Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Cars, Colleagues, Craft, Culture, Customer Service, Emotion, Experience, Fake Attitude, Japan, Luxury, Marketing, Mercedes, Money, Packaging, Resonance, Respect
Over the years I’ve written a lot about brands who spend time and money ensuring their customers feel they’ve purchased something of significantly greater value than the functional cost of the item they’ve purchased.
The original ‘brand experience’ as it were.
There’s Tiffany with their iconic ‘little blue box’.
There’s Apple with their packaging and attention to detail.
Hell, there’s even Absolut with their special edition bottles – though I accept that’s more a satisfying novelty than something that builds real additional value for the brand.
But what I find interesting is for all the talk of ‘brand experience’, most brands – except those truly in the luxury space – suck at it. And that’s not counting the masses of brands who don’t even bother with it – often believing their customers should consider themselves fortunate for owning whatever it is they’ve just handed over their cash to buy.
But that aside … the problem with a lot of ‘brand experience’ is it’s starting point is the cost to do it, not the emotion they ignite because of it – so we end up with countless Temu versions of whatever it is they want to do or what they think people want to get.
Now I am not saying that these approaches don’t work or aren’t liked, but we end up in parity status very quickly – which has the result of completely nullifying whatever ‘value’ you hoped you would get from it in the first place.
The reality is experience is less about what you do and how you do it …
Not just for distinctiveness.
Not just for memorability.
But because it conveys what you value and the standards you keep.
This should be obvious as hell – but the problem is, when companies evaluate it against the cost – or time – many view it as an expense rather than an investment in their brand and customer relationship, so before you know it, they strip things back to its most basic form.
It’s why I love how Japanese brands tend to approach brand experience.
As a society, care and attention seem to be built into the DNA.
You just have to see how they package anything to realise they – if anything – over engineer brand experience.
It’s a culture that places high importance on standards, respect and consistency – which is why I like this video of someone picking up their new Lexus car.
On one level, it’s not that different to a lot of car manufacturers around the world who place a bow or blanket over a car when it’s about to be picked up, however when they do it – you know the amount of effort involved in executing is minimal, whereas this – whether part of a fixed process or not – requires commitment and time.
Is this overkill?
Yep.
Is this more culturally influenced than category?
Undoubtedly.
And is the whole thing a bit awkward?
For many, it absolutely would be.
However, the point of the Lexus example is less about what they do and more a case of showing a brand who are committed to expressing who they are and who they’re for – because where brand experience is concerned, too many companies approach this key part of the ‘sales process’ with passive energy whereas Japan is almost aggressive in ensuring its point of view in expressed in an active and engaged manner.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Conformity, Culture, Customer Service, Effectiveness, Experience, Fake Attitude, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail
NPS – which stands for Net Promoter Score – is a way for companies to evaluate how their customers view them.
The higher the score, the more satisfied they are with the company. Or so they say …
Because while I appreciate there will be a lot of evidence to back up this equation, I find it fascinating that the way they do it is by adding a layer between brand and customer.
More than that, it dimensionalises ‘satisfaction’ into a numerical value … meaning humanity, nuance and individuality is washed over. Now I appreciate when you’re dealing with potentially ‘millions’ of people, it would be almost impossible to achieve this with more texture and intimacy, however I can’t help but feel this methodology also suits the C-Suite in companies because it allows them to be incubated from having to deal with customer issues and simply point to an outsourced number to justify how well they are doing.
Add to the fact that when asked to evaluate a company, most people will just choose a random number – simply because the service they experienced was transactionally efficient rather than something more meaningful or memorable – and the whole NPS score should be taken far more as a guide than a fact.
Of course, we live in a time where everyone sells everything with the confidence of unquestionable authority … which is why I saw two things recently that reminded me what good customer service is, without having t refer to a number between 0 and 10.
First was this:
A young boy was at a baseball game [Philadelphia Phillies] and his father was able to retrieve a ball that had been hit into the stands to give to him. Almost immediately, another fan came up and claimed it was theirs [it wasn’t] and basically intimidated the father into giving it them. Someone in the team saw this and immediately made amends … first sending them a bag of ‘team goodies’ while they were still in the stands, and then following it up by inviting him – and his Dad – to meet the players and receive a signed baseball bat from one of the stars.
It probably cost the team $100 max, but the emotional value was way, way more than that … which was also only increased by the speed of their action.
No processes to go through.
No layers of approval to obtain.
Quick, decisive action from the whole team – rather than just one department.
You can read about it by following these links.
First the incident.
Then the first follow up.
Then the meeting of the team.
Then the positive internet reaction.
The other is much closer to home and involves a courier company I wrote too.
