Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Communication Strategy, Content, Context, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Packaging, Planning, Point Of View, Positioning, Relevance, Resonance, Strategy
This is a shop near where we live.
Now I appreciate the above is basically an adoption of the TK Max strategy – reframing ‘random stuff’ to the joy of discovery and exploration – but I love it.
I especially like that it offers a far more compelling reason for people to keep visiting than simply saying ‘cheap stuff sold here’.
Now I get on face value, reframing is easy to do – but based on a bunch of effectiveness papers I’ve read – it isn’t.
Right now, the basic approach to a lot of strategy appears to be either ‘state the bloody obvious’ or ‘live in a dream-world’.
Logic or fantasy. [Though it’ll be called ‘laddering’ to make it sound smart]
But what I love about the Opportunity Shop is that it does neither of those.
What they’ve done with that name is take something inherently true and then convey it in a way that opens possibility.
Elevation rather than explanation … helping you connect to it because it doesn’t ask you to reject your perceptions, but invites you to interpret them in a new way.
It’s part of the reason why I loved living in Asia so much … because there was so much that operated in similar ways there.
When we lived in Singapore, there was a market near our apartment on Club Street.
A bric-a-brac place … full of stuff like single shoes or jigsaw puzzles with pieces missing. Totally random stuff.
But one of the reasons it was popular was because of the name it had … the ‘thieves’ market’.
How great is that?
A name that not only defines the weird shit you will find there, but also gives you a reason why you would want to keep going there.
A proper reframe. Not trying to associate with stuff they wish they were associated with but acknowledging the starting point of how they’re actually seen.
Emotional self-awareness rather than blinkered ego.
And that is why most companies get ‘reframing’ wrong …
Because they want to hammer home how they want to be seen.
So they repeat it ad nauseum … regardless of perception, reference, context or reality.
And the irony of this approach is rather than capture people’s attention, imagination and emotion, they kill it.
Pushing people away rather than inviting them in. Kind of like a lot of the effectiveness papers I’ve read.
Where I have to keep re-reading them to try and work out what the hell they’re trying to say.
What their idea is.
Why it’s right.
How it worked.
A constant stream of explanation which – ironically – never really explains.
And while I appreciate effectiveness papers require a lot of information, there’s 2 quotes that I feel everyone should think about when defining an idea, be it for an effectiveness paper or to get a client to buy.
The first is something we heard from a chef when doing research for Tobasco who said: “The more confident the chef, the less ingredients they use”.
The second is even more random.
It’s from ex-US President, Ronald Reagan, who said, “If you’re explaining, you’re losing”.
[You can read about them more here and here]
Think about those and you’re basically being given the rules to develop a reframe that can change minds, behaviours, and outcomes rather than build cynical – or just indifferent – barriers through rationality, fantasy or bullshit association.
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, Auckland, Communication Strategy, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, New Zealand, Perspective
A few weeks ago, while going for my daily walk, I saw this:
I know there’s nothing new in this concept.
Let’s face it …
+ Solving problems are more powerful than communicating problems.
+ Talking to someone is always more effective than talking to everyone.
+ Changing contexts and perspectives helps change contexts and perspectives.
+ Being self-awareness opens up possibilities for who you can become.
… is well established and been practiced for years – such as this iconic piece from London’s V&A years back – but I still like it. A lot.
I know it won’t change the world, but it’s an idea that may change somebody’s … because to paraphrase Ferdinand Porsche, ‘its better to be everything to someone than try to be anything to anyone’
So to the Auckland Museum and the people behind it, well done.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Design, Differentiation, Innovation, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Packaging, Perspective, Positioning, Pride, Purpose, Reputation, Respect, Steve Jobs, Technology, Values
I’ve written a lot about the bullshit of brand purpose.
Or should I say the hijacking of purpose by marketing departments and agencies.
Far too often, we see companies where their ‘purpose’ has no day-to-day impact on the operations or decisions they make beyond pushing their marketing messages and promotions. For these orgs, purpose is positioned simply as ‘something we hope might change’ rather than actively doing stuff that actively pushes it.
As they say in the UK, “the truth of the pudding is in the eating”, and a lot of corporate brand purpose tastes like bullshit.
