Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Confidence, Content, Context, Craft, Crap Marketing Ideas From History!, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Design
A few weeks ago, I went on a trip where the people I was going to meet, had sent a car to pick me up.
If this wasn’t flashy enough, it was a Mercedes. With a driver who wore a fucking cap … and it wasn’t even a German Policeman.
As I sat in the plush leather seats, I couldn’t help but notice one thing.
This.
Brown.
Brown on brown.
Brown on brown. On brown.
It was as if the design team were a bunch of perverts who loved sewer porn. Or something.
And I have to say, I found it pretty off-putting. Well, when I say off-putting, I mean distracting … because I couldn’t take my eyes off it. Wondering why anyone would do this.
Because it wasn’t just 50 shades of brown, it was also made up of multiple materials of brown.
Leather.
Wood.
Plastic … often disguised to look like leather. And wood.
What the actual fuck?
I tell you something, when you’re literally cocooned in a car of poo, the last thing you want to do is drink the bottle of water they kindly put our for me.
At the time, I tweeted out a picture of the car and said:
“Mercedes really like brown. Though no doubt in the brochure it was called, ‘decadent dark chocolate’. 💩”
To which someone tweeted back that the official colour was, ‘Macchiato Beige’
MACCHIATO BEIGE!
BEIGE!!!
Jesus Christ … if associating with brown is alarmingly questionable, then surely associating yourself with beige is even worse?
Who the hell decided that???
I’m as confused by that as I am the people who actively chose to spend multiple tens of thousands of dollars on having it as an option.
But then history is littered with companies being able to embrace terrible decisions as long as someone has given them a reason to ignore reality.
Years ago, Bloomberg Businessweek asked me to write something for them.
One of the things I wrote about was UPS and their choice of ‘corporate brown’.
At the time I said, “if I had millions to spend, I don’t know if I’d be using it to associate with the contents of a dirty nappy.”
[Otis was approaching his 2nd birthday, so that was relevant to me rather than an attempt to be controversial]
While I appreciate the role colour has in branding – even though the way many use it. think about it and talk about it is utter bollocks – I still don’t really understand how any organisation could decide ‘brown’ in their shade.
In fact the only reason I imagine that can happen is when they hire a consultant firm and they tell them, “brown is a white space for your category, so by owning brown, you differentiate yourself from competitors”.
Which highlights five major considerations for brands:
1. When you allow ‘white space’ to define your strategic decisions, you’re ultimately seeding control to your competitors, not your truth.
2. The quest for differentiation only counts if it offers something of value, not just is different.
3. Without creativity and meaning, your ‘brand asset’ is a conformity drain.
4. Job title doesn’t equate to being smart.
5. Honesty trumps harmony … at least with companies who don’t have god complexes.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Business, Cannes, Chaos, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Emotion, Empathy, Honesty, Innovation, Insight, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Martin Weigel, Mediocrity, Metallica, Nike, Paula, Provocative, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Sport, Strategy
It is pretty obvious I have a major issue with a lot of the ‘best practice’ processes and practices certain members of my industry love to bang on about.
Not just because ‘best practice, is past practice’, but because these individuals position their approach as the legitimisation of the discipline they claim or suggest they are an expert in. Implying that anyone who does not strictly adhere to their process is an imposter and a danger to whatever organisation they’re working with.
It’s the sort of deluded arrogance that people who describe themselves as an ‘evidence based’ strategist embodies … attempting to infer everyone else is simply making things up and don’t give a fuck what happens afterwards.
It’s everywhere. Twitter. Linkedin. Conferences.
You name it and someone is bragging and banging on about it.
But what makes this hilarious is that many of these self-appointed experts have never made any work of any repute whatsoever. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Which means their entire viewpoint is either based on their own post-rationalised evaluation of another persons work or their narrow, naive and/or skewed viewpoint of what constitutes as ‘good’.
Don’t get me wrong, process matters.
In no way am I advocating you just chuck it all out.
However the difference is my processes does not require me to outsource my brain, imagination, curiosity, gut or ambition to fit into a format whose goal is to deliver a standardised, consistent response rather than enable the opportunity for greater possibility.
And that’s the big problem for me …
Because so many of these ‘models’ seem to care more about the process than what the process is meant to help enable. Actually, even that is wrong … because more and more of these models don’t even care about ‘enabling’ anything … they instruct you to simply follow the format and then do whatever the fuck comes out the other end.
No questioning.
No challenging.
No pushing.
Just blind adherence.
Martin and I talked about the folly of this approach in 2019 with our Case For Chaos talk at Cannes for WARC and then – in 2023 – Paula joined us on the same stage for our Strategy Is Constipated, Imagination Is The Laxative presentation.
But still this approach and attitude goes on … and while I don’t deny it can be effective, it rarely has the impact or influence as work that comes from a process shaped and flavoured by ideas, imagination or ambition.
But then I wonder if that is the goal anyway … because frankly, the obsession with efficiency means more and more companies don’t want to move towards where they could be and just want to optimize where they’re currently at. Adopting an attitude of ‘when we fall behind, we’ll simply catch up’.