I had got an email saying an item had been delivered to my house. Except it hadn’t.
I wrote to them to tell them that and almost immediately, they responded and told me they’d checked and could confirm delivery. Crucially they were able to tell me what was sent and I realized they were right and had confused their original notification for another product I was waiting for.
I wrote back to apologize and explain they were right and then – again, almost immediately – they sent me this.
Now I appreciate there may be an element of ‘lost in translation’ in this reply … but ‘we wish you a happy life’ is delightful. Even more so given it was my fucking mistake. But the real power of it is that as ridiculously over-the-top as it is … it’s also undeniably human. Not some contrived, often repeated set of words that have been carefully designed to ensure the company does not convey an inch of accountability in any interaction.
That’s customer service.
Everything else feels more like being in-service to the company legal department or C-Suite ego.
So while I appreciate we have to have systems and processes in place to deliver a level of consistency … when they take the precedence over ensuring customers comes out of any situation feeling at least seen or heard, then it’s no wonder we’re seeing more and more companies hiding behind NPS scores rather than listening, interacting and enabling their teams to deal with the needs of their customers, rather than the egos of their C-Suite.
Filed under: Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Class System, Colleagues, Community, Complicity, Conformity, Corporate Evil, Corporate Gaslighting, Culture, Delusion, Effectiveness, Equality, Fake Attitude, Honesty, Imposter Syndrome, Individuality, Leadership, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Meetings, Membership, Perspective, Pollution, Popularity, Prejudice, Process, Professionalism, Relationships, Reputation, Respect, Ridiculous, Service, Social Commentary, Social Divide, Social Media, Standards, Status, Status Anxiety, Strategy, Subliminal Hatred, Succession, Systems, Talent, Teamwork, Technology, Toxic Positivity, Values
This is a long post, because it has been written by a lot of rage. Mine.
So buckle up and read it, because while most of what I spout is utter shite. This is important.
Recently someone I know left the company they had been working at for a few years.
When they announced it on Linkedin, they were flooded with supportive, celebratory messages. As they should be.
But there was one other thing that was common among the comments, and that was people writing “what a good run you had”.
I don’t know about you, but when I hear that, it immediately conveys a company who has a reputation for letting people go … and so ‘what a good run’ really means is that you lasted longer than most. That your achievement was as much about staying in the role as it was about what you did in the role.
And to me, that all feels toxic as fuck.
Not by the people saying it.
Or the person it is being said to.
But the organisation who seemingly doesn’t give a fuck about letting people go.
Of course – like US politicians who ask for ‘thoughts and prayers’ after another mass shooting – their corporate mission statement only talks about their belief in their people …
How they’re trying to build a thriving, collaborative community and culture …
In fact, they say a lot of things except one: ‘when people leave, they will be cushioned by comments saying they ‘had a good run’.
So how do they get away with it?
Cash.
They pay significantly more than market rate and so there’s a steady stream of people who are willing to go work there either because they need a gig, they have fallen for the hype [and not checked it first] or they believe they can be the exception to the rule.
That’s not a judgement on the people, I get it … but it is a judgement on the org.
Especially as – in the big scheme of things – the money they pay comes at a huge cost.
The talent they’ve burned – and burned through – is extraordinary and yet no one, be it past of present employee, says a thing.
On first impression, it can feel like they’ve all agreed to collectively gaslight society, but on closer inspection you soon realise the real reason for that approach is far more due to fear than delusion.
Fear of losing your position.
Fear of never working again.
Fear of inviting more abuse.
One look at Corporate Gaslighting and you see this is not an uncommon – or unjustified – view. What’s even scarier is it is seemingly happening more and more … to the point where I swear some companies think ‘salary’ means they fully own their employees.
OK that’s a ridiculous view … a totally over-exaggerated and overblown view … an over-exaggerated and overblown view that is almost as ridiculous as:
Zero-hour contracts.
No overtime payments.
No training and development.
Expectation you are always ‘on-call’.
Personal social media monitoring.
Yes, I get those ‘work practices’ are still more the exception than the rule … but the fact they are there at all, is madness.
I get companies have to make money.
I get we live in a highly competitive world.
I even appreciate not every person is good for every company.
But come on …
What bothers me more is this is quickly becoming standard work practice.
STANDARD!
It’s like someone read a book on Victorian-era ‘workhouses’ and thought, “That sounds fun”.
And so, they’re trying to create a new set of beliefs for the ‘modern’ workplace.
Culture will not be born from the employees but dictated by the leadership.
Opinions can never be expressed; they must always be silenced.
Growth is not measured by personal development, but corporate conformity.
Success is not defined by personal achievement, but individual survival.
