Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Age, Attitude & Aptitude, Curiosity, Distinction, Insight, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Point Of View, Pretentious Rubbish, Relevance, Resonance
One of the things I hate about planning is the quest for intellectual superiority.
Of course, not everyone is like that … but there’s a hell of a lot who are.
Wielding their smarts like a sword, without realizing that it is rarely as sharp or dangerous as they think. Or hope.
It’s why I also find those who bang on about planning being all about ‘curiosity’ laughable. To imply that’s a trait solely owned by those of the strategic community is egotism at its best.
Sure, there are some truly brilliant thinkers in our industry, but more often than not, we’re surrounded by a bunch of loud duplicators.
And there would be nothing wrong with that if these people admitted their declarations came from – or were influenced by – others. But in a world where everyone wants to position themselves as the brightest, sharpest mind – more often than not, we hear history being restated with just a more modern, confident voice.
Of course we all do it to a certain extent – I know I will have – but the realty is I find the most interesting perspectives coming from people outside of adland rather than in. That does not mean there are not good things being said within our industry, it’s just they all tend to follow whatever theme is cool at the time, so – for me at least – it all gets a bit boring.
Which is all my way of saying how much I enjoy hearing or reading the ‘insights’ of people form outside our bubble. Sure, some can be utterly farcical. And some may be doing the same repackaging as I’ve just complained about. But occasionally you come across something so sharp that you find yourself asking ‘when was the last time you read something so brilliantly stated from your peers’.
That happened to me recently with this before/after photo of Mickey Rourke.
No, I don’t mean the photo.
Nor do I mean the judgmental question being asked of the images.
I mean the comment underneath it all.
“When we’re born, we look like our parents. When we die, we look like our decisions.”
Fuck me, that’s good.
So good that it’s changed the way I look at people and aging.
Hell, it’s even given me a fresh way to talk to my clients about their past choices and decisions.
I rarely get that from the observations, declarations or ‘insights’ from my industry.
Of course there are some who are phenomenal, but sadly too many planners aspire to be seen as ‘smart’, without realizing the real value is when you are clever.
Just ask Lucille Ball.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Age, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Cars, Cliches, Comment, Complicity, Confidence, Creativity, Culture, Delusion, Effectiveness, Innovation, Insight, Leadership, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, New Product Mentalness, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Provocative, Relevance, Research, Resonance, Strategy, Success, Technology
One of the things I find hilarious about a lot of strategists, agencies and companies is how they talk about their openness towards innovation, but do all they can to maintain the status quo.
Oh, they’ll claim they give things a chance, it’s just their version of doing that is to immediately compare/judge any new approach against ways of working that have literally had decades to evolve and iron out any quirks … and so, generally, it is always going to end up being the unfairest of unfair fights.
However sometimes dismissal is not even about a lack of effectiveness.
Many times, it’s driven more by personal ego … where rejection occurs because a particular individual fears that any new methodology may result in them losing power and control and because of that, they’re openly hostile [and subjective] to anything being presented for consideration.
So what happens is the industry invents terminology that allows them to feel they’re being innovative but actually it’s all about conformity.
It’s why we hear the word ‘transformation’ banded about so much.
Oh when you hear that you think of acceleration … revolution … category redefinition … but what does it tend to really mean?
That’s right … it’s companies who have been left behind by years of ignorance/arrogance/complacently who finally realise they need to get their shit together so spend a fuckton of cash simply to be where everyone else has already been. The irony with this approach is that despite making such a big deal of their ‘transformation’, they still end up behind their competition because while they’ve been trying to play catch up, everyone else has been moving forward. Again.
But just as much as fearing innovation is harmful to your growth and potential, so is blindly accepting whatever new thing is available to you.
Far too often we’ve seen some companies embrace the new, shiny thing for the simple reason they want to be associated with the new, shiny thing.
Worse, they embrace it and then talk about it like it’s the finished article only to quietly move things aside when [1] they realise it may be shiny, but it’s not worthy or [2] there’s a newer, shinier thing that they need to be seen aligning themselves with.
Sadly adland is one of the worst at this. But so are the tech industries. And basically everyone on Linkedin, hahaha.
New is wonderful. It needs embracing, celebrating and championing. But most of all it needs patience and objectivity.
Patience for the idea to evolve, develop and see where it can go or goes.
Objectivity for you to be able to assess without bias, whether you’re dealing with hype or hope … allowing you the clarity to know if you have to protect it or kill it.
