Filed under: 2025, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Confidence, Craft, Luxury, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Relevance, Reputation
Birkin.
The Holy Grail of handbags.
Created in 1984 when the CEO of Hermes, Jean-Louis Dumas met the actress Jane Birkin.
They’re sold exclusively through Hermes stores and you have to jump through all manner of hoops to be able to buy one.
You also need to have a fuckload of cash because they can cost in the hundreds of thousands.
That’s MULTIPLES of hundreds of thousands.
And that’s in US dollars.
Whether those prices are justified is immaterial … the reality is, they are viewed almost like precious gems.
Which is why this ad for a beauty company – MCoBeauty – made me laugh out loud.
Look at it.
LOOK AT IT!!!
It’s more Burger King than Birkin … made even better that it is appearing on bus shelters.
On one hand, I quite like how they have just destroyed the pomposity of the Birkin brand with one simple image … but on the other, they’ve not just destroyed the aspirational value of the ‘prize’ they’re giving away by making it look like a ‘pound shop knock off’, they’ve also just fucked themselves over by reinforcing that however much brands like MCoBeauty may try and claim they’re all about ‘accessible/everyday luxury’, they’re basically admitting nothing compares to getting your hands on real luxury.
But that last point is immaterial when you make an ad that makes a Birkin Bag look less appealing than a supermarket paper bag.
If it was ironic it might work, but it’s not … it’s pure ‘starburst’ sales promotion awfulness
Who designed this thing?
The colours are hideous.
The copy is disastrous.
The art direction is scandalous.
If you want to leverage giving a Birkin Bag away to drive sales … maybe you should make it feel like something you would actually like to own, rather than avoid. And god forbid Hermes see it because they will come after you like a ton-of-bricks. Even if you own it. And even if it is second hand. Hermes understand the value of reputation … it’s why they can sell bits of stitched leather for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
What is so annoying is this could have been really good.
Not just executionally, but for building the reputation and value of the MCoBeauty.
But no, instead – as is the case with far too much these days – they haven’t given a shit and just banged any old bollocks out, because we live in times where marketing is focused more on what you want to say rather than understanding the importance of how you say it.
Or said another way. There’s too much focus on systems rather than appreciating the value and impact of craft.
Which may explain why Hermes – for all the challenges the luxury category are experiencing – are still doing better than MCoBeauty and the entire ad industry put together.
Filed under: 2025, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apathy, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Audacious, Authenticity, Comment, Context, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Emotion, Empathy, Imagination, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Planning, Play, Point Of View, Process, Provocative, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Stupid, Success, Work
So I have good news.
This is the last post for a week.
Yep, I’m away. Again.
Not because of whatever happened with the result I wrote about yesterday – but something else. Though if the result wasn’t good yesterday, the week away for me is going to be very bitter sweet because something that should be full of crazy wonderfulness is going to be infected by sheer fucking panic. But let’s stay positive shall we and ignore the fact I started a company called cynic – hahaha.
[I also, let’s not forget, started a company called Sunshine, which proves I am the living embodiment of a ‘gemini’, haha]
Anyway, I say you have ‘a week’ rest from this blog but I have written a post for next Friday because it’s Halloween and I couldn’t resist posting something truly horrific.
A blast from the past that no one needs seeing again but still makes me laugh.
So apart from that, you’re free from me for one whole week.
What a way to see in the weekend …
So with that, I’m going to leave you with this …
I saw the above recently and it reminded me of a meeting I was in once, where an HR person talked about ‘cultural fit’.
Now I get what they meant – from a theoretical place – but it was what they were trying not to say that bugged me.
Because in essence, they were saying they valued the complicit and consistent over the interesting and challenging.
They didn’t care that people who questioned or pushed were actually doing it because they wanted to help the company be even better … to them, they saw them as ‘problems’ who they could discount or disregard under the guise of being a ‘wrong cultural fit’.