Failure is always – ALWAYS – to be aimed squarely at the shoulders of the employee.
[As an aside, if anyone is visiting Nottingham, they should check out the Workhouse in Southwell and go back to the future]
It’s like an episode of Black Mirror if Black Mirror was a documentary, not satire.
It’s here we’re taking a commercial break, because as much as this post has been about bullshit behavior – at least the people it’s about got paid well. But over the last 6 months, I’ve met many, young, lowly-paid, talented strategists be burned out by the expectations, pressure and demands of their employees.
As we highlighted in our 2024 book, Dream Bigger, too often people of my generation look at the young and say they don’t have the right work ethic … they expect too much … they are lacking in drive and skills … but apart from the fact that’s bullshit, even if it wasn’t, could you blame them given how they’ve seen so many of us invest so much in the promises of ‘hard work’ and then end up with nothing. And at least we had options available to us that could actually help. These poor fuckers don’t have any of that and yet we hold them to even higher expectations.
But that’s different to burnout because burnout is criminal. Actually criminal.
How are companies letting this happen? What are the fucking HR people doing?
What makes it even worse is the 5 people I met all worked at companies who talk big about ‘how their people are their greatest asset’. More like burning asset.
You want to know why we find it hard to attract the young to our industry? Because too many companies treat them like cannon fodder – and then when they’ve been battered, broken or bruised. we turn around and say ‘they couldn’t cut it’. Bastards.
Back in 2021, when we did Dream Small, we highlighted how this was a generation tolerated rather than welcomed. Then a few months later, I wrote how the ‘great resignation’ was actually – for many of the young – the ‘great reset’. But as much as they have pushed for change, this shit is still happening to so many – as demonstrated by the fact I’ve talked to 5 people in the past 6 months who could be great, but have literally been burned and no one seems to give a fuck.
All their bosses do is throw them some compliments or cash, believing it will ‘shut them up’ when what the person actually needs is to be thrown a fucking life raft of compassion, care and change. But what makes this even worse is that when the bosses discover the cash and compliments no longer have any sort of effect – when they have wrung the person out completely – they get rid of them while doing all they can to make sure the individual feels they have done something wrong to shame them for life and to keep them quiet.
It’s horrific and shows nothing has changed in the 4 years since I was featured in The Guardian about this corporate practice of employee shaming. Or the attempt of it.
What are we going to do when we have no one want to come to our industry?
We don’t pay many fairly.
We don’t train them well.
And then we work them to the point of exhaustion.
Seriously, in terms of analogy, there is no better one for this group than Workhouse attendees.
We can try and claim their attitude sucks all we like, but we’re the fuckers who need to take the long hard look in the mirror.
And with that, I end the commercial break and take us back to ‘regular programming’.
The reality is we’re getting to a point where there’s no bigger red flag about an organisation than when employees get congratulated by ‘the run they’ve had’.
Some may be well paid ‘middle management’.
Some may be poorly paid ‘young talent’.
But all of them are out-on-their-ear … surplus to requirements or drained of all life.
Which is why – and I appreciate the privilege I say this with – if you find yourself in a company like the one my mate has just ‘left’, then maybe the best thing you can do for your future health, well-being and career is to ‘run the fuck away from them’.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Collaboration, Colleagues, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Empathy, Equality, Fake Attitude, Fear, Harmony, Honesty, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Music, Relationships, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Trust
Following on from yesterday’s post, this is about the value of transparency.
Years ago, I wrote a post about a [then] new Police interrogation technique, which basically centered around empathetic transparency.
In essence, rather than use traditional tactics such as intimidation or ‘half-truths’ to obtain the information they wanted, they found transparency – without judgment – achieved much more positive results.
So, for example if someone asked if their actions were going to result in jail time, rather than give them the impression they will be OK if they hand over the information they want, they simply respond with the following:
“It is highly likely you will, but I will ensure the authorities are made aware of how you have helped us in this investigation”.
And then they actually ensure the authorities are made aware of how that person has helped in the investigation.
OK, it’s obviously more nuanced and complex than that … but the heart of this approach is the acknowledgement that people react more positively to truth than harmony.
And yet, despite this, harmony prevails in our lives.
+ We’ll keep your resume on file.
+ We’ll work with you in the future.
+ We like being pushed and challenged.
+ We will issue the payment this week.
+ We will introduce you to other companies.
There’s so many of these ‘daily’ statements of harmony going on in every office and company around the World … and while most are doing it because they want to avoid disappointing or hurting the other party, the problem is when it’s not true, it ends up creating bigger issues because people find out and then resentment cultivates and trust gets destroyed.
It’s why one of the greatest lessons I have ever learned came from the wonderful LTA of Wieden+Kennedy.
