Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Colleagues, Comment, Complicity, Confidence, Content, Context, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Distinction, Diversity, Education, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Friendship, Honesty, Individuality, Insight, Loyalty, Marketing, Martin Weigel, Paula, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Point Of View, Presenting, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Social Commentary, Social Divide, Standards, Wieden+Kennedy
Hello. I’m back.
And because you’ve had no posts for basically 2 weeks, this is going to be a long one.
Yes, I know my posts are already waaaaaaay to long. Sorry, but deal with it.
I had a great time in LA and before that Australia.
Well, I say Australia – but it was in Perth which is closer to Singapore than Sydney.
Met lots of people.
Had good conversation.
It was fun … so thank you State of Social, for inviting me to come over.
I have always loved to go to talks. The stress of putting it together isn’t fun … but for me it’s also about visiting new places, hearing new perspectives and just generally chatting to new people.
And on the rare occasion I get to do a talk with people I know and love, then I get the added benefit – as screenwriter/director Nora Ephron once said was one of the happiest feelings on earth – of enjoying dinner with friends in a city or country none of you live in.
It’s one of my favourite feelings too.
And that’s why Cannes was so special to me.
The event – if I’m being honest – wasn’t that great. Certainly compared to previous times I’d been … and I’ve never really liked it in the first place. But this time it felt the whole industry was in full-on heads-in-the-sand mode.
Nothing highlighted this more to me than the relief/confidence the industry media reported a comment made by Torr – from Apple – in his speech when he said Apple will always need and use agencies. That may be true, but it doesn’t take a data scientist to realise Apple are doing more and more creative work in-house and even their specialist agency – MAL – is seemingly doing less for them.
But I digress …
Because my favourite thing of doing a talk at Cannes was this …
I love these two.
And I love this photo … me, Paula and Martin.
I didn’t exactly have to bully them to do the talk, but I knew I only wanted to do it if they said yes. And the reason for that was we would get to hang out properly for the first time ever.
By that I mean, physically be in the same place … because throughout our time together, we’ve either only met on Zoom or been in situations where just 2 of us would ever be in the same place/country.
So it was special. It was also different.
Because being in the same place – away from the responsibilities of time/life – meant we could properly connect. A deeper way to interact … argue … debate. I totally get why some people prefer working from home. I appreciate the financial impact of travel and time – but you get something more out of being with others ‘in the flesh’, so to speak.
Just like you can learn about other countries from the internet … it’s not the same as actually going there or working there.
But many are discounting this. Claiming they can do their job perfectly well from the comfort of their home. And they probably can … but the question is whether they’re growing and evolving doing it that way. OK, so many will think they are … and many may not care … but there’s a massive difference being immersed in an environment rather than sitting on the outside of it.
I still remember trying to hire someone for W+K Tokyo. They were keen but it was their first overseas move so were rightfully apprehensive. They eventually turned it down and when I asked why, they said they had spoken to someone they knew and they’d advised against it. So I asked if that person had ever lived overseas and they said no – but they’d ‘visited a ton of countries’.
And I am sure they had, but just like looking up a place on the internet doesn’t give you a full understanding about the culture or nuances of a country, either does ‘visiting’ one for a week or two on holiday.
Of course there’s huge amounts you can learn from wherever you are. And there will be stuff that is amazing, important and unique to your situation and nation. But to think there is nothing to learn from outside experiences, perspectives and interactions, is crazy.
And that’s why being with Paula and Martin was so wonderful.
Because we’re bonded by what isn’t common.
We come from different countries.
We all live in different countries from where we were born.
We have all lived in multiple different countries – in my case, double figures.
We [now] all work at different companies and on different clients.
We all have different experiences that has led to different viewpoints.
And while by today’s nationalistic philosophies, it shouldn’t work – in fact we shouldn’t even want to interact – it does. Because perspective and growth comes from the environments, interactions and challenges we embrace … even the stuff that isn’t comfortable.
Sure, it’s all about how you do it – and we do it with respect for the global experiences, exposure and standards we all bring to the table and the knowledge no one is doing it to hurt the other, but to expand perspectives and considerations – but it still can be challenging and we may still may not agree.