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate good companies have strong cultures … a set of principals, values and behaviours that the people within shapes who they are and how they act. But too many organisations mistake this for control and complicity when in reality, it’s about expression, standards and possibility.
And it’s why I loved that piece But here’s the thing, these people make great shit a possibility.
Sure, I get they often need to be surrounded by those with the skills and abilities to both interpret what they say and action it … but without them, you are forever lost in the middle.
Yes I get for some that is exactly where they want to be … but for those with hunger, ambition, a desire for originality, craft and possibility, that’s literally the worst place you can find yourself positioned.
And yet too often, it’s these ‘big talking companies’ who have embraced protocols and processes that filter these people out immediately … replacing them with an endless stream of plastic and beige puppets. It’s why as much as these sorts of individuals can cause all manner of headaches and mayhem – and I say this both as someone who fits this description as well as someone who seeks out people of this description – they remain the individuals who I love to work with and hire the most.
And there’s a reason for that …
Because not only do you never know what they’ll come up with – and often they don’t know wither – you can be sure it will be smart and impossible to forget.
Or to be more poetic …
They are like comets flying across a night sky. They might not stay around for long, but boy … do they always shine bright.
Which leads to something else.
Recently London School of Economics [LSE] asked me to write a piece for their business management and strategy curriculum.
I don’t know if was because they thought my perspective would educate their students or serve as a warning of what NOT to do, but it was lovely to be asked.
The one thing they wanted me to specifically talk about was how I have been able to build and lead successful teams wherever I’ve worked.
And without blowing my own trumpet, I have.
Whether it’s been at different agencies or different countries, I’m proud I’ve been able to help nurture strategically intriguing, creatively interesting teams. Where every place I’ve been, has enjoyed a period that has come to define the department, the agency, the client, the category, the work we create or – most importantly – the people who are there.
The reason that’s so important to me is that where strategy is concerned, you can never be sure if you’re making a difference or you’re just riding on the coat-tails of the talent that was – and is – already there.
Or said another way, are you good or are you lucky?
And while I’m definitely lucky – both in terms of where I’ve worked and who I’ve got to work with – I do believe I’m pretty good at developing people and gangs – and I choose the word ‘gang’ very deliberate.
You see the word ‘gang’ means you have a motley crew of different people with different talents and outlooks who are united by a common philosophy, enemy and planning identity … whereas a department tends to be a production line of similar people, doing similar things with similar backgrounds and expectations.
Or as Lee Hill, my mentor and friend once said, “you can choose to partner with people who find interesting ways to open possibilities or people who are only focused on keeping things the same”.
And while there is nothing wrong with being boringly expected, it’s not what I value or what drives the greatest commercial growth … which is why – as part of the piece I was asked to write – I wrote this:
[Click on the image above to read it properly]
_________________________________________________________________________
It’s why I always say you should beware of those who offer convenient answers.
Or solutions that are more complicated than the actual problem.
Because you may find they end up costing you far more than the people who challenge or push you in terms of who you are pr who you want – or could – become.
See you properly a week on Monday – via something stupid on Friday.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Business, Clients, Collaboration, Colleagues, Comment, Content, Context, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Egovertising, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Innovation, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect
Imagine you go to the doctor.
You tell them your problem.
They diagnose your issue and prescribe meds.
“No …”, you say, “… that’s not right, you need to give me this”.
The doctor listens patiently then explains why their diagnosis and prescription is right for you.
You – with no medical knowledge or expertise – disagrees, and threaten the doctor with a malpractice suit saying, “I know my body so I know what’s it needs”.
The doctor says their diagnosis is based on what you have told them and what their examination of your body has informed them.
You tell them they have to give you what you want, then – despite keeping the doctor busy with your issue – you refuse to pay the full fee because you say you did all the work and other doctors are offering their services for less fee.
After lots of intimidation from you, they agree to the lower fee and you walk out with your new prescription.