He said, “transparency is one of the greatest gifts you can ever give a client”.
That doesn’t mean you are a rude or selfish prick.
Nor does it mean you can act like a sledgehammer.
But it does mean you respect the other person enough to tell them the realities of the situation rather than the fantasy of it.
Not because you want to upset them or hurt them, but because you want to empower them …
To know where they stand.
To enable them to choose what to do next.
To own their situation rather than be owned by it.
And while you may all think this is just basic common-sense, in this age of toxic positivity it’s a pretty radical approach to commercial relationships.
But then, a lot of what we call relationships, aren’t these days are they?
More marriages of financial or outsourcing convenience.
Which may explain – as I wrote a few months ago – why one of my clients is so successful.
Because while relationships are at the heart of his business, not only does he understand they need to be mutually beneficial to encourage longevity, they need to be more than just convenience to be worthy of that label.
Put simply, relationships are built, not bought.
And the foundations of the best ones are always truth over harmony.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, China, Cliches, Clothes, Comment, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Consultants, Context, Craft, Crap Products In History, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Cynic, Delusion, Distinction, Equality, Fake Attitude, Imposter Syndrome, London, Perspective, Planning, Point Of View, Professionalism, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Wieden+Kennedy
This is a post about naming strategies.
Yes, I know I’ve talked about this before.
A lot of times before.
The processes.
The considerations.
The complications.
… but mainly it’s been about how certain branding consultancies charge an absolute fortune to come up with some utter nonsensical bullshit that they back up with 1000’s of pages of self-serving pseudo-science bullshit and still end up creating something pants. Kind of like the explanation of the Pepsi rebrand from 15 years ago. Or most Linkedin ‘guru’ pontification.
But the other side of this is when people choose to put no effort in whatsoever.
Hiding their recommendation behind terms such as ‘colloquial context’ or ‘cultural vernacular’.
Don’t get me wrong, there are times where a stripped back approach can be powerful.
A way to connect to society by taking their cultural references and contexts head-on.
Hell, cynic used to embrace an approach that we literally called, ‘unplanned‘.
However, while this was about removing any element of pomposity, it still had to elevate how people saw or connected to what we did. Any fool can churn out lowest common denominator stuff … but it takes a certain amount of skill and flair to develop something that not only connects and engages the masses, but does it in a way where the value of the product/brand is increased and improved to all.
We used to call this ‘massperation’ … which still makes me feel sick even today, hahahaha.
I say all this to justify something I saw recently.
Or should I say something Otis saw recently.
You see down the road from us there’s a house being built.
It’s in full-on construction mode and as it is on the way to Otis’ school, he passes it every day.
Anyway, one day he came and told me he’d seen the building site loo and was shocked with its name.
It was this:
That’s right, it’s called the ‘Shitbox’.
To be honest, I’m not sure if Otis should have been more surprised at the name or the fact it proudly states it’s a ‘high viz’ toilet box.
HIGH FUCKING VIZ!
Is the toilet going to be walking along the street late at night? Do builders have such bad eyesight they can’t find a 6 foot high toilet without it being painted bright orange? Are construction workers such bad drivers they need to be warned of where the portaloos are so as not to hit them?
WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK?
Anyway, I digress.
The point is that while calling the portaloo a ‘shitbox’ may make sense … I can’t help but feel it is also playing into the builder cliche. Sure, cliches happen because they represent a common behavior or attitude that is played out over a sustained period of time … but often this is only a ‘perceived’ behavior or attitude [usually promoted by an individual or organisation who have found a way to monetise the acceptance of this view] that victimizes anyone who does not live upto the cliche.
I appreciate you may think I’ve gone full-on woke … but apart from the fact I don’t think considering others is a bad thing, I see this behaviour over and over again.
Hell, even Jaguar – with their ‘interesting’ rebrand did it by revealing their new concept cars in pink and blue.
PINK AND FUCKING BLUE.
They made such a big deal about how they ‘delete ordinary’, ‘break moulds’ and ‘copy nothing’ and then they actively, loudly and proudly reinforce the most basic of gender stereotypes. On the World fucking stage!
I totally appreciate you can go over-the-top with this stuff – especially given this whole post was inspired by a building site portaloo. I also get people may think I am suggesting we should name products/brands with words that offer no defining characteristic to avoid any potential stereotype. But neither of those are what I’m trying to say.
All I am attempting to point out is that words matter. And while I fully appreciate naming is a difficult task, I find it fascinating companies spend millions on ‘solutions’ that tend to fall into either pompous, basic or made-up.
Or said another way, names that define, limit or pander rather than celebrate those who use them and the reasons they do.