Then there’s the fact that we are three, white, privileged adults … so despite having lived in multiple countries and worked with brands on a whole range of challenges and audiences … there’s still huge amounts we want to learn from others outside our frames of reference or understanding.
And while I totally appreciate some don’t want to – or can’t do that – to discount its value says more about the people putting up the barriers and blinkers than it does about the value of the alternative.
And that’s why things like Cannes is important.
The engagements and lessons and interactions.
I wish it wasn’t so expensive so more people could immerse themselves in it rather than just play on the outskirts of it … but wanting to be grow is a noble thing.
And while we were talking at Cannes and had an opinion we wanted to share … we went there wanting to grow too.
And that’s why it was so good to be there. With them.
To listen. To learn. To debate. To argue.
But most of all, to want to be challenged, so we can grow.
I’m lucky to have them in my life. I’m even luckier I got to spend time with them in person.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand Suicide, Business, Comment, Complicity, Confidence, Consultants, Context, Corporate Evil, Corporate Gaslighting, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Fake Attitude, Imposter Syndrome, Leadership, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Prejudice, Professionalism, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Succession, Toxic Positivity, Trust, Truth
I appreciate that at my age, the title of this post may suggest I’m going to whine about companies overlooking people of a certain age for younger, cheaper, hungrier individuals.
I’m not. I get it.
Not only that, while age and knowledge have some level of interconnectedness … I’ve met countless young people who are bloody brilliant [not relative to their age, just bloody brilliant] as well as plenty of people with ‘experience’ who, frankly, aren’t.
What I’m talking about is the blinkered confidence some companies place in their people simply because they’re their people.
On one hand I suppose I should celebrate it, given its not that long ago that companies overlooked internal capability for the external shiny and new.
And while this post does not reflect any of the clients I specifically work with directly, I am seeing and hearing more and more companies go to this other extreme and worse … enabling a level of arrogance in their people that results in any objectivity they face – regardless of the knowledge and expertise of the person delivering it, let alone the desire to help make things more successful – as a threat.
Complicity is the name of the game these days.
Blind acceptance that whatever the person ‘in charge’ says, is right.
A belief internal employees are better informed about every topic than people who are experts in specific topics … so companies can feel great about themselves.
Of course, the issue with this approach is that when things go wrong – or don’t go right enough – everyone else gets the blame. Not just by the person in charge [which you almost expect] but by the company they work for, despite the fact the only reason they gave this employee the project is because they knew a bit more about a subject than senior management, so they saw them as [1] an expert in the field and [2] a cheaper option that bringing in external expertise.
Now you’d think the fear of this outcome would ensure people would stand up for what they believe is right.
Not because they’re arrogant, but because they know their experience and knowledge can disproportionally benefit the end result.
And some do. At least the really good ones …
But even they are under increasing pressure to go along with the whims and wants of certain people/companies … because the whole industry is seeing more and more work being handed to people and companies who simply say yes to whatever is wanted.
Or said another way, convenience and fawning is more valued then expertise, knowledge and standards.
Now of course, it’s human nature to believe we can do more than we actually can.
We all like to think we are ‘special’.
We all like to be acknowledged as important.
We’ve all heard the ‘fake it till you make it’ philosophy.
But the truly special are the ones who know that however good they are, having people around them who are better than them – in different fields – can make them even more effective.
It’s why the World’s best athletes have coaches.
It’s why the World’s best musicians have producers.
It’s why my brilliant ex-NIKE/FFI client, Simon Pestridge, said: “middle management want to be told they’re right. Senior management want to know how they can be better”.
The reason I say all this is that I recently reached out to one of the best organisational psychologists in the World. They work with the CEO’s of some of the most respected and successful companies in the World including Apple, NIKE, Ferrari and Electronic Arts to name a few.
This is what they said when I talked to them about what I was seeing:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“I call them professional imposters and the reason so many succeed in corporations is because they target other imposters. It becomes a co-dependent relationship where they ensure their ego, status or promotion opportunities won’t be challenged.”