Except a week later you become more ill because the meds you were prescribed – that you demanded – were wrong.
So you go around telling everyone the doctor who treated you was terrible and everyone should take their business elsewhere.
Bullshit isn’t it.
And yet, everyday … many companies do exactly this.
Going to the doctor and prescribing their own medicine.
Using procurement to bully their way to get what they want without realizing what they need.
Don’t get me wrong, ad agencies have a lot of issues … there’s a lot they can do better at … but knowing how to use creativity to connect and engage humans is not one of them.
Which reminds me of the time I did a project for the Red Hot Chili Peppers and they – well, specifically Anthony Kiedis – tried to do the same thing to me.
Just over 5 years ago,. I was asked to do some work for them by their team.
I did the work and presented it and he hated it.
In fact, hate is not a big enough word to describe how much he loathed it.
And me.
Was it bad?
Nope … it was simply a truth that his ego refused to accept and one I stand by to this day.
Anyway,, I was told I could present a response to his ‘comments’ so a few days later, I simply presented this:
Yep … that’s all I presented back.
One slide.
.
To be honest, my memory of what I had written was slightly different so when I saw this on my Facebook memories – it was quite nice to see the original work again,
That said, I do remember showing it my wife prior to presenting to see what she thought … and she said, “Hmmmmn, are you sure that’s what you want to do?”
Now normally, I listen to what she says as she’s much smarter than me, but this time I was adamant I was going to present it as is because of how personal, arrogant and just plain fucking rude he had been to me.
And the result of that?
Bonkers basically. He threw some big insults at me then hung up the call.
The next day I was fired.
And while you can say that is not commercially astute, I still wear it as a badge of honour … because while the other guys in the band couldn’t have been nicer, Kiedis was – and remains – a dick. [Which he futher demonstrated to a Guardian journalist who also questioned him on some home truths he didn’t want to akcknowledge – hahaha]
I was signed to work with Muse a week later. I don’t think this was a coincidence.
So while I am not advocating being an asshole to clients. I would also encourage clients who think they know everything about industries they’ve never worked in, to not be an asshole to those who have studied, worked and achieved the very things they are being engaged for in the first place. It’s why it’s worth remembering, even the best in the world have producers, coaches and mentors … because while the spotlight tends to shine on individuals, it’s the people in the shadows who make it better than they imagined.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
As an aside, the reason I am using that photo at the top of this post is very deliberate.
A few months ago a person I’m very close to suddenly suggested I shared ‘resemblances’ to the old TV character, House. I laughed but found myself casually mentioning it to a few other people who know me well who – much to my surprise – all enthusiastically agreed.
“Sarcastic” and “a bit of a prick” were a couple of the things uttered quite a lot.
And then, in a twist of fate that would suit any Hollywood story, I found myself in the US working with the original writer/runner of the show – the brilliant David Shore. At the end of our time together, I sheepishly told him what certain friends and colleagues had said and asked if he saw any shared traits from our time together.
He paused as if to gather his thoughts and then said what you read below.
[The redaction relates to the person we’re both working for who brought us together]
For what it’s worth, I think he’s being overly generous … but his last sentence nailed me … which means I’m less TV character and more greenhouse. ‘Transparent’. Damnit, ha.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brian Clough, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Consultants, Craft, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Empathy, Football, Grifting, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Nottingham Forest, Perspective, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Point Of View, Positioning, Process, Professionalism, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Standards, Strategy, Success, Systems, Work
A little while ago, A few months ago, the ‘25/’26 Premiership football season started.
Following an incredible season the year before – which saw Forest get into Europe for the first time in 30 years – their first match was against our bogey team, Brentford.
We won. 3-1.
But this post isn’t about the victory … nor is it about the implosion of the team thanks to the ego of the owner and his disastrous and potentially ruinous hiring of Ange Postecoglou who, at this point, has not won a match in 7 attempts and has seen our European and League dreams already end because he’s shit, arrogant and never cared about Forest, just the money he would get from the job [can you tell I’m bitter?] – it’s about the goal Forest scored when Nuno was still our wonderful, beloved manager.
