Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Confidence, Creativity, Effectiveness, Egovertising, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning
It’s not that long ago that advertising award submissions would talk about how many Facebook ‘likes’ a post got as proof of effectiveness.
As I wrote a few years ago [even though I can’t find the post, haha] that’s the equivalent of claiming someone is your fan simply because you asked them to pass the salt in a café and they did.
And while many were quick to try and blame Facebook for suggesting this as a metric, the reality – similar to those who blame Powerpoint for writing bad presentation – was it was the people who wrote the submission who were to blame.
For all the talk and conversation about effectiveness, it’s amazing how we continue to try and reframe what it is and how you achieve it.
Hell, even those who literally make a living out of it, do it with one eye on serving their own needs and wants – resulting in methodologies that, while not wrong, tend to be more about not failing than liberating.
But hey … they’re way smarter, objective and valuable than so much of the stuff we’re seeing being peddled left, right and centre.
Some things to note.
Having 100,000 followers on Instagram is not a demonstration of your strategic effectiveness.
Having 10,000 subscribers to your newsletter is not a demonstration of your strategic abilities.
Having clients write you a letters of thanks is not a demonstration of your strategic skills.
They’re all lovely.
They’re all things you should feel proud of.
But they are not a demonstration of your strategic chops.
Christ … I have 17,000 instagram followers and do you know how I got them?
Well, as much as I’d like to say it was down to the 18,000 excellent images I’ve posted over my 14 years on the platform, the reality is it was an accident.
Metallica linked my insta to one of their photos and overnight, I gained about 20,000 followers.
Literally overnight.
Now I know what you’re thinking …
“How come 20,000 people followed you but you only have 17,000 followers now?”
Well, it’s easy …
Once people realised I was not going to furnish them with insider knowledge of their hero’s and instead, would be bombarding them with photos of my cat, they left in droves.
Almost 10,000 people.
So those 17,000 people on my insta consists of about 10k who find me so insignificant they can’t even be arsed to stop following me and 7k of people I’ve overshared into submission.
To paraphrase Lee Hill who once told me, “turnover is sanity, profit is vanity” … we can say the same about followers/readers and happy clients.
Sure, having a lot of people like what you do is good … but it doesn’t mean you’re strategically effective.
It doesn’t even mean you’re even strategic … and yet so many seem to be mistaking their volume of insta/newsletter/client letters as proof that they are.
All that means is – at best – you’re good to the people who have chosen to follow/work with you and as good as that is, it’s worth remembering a lot of people think Donald Trump is the messiah which highlights many people don’t know what the fuck they’re doing or talking about.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, China, Content, Context, Creativity, Culture, Grifting, Perspective, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Respect, Standards
Once upon a time, I did some work with the Google exec, Jonathan Rosenberg.
He was very kind and generous to me, more kind and generous than he should – which I suppose means extra kind and generous – but there’s one thing he said to me that has specifically stayed with me.
We were talking about a book someone had written about google and to paraphrase, he said, “they made us sound more interesting than we were”.
Now I remember this for 2 reasons.
1. At the time I was shocked he thought google wasn’t that interesting … because at the time, they were probably the most interesting and exciting company on the planet.
2. I realised that the book he was referring to was written by an observer, not a participant.
There’s a lot of good things being an observer.
You often see things those inside are too close to realise.
An objective perspective that shines a light on things others may take for granted or not even considered.
But … and it’s a big but … there’s also a shitload of danger.
Because ultimately, you are evaluating from your own perspective which is laden with your own prejudices, contexts and opinions.
Now that’s not necessarily wrong, where it goes dodgy is when you ignore that and just write your view as fact. That what you see is declared as a statement that suggests everyone thinks this way. Which is – generally – ego bollocks.
I used to see this all the time in China.
People coming in making big points based on their observations of the country without realising what they think is important, is only because it’s new to them rather than realising its normality to the people they’re referring to.
It was like they couldn’t wait to shout and share.
To position themselves as ‘in the action’, when really they were just casual observers.