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
To be honest, I was not shocked by their view, I was more shocked by the acknowledgment.
Of course, I probably shouldn’t be. It’s hardly a new phenomenon and we also had one of the most successful shows in TV history shine a light on it …
Succession was a celebration of the role of co-dependence and complicity within organisations.
As I wrote recently, Tom was the epitome of it.
But this post is about Tom before he ‘won’ [even though he is still a pawn to the real power] … this is about Tom when he just wanted to please to win favour. Where he thought nothing of being vicious and vindictive to those beneath him because he knew that didn’t just please the people above him, it let him feel he was above everyone around him.
And so Tom eventually gets promoted beyond his capability …
Where the illusion of power and external fawning is more important to him than pay checks.
Where his belief is he is superior to all, regardless of knowledge or experience.
Where his understanding of situations is the only understanding of a situation.
Yeah, it’s bleak. It’s fucking bleak. Because while Tom was fiction, Trump got to be President of America. And what makes it worse is we all see it. Hell, we’ve probably all been exposed to it. And yet it goes on.
If companies truly want to be great, then they’ve got to kill and stop rewarding toxic positivity … because value will be revealed when they allow more people to say no to them and they say yes to more people.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, Business, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail
A few weeks ago, I saw this …
… and I have to be honest, it’s had me thinking a lot.
Because while I acknowledge you can’t take things for granted, when you get lost in the weeds, you lose sight of what you’re working towards and how you do it.
And a lot of people are doing both of those things.
Nothing sums this up more to me than the issue of attribution.
The quest to minimise risk – or ‘optimise value’ – has resulted in brands forgetting that the easiest way to get attribution is to do something interesting.
But instead – reinforced by industry ‘guru’s – we have ended up with a continual production line of commercially responsible alternatives.
Be a one colour brand.
Place brand assets higher than a brand idea.
And – worse of all – have watermarks in your ads.
While colour and brand assets have a role – albeit not a primary role as so many people seem to suggest – if you feel the only way your brand will be remembered in your commercial is to place your logo all the way through it, then you either don’t know how people work or how advertising does.
Or said another way, you’re admitting your brand and your product are forgettable.
Seriously … why would you do that?
Why would you spend millions on something that positions you as uninteresting.
Worse, why would you spend millions on something that positions you as uninteresting and make sure people know it’s you by ramming your logo down their throat?
But somewhere, someone is measuring the ‘impact’ of this approach and finding a way to demonstrate its effectiveness to clients. Letting everyone feel pleased with themselves. Their choices. Their actions. Creating a precedent others will follow in the blind belief they’re being smarter … more optimised … more effective than all their competitors. All the time consciously and deliberately ignoring the critical fact that it’s undermining them rather than liberating them.
Which leads back to that tweet at the top of the page.
Because while knowing how things are going is important, nothing reveals how lost you are than measuring everything but valuing nothing.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Audio Visual, Brand, Comment, Confidence, Context, Craft, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, Experience, Legend, Loyalty, Management, Metallica, Music, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Trust, Truth
Late last year, Metallica launched a new song called LuxEterna, from their upcoming new album, 72.
While it is a brilliant return to their roots, the choice of ‘yellow’ as a key colour was met with some negative commentary from ‘brand purists’.
I don’t mean fans, but brand and design folks.
This was amazing for 2 reasons.
The first is our job is to keep things moving evolving rather than continually replicating what’s gone before, so if anyone should be open minded to change, it’s brand and design folk.
[It also highlights my problem with people who keep banging on about ‘brand assets’, because they are confusing recognition with interesting. Or worse, thinking recognition beats being and doing interesting stuff for audiences]
Secondly, the album was designed – as many have been – by the brilliant folk at the wonderful Turner Duckworth … and given their body of work, if anyone knows about designing modern iconography, it’s them.
But overall, I just found the whole debate amusing.
Metallica have always approached albums as a way to express their current frame of creative mind … and given they always look to inject something new or challenging into their work, the choice of yellow seems the perfect way to communicate ‘next chapter’.