The last thing to remember is that sometimes, the thing an idea needs to work is ‘good timing’.
When I was younger, I never believed it when people [read: girlfriends, haha] said it was ‘bad timing’.
I thought it was just their way of getting out of seeing me.
And maybe it was … however as I got older, I’ve realized timing is a thing. Often an intangible, unexplainable, unmovable thing.
It may be driven by coincidence. It may be driven by circumstance. It may be driven by attitudinal shifts. But there are countless examples of ideas that were made or died because of timing, regardless of who was behind it, how much they spent on it or their history in doing it.
One of my favorite examples is the Toyota Prius.
The general view is Toyota launched the car in response to societies increased awareness of the car being a threat to the environment.
It may be true, after all the concept of the electric car had been around well before Toyota launched the Prius, albeit with continual failure.
[As an aside, there’s a documentary entitled ‘Who Killed The Electric Car’ that is well worth a watch]
However, I was told the development of the Prius had nothing to do with environmental concerns and was a byproduct of Toyota experimenting with their engineering capabilities. By pure chance, they developed a viable electric car at a time where society was changing/evolving … both in terms of environmental awareness but also economic situation. In essence, Prius was a happy accident of timing rather than forward planning.
As with most things, history has a million different authors … but given the Prius was so far ahead of other car manufacturers – and very different to Toyota’s traditional approach to car manufacturing – it feels there may be legitimacy as to how and why it succeeded and it had very little to do with being culturally aware.
Whatever the answer, the issue of ‘new’ is a complex one.
Too many people dismiss it.
Too many people fawn over it.
All I know is we should value it and respect it.
That doesn’t mean you can’t challenge or question, but in a world where everyone wants to give their hot take in the blink-of-an-eye, the smart people give ‘new’ the time to surprise and evolve as well as remember that on the occasions something doesn’t work out, they acknowledge it may not be the idea, but the times.
And times are always changing.
Just ask the horse. Or Ed Klein.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, America, Attitude & Aptitude, China, Comment, Complicity, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Diversity, Empathy, Government, Insight, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Politics, The Kennedys, The Kennedys Shanghai, Wieden+Kennedy
Recently I read a comment on a post Zoe Scaman had written about democracy.
Her point was – with social media companies bending to Trump’s will – we were witnessing the crumbling of established and vital democratic systems. Most people were in violent agreement until someone wrote this comment:
“Can you elaborate on ‘democratic systems are crumbling’ please? My in-laws were born and raised in Russia, and they believe Venezuela is doing great and Cuba is heaven”.
It was not just a good point, but an important point one. Not said to insult or embarrass, but to simply remind us that context is everything and rarely is it experienced equally.
I say this because it reminded me of a similar situation I experienced a few years back… except, unlike Zoe, there was no legitimate reason not to have considered this from the beginning given I’d been living in China for a long time.
You see, back when Trump was running for his first Presidency, I was running The Kennedys at Wieden+Kennedy Shanghai.
Because the election was a hot topic, I set them the challenge of creating a campaign to tell voters Trump was a monster.
For a few days The Kennedys went about researching more about who Trump was until one day they asked if they could have a chat to me.
“We don’t get the assignment” they said with genuinely confused and harassed looks on their faces.
I must admit, my first impression to this was consternation, until they added:
“Maybe Trump is a bad person but America gets to vote who they want to run their country and that seems amazing”
Basically, they couldn’t understand the task because as bad as Trump may be, the brief was still about democracy and democracy is good. Especially when you don’t have it.
[As an aside, a young, brilliant Chinese planner once described the Government as ‘Rock n’ Roll’ and when I asked why, they replied, “you told me Rock n’ Roll is doing what you like and not caring what others think and there’s no better description of the Chinese Governments attitude and behaviour”]
Anyway, when they said that to me, I realized just how badly I had fucked up – not them.
That I’d made the cardinal sin of taking my context for granted. That I’d assumed everyone understood and appreciated the context and situation I was asking them to embrace and communicate.
And I was obviously wrong.
I’d made the most basic of fucking mistakes – albeit one practiced by most companies and marketing departments around the World.
And I hated myself for it ….
But as they say, it’s only a mistake if you don’t learn from it and I learned from it. Big time.
A lesson that I remind myself – or remind my colleagues/clients/researchers – literally everytime we talk about people, situations and contexts.