Desperate to broadcast to the mass rather than take the time to consider others contexts and cultural references.
There’s a lot of that around at the moment.
Post rationalised, personal perspectives expressed as unquestionable fact.
Or worse, unquestionable genius.
God complex pricks … as a friend of mine refers to them.
And worse, it attracts others like them who value shortcuts than substance.
Look on Linkedin and it’s everywhere. Opinions spouted as fact by people who have the most tenuous relationship with what they are talking about.
Now don’t get me wrong, outsiders have an important role for reasons mentioned above … but that only works when they’re focused on gaining understanding rather than demanding answers and accepting their view may have to evolve with additional knowledge and information … because when they do that, they’re creating contexts based on their own personal blinkers/ego and everyone suffers for it.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Cannes, Comment, Consultants, Craft, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Differentiation, Martin Weigel, Paula, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Point Of View, Pretentious Rubbish, Relevance, Research, Resonance, Respect
There are a lot of quotes out on social media that explains how to make great creative work. Hell, a bunch of them are probably mine.
But putting aside the fact many of the quotes originate from people who, arguably, haven’t done much work that is deserving of that description – all of them, in their own way, are right.
And that’s great, because the survival of this industry is down to making work that is great and achieves great things for those it’s for.
But the problem with those quotes is they often reflect an unrealistic World.
One where time … or budget … or client mandatories don’t matter.
Which is why this quote from Leonard Bernstein is so good.
Because it captures how to get to great in the real World.
We need more of this.
I think people want more of this.
Because not only is there a distinct lack of training in our industry at the moment – and what is there is often from the same outsourced ‘gurus’ everyone else is outsourcing to – but Fergus, from OnStrategy, told Paula, Martin and I how so many young planners outside of the ‘big cities’ end up thinking they have no chance to make something even good, as they lack the tools, processes and infrastructure to do what the people on his show said they did.
It’s why we ensured in our Cannes talk we put 3 practical pieces of advice that anyone could use … because if we want to change the standards, we need everyone to have the ability to do that, not just the privileged big city types.
Which is why I leave you with this.
Because as much as time can help craft, a lack of it can force audacious leaps.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Cannes, Colleagues, Creativity, Effectiveness, Embarrassing Moments, Martin Weigel, Paula, Perspective, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning
In 2019, WARC made the stupid mistake of inviting Martin and I to talk at their event at Cannes. I was so confident that this would be the only time it would happen, I even asked the audience if I could take a photo to commemorate this once-in-a-lifetime moment.
Now, it’s fair to say The Case For Chaos talk went down quite well – hell, I even got a Getty Image of me out of it [number of sales: 0] – but I also think it’s fair to say the reason Covid happened is so Cannes would be cancelled for a few years spot the industry could get over WARC’s shocking mistake.
However, as time goes on, there is more and more evidence that long covid is a thing … where the virus continues to live within people and causes long term negative effects.
I say that because this can be the only explanation as to why WARC have asked us back to present at this years Cannes Festival.
Yep … it’s happening.
June 22 at 3:30pm.
God help us all.
But before you all run off to tell George Bush you’ve discovered a real weapon of mass destruction … there’s good news and bad news.
The good is both Martin and I know we don’t stand a chance of saying anything remotely interesting by ourselves. Because of this fact, we went out and asked/blackmailed/paid if our dear friend – the brilliant Paula Bloodworth – would be a part of this with us.
As anyone who listens to OnStrategy will know, Paula, Martin and I meet up every week on Zoom to put the world to rights. Or bitch. Or ask each other for advice. So we used one of these sessions to beg for her brain and charisma to help make this something people would want to see and would actually get something out of it.
And – because we caught her when she was tired – she said yes!!!
However, it’s because she was tired that we got her to agree what our talk would be called.
Which leads to the bad news.
Because while all the other invited speakers are giving talks about the role strategy in terms of it’s future, it’s role in driving business and effectiveness, the emerging roles, trends and opportunities for the discipline, our talk is called:
Strategy is constipated. Imagination is the laxative.
And while we haven’t written a word of it yet, I’m not joking.