Specifically, THIS goal.
Now I should point out this post is not about the outrageously brilliant pass from Elliott Anderson to Chris Woods that allowed a goal out of nowhere.
Nor is it about how Chris Woods started sprinting towards goal before Elliott had even reached the ball, let alone made the pass.
It’s actually about what Chris Woods did next …
Yes, he scored, but it’s how he scored that I found interesting.
Truth be told, if it hadn’t been for a post-match interview with an ex-Nottingham Forest player, I may not have realized the significance … but when I heard him talk about ‘the successful strikers mindset’, I suddenly realized how valuable – and relatable – this could be to strategists.
You see in the interview, the ex-player – Gary Birtles – talked about how decisive Chris Woods had been when running towards the goal. How he had decided very quickly how he was going to deal with the on-coming keeper. How once he had made his choice, he was going to stick with it which, according to Gary Birtles, gave him an immediate advantage over the goalie. He went on to say how Brian Clough – the iconic and ridiculously successful Forest manager he played under in the late 70’s/early 80’s and someone I’ve written copious amounts about, over the years – had always told him this:
“When you’re in a one-on-one situation with the goalkeeper, make your decision immediately and don’t second guess it. It might not always come off, but if you wait or hesitate, you give the competition the split second they need to adapt and then you lose the opportunity of even having an opportunity”.
I love that.
I love that because it gets to the heart of what sometimes strategy needs to do.
Because contrary to what many say – especially those who make their money flogging for-profit systems and models – the reality is the ‘answer’ very rarely reveals or presents itself, you come to a point – once you’ve done the hard work and rigor – of making a call on what you think is best.
It may be to enable a fast result.
It may be to enable a more effective outcome.
It may be to enable a more interesting solution.
But at some point, you have to decide which side of the fence you’re going to jump on and back yourself.
We don’t talk about that enough.
We don’t talk about the importance of the independent mind.
We don’t talk about the value of experience, perspective and belief.
Right now, everything we talk about is systems, models and processes. And while there is a role in those – or at least some of those – if we are outsourcing all decisions and choices to that, then not only should we be asking exactly what the fuck we’re adding to the outcome, we also have to ask why on earth we think we’re going to get to a different outcome that every other fucker following the same one-size-fits-all, the-computer-told-me-to-do-it approach.
Look, I appreciate what we do costs a lot of money.
I also appreciate that means companies are seeking more and more certainty in their lives.
But while some may say allowing someone to make a call on what should happen next is a sign of insanity, I’d argue the crazier thing is to do nothing and let others make the choices and decisions for you.
Sure you need to have experience.
Sure you need to have put in the rigor and work.
But at the same time, you can’t play to win, if you follow a system designed to play not to lose.
Given all the gurus in our industry flogging their system on how to do the job – despite having never made any work of note – it probably can’t hurt to repost a talk I did years ago about what we can learn from Brian Clough about how to ‘win better’.
Filed under: 2025, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Business, Comment, Confidence, Conformity, Consultants, Craft, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Effectiveness, Egovertising, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Martin Weigel, Mediocrity, Paula, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Process, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect
In strategy, one of the biggest insults is someone saying the strategy was post-rationalised to fit the work. The accusation implies you are a parasite of creativity … bigging yourself up on the sweat and tears of the creative team.
I get it. We all like to think we are a vital part of the process … the ignition of possibility … but the reality is, we all post-rationalise at some point, in some way.
I don’t mean we do fuck-all work and simply ‘badge’ our involvement post creative development – well, there’s some who do that, but they’re not hard to spot. No, what I mean is we all fine-tune our strategy as the creativity starts to reveal where it can go.
And that is good.
