Filed under: Attitude & Aptitude, Daddyhood, Emotion, Family, Jill, Love, Loyalty, My Childhood, Otis, Paula, Rosie, Singapore
As you all know, we recently lost our beloved Rosie.
I bloody loved that cat. Still do.
In many ways, she was my first ‘proper’ pet. We got her in Singapore because Jill – who had always had animals – was desperate to have one again.
We had resisted for a while for a couple of reasons.
1. We were in the early days of our relationship … don’t forget, we moved to Singapore together mere weeks after we met in Australia.
2. We didn’t know how long we’d be in Singapore and so were worried about the challenges of moving and taking the pet with us.
Obviously. we got past both of those as we’ve just celebrated our 17th wedding anniversary and Rosie moved to 7 different countries … but the point is, our little Singaporean street cat went from ‘satisfying Jill’s ‘pet’ need’ [even though she’d always had dogs and so a cat was our compromise – based more on practicality than preference] to igniting my ‘family love’.
I don’t say that lightly …
You see, there was a chance Jill and I may not have been able to have kids and as traumatic as that would have been for us, having Rosie helped me realise there were other ways my desire to be ‘a parent’ could be fulfilled.
Which explains why I was overjoyed when Otis was born and so devastated when Rosie died.
But even though our cat was a small little thing, her presence was huge and so our house – as I wrote previously – feels less alive.
A different sort of energy.
A bit too much space.
A little less noise.
We had talked about getting another cat, but it all felt too soon.
As if we would be disrespecting Rosie.
Made worse by the concern we’d want it to replicate Rosie rather than let its own personality reign.
Add to that Otis’ budgie – Sky – and the realization a new cat wouldn’t show it the same patience Rosie did and it just didn’t seem to make sense to get another cat. For now.
So slowly, the idea of a dog has started to make sense.
It’s not that I don’t love dogs – if truth be told, I was probably a dog person before we had Rosie – but the reality is they’re more work and harder [read: more expensive] to move countries.
And we will be moving countries, probably at least twice in the next few years.
But there has definitely been a 4-legged animal sized space missing in the house and I don’t like that.
And neither does Jill or Otis.
If Jill had her way, she’d fill the house with animals.
Chickens, sheep, horses, dogs, cats … you name it, she’d have it.
And for 10+ years, Paula bloody Bloodworth has been telling/bullying me to get a dog.
But at the end of the day, a pet isn’t about ‘convenience’, it’s about what it adds to the family … and given Otis has dysgraphia and some anxiety issues, a dog would be more than just a member of our family, it could be a special buddy for him.
And I want that for Otis.
I want him to live a life where he feels he is equipped to thrive.
Which is all my way of saying, this …
No, it’s not a dog … but it’s in preparation of a dog.
And as much as you may think I am the sort of idiot who would buy an Audi ‘car seat dog seat’ because I buy shit from Audi … I’ve actually got it because we’re getting a dog.
Deposit paid and everything.
Now it won’t be until early in the new year, but it’s happening and I’ve resigned myself to the consequences.
Because for all the disruption they may cause … for all the walking I’ll have to do … for all the costs they’ll incur … they’ll still give us more than they take and that means its an investment rather than a cost.
Even though it will bloody cost us, haha.
And while one day we may well get a cat to add to the fam, I look forward to our house once again radiating an energy greater than the sum of us as well as be grateful I got healthy over the past year so walking will be a pleasure, not an agony.
Filed under: Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Colenso, Collaboration, Colleagues, Communication Strategy, Craft, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Leadership, Love, Loyalty, New Zealand, Paula, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Play, Point Of View, Provocative, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect
So here we are. December.
9 days to my beloved son Otis’ 10th birthday.
18 days to the last blog post of 2024.
23 days to the festive season.
30 days to 2025.
Bloody hell. I mean … if I thought the last 11 months have gone fast, how quick are the next 30 days going to go? Worse, how quick will the gloriously long New Zealand summer holiday fly past.
ARGHHHHHH.
OK, before I wish everything away before I’ve had a chance to do it – and acknowledging I can’t write my ‘year in review’ post quite yet – I’m going to dedicate today’s post to my mob at Colenso.
Not Colenso – they will get that later – but my planning mob.
God they’re annoying.
A bunch of banter-loving, fault exposing, pricks.
But you know what else they are?
Smart, funny, caring, curious humans. All of them. Even the dodgy ones … of which there’s definitely more than one.