I’m so sorry …
For Paula.
For Martin.
For WARC.
For the discipline.
For all the attendees.
But hey, at least I’ll get another photo op out of it, even if it ends up looking like this:
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Complicity, Confidence, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Distinction, Effectiveness, Innovation, Insight, Linkedin, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Relevance, Standards, Strategy, Trust, Wieden+Kennedy
There is a lot of talk about a new term in marketing, called ‘UBR’.
UBR stands for Universal Buying Reason and there’s a lot of people seemingly wetting their pants over it. In essence, UBR is when a brand owns a position within a category that arguably, anyone within that category could have had, but they were first or the most consistent or invested in making it their or were simply, the biggest spenders behind it.
If you’re thinking this is not exactly new, you’d be right … but many people seem to be more obsessed with being associated with new terminologies or methodologies than actually making stuff that pushes brands and business to new places.
That’s why UBR feels like the next terminology trope in a long line of terminology tropes …
Brand Assets.
Brand Eco-Systems.
Global Human Truths.
Overly simplicitic labels that promote conformity under the guise of effectiveness or efficiency.
[And yes, I know Dan Wieden used to talk about Global Human Truths … and as I told him, he was wrong. Because while all Mum’s may love their kids, a Mum in Wuhan shows it in very different ways than a Mum in Washington, and to ignore that nuance is to ignore truth for convenience and complicity. And as anyone worth their salt will tell you, often it’s the nuance that is the difference between doing things for people or about them]
Of course, like all trope trends, there’s some value in what is being said about UBR – after all, its hardly a new concept given countless brands and categories have used this approach for literally decades, from alcohol to jewellery.
But what some of the people pushing UBR are seemingly forgetting – or not understanding – is that even at the most functional level of category marketing, it requires depth and consideration to fully release its potential … and frankly the lack of discussion about that highlights the industries obsession with providing clients with easy answers/solutions rather than encouraging/pushing/provoking them to appreciate the rewards [and shareholder benefit, let alone expectation] of putting in the hard work to identify how they can consistently build their value, role and position.
What scares me most is that some of the people ‘fluffing UBR’ – but thankfully not all – are in jobs where they’re paid to help clients with their business … and yet they talk in incredibly generalistic and simplistic terms about something that has context and complexity.
Where the hell is their objectivity?
Where is the understanding?
Where is the nuance?
It all feels like a desperate play to be seen as an industry thought leader, where the goal is to highjack whatever seems to be getting industry traction and then aligning themselves to it.
What’s worse is we’ve seen how this approach works as more and more people value and aspire speed and status over substance and experience … and I don’t really care that makes me sound old, because it actually has nothing to do with age, and everything to do with valuing what our industry can do when we do it with craft, understanding and ambition.
What sums it all up [for me] is how one of the brands the UBR advocates bang on about is Tesco’s.
I get why, because on face value, Tesco’s is a supermarket like every other supermarket.
But …
All it takes is a quick look at Tesco’s history – from their foundation in 1919 through to the many acts and actions they’ve embraced and led over 100 years, from the ‘computers for schools’ program to challenging EU law to give their customers access to products at the same price as their European cousins and a million things in-between – and they’d see the ‘Every Little Helps’ position is not something ‘anyone’ could say, but something far more specific to them specifically … something they’ve continually reinforced and invested in through retail, customer and cultural innovation as opposed to just the repetition of a category trope.
It’s yet another example of people needing to know their history before they can claim they’re creators of it.
Or – said another way – why clients and the industry at large, need to get back to valuing those who have DONE and DO shit, rather than just talk it … regardless how popular or well-meaning they may be.
[OK, ‘talking shit’ is harsh, but it sounded good in that sentence, so forgive me]
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for pushing knowledge and possibilities, I’m just not for people putting lipstick on a dead sheep and calling it Ms World.
And don’t get me started on how many of these people are ultimately downplaying someone else’s creative excellence to make it all about them.
Wow, that’s like a rant from 2010. Felt good. Thanks industry trope for waking me up.