going to buy it?
Will it be people who want EVERYONE to know they own a Ferrari?
Will it be people who want everyone to THINK they own a Ferrari?
Will it be people who simply want to LOOK part of the Ferrari lifestyle?
Full disclosure, I own one of their items … but while I really do like the design and the quality is superb, I was given it as a gift because there wouldn’t be a cat-in-hells-chance I’d own it if I had had to pay my own money for it.
I digress …
The point is, given Italy isn’t exactly short of highly respected, highly regarded, highly aspirational luxury fashion brands … who do you think is actually going to buy their products and, even more interestingly, why are they???
Now if only I had a comment section people could write their answers on?!
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Corporate Gaslighting, Creativity, Culture, Data, Emotion, Experience, Humanity, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Marketing Practice, Marketing Science, Technology, Toxic Positivity, Transformation
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.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apathy, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Cliches, Clients, Collaboration, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Conformity, Consultants, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Distinction, Diversity, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Egovertising, Emotion, Empathy, Entertainment, Experience, Fake Attitude, Focus Groups, Food For Thought, Fulfillment, Independence, Influencers, Integrity, Leadership, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Marketing Practice, Marketing Science, Mediocrity, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Point Of View, Popularity, Professionalism, Provocative, Purpose, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect, Strategy, Technology, Toxic Positivity, Work
I know, that’s quite the title isn’t it.
Some would even say it’s ‘clickbait’.
Well, while I readily admit it’s slightly exaggerated, hang in there …
So years ago, Jill rang me to tell me she’d discovered Otis – who was about 4 years old back then – had made a shopping list of things he wanted to order on Amazon through Alexa.
Loads of stuff.
Fortunately for us, this included a range of items even Amazon can’t source.
Stuff such as: Eyeballs … Polar Bears … “Poo Poos” … and countless other weird shit his mind decided would be fun to own.
Putting aside the fact this proved he was most definitely my son, hearing his little voice recite all the things that were on his ‘ownership bucket list’ was wonderful, which is why we have never deleted it.
Not just so we can forever relive his childhood curiosity, but because it will be brilliant to play it when he has his 21st birthday – hahaha.
I say this because I recently read another evil genius use – or should I say, abuse – of Alexa.
This.
Why the hell had I never thought of doing this before?
On the positive, it has shown how mature I have become over the years. On the negative, it has highlighted how I am a groupie for mischief because you can be sure-as-hell I will be finding ways to do this to people from here on in. No wonder the guys at Q-Prime called me ‘immune to maturity’.
And while you may shake your head and call me a ‘sad bastard’ for wanting to do this, think of it as an act of revenge against the tech-bro boys.
Because as much as Alexa may have many uses and benefits … it has also fucked humanity. Teaching us to expect instant gratification for whatever we want, whenever we want it.
No moment for pause.
No time for consideration.
No appreciation of nuance.
Where the only thing that matters – and you are judged on – is the speed of the response.
It’s probably why so many brands love influencers.
Not simply because of their audience.
Not simply because of their popularity.
But because they will say EXACTLY what they want … without challenge, opinion or rearticulation.
I don’t blame the influencer for this, because not only are they making bank out of it, why should they give a shit … for them, the relationship is purely transactional and what they’re selling is access, not authenticity.
But I tell you who should care …
Clients.
But in these days where the main topic of conversation seems to be about ‘shouting at scale’ – read: believing media is way more important than working with people who know what to say and how to say it – is it any surprise that despite spending over US$1 TRILLION dollars on advertising last year, the industry feels like one homogenous, barren contrived-as-fuck blob?
Or as a client of mine recently said, “we’re past the brand building age and now in the brand shrinking era”.
I get instant answers are convenient.
I appreciate having people push back on you can be a pain.
But we need to get back to normalizing the value of objectivity.
Because the point of it is not to frustrate, but to stop you shouting into an echo chamber and building something that people helps people become something.
__________________________________________________________________
Finally – as if it being Friday wasn’t good enough – I am away again for 11 days.
ELEVEN!!!
However it’s not all good news because if you’re in Perth, Western Australia … then Paris, France … then Beijing, China … I’m going to be in your hood so watch out.
Actually, it’s even worse for the people in Perth because I’m going to be shouting swearwords at the brilliant State Of Social conference.
That’s right, the wonderful, generous, kind idiots have invited me again … which means some people just never learn from their mistakes.
So have a good weekend/week. Unless you’re in Perth, Paris or Beijing.