As I’ve written many times before, I’ve always been very lucky with the teams I’ve got to work with. Sure, there have been a couple who have been toxic wankers, but given I’ve been in this industry longer than dinosaurs, I take that as a massive win.
What I’ve loved about all of them is that rather than know interesting things, they’ve done – and do – interesting things. I adore that. I value that. I deeply respect their ability to jump head first into stuff and then naively tell me about what they did and what didn’t work in the naive belief I won’t hold it against them for the rest of their days.
They keep me young and make me old.
They teach me and frustrate me.
They challenge and want to be challenged.
But most of all, they give a fuck.
About the work.
The job.
The standards and each other.
That doesn’t mean it’s a love-fest, oh no … there’s competition. But when the chips are down, they’ll do whatever needs to be done to look after each other. And I mean that … because I’ve seen that. A lot.
Does this mean they’re perfect?
Hell no.
Can they be better at what they do?
Absofuckinglutely … but then, regardless who you are or however long you’ve been doing this, you can be.
Even Paula Bloodworth and she’s as near perfect as anyone I’ve ever met, let alone had the pleasure of working with.
But can you find a better bunch of humans?
Well that would be pushing it.
And the good thing about that is in my experience, the best people in this industry – by that, I mean those who consistently create the best work and ideas – tend to be great humans who just so happen to work in this industry.
They have varied lives, varied backgrounds and varied interests.
What makes them interesting is not simply how they think, but how they live in the world.
At a time where strategic thinking is seemingly being forced into an evermore formulaic approach, this gang of brilliant fools are all – in their own way – trying to break that apart.
It doesn’t always work. It doesn’t always go far enough. But where so many in the industry crave the comfort of the tropes and tribes of strategy, this bunch like to play in the messiness of life.
Or said another way …
They get that interesting lives lead to interesting thinking. Which is why they believe more in the power of creativity than whatever the latest framework, format or buzzword that is being banged on about on Linkedin by someone who has never made anything of note.
I love that about them.
I love we believe in a planning identify more than a process.
And we’re pretty good …
Good enough to have won Global Effies, Grand Prix’s and WARC awards.
Not as one offs, but on going.
Not bad for a teeny-tiny agency on the other side of the planet.
So to Martin, Meg, Gi, Augustine, Tobbi, Emma, Lizzie, T, Syd, James, Caitlin, newbie India – and not forgetting Amy – thank you. For being who you are, for turning down all the agencies who keep trying to hire you [oh I know which agencies you are and what you tried to do – cue: evil laugh ] … but most of all, for putting up with all my HR-violation shit.
Enjoy this, it literally will never happen again.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Dad, Design, Jill, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Paula, Perspective, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Women
I know it’s Halloween, but how I’m choosing to ignore it because I wrote this post ages ago and I can’t be arsed to write a new one to celebrate the ghosts and ghouls.
Hey, at least I’m being honest.
So anyway, I love design.
In fact, I would go one further …
I think design can see opportunities most strategists could never pull off.
This is not because my wife is one.
And some of my closest friends.
It’s because design can make the impossible, happen.
It can make a teetotaler buy alcohol.
It can make static images move.
It can make you want to pick up a specific product on an aisle of identical products.
It can open possibilities to people who have been denied for years.
And it can make you pay a premium for something that does exactly the same thing as everything else.
This last one is exemplified by something I saw when I was recently in China. Specifically this:
How lovely is that?
Yes, I really am talking about IT and mathematical equipment.
And while I assume the manufacturers are trying to attract a female skewed buyer – given its lipstick pallete inspiration [Don’t shout at me, I said skewed, not exclusively women because I totally appreciate the role cosmetics play across culture] – it’s such a refreshing change from the old, lazy, sexist and conformist ‘just make it pink’ bullshit that so many marketers used to think was the most efficient and effective way to engage the ‘female customer’.
Like this.
Or this.
Or this.
Or this.
Or this.
But it’s not just because it’s an update on the lowest-common-cliche we’ve seen – and still see – from brands. No, what I also love is the craft and consideration that has obviously gone into all of it.
It’s wonderful.
It’s refreshing.
It’s something I bet few planners would ever come up with, because one of the biggest problems we have as a discipline is our desire to reveal our self-appointed ‘intellectual superiority’ and frankly, creating a set of IT equipment that has been inspired by lipstick palettes is probably something the vast majority of us would see as ‘beneath us’.