Though they will never admit that publicly – oh no – what they is they’re investing in ‘business transformation’.
Hahahahahahahaha.
A while back I met one of these ‘dot-to-dot’ advocates at a conference I was attending.
Early in the discussion, they said their company had pioneered a process that “guaranteed success”. And then proceeded to talk about their system that ‘removed the risk of contaminated thinking’.
They literally said that.
I looked around the room waiting for someone to say something. Anything. But no one did.
Worse, they seemed to be nodding their heads in agreement. Or awe.
So I stuck my hand up.
Eventually I was seen and asked if I had a question, to which I replied:
“I was just wondering if you know what the words ‘guaranteed’ and ‘success’ mean?”
Yes, I know that was a total asshole move.
It alienated me immediately.
And while I regret how I asked my question, I don’t regret asking my question because that sort of declaration is insane. Not just because it’s not true, but because their ‘examples of proof’ are rarely more than a brand doing a bit better than it has before.
Now I appreciate that’s nothing to sneeze at, but it’s hardly Metallica is it?
A band that plays a niche genre of music, has pensioners as members and yet is the 2nd best selling American group in music history. MUSIC HISTORY!
And I can tell you, that didn’t happen blindly adopting the latest best practice process.
Where are their examples of that sort of impact?
Oh I know … in the hands of the fuckers who do shit, not spout it.
Look, I am not dismissing process.
Nor am I devaluing rigour.
But I am redefining what they mean in comparison to how more and more people seem to be interpreting it.
As we said at Cannes, strategy is the first creative act.
A chance to leap not step.
An opportunity to leave the category behind rather than reinforce the category.
But you don’t achieve that by simply ‘filling in the blanks’ with your functional and rational data.
No … if you really want to have a shot at changing where you can go and where you can be, you have to heed the advice of Rob Strasser – the iconic Nike exec – who said this:
“A shoe is just a shoe until someone steps in it”.
By that, I mean don’t just follow a framework, put your whole self into it.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Content, Context, Craft, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, Empathy, Music, Queen, Resonance
Of all the terms banded about by the creative industry … craft is one that is spoken about a lot.
For many people, they interpret this in terms of executional quality and without doubt, that is a part of it, but it is so much more.
In fact, craft starts at the thinking phase … before a single thing has been defined or committed to paper.
I’ve written a lot about craft over the years, but I recently read something that for me, is a wonderful expression of its role and power.
Now, I get there’s going to be a lot of moaning when you see what my example is – or, should I say, – who my example of craft is coming from. But hang in there. Please.
Are you ready?
OK, so it comes from Queen’s Brian May.
I know … I know … but there’s a reason for this.
You see he was recently asked about the lyrics to one of his songs called ’39.
This song appeared on their 1975 album, ‘A Night At The Opera’ and it is a song about space travel through different dimensions.
For haters of Queen, just description probably justifies all your loathing … but there is method in the madness.
You see Brian May has a PHD in astrophysics.
And while he gained that qualification in 2007, the reality is he was a leading researcher in the field prior to joining Queen.
In fact the only reason he didn’t gain his PHD back in the 1970’s is because the band took off and so his studies stopped.
But even then, his love of astrophysics was a key part of who he was – especially the relationship it had with the dimension of time – which is maybe one of the key influences behind this song.
To understand the rest of this post, you should hear it … paying particular interest to the lyrics. So click here.
Did you do it?
Did you bollocks.
OK, then just click here to read the lyrics.
Did you do that?
Hmmmmn, OK … I believe you even if no one else will.
The point of this is because Brian May was recently asked about the story of the song and his reply is fascinating.
Fascinating in terms of where and how song writers get their inspiration …
But – to link back to the point of the post – fascinating in terms of how this crafted how he specifically wrote the lyrics …
How amazing is that?
I love how he explains why the tenses are mixed up in his lyrics.
How it is integral to the idea he had for the song.
How it is an example of craft in motion.
Sure, there’ll be some pricks who will claim its ‘post rationalized justification’, but that’s because they are confusing their ego with their ability.
Because here’s the thing with craft …
In many ways it is not immediately obvious to the recipient … they may not engage with it in the detail and care that went into it. They probably encounter it as a singular, all-encompassing experience. But to the creator, everything will mean something. Not in terms of ‘contrived, focus-group instruction and manipulation, but in terms of ensuring their creativity is crafted to represent their idea in its purest, most honest form. All the while embracing – and valuing – that the recipient may interpret and connect to the work in different ways than intended. Taking it to somewhere new, different and personal.
It’s a beautiful and generous act and why one of the most important questions I ask in any initial creative meeting is ‘what’s the story behind your story?’.
I don’t mean that in terms of them reiterating the brief or conveying some ‘insight’ they’ve defined to answer/justify their solution … but the journey they have been on in terms of inspiration, consideration or history that has led them or shaped what they are going to show.
Mainly because at this stage of proceedings, it’s got less to do with ‘answering’ the brief, but understanding how they see it.
