Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Creativity, Culture, Insight
A few years ago, the APG asked me to do a presentation about how to get to interesting work and I summed it up by saying, ‘live an interesting life’.
While I appreciate that is a relatively superficial answer, there’s truth in it.
Put simply, what you find interesting is directly related to the experiences you have and the people you meet. The more experiences – and people – you have, the more interesting the possibilities.
But when I look around, it can feel like a cultural echo chamber.
Everyone reading the same things. Following the same people. Commenting on the same issues.
Sometimes I wonder if people even look at life outside of work. Hell, there were people over the festive season who used social media to only talk about ‘ad issues’.
WHAT THE FUCK?
Look, I get strategy means everything can have some sort of professional value … but there’s a big difference between looking at life with ‘professional blinkers’ and just doing shit for the sheer curiosity and interest of it.
It’s why I think there’s huge value in the messy stuff.
The weird … the strange … the ‘makes no sense’ …
That’s where you find the new and the different.
That’s where you gain understanding rather than answers.
That’s where you learn about people not ‘consumers’.
Of course it’s rare these days.
Now everyone is looking for short-cuts.
From online surveys to AI driven chat bots.
Optimise … maximise … squeeze every inch of efficiency out of what you’re doing.
And while some of that has value, it’s no where near as good as running with reality.
It’s why Wieden – despite being all about the work – has always been so good at strategy.
Because they celebrate those who are more than just professionally curious, but culturally.
The people who have a hunger and desire to get ‘in it’.
To get messy and lost in the opinions, behaviours, actions, viewpoints and nuance of the communities and subcultures they’re exploring and working with. Which is why they value being among them as much as reading every possible book about them.
A commitment to authenticity over advertising.
A commitment to adding to culture not just stealing from it.
A commitment to finding the interesting rather than repeating the tropes.
A commitment to fucking around and finding out rather than playing where you’ve always been.
Sure it takes more work. Sure it takes more time. Sure it probably adds more initial cost.
But putting aside the fact this helps get to better work – that plays to where the culture/subculture is heading rather than where it currently is, or worse, was – there’s the simple fact of doing things right. Because, as my Dad once said to me, if you’re not interested in doing that, then what’s the fucking point of doing it at all?
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Insight, Perspective, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Relevance, Resonance
I know ‘insights’ aren’t in vogue these days – but I am still a massive believer in them.
Sure, I don’t think there’s ever a ‘one insight fits all’ solution and I appreciate that what many people/companies pass as an insight is anything but … however to dismiss them out of hand seems idiotic, especially when you see what people are using in their place.
Observations.
Generalisations.
Global human truths.
Of course, there are other ways you can understand the issues and viewpoints society has towards issues and categories [which I am also a massive fan of] but the power of insights is that it gives you understanding WHY people do things not just WHAT they do and used correctly, can open up opportunities and possibilities that would otherwise never see the light of day.
I say this because I recently saw something that made me smile for the sheer truth of it …
I mean, for something we all do, it is amazing how we all have a relationship with our own toilet seats. Of course it has a lot to do with it being located in an environment that is ours – one we only share with those we know and/or are related to – but the ‘pull’ of doing our business on our own seat is something many will relate to.
But what I particularly like in that definition is the word ‘trust’.
The idea our bums have to trust ‘the seat’ is fascinating to me …
Raising all manner of issues from hygiene to history to relationships and god knows what else.
That’s not just insightful, it ignites a whole lot of ideas that could work for all manner of brands and products … an insight that elevates how you see what you can be, not just what you do. A way to connect and engage with people rather than just be about them.
Oh, I know what some people would say about this:
“But if this could be used for a range of products, it means it’s not unique to a particular brand … plus it’s hardly positive, so it’s unappealing for use”.
And to them, I’d say they don’t understand creativity … because putting aside the fact this isn’t ‘unappealing’, even if it was it wouldn’t mean the work would be, because insights are there to allow the work to take lateral leaps not be literal expressions of it.
But that’s where we are these days.
Which is why companies want insights that are directly linked to their specific brand/product rather than the audiences and contexts they deal in … even though [1] rarely do they actually exist and [2] if they do, they’re boring or lacking any motivational appeal.
As I’ve said many times, my problem with the industry is we’re more focused on the process than what the process is meant to serve. Obsessed with saying what we want people to think is important than saying what people find important. Obsessed with pleasing our bosses than our audiences.