In the case of 27 Seasons – also known as the first 18, and arguably, most significant years of your life – James said this …
“There’s been a lot of darkness in my life and in our career and things that have happened with us … but always having a sense of hope, always having the light that is in that darkness, keeps us moving. Without darkness, there’s no light, and being able to focus a little more on the light instead of how it used to be and how horrible it is, that can only be a good thing. There’s a lot of good things going on in life — focusing on that instead helps to balance out my life. And there’s no one meaning to it — everyone has some sense of hope or light in their life, and, obviously, music is mine.“
When you read that, it’s not hard to work out that the use of yellow is part of a bigger idea around the album rather than a desire to build a one colour brand which some have claimed.
Unsurprisingly, they’re the same people who talk about brand assets like you can just buy them off the shelf rather than make them a byproduct of what you do, so that they have value in them that you also keep building.
By pure chance, I was asked by people connected to the band to do a talk to a music publishing company.
While not specifically related to Metallica, I was asked by someone in the audience for my opinion on their ‘new image’ and whether it risked upsetting their core audience.
I had thought this question may came up, which is why I had prepared an answer.
After informing them I had never known a brand – let alone a band – who knew their audience as well as them … and if you listen to the track, I doubt any of their fans would mistake a revitalised Metallica for Ed Sheeran … I said this.
“If Rock n’ Roll is about rebellion, then surely there’s nothing more rock n’ roll than Metallica using yellow rather than the category norm of black?”
It was met with applause.
And some disgust, hahaha.
But here’s the thing …
Brands – and bands – don’t move forward if all they do is give audiences the same thing over and over again. Nor will they if they just give audiences exactly what they want over and over again. Longevity is as much about keeping people on their toes as it is satisfying their passion and curiosity and you only stand a chance of achieving that by following what interests you, not what interests everyone else.
Metallica get this more than most.
It’s part of the reason they have stayed at the top … because by doing things that interest them, they do things that interests more people rather than just the same people.
As I wrote for MTV years ago, brands can learn a lot from bands … because while brands may think finding shortcuts or disguises allows them to optimise their efficiency, everyone else can tell it’s because they’ve run out of ideas or energy.
____________________________________________________________________
By the way, 72 Seasons comes out tomorrow. This is not a sponsored post. Well, not directly anyway, hahaha.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Business, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creativity, Culture, Customer Service, Effectiveness, Food, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Membership, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Strategy, Trust
So Kevin Chesters recently posted some work from the far distant past.
It was work that I adored at the time and even now, I feel is one of the best pieces of communication ever made.
EVER. MADE.
But it’s not NIKE. Or Apple. Or anything approaching ‘cultural cool’ … it’s for a supermarket.
Oh, but wait … there’s more.
Because it’s not a brand ad – though it does a ton for the brand – it’s a retail ad.
But instead of starbursts and shelf wobblers … it’s a masterclass in craft and smarts. Where the majestic charm and wry humour not only treats the audience with intelligence, but communicates price in a way you see value both in the product and the company selling it.
Regardless of the item.
Regardless of the audience ‘segment’.
Regardless of whether it’s selling food or their loyalty scheme.
It’s incredible and what’s more … it’s from the early 2000’s.
I think.
But despite being almost 20 years old, it’s still one of the best examples of a brand that knows who they are, knows who their audience is and knows the relationship they would like to have with their audience.
More than that, they know the problem they’re solving.
Not just in a general sense … but in terms of the potential barrier for each item.
In a world of wish-standard Nike knockoffs, this is an example of advertising not just communicating, but undeniably contributing to the growth, value and reputation of the company it represents.
When it wants to be – and when it’s allowed to be – this industry can be outstanding.
While we can’t control the standards other parties may demand, we can control what ours are.
Of course, in these ‘procurement-led times’ you could say ‘you get what you pay for’.
And I get that.
But watching the value and standards of what we do fall down a drain doesn’t seem a particularly good business approach.
Which is why I find myself repeating what an old boss of mine used to say to me.
“What happens next is up to us”.
He’s never been more right.