A glimpse into where it could go, rather than what it currently is.
It’s why we need to remember craft isn’t something to wrap an idea in, it’s what informs the entire expression of the idea.
Because even if people don’t recognise it, they will probably feel it … even if they can’t explain why.
And that is the power of creativity … something we need to protect, especially from those who try to present it or define it like its engineering and their master mechanics. Which is ironic, given they’ve never created anything with it.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Colenso, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Loyalty, Management, Wieden+Kennedy
I’ve written a lot about office culture in the past.
Like here. And here … to name but two.
I’ve talked about how I was deeply skeptical of companies who claimed it until I worked at Wieden.
Mainly because that was the only place where I felt they truly had one.
Shaped by the philosophies of Dan and Dave but evolved by the people in the agency.
Born rather than planned.
A byproduct of the people in the place, not a mandate from the people running the place.
A culture that created the identity of the work but also held people to account for what they did and contributed.
Some people hated it.
Some people were made by it.
I was definitely in the latter camp … but recently I saw a quote that kind of summed up why I thought it was so good.
“Culture is the worst behaviour management will tolerate”
I love it.
I love it because it represents what culture is.
Not Hallmark Card happiness, but a mishmash of weird and wonderful.
Where people are allowed to be themselves but everyone knows what they’re there to do.
Wieden was great at it … giving freedom to people to express who they are, however weird it was. Or should I say, however weird they are.
Because the main thing was as long as it was serving the work – and not damaging others – they were OK with it.
In fact I once asked what it took to be fired from the place given all the ‘unique’ things I had seen. OK, that I had personally done and got away with … to which the answer was, “it happens if you don’t care about the work and don’t push to keep making the best work of your life”.
That – ladies and gentleman – is culture.
Not beanbags or dress down Friday … but self-created, self-policed expression.
But that self-policed bit is important.
Because as much as Wieden felt like an art school a lot of the time, people knew was only possible if people respected the freedom they were given and trusted to embrace. Anyone who took the piss was often dealt with by the people in the place. Not to put them down or dictate how they should behave … but to ensure they knew the responsibility they had in maintaining the openness everyone else got to enjoy.
Which is why you can’t plan culture, you can just create the conditions for it.
And that’s what separates those who get it and those who don’t. Who can’t.
Which is why writing this post today is especially appropriate given it’s Colenso’s founders day.
A day where the agency shuts its doors so the people inside can go and play.
Because Colenso is another agency who ensure creativity always wins.
It has – and does – continually do it, regardless of employees, leadership or client.
And in Colenso’s case, we’ve been doing it for over 5 decades.
Because there’s something in the water of the place.
Let’s be honest, any individual or company can have a good year or two … but only those who have a true creative culture get to perform at that level for so long.
Of course that doesn’t mean other agencies are bad – far from it – but it does mean many are in the business of trading creativity whereas some are actually believers in the power and creation of it.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Complicity, Contribution, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Technology
It’s Brian May’s birthday today, so given it has been 4 days of slightly seething posts, I considered ending the week on a positive.
And then I realised that sometimes, ‘seething’ is my version of positive so I wrote this.
Obviously, right now there is a lot of talk about AI.
And in our industry specifically, a lot of that conversation revolves around how it will destroy advertising.
Taking jobs, destroying creativity, devaluing craft and breaking production.
All that may or may not be true .. only time will tell … though I tend to believe it won’t be as black and white as so many in the industry love to present the reality.
But I tell you what I’m far more frightened about …
Something that has proved its disastrous impact on the industry.
And the brands, business, communities and customers we’re here to serve.
And that’s the individuals who are making decisions about creativity who don’t know what good creativity is, how it works or how to create and enable the conditions for it to happen.
Individuals who hide their ego, delusion, ignorance, lack of experience and/or desire for control behind the justification of process, procurement, prices, timelines, qualifications and/or marketing practice.
In blaming AI for the death of the industry, we’re in danger of becoming like those people who blame powerpoint for every bad presentation ever written … conveniently ignoring that while the tools play a part, the real blame – and issue – needs to be aimed at the people who choose it, write it, prefer it and demand it.
And while AI will no doubt have a bigger and bigger impact on what we do – of which, let’s not forget some will be really good – if we want to fight for our lives, then it may be better to acknowledge who is the real problem versus who we feel is more convenient to blame.
_________________________________________________________________________
Last thing …
Despite this blog having basically posted the same 7 stories for the last 20 years – which means it would be VERY easy for AI to replicate the rubbish I post on here each day – I’ve decided to give anyone who has accidentally found themselves coming on here TWO WHOLE WEEKS OFF off as I’m flying to China tonight, then off to the US. I’m not even travelling for the whole 2 weeks … which means this gesture demonstrates a level of generosity that highlights while AI may have the productivity, humans have the generosity.
Have a great one. Let’s be honest, with a fortnight of silence from me, we all know you will. That is except Andy, George and maybe even Billy … who all stupidly said yes to having dinner with me. And I can’t wait. Except when they expect me to pay.