That doesn’t mean the concept of purpose is entirely wrong.
Oh no.
However the reality is true brand purpose is born rather than manufactured – especially by a marketing department – so for every Patagonia, there’s a Unilever … which is why I find the easiest way to see who is talking truth versus shite is simply by exploring how much inconvenience they’ll accept and embrace.
Recently I saw an interesting example of a brand who not just embraced inconvenience, but demanded it.
An example which I imagine caused all manner of friction and tension throughout the company.
And yet, when you think about who the company were and – more importantly – who they wanted to become, you see it as absolute commitment to their beliefs and ambitions.
Take a look at this …
Now I appreciate some would read that and only see the problems … the costs … the disruptions … the impact on productivity … the C-Suite ‘bullying’. But they’re probably the same people who think purpose is about ‘wrapping paper’ rather than beliefs and actions … which is why I kinda-love this.
I love how much they were pushing it and how they pushed it.
It was important to them.
Not for virtue signaling, not for corporate complicity – though I accept there’s a bit of that – but mainly because a company can’t talk about technology, creativity and the future while asking your very own colleagues to embrace the cheap, the convenient and the conformist.
Just to be clear, this is VERY different to companies who mandate processes.
That’s about control and adherence.
A desire to keep things as they are rather than what they could be.
And to me, that’s the difference between those who ‘talk’ purpose and those whose actions are a byproduct of it.
Every day in every way.
Because as the old trope goes, it’s only a principal if it costs you something and the reality is – like strategy – too many talk a good game but will flip the moment they think they could make/save a bit more cash.
Apple may have a lot of problems, but fundamentally, they mean what they say and show it in their actions – both in the spotlight, but also in the shadows … where very few people will ever see – as exemplified by Jobs famous ‘paint behind the fence‘ quote.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Content, Context, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Imagination, Planners, Planning, Play, Point Of View, Ridiculous, Stories
For all the talk of planners having curiosity, we rarely talk about imagination.
Of course, Martin, Paula and I talked about this back in 2023 at Cannes with our Strategy Is Constipated, Imagination Is The Laxative talk, but the reality is imagination is more than just a topic for consideration, it’s a muscle that needs exercising every day and needs rigor to enable it to reveal where its capable of going.
The good news is it’s easy to do if you put your mind to it, which is why one of the things I tell junior planners to do is to always look for the unintended stories that surround us.
It might be in a cafe.
It might be at a bus stop.
It might be a coffee cup on the street.
But the point is, look for things that allow you to imagine the stories or situations that led to what you see in front of your face.
Now I should point out that I may have stolen this from the great Russell Davies … but even now I still do it because when it comes to writing briefs, it helps me imagine where it could go before logic tries to dictate where I have to take it.
Recently I was out for a walk when I saw this …
On one hand, they’re just 2 kids shoes on a pavement.
Maybe lost as their parent pushed them along in their pram.
But there’s a whole lot of other stories that could be made from them.
Full of light or full of darkness.
For me, the first place they took me to was dark.
There was something about their placement and context that felt so unnatural that it suggests something bad has happened.
The shoes are too far apart, yet facing each other rather than pointing in the same direction.
They’re on a suburban street. On a Tuesday lunchtime. Yet no one is around and all is quiet.
Then there’s the fact both shoes are missing. One makes more sense … but both?
It all felt like the opening scene of a British Police drama.
Now of course there’s an alternative storyline … one filled with joy and effervescence.
A celebration of a kid being allowed to truly be a kid.
But wherever I could take it, it is much more than simply 2 shoes on the street and yet so often, we spend our time looking at briefs through the lens of the research, the focus groups, the competition. Stuff that confines our imagination to exist – at best – in a small corner.
Which is why if you want to grow your skills, stop blindly following the [financially self-serving and ego fulfilling] rules of Ritson, Cole and co and put more energy and effort into noticing and exploring what is around you. Because while the ‘lessons for profit’ crew will tell you what you should do [and just for the record, I do appreciate their experience and perspective, especially in terms of learning important rules in the fundamentals of marketing strategy] … it’s the street that will help reveal where you could go.