See you around the 3rd Sept.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Conformity, Craft, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Egovertising, Experience
If you are going to read this post, please start by watching this clip …
I cannot tell you how much I love it.
Not because the speaker answers the question in a way that forces the entire audience to reconsider or re-evaluate their own perspective or judgement … but because I feel it shines a light on something we – as an industry – are increasingly failing to care about.
And that is, ‘do we like what we are creating?’
Don’t get me wrong, I know our job is to find a way to make audiences think or care about our clients in a way that offers them a commercial advantage … but too often it feels we’re ignoring the importance of whether ‘we like it’ in favour of whether ‘the focus groups’ and/or ‘research methodology’ does instead.
And while I fully expect many people will say, ‘who cares, the only people who matter are the customers’, you’d be wrong.
Not simply because it can feel you’re making work to please/appease the C-Suite more than the audience. Not simply because despite billions spent on market research [$150 billion in 2025], we still see high levels of underperformance when work is put out into ‘the real world’. But because if the people creating the work don’t find any joy in the work, then why the fuck do you expect anyone else to like it?
Actually, let’s go one step further …
If you don’t find any joy in what you’re creating, why would anyone else like it to the point they will actively choose to pay large sums of money for it?
Of course, ‘like’ is subjective. On top of that, it is incredibly dependent on having been exposed to a level of breadth, depth and craft of creativity that enables them to make objective and considered choices in how they judge and answer challenges. Which all leads to 3 points:
1. Companies need to stop thinking outsourcing their annual ‘one-size-fits-all’ training is acceptable behaviour. Especially when it’s outsourced to the same individuals and companies as everyone else is using, even though – ironically – they have never actually made any work that has made a sustainable and meaningful impact on society or categories.
2. Employees need to stop thinking that just because they receive a salary for doing a job – and/or have social media followers – they are equipped with all the skills, standards and qualifications to consider themselves ‘an expert’.
3. Marketing needs to respect and elevate the value of ‘experience’ again.
Not popularity.
Not price-point.
Not the ability to write ‘thought leadership’ articles.
Actual experience.
People who have consistently created, crafted and delivered work – not simply been associated with it – that has achieved, challenged pushed standards, brands and categories over and over again.
Because while they may be more expensive than other hires.
While they may be harder to work with because they call out the bullshit.
The value they offer is they’ll create work for you that passes the first level of the harshest critics … themselves.
And in a world of slop, parity and lowest common-denominator landfill, experience means you’ve just increased the odds of your business being able to take giant leaps rather than – at best – a few teeny-tiny, barely noticeable [unless pointed out with a big arrow] shuffles.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Corporate Evil, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Leadership, Loyalty, Management, Passion, Stress
Over the years I’ve written a lot about companies viewing ‘emotional people’ as problems.
Viewing them as too passionate.
Too dramatic.
Too impatient.
But the reality is, emotion means you give a fuck and I’d rather have that than work with robots who efficiently execute what’s needed without ever wishing to add, elevate or challenge the status quo.
Of course, the irony is the companies who criticise employees for caring deeply about what they do, tend to also expect their people to be disproportionately passionate and loyal about the company – but guess what fuckers, you can’t have one without the other.
Now I appreciate there are different ways to express emotion …
And when it becomes about what YOU want versus what you want the work to be – they’re very different things.
But having people who care … who deeply want to do the right thing, the better thing and the new thing … is creatively and commercialy far more valuable – let alone interesting – than having an entire department of drones. And yet in these optimisation obsessed times, companies have decided the opposite is true.
Which leads to the point of this post.
Recently I saw this clip of Robert Glasper playing Radiohead’s ‘Everything In It’s Right Place’.
In it, you witness Robert crying as he plays the piece.
The emotional impact he feels because of the piece.
It’s not ego.
It’s not performative.
It’s pure, unfiltered emotion. For a piece of music he didn’t write but feels deeply connected to.
So connected, he gives his all in performing it. To honour what it means to him and what he hopes the audience will get from it.
In many ways, it’s one of the most selfless, geneous acts you could ever witness.
Something I am sure Radiohead would feel honoured by, rather than say:
“Robert … Robert … stop being so emotional about the music. It makes us feel uncomfortable and we don’t know how to deal with it”.
Because that’s the thing … the issue of emotion is not about the person feeling it, but the people who never can.
Who are so disconnected to what they do, the only thing they value is the checklist of what has been done.
Because for them, quality isn’t the goal, it’s productivity.
People who care about what they do and what the company does, is a gift.
It’s why we have to put an end to this false narrative of them being a problem … because they provide life to what so many senior leaders destroy.
Enjoy.