And that’s problematic for a whole host of reasons.
From the fact we prefer to give answers rather than gain understanding right through to our motivation seems to be more about impressing our peers than doing things that actually change outcomes. Not in reality, but theoretically. Hence we read so many ‘hot takes’ about what’s wrong with work from people who have never made anything of note whatsofuckingever.
It all reminds me of something my Dad used to say, which – because I love the Lucille Ball quote about the same issue – I’ve paraphrased to this:
A person who wants others to know how intelligent they are may be smart, but they’re not very clever.
And that is why I adore what my wonderful and brilliant friend, Paula Bloodworth, recently spoke about at a conference when she said, ‘the smartest thing a planner can be, is stupid’.
Happy ‘trick or treat’.
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.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Cannes, Chaos, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Emotion, Imagination, Logic, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Martin Weigel, Paula
Just to be clear, I am not anti-logic.
Of course not.
But I am anti-blinkered logic.
Where anything outside of established rules or norms are discounted because they’re outside of established rules or norms.
It was the foundation of our Strategy Is Constipated, Imagination Is The Laxative talk, last year at Cannes.
And ironically, if I thought it was important then … it’s become even more important now with people like Jon Evans waxing lyrical about ‘System 2’ thinking.
Have a look at the functional benefits he is stating:
+ Facts don’t care about your feelings
We all know how unreliable our feelings can be so why would you make a large business decision based on what people feel about it?
+ Measure Everything
I never understood at System1 why we worked so hard to reduce it down to a few key metrics. The results also came in this super easy online report rather than PowerPoint. Now you can have every measure you ever wanted in a shiny PowerPoint presentation with our ‘minimum page promise’ of 93.
+ Infinite personalisation at scale
We have finally achieved the holy grail of marketing reporting namely infinite personalisation at scale. With so much data at your disposal whatever conclusion you need to make we can provide it. We also present it in such a scientific way that no-one will be able to challenge your conclusion. Imagine that!
+ The Price is Right
One of the reasons you employ McKinsey is because they charge a lot of money and therefore must be making a huge impact on your business. We have followed this immutable logic to ensure this is the most expensive research you will ever pay for because, well, we’re worth it.
Now on one level, a lot of what he’s saying isn’t wrong. But by the same token … it’s also not entirely right.
The reduction of everything to a quantifiable – and historical – measure ultimately means you’re advocating, at best, for incremental change or, at worst, following a model of ‘best practice’ without remembering that best practice is past practice.
Of course some will love it. But then, some love beige office furniture.
Which is why this old ad kind of sums up my concerns with myopic approaches based on models designed to not fail rather than liberate possibility.
History is littered with once great brands and ideas that fell foul of ‘the research says no’.
What makes it even worse is often that research is based on the lowest common denominator of audience versus – say – the highest.
Resulting in commoditised mediocrity, hidden under ‘effectiveness and optimisation’ justifications.
Or said another way, outsourcing your cowardice to ‘for profit, external organisations’.
I am not saying what Jon is saying is wrong.
I am not saying using facts and data are wrong.
I’m saying his view – as I say about many people who sell their specific processes/programs as guarantees of success’ – is.
[For example, as the very brilliant Lee once told me, “if you’re measuring everything, then you don’t know what is important”]
As I wrote a while back, there’s many examples of brands who buck his view.
Hell, I work with a bunch of them, including:
SKP-S … the most profitable luxury retailer on the planet.
Gentle Monster … the fastest growing and selling eyewear brand across Asia.
Metallica … the 2nd most successful American band in music history.
… to name but 3.
The point is, for all the cleverness of Jon Evans – and he is very clever and I respect him, what he does and how he does it – the implied suggestion, whether intentional or not, that his way is the only to be successful, is wrong.
As is his new statement around ‘system 2 thinking’.
I get why he says it … just like I get why many people in that industry say it … because it’s as much what they believe and how they make money.
And while that is all well – plus they’re very good at what they do … especially with organisations who are conservative and/or have people with little formal training – they’re services are more like insurance products than business accelerators.
Nothing wrong with that, as long as you’re not claiming otherwise.
Which is why it’s important to remember – to paraphrase what Martin and I also said at our ‘The Case For Chaos’ talk in 2019 for WARC at Cannes – logic might give you what you think people want, but chaos gives them what they’ll never forget.