Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Communication Strategy, Customer Service, Empathy, Management, Marketing Fail
We need systems.
We need them for all manner of how we live.
From ensuring we get our content on Netflix through to ensuring our food is safe.
Systems drive efficiency and effectiveness and are a competitive weapon for business.
But they can also be suicide.
When ‘human centred design’ isn’t that human.
When you focus more on what the system does rather than who it’s for.
When you set rules that become dictatorial rather than accessible.
And while the post below is funny, it’s a good reminder that if you don’t put the needs of people first – rather than what you want the needs of people to be – then you not only run the risk of having to tell your customer/client/colleague “the computer says no”, you may end up calling them a loser … literally and metaphorically.
Worse, the person telling them that is a bitch. Apparently.
Again, literally and metaphorically.
And then you will have invented a new system.
The customer disservice and ineffective model.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, China, Comment, Confidence, Craft, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Entertainment, Environment, Experience, Fulfillment, Happiness, Honesty, Imagination, Innovation, Insight, Legend, Marketing, Technology
I’ve written a lot about experience in the past.
How important it is.
How it can drive brand value and growth.
How it can create distinction and differentiation in crowded categories.
I’ve also talked about how badly so much of it is done.
That it’s more about consistency than excellence.
That it isn’t a new approach, just a new profit centre.
That many aspire to everything average than some things spectacular.
It blows my mind what some agencies and companies think is ‘an experience’.
Especially when you compare it to people who genuinely ‘get it’.
Whether it’s certain luxury brands or my client, SKP-S in Beijing.
Which is why I love the picture at the top of this page.
At the time, the person on the runway was 62 years old.
SIXTY TWO.
This was taken on the first of 3 nights of performing to 68,000 paying people.
So over 200,000 in total.
In South America.
Think about that for a second.
OK, so the person in question is Brian Johnson … lead singer of rock band AC/DC.
But let’s also remember we’re talking about a group of pensioners.
Literally.
Yes, I appreciate there are all-sorts of factors/considerations/contexts/excuses you could use to explain why they can achieve that sort of response when brands – with all their experience models and big budgets – can’t.
But the one thing AC/DC understand is if you want to keep people coming back, you need to focus on creating a seminal moment for your audience not average consistency.
It’s why I always ask ‘experience strategists’ about their life rather than just their work. I want to know what their frame of references are for experience. Because frankly – and I appreciate I’m being a massive snob here – if it doesn’t include festivals, theatre, art, music, retail, museums … then I don’t know if we’re ever going to share the same ambitions.
Because while I appreciate ‘average but consistent’ has value to some organisations, I would rather drink bleach than advocate that as a brand goal.
Not simply because I have an aversion to average.
But because when you do experience right – which means knowing who you are and who your customers are – the profits extrapolate. See, I’m not totally selfish.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Corporate Evil, Cunning, Death
A few months ago, I wrote about Philip Morris’ alleged ‘transformation’ from being a manufacturer of cancer sticks to a health company.
Well not only are they continuing with this ambition, they are adopting the Trump/Johnson strategy of acceptance.
What that means is this.
1. Drop the word ‘health’ in every conversation.
2. Use language that positions you as ‘the good guys’.
3. Under no circumstances ever acknowledge any mistake from the past.
4. Publicly question the credibility of anyone who challenges your actions.
5. Act like you only care about average people, never the corporate elite, despite you constantly and continually living and flaunting the sort of life no average individual could enjoy.
And why am I saying all this?
Because of this …
What the absolute fuck.
This is a company who purposefully, willingly and cynically spread false information about the benefits of their product over decades … talking about the dangers of companies who spread false information.
Hell, they even add a ‘warning’ that sounds awfully like the government mandated warning that appears on the front of every cigarette packet.
Seriously, this could only be more ironic if it came from Facebook.
Only a company who literally doesn’t give a shit about morals or honesty or other people’s health would do something like this. But let’s be honest, we shouldn’t be surprised.
Their whole history is littered with manipulation, lies and false information.
From making cigarette products labelled ‘lite’ to give the impression they were ‘better for you’ [they weren’t] to that iconic moment of shame, where the CEO’s of the biggest tobacco companies stood up in from of politicians in the House of Representatives, raised their hand and said their product was not dangerous when they already knew it was and it was killing people.
In fact, in this testimony, not only did the CEO of Philip Morris of the time, William Campbell, proclaim:
“I believe nicotine is not addictive” … which was subsequently repeated by the other executives of the biggest tobacco companies in America … one went on to insist that cigarettes were no more addictive than coffee, tea or Twinkies.
Fortunately, Henry Waxman, a democrat politician who was leading the proceedings, fired back: “The difference between cigarettes and Twinkies is death”.
Pretty hard to come back from a statement like that, even though they tried. Not because they had got so used to lying they thought it was true – they were VERY aware of the deceit they were peddling – it was more they were incredulous to anyone questioning what they said.
So given Philip Morris are so passionate about facts, compare what they say in their ‘brand ‘purpose’ with what they say in public.
Don’t know about you, but it appears they’re not as aligned as they should be … because rather than being about health, it’s more about making their product less death.
‘Less’ death.
But for all the cleverly ambiguity they’ve placed in their writing, the overriding impression I am left with is that they don’t actually understand the meaning of the word truth … which is the only thing I may believe from Philip Morris.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Innovation, Management, Marketing, Mischief, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Point Of View, Positioning, Relevance, Research, Resonance, Rick Rubin, RulesOfRubin
I like quotes.