And while Zoe wasn’t as naïve as I was – because for her, it was more about how she phrased her point rather than being ignorant to the wider issue – she has also likely learned from it. A lesson that will make her even better than she already is – which is more than can be said about the people who voted for Trump again, even though I have far more understanding and even respect for why they did it rather than just assuming ignorance and racism.
Anyway, the reason for this post is that I recently saw a tweet that reflected how young Chinese people see Americans – in relation to the most recent election – and I found it fascinating. Because rather than viewing ‘democracy’ as freedom of choice, they now see it as something else … something that not only may be the best take on what modern democracy is, but also explains why all the social media companies have been so desperate to bend to the will of the new administration and why Trump [as much as I hate to admit this] probably understands how modern communication works more than most media and ad agencies.
Have a look at this and remember, what’s normal for you may be abnormal for everyone else.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brands, Brilliant Marketing Ideas In History, Cars, Communication Strategy, Context, Creativity, Culture, England, Experience, Insight, Leadership, Legend, Luxury, Management, Marketing, Mercedes, Perspective, Point Of View, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Retail, Strategy, Success
I’m back.
Worse, I’m back and ready to make ‘amends’ for not writing any posts for 5 days … I’m going to be writing some extra-long ones. Even by my overlong standards. However the good news is – unlike my usual standards – they are pretty good. I think. At least some of them.
So years ago I worked with on a global project for Mercedes.
One of the people they said I should meet was a dealer principal of a local Mercedes dealership in Derbyshire, England.
To be honest, I was thrilled as many companies try to keep you away from ‘the coal face’ to ensure their carefully constructed ‘delusion of perfection’ can be maintained … but they were pretty insistent I met this person.
What made it even more intriguing is when I asked them why, they replied, “Oh you’ll see”.
So, a week or so later, I found myself on a train heading to Derby to meet this gentleman.
Now let’s be honest, car salesman have a certain reputation …
A lot of the stereotypes are most likely bullshit – or shaped by a few bad eggs rather than the whole industry – but I admit I went in slightly cautious as to who I’d meet.
But the person I sat down with was one of the sharpest marketers I’ve ever met.
I also loved that – despite owning multiple different Mercedes dealerships, something like 20 – he called himself a ‘car salesman’.
He was passionate about the brand and equally as passionate about selling them and didn’t want to hide that fact.
He also said his Mum had told him she was embarrassed he introduced himself that way to people … which had motivated him to be even more focused on making his business successful.
One of the best examples of his attitude was his story about how he chose where to build a new dealership.
He was going to open a dealership in a new city and wanted it to be where all the competitor car dealerships were located. His attitude was it was better to be where everyone goes than to try and convince people to go somewhere out-the-way, just for him.
Apparently, there were a few available locations he could have built, but he had his heart set on one place … next to the local BMW dealership.
They were something like number 110 and he was going to be 111. [I can’t remember the exact numbers, but you get the point]
Anyway, by his own admission, he overspent on buying the land – but for him, there were three major reasons he wanted to be there.
The first was that he knew BMW was his main competitor and so if he was located next to them, most people in the market for that level of car would end up visiting both dealerships.
The second was that he knew many people saw the BMW and Mercedes brand as interchangeable. By that I mean their ‘quality and status’ were pretty similar so often the choice of vehicle came down to service standards and/or price.
Which led to his 3rd reason …
Because he wanted customers to feel Mercedes was the more ‘prestigious’ car to own before they had even entered the dealership – to increase the odds/desire to own – and so by choosing that specific location, he could run ads that signed off with:
Visit your local Mercedes dealership. One up from BMW.
Yep, he spent all that extra money just so he could do that with his ads.
And you know what?
It worked, because it became the most successful Mercedes dealership in the UK.
Of course, these days no one would ever do that sort of thing – at least in terms of marketing – because you’d have some ‘guru’ state ‘when you use a competitors name in your advertising, you’re promoting your competitor’.
It’s the same myopic thinking that has led to certain clients having a negative reaction to anything they perceive as negative … even if it is [1] just in the brief and/or [2] being used to elevate the value of your brand.
Now you may think this post is going to take a dark turn, but it’s not …
Because I tell this story because I saw something wonderful on Twitter/X about Everton Football club.
A story that reminded me of that Mercedes car salesman and his commitment to always finding ways to paint a particular image in people’s minds.
