Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Communication Strategy, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture
One thing I love is working with creatives who – during a review – looks at the nuance of the idea, not just the excitement of it.
I don’t mean getting lost in the details … I mean understanding what the actual idea is behind the thought and seeing how it all works together.
Of course, knowing when to do this is important.
Too early and it kills the creative journey of exploration.
Too late and it just fucks and undermines everyone involved.
But done properly doesn’t just mean you gain clarity on what the actual idea is … but it highlights the nuances make the idea work so it can be pushed and elevated in ways that allow it to be consistent without ever being boring.
To be honest, it shocks me how little this stuff is talked about …
For all the talk of ‘brand’, it’s amazing how many people equate that to simply repeating a tagline a colour or a set of ‘brand assets’ without realizing the work they’re producing is slowly but surely moving further and further away from the premise of what the creative idea was built on or what the brand stands for.
What really brought this home was a post by the brilliant Trevor Beattie.
For those who don’t know who Trevor is, please go learn your creative history.
For those who do, you’ll appreciate why this is so good.
How good is that?
I particularly love how concise and articulate Trevor is in identifying the heart of the Specsavers idea.
“The comedic potential of not seeing clearly enough”
Clear. Definitive. Focused.
Opening creative possibilities without falling into creative ambiguities.
And then there’s the fact it’s delivered with such brevity.
No rambling. No ambiguity. A demonstration of someone who can see past the flash and see the core. Affording them the ability to give proper feedback … feedback that changes how people see the work and how they can improve it.
Simple. Valuable. Powerful.
Which – based on a lot of the work I see out there in the world – seems to be a dying art … lost to a sea of concepts without consideration or pithy headlines over random images. Or – as Trevor’s feedback also highlights – people interpreting ideas without ever really understanding them or giving them proper consideration so they end up dumbing it down and taking it to somewhere else. And while Trevor politely suggests that in the case of Specsavers, its a strategic pivot [laughing at stupid people] it’s probably more likely laziness, convenience and a lack of craft.
When we’re good our industry is a total fucking force … an infectious, impossible-to-ignore, emotion pleasure machine … but when we’re bad, we’re cheap wallpaper.
But while we have to take a lot of the blame, it’s not entirely our fault.
A lot of clients need to take responsibility for their contribution to this situation.
A situation that undermines their potential with all their mandates and demands.
Demanding simplistic and tactical than distinctive and definitive and caring more about what is said rather than what their audience will embrace and connect to.
If we think craft is dying in our industry, so is the understanding of what it means.
Too many dismiss it as time consuming or expensive.
An outdated concept from a time where advertising was a broadcast only medium.
But those people are wrong.
Because craft isn’t limited to execution, but in the nuance.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Confidence, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, Fashion, Fragrance, Luxury, Planning, Smell
A while back I wrote a post about the naming strategies of fragrance brands.
Or should I say the lack of them.
It wasn’t a dig, it was almost fawning respect for their complete disregard for logic and their blind commitment to visceral inducing, imagination.
To be honest, the self-awareness is inspiring.
An acknowledgement that in the big scheme of things, their product is kind-of ridiculous and so by embracing that, they can go wherever they want with their naming approach … which is how we end up with Tom Ford’s Noir Extreme … because in the business of smell, the darkness of ‘noir’ just isn’t dark enough.
However in their ‘anything goes’ mentality, they may just gone a bit too errrrrm, mental.
Have a look at this …
Vanilla Sex.
VANILLA FUCKING SEX!!!???
Jesus bloody Christ … they may as well call it, ‘Excel Spreadsheet’.
Now while I appreciate sex is seemingly going out of fashion, I’m not sure a scent that conveys ‘the most average 3 minutes of your life’ ignites aspiration.
Even among Monks or Nuns.
Or Billy. Hahaha.
For a category that loves to communicate its power of seduction, attraction, expression or self-confidence, Vanilla Sex pours a big bucket of cold water over all that and instead celebrates the idea of feeling like you’ve been fucked by a Tax Accountant from Slough.
At 3:17pm.
On a cold Tuesday.
In a Travel Lodge.
Located on the side of a Motorway service station.
It’s so utterly bonkers I don’t know if it is an act of brilliance, madness or just a desire to just see what they can get away with.
Or maybe it’s just proof they don’t give a damn because by the same token, they also have this …
It’s all kinds of amazing.
A case study for the power of strategy to take brands to places never imagined or, by the same token, proof this strategy stuff is all fucking nonsense because even when you ignore – and break – every rule of it, you can still be wildly successful.
But as amazing as all this is, it’s still not as amazing as the thought that two people could meet one day with one smelling like Vanilla Sex and the other being Fucking Fabulous.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Cannes, Colenso, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Distinction, Effectiveness, Entertainment, Martin Weigel, Mischief, Paula, Planners, Planning, Relevance, Resonance
Systems.
Processes.
Models.
Theories.
We’re surrounded with ways to do stuff and yet it feels we’re surrounded by more boring stuff than ever before.
By boring, I mean derivative.
A production line of repetition, albeit with different brand names emblazoned on the front.
I’ve said this before, but while a process is important … when we place more emphasis on that, than what it produces – or what we want it to produce – then we’ve got our shit the wrong way round.
It’s why I’ve also talked about the commercial effectiveness of creative ridiculousness.
A way to make an impact by the simple nature of not following the same patterns and processes of everything that has come before.
I don’t mean in terms of ‘differentiation’ [which is still based on using category norms] but – to steal from TBWA mainly because I don’t see them doing it much anymore – disruption.
Which is my way of saying why I love this …
Yes, it’s got cats on it.
And yes it says it will let me talk to them.
But even I know it’s not true … and yet I bought it and paid a premium for it, which is more than I would ever do for any other form of gum.
Fuck, I don’t even buy gum normally which reminds me of this post back in 2007 that reinforces the power of packaging.
Planning is important.
It has a real role to play for business and creativity.
But when that role ends up being shaped exclusively by the rules of the category, the competition and the ‘average consumer’ … then we’re not moving our brands forward, we’re in danger of cementing them where they are.
Of course I appreciate the difference between a novelty candy and a major brand with global distribution … but the premise remains the same.
If you let your blinkers only allow logic to influence your choices, you’re not liberating opportunities … you’re stifling it. Or – as Martin, Paula and I said at last year at Cannes – you’re being strategically constipated and only imagination can be your laxative.
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: Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comedians, Communication Strategy, Context, Creativity, Culture, Cunning
Years ago I wrote a post about how Borat was deeply prejudiced and yet – because it was done for humour – it was totally fine to use the worst stereotypes to define and express a culture, heritage or community.
Now of course that’s something comedians have hung onto for years.
The ability to leave no subject on the table.
To let humour challenge myopic beliefs and attitudes.
And, to be honest, I’m a big believer in that – as I am with art – but sometimes you can’t help but feel some people use it as a convenient excuse to purposefully profit from notoriety.
Where instead of adding to the conversation, they just exploit it.
Taking rather than adding.
I say that because I recently saw this:
Yes, I know it does no one any harm.
And I appreciate that London is not the sunniest place in the World.
But it all feels a bit lazy … not to mention confusing given they have called yellow, ‘bumblebee’ when surely they could have named it, ‘LA sun’.
Or something.
But by the same token, I not only remembered it, I wrote about it – so maybe this highlights the reason we need to allow humour to challenge our perceptions and perspectives because maybe the biggest thing that this post has actually revealed is my English fragility, and I’m not even from London!
Wow, I’ve got whiplash from the turnaround of this post.