Always have.
I like them because they often frame something in a way that sets my brain on another track.
It’s why I enjoyed the Rules Of Rubin series I did a while back. And while that was for a specific work-related reason, I came out of it with far more than I imagined.
Recently I had another one of those quotes, not by Rubin but by Paracelsus … a Swiss physician who was a pioneer in many areas of the medical revolution’ during the Renaissance.
It’s that one at the top of this post.
Yes, I know what it is saying is obvious.
Let’s be honest, the phrase ‘everything in moderation’ has been around for decades, but there’s something about this that just has more bite.
Maybe it’s the use of the word poison.
Maybe it’s the way it doesn’t define any specific thing as bad.
Maybe it’s the way it doesn’t feel condescending or judgemental.
But it set my mind whirring far more than using words like ‘moderation’ and I would imagine it would do the same to any creative having to work with such a brief.
Quotes have a wonderful way of doing that.
They’re far more valuable to provoke different ways of thinking than filling in a creative brief with the answer you want the creatives to execute rather than giving them the problem you want their brains to explore and resolve.
We’re in danger of only valuing literal thinking rather than lateral … and that’s what I love about quotes. They challenge how you think … make you take some leaps, look in some new corners, explore what you think is possible … but never adding pressure on what or where you go with them.
I have always had a hard time writing briefs.
I place so much pressure on myself to get to something intriguing and interesting that I end up writing 7 or 8 different versions – all with different possibilities – so I and the team – can have a real chat about where our energy is at.
I think my record is something like 14 odd for Spotify.
And that’s before we even start on all the other briefs that come from it.
I still do that, but what’s helped my sanity is starting with a bunch of quotes or poems or song lyrics. Stuff related to the issue without being obviously directly about it.
It’s such a great time saver to open discussion.
Like the brief before the brief.
The opportunity to work out what excites you about a possibility without getting too lost in the detail of the possibility. At least initially.
So next time you’re stuck on where you should go, don’t start filling in the brief boxes in the hope the answer will present itself [it never does] … fill up the walls with stuff that opens things up before you start closing things down.
Because the best briefs are not a flow of logic, but a story of adventure.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Disney, Egovertising, Experience, Innovation, Marketing, Truth
I’ve talked a lot about how the industry loves to talk about innovation when what they actually mean is evolution.
Hell, sometimes it’s not even that … sometimes it’s just a new name for an old thought process or discipline that was expressed as part of what people always did rather than split out in an attempt to make more money or gain more influence.
I once said to the wonderful Martin Weigel that I am pretty certain marketing is the only industry that would make a paper plane and claim they invented flight.
Now that doesn’t mean people aren’t adding to what is being done … or bringing new thinking and craft to it … or finding new ways to incorporate it into work … but it does mean they’re trying to maybe ‘own’ too much of the narrative of the discipline. Suggesting they’re inventors when they’re actually craftspeople. Valuing ‘theory’ rather than actually making something truly interesting with it.
Now there’s many possible reasons for this.
+ We’re in marketing and so they’re marketing themselves.
+ Being a craftsperson has lost the value it deserves.
+ It’s cheaper to badge than to actually create.
+ People don’t know their history.
Now I’m sure I’m going to be accused of being a prick … an old, condescending prick. And maybe I am. But I am also not claiming I’ve invented anything and I’m just pointing out neither has many of the people who do.
And there’s nothing wrong with not inventing something … because doing your job really well is something worth celebrating, especially when you see what passes for ‘good’ in so much of what is put out these days.
But it appears the allure of pioneer is infectious these days.
Case in point is the talk around eco-systems, flywheels, multi-platform DTC/e-comm and the like. Yes, it’s amazing. Yes, it driving new ways for brands to behave and earn. Yes, technology has allowed this to be done in more powerful and profound ways. But in many cases, it’s not revolution, it’s not really even innovation … it’s evolution.
And why do I say that? Have a look at this.
That is from 1957.
NINETEEN FIFTY SEVEN.
It’s Walt Disney’s ecosystem/flywheel/multi-platform DTC, e-comm [without the e] for the Disney corporation.
The blueprint for how he would use creativity to fuel his business in ways where every division is helping another division.
And while modern expressions of this have evolved and added more nuance, it’s not miles off, which is why whether you like/hate/respect/loathe him or the Disney Company, that’s pretty progressive thinking.
Or it was in 1957. in 2021 maybe not so much.
[Though, being honest, it probably is – which is even more worrying]
And yet we read so much from people acting like Walt Disney … except they’re not building their own brand, they’re selling their concept to build your own brand.
As I said, there’s nothing wrong with that.
Fuck, there’s a lot of value and money in that.
It’s genuinely exciting when you see someone identify opportunities in old approaches and habits that millions have missed. And for that, you should absolutely be using it to build a platform for your future success, growth and change.
I am literally cheering from the sidelines. All I ask is you please don’t act like you have invented flight when you’ve actually made a more efficient and effective paper plane. Not because I’m a bitter bastard – OK, let’s not go there – but because the future of this industry requires bigger leaps not better wrapping paper and the more we manage up our abilities, the more we lower the reality of our potential.
Christ, that’s a heavy post for a Monday isn’t it.
Given I know what the rest of the week has in store, it gets worse. Eek.