And while I appreciate in this case, it is so subtle that many may miss it … once you know, you’ll not only node your approval for their genius but – if you’re an Everton Fan – you’ll feel pride that you got one over the ol’ enemy.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Business, Cannes, Chaos, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Emotion, Empathy, Honesty, Innovation, Insight, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Martin Weigel, Mediocrity, Metallica, Nike, Paula, Provocative, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Sport, Strategy
It is pretty obvious I have a major issue with a lot of the ‘best practice’ processes and practices certain members of my industry love to bang on about.
Not just because ‘best practice, is past practice’, but because these individuals position their approach as the legitimisation of the discipline they claim or suggest they are an expert in. Implying that anyone who does not strictly adhere to their process is an imposter and a danger to whatever organisation they’re working with.
It’s the sort of deluded arrogance that people who describe themselves as an ‘evidence based’ strategist embodies … attempting to infer everyone else is simply making things up and don’t give a fuck what happens afterwards.
It’s everywhere. Twitter. Linkedin. Conferences.
You name it and someone is bragging and banging on about it.
But what makes this hilarious is that many of these self-appointed experts have never made any work of any repute whatsoever. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Which means their entire viewpoint is either based on their own post-rationalised evaluation of another persons work or their narrow, naive and/or skewed viewpoint of what constitutes as ‘good’.
Don’t get me wrong, process matters.
In no way am I advocating you just chuck it all out.
However the difference is my processes does not require me to outsource my brain, imagination, curiosity, gut or ambition to fit into a format whose goal is to deliver a standardised, consistent response rather than enable the opportunity for greater possibility.
And that’s the big problem for me …
Because so many of these ‘models’ seem to care more about the process than what the process is meant to help enable. Actually, even that is wrong … because more and more of these models don’t even care about ‘enabling’ anything … they instruct you to simply follow the format and then do whatever the fuck comes out the other end.
No questioning.
No challenging.
No pushing.
Just blind adherence.
Martin and I talked about the folly of this approach in 2019 with our Case For Chaos talk at Cannes for WARC and then – in 2023 – Paula joined us on the same stage for our Strategy Is Constipated, Imagination Is The Laxative presentation.
But still this approach and attitude goes on … and while I don’t deny it can be effective, it rarely has the impact or influence as work that comes from a process shaped and flavoured by ideas, imagination or ambition.
But then I wonder if that is the goal anyway … because frankly, the obsession with efficiency means more and more companies don’t want to move towards where they could be and just want to optimize where they’re currently at. Adopting an attitude of ‘when we fall behind, we’ll simply catch up’.
Though they will never admit that publicly – oh no – what they is they’re investing in ‘business transformation’.
Hahahahahahahaha.
A while back I met one of these ‘dot-to-dot’ advocates at a conference I was attending.
Early in the discussion, they said their company had pioneered a process that “guaranteed success”. And then proceeded to talk about their system that ‘removed the risk of contaminated thinking’.
They literally said that.
I looked around the room waiting for someone to say something. Anything. But no one did.
Worse, they seemed to be nodding their heads in agreement. Or awe.
So I stuck my hand up.
Eventually I was seen and asked if I had a question, to which I replied:
“I was just wondering if you know what the words ‘guaranteed’ and ‘success’ mean?”
Yes, I know that was a total asshole move.
It alienated me immediately.
And while I regret how I asked my question, I don’t regret asking my question because that sort of declaration is insane. Not just because it’s not true, but because their ‘examples of proof’ are rarely more than a brand doing a bit better than it has before.
Now I appreciate that’s nothing to sneeze at, but it’s hardly Metallica is it?
A band that plays a niche genre of music, has pensioners as members and yet is the 2nd best selling American group in music history. MUSIC HISTORY!
And I can tell you, that didn’t happen blindly adopting the latest best practice process.
Where are their examples of that sort of impact?
Oh I know … in the hands of the fuckers who do shit, not spout it.
Look, I am not dismissing process.
Nor am I devaluing rigour.
But I am redefining what they mean in comparison to how more and more people seem to be interpreting it.
As we said at Cannes, strategy is the first creative act.
A chance to leap not step.
An opportunity to leave the category behind rather than reinforce the category.
But you don’t achieve that by simply ‘filling in the blanks’ with your functional and rational data.
No … if you really want to have a shot at changing where you can go and where you can be, you have to heed the advice of Rob Strasser – the iconic Nike exec – who said this:
“A shoe is just a shoe until someone steps in it”.
By that, I mean don’t just follow a framework, put your whole self into it.