Which is why one of the most important lessons all agencies and client should embrace is something Mr Martin Weigel said about 10,000 years ago …
“You can be relevant as hell and still be boring as fuck.”
Don’t blame insights. Blame what people think is an insight.
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.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Colenso, Colleagues, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Cynic, Empathy, Honesty, Marketing, Media, Perspective, Planning, Point Of View, Provocative, Relevance, Resonance, Wieden+Kennedy
This blog has been going for a loooooooong time.
Which means, it’s had its fair share of April Fool posts.
Some have been very good [even though I say it myself] with different industry people picking it up and commenting on it thinking it’s real.
And some being utterly, utterly shite.
But this year I decided not to do one.
Not because I couldn’t be bothered.
Nor because I couldn’t think of what to do.
Not because it was an Easter holiday on April 1.
But because after a while, it just becomes a bit boring.
I say this because a lot of brands don’t seem to get that. Instead, they keep doing the same thing over and over again without realising the audience have moved on.
That might be because of ego. That might be because of a lack of self-awareness. That might be because they don’t even know who the fuck their audience is … but whatever the reason, they keep doing what they do regardless.
And one of those things they keep repeating is ‘hijacking culture’.
By that I mean either during or after a topical event … they hire a van, slap a billboard on the back, put some headline on it that refers to whatever event they are ‘leveraging’ and then drive back and forth so a photographer can snap it in situ and then send it to the press or put it on the socials.
Hey, sometimes it’s really good.
But often, it just feels pretty sad.
Especially when lots of companies are all trying to do exactly the same thing for the same event at the same time.
Look I get it … it’s a way to get boost attention.
It’s also a way to show your client – or their bosses – you’re ‘on the ball’.
Can’t criticise that … except in many cases, it also seems to have a subliminal admission that they need to borrow from others to make people care about them.
Which is less good.
Yes, I know I’m being a bit of a pedantic asshole here, but here’s the thing … when people expect brands to do this stuff, then you have to accept that you’re no longer ‘hijacking’ anything, you’re simply conforming.
Of course there are ways to do it well.
Wieden were the masters and – arguably – the originators of it.
Which was basically to do stuff that ‘added to the cultural conversation, not just stole from it.
They did it with NIKE for literally decades.
Olympics.
Superbowls.
World Cups.
Winning.
Failing.
Achievements.
Retirements.
Fines.
Spectaculars.
But achieving it wasn’t simply down to great talent, great clients or being quick at doing stuff like this, it was down to 3 things.
Creatives co-run/run the account, not simply make the ads.
They understand the culture around the category, not just the category.
They think in terms of owning the brand voice, not just launching campaigns.
What the combination means is everyone feels there role and purpose is more than just making advertising, but finding how … where … when and who the brand can/should a voice and point of view. It’s more than just being pro-active, it’s a confidence in your preparation.
You know what the brand will say.
You know how the brand will say it.
You know what the culture of the audience want and need.
You’re moving things forward because you’re always moving things forward. Seeing your role as far more than simply fulfilling ‘campaign requirements’ and ‘unexpected opportunities’ but directly and continually driving, shaping and influencing the behaviour and energy of the vision and role of the brand in culture.
Many people will say they do that, few do.
Instead they just churn out stunts or puns that often end up being more for the ego of the people involved than the benefit of the audience it is supposedly for.
Which is the heart of what, in my opinion, separates brands/agencies who get it and those who pretend they do.
Because the wannabes and imposters talk about how they will make the masses love their brand, whereas the real deal know it’s about the brand showing and expressing who they love and who they are for.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Business, Comment, Corporate Evil, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Dad, Effectiveness, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Professionalism, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Respect, Stupid
One of the things I find fascinating is how everything these days is ‘a sprint’.
The urgent need for an immediate solution to enable a brand or business to move forward.
Except it’s not true is it? Not really.
I mean – I get that there are occasions where circumstances demand an extremely quick response.
A terrible event.
A moment of opportunity.
An act forced by an aggressive client.
But in the main, these ‘sprints’ have nothing to do with that.
They’re for a new product launch.
A brand campaign.
An annual event.