Because if you are so purist you think what you write is the rule of law, then you either better be fucking incredible or prepared for disappointment.
Sadly, I know there are some who think that way.
People who don’t get strategy without output is intellectual masturbation.
People who don’t get strategy that doesn’t create change is cowardly bullshit.
People who don’t get if strategy doesn’t make the first creative leap, it’s commercially small.
The reality is there’s a big fucking difference between having a vision for the work and dictating the work … and far too often, I see a lot of strategists talk about the former but act in a way that is much more about the latter.
It’s why I’ve enjoyed working so closely with artists – be it fashion, music, photography or authors – because while many approach their work with a clear vision for what they do … and an incredible focus on ensuring every little detail that goes into it is true to what they are trying to express … they also stay open to possibilities, opportunities and happy accidents throughout the entire journey.
Put simply, if they find something that feels/looks/sounds better than they imagined or intended, they go with it.
They chase the excitement and the interesting – which Paula, Martin and I discussed in detail [in particular regarding how Succession creator, Jesse Armstrong, approaches his ‘writers room’] a couple of years ago at Cannes with our talk ‘Strategy Is Constipated, Imagination Is The Laxative’.
And that is what strategy should be doing as well. And often it does … and yet, I continue to hear people throw ‘post-rationalised’ barbs like they’re confetti. Given how much work is seemingly churned out without any strategy whatsofuckingever – masked by using a celeb, a gimmick or some made-up ‘consumer need’ – I can’t help but feel we should be focusing our judgment on those who are literally undermining the value of our discipline rather than someone who wrote a strategy, saw work that revealed a bigger possibility and then evolved/adapted their thinking because it helped everyone get to a bigger and better place.
I say this because I recently watched an interview with Bowie who perfectly articulated how the ‘creative process’ that is spouted and sold by so many is often a pile of shit.
As usual, he’s right.
Of course I appreciate there are some industries, processes and jobs where there is no room for deviation.
But in terms of business – and especially the business of creativity – that’s a terrible idea.
It’s why I find it hilarious how many companies and individuals try to claim they have perfected the ‘creative process’ when not only are most basically flogging self-serving insurance policies rather than business liberation but ALL OF THEM – and I mean ALL – are peddling processes that revel in ‘removing process inefficiencies’ without realizing they’re the very bits that allow great work to be born.
And that is the problem with where we’re at right now.
People who have never made any work, creating processes they say lead to great work.
But when you’ve never done it – or never done it at a level that has made a difference – you don’t realise the things that make no sense to you, are often the very things that make special things happen time and time again.
So what do they do?
They get rid of them …
So there’s no time to do nothing but just think about stuff.
There’s no time to shoot-the-shit with colleagues, clients and people in general.
There’s no time to explore, research and experiment with your thoughts and ideas.
There’s no time to collaborate with people who have exceptional taste, craft and vision.
And all this is before we even get to basic shit like being given a good brief, a good amount of time, a good enough budget and good enough people who not only can make the work … but evaluate it and take responsibility of getting their organization to embrace it.
So all these pundit processes sell the illusion of a seamless, processes where the people involved are immaterial to the work that is produced … often using the shit in the market as the ‘ultimate validation’ of their approach, while conveniently ignoring the fact most of that shit was created because of their processes, not despite them.
Look, I get what we do is expensive … I also get what we do has a lot riding on it, so the desire to have more certainty in decisions is understandable. But you can’t expect certainty while demanding possibility … while at the same time, reducing budgets, people and time … and anyone who says you can is not just bullshitting you, but stealing from you.
I’m not saying there isn’t stupid shit in adland, but we also have to acknowledge there’s stupid shit in corporateland.So given we’re all supposedly wanting the same thing – while appreciating what each party brings to the table that the other is not capable of doing – maybe we’d all be doing better off if we talked honestly and openly rather than egotistically and judgmentally.
I know I’m dreaming, but hey … it’s close to Christmas, so when better to make a wish?