If they need a sprint for those, then surely that means they haven’t [or just as likely, their bosses, bosses haven’t] got their shit together because those things don’t ‘just happen’ do they? It’s not like the Paris authorities are going to wake up on the 1st of July and suddenly realise they have to hold the Olympics in a few weeks time so need construction companies to engage in ‘a sprint’ to knock up a few stadiums in time.
Now if my Dad was alive and found himself in this situation he would say – as I often heard him tell clients who had failed to plan appropriately – “your emergency is not my problem” … however in adland, we tend to jump in and try to help.
Yay us!
Except quite often, when we do this, we’re made to feel like we’re the reason they’re in this mess and so rather than see us as someone trying to help, we’re seen as someone holding them back.
It’s so weird.
Even more so when they then question our hours and fees.
Which is why my attitude is that unless there is a real reason for the urgency – and a respect for what you’re asking people to do – you should probably say no. I get it may be unpopular, but you’re not going to win in this situation.
And don’t get me started when companies brief agencies before a major holiday.
OH MY GOD.
I used to see this in China a lot … and we [as in Wieden Shanghai] would always say no.
Sure, if it was a client of ours who was in a pickle for legit reasons, we’d do all we could to help them … but if it was about ego or mismanagement, we’d politely decline.
And yet, from what I see and hear from others – and occasionally experience – this situation seems to be happening more and more often … the defecto rather than the exception.
What’s even more bizarre is that the supposed urgency for a solution gets more and more delayed as additional contexts, mandatories, and approval processes get added to the list of deliverables … resulting in you wondering how urgent this really was as a supposed ‘sprint’ turns into a marathon.
Of course, the reality of these situations is it’s actually about money and time.
Or said another way, the desire to reduce it.
I get it, developing work can be time-consuming and expensive … but here’s the thing, shortening the time doesn’t automatically mean it makes it the work better.
Cheaper, maybe.
But not better.
In my experience, there are 3 main reasons this situation continually and persistently occurs:
1. The client doesn’t value creativity.
2. The client doesn’t understand creativity.
3. The client doesn’t actually know what they want or need.
For far too many, creativity is seen as expressing what you want people to know about your brand/product before adding ‘some wrapping paper’ around the messaging to make it ‘creative’.
I’ve talked about the folly of this ‘wrapping paper’ analogy before … but that perspective continues to grow. Worse, some agencies actively reinforce it in an attempt to show ‘they get the client’ or they ‘get business’, all the while undermining their single most valuable asset.
Which means that maybe they don’t know business as much as they think.
Don’t get me wrong, it is entirely possible to spend too much time on something. But there sure-as-hell can be too little. And when you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t know what they want – so use creativity to try and work it out and then judge it as if its your fault – then any length of time is too much time.
And yet it feels like ‘quality’ has now become defined by the speed it takes to create rather than the effect it creates … often reinforced, as I said a couple of days ago, by ‘for profit’ research companies and gurus who focus on clarity not interest.
No wonder so many clients are asking agencies about what their AI approach is.
Now as I said at Cannes, I think AI – and tech as a whole – offers a whole world of possibilities and opportunities for brands to evolve, grow and connect. Hell, we just did it with our Pedigree Adoptables campaign that literally wouldn’t be possible without it. But that’s not what a lot of clients mean when they ask that, they’re looking for cheaper and quicker output. Optimising the optimized.
The great irony of this is that when you talk about AI affecting their business – especially if the competition embrace it against them – many react like you’ve just tazered them.
They’ll say there’s no comparison.
That their product price-point is based on the value of their expertise, craft and innovation.
And for some, that’s true. But it’s some … not all.
Which is very similar to the post I wrote a while back about how many brands like to think of themselves as premium, but their actions and values are all about how cheap they can be.
A while back I spoke to someone who is one of the most influential luxury expert in the world.
They own, invest and consult with the best of the best … new and old, classic and innovative.
And they said to me they believe the future of luxury will be about recognizing the value of humanity.
The custom, craft and care.
Because in a world that is increasingly about speed, scale and optimization, the brands who will command the greatest value, influence and price will be the ones who offer their customers the most human interaction, engagement and service experience.
It’s a fascinating thought … one that could separate the real from the wannabes.
Or, said another way, the companies who those who talk about valuing their brand and audience and those who actually do. Because one only cares about the sprint, where others appreciate the jog.