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: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Business, Collegues, Comment, Complicity, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Experience, Fulfillment, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Process, Professionalism, Reputation
A few weeks ago, my beloved Nottingham Forest imploded.
Despite having the best season we had experienced in decades, I woke up to the news that our manager, Nuno – the best and most successful one we’d had in decades, was potentially going to leave the club after just one game.
One.
A game that we had won and that I’d written about here.
Add to this that Nuno had very recently signed a new contract and the whole thing made no sense.
Until it did.
Because while details were still murky at the time, it appeared that a new, senior executive had joined the club and in a period of just 2 months, they had caused huge rifts with his decisions, stubbornness and ego.
Now I am not denying that the way our manager raised this issue – via an interview – had a lot of room for improvement, however the real issue was that a club bursting with optimism had burst in a matter of weeks because of one, senior, leader.
In many ways, this is not a story of football, but of modern corporate behaviour.
Let’s be honest, we’ve all seen it …
Where someone comes in and thinks they know how to do the job of everyone else better than everyone else – regardless of the fact they’ve never done those jobs or being as successful as those in the job.
And rather than start by listening, learning, discussing and collaborating … they immediately turn it into a ‘big swinging dick contest’ and before you know it, they’ve destroyed everything that made things special before they came.
People.
Culture.
Process.
Standards.
Everything.
But if that wasn’t bad enough, they then blame it on the people they went out of their way to undermine which they’ll then justify using words such as “efficiency”, “consistency”, “modernisation”, “uniformity”, business demands” and/or “unlocking the power of our collective strength”.
I should point out at this stage, this is not always the case.
But I should also point out, it is often the case … as demonstrated by the fact that despite the owner of Nottingham Forest publicly stating he supported Nuno and would be holding ‘clear the air talks’ shortly, he ended up ‘clearing Nuno’s desk’ and firing him.
So why does this keep happening – both in football and in companies?
Is it because companies like hiring psychopaths?
Is it because companies only care about the cash?
Is it because employees are idiots when not controlled?
While it would be tempting to say yes, we all know that’s not the case.
However there is a reason why I think happens more and more – and to that, I point to this brilliant piece by the original manager of Guns n’ Roses – Alan Niven.
Put simply, he highlights how too many companies hire senior leaders from other industries – believing their ‘business knowledge’ will help them achieve greater success. And while that sounds all well and good, they forget that while business may have some steadfast principals … every industry works very differently from one another and if you fail to realise how a specific industry truly operates – or you try to make it work how your previous industry operated – you find many end up tearing things down, rather than building them up.
Pretty much nails it.
And while he writes about the music industry, we don’t have to look too far to see this happening all around us.
Where people who have never made the work, decide and dictate how the work should be made.
Placing more importance on scale, conformity and cost-saving than creativity.
Believing the only thing that motivates is money, rather than acknowledging the importance of standards, craft and respect.
Of course every industry can improve.
Every industry has things they can tighten-up and evolve.
But if you’re not from the industry, you often see the bits you don’t understand as the bits that need to be addressed and then before you know it, you’re killing the very thing that drove and defined your value.
And everyone suffers … except the people who instigated all the change.
Because the way their remuneration is structured, even when they lose, they win.
Experience matters.
Not just in terms of the roles you’ve had, but how you gained them.
Because while outside perspectives are powerful and beneficial, when there’s more people with that context than there those who have the knowledge and understanding of how everything actually works … then you find that many of their strategies end up driving a companies demise rather than their future.
Or as my mentor Lee Hill said:
“The greatest lesson I’ve learned is that when it comes to industry practice, logic is personal rarely universal”.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brands, Cliches, Collegues, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Consultants, Corporate Evil, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Delusion, Distinction, Effectiveness, Leadership, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect, Standards, Success
It’s been a while since I’ve had an all-out rant, but here we go.
So recently, I saw a quote recently I loved.
It was by Arnold Glasgow, the American businessman and satirist who said:
“Consider how hard it is to change yourself and you’ll understand what little chance you have trying to change others”.
I say this because too many brands – and agencies – think they can.
Worse, they think they can with an ad … an ad that either tells people specifically what to do/what they should do and/or a list of product attributes that they believe will make someone immediately stop whatever it is they have been doing for decades and change tact because they’ve suddenly been ‘enlightened’.
Of course, this is not entirely the fault of agencies and clients.
Too often, it is backed up by some for-profit research group who has said their findings prove – without any possible doubt – this is what people will do and, even more importantly, want to do.
Now this is not an anti-research stance. Or an anti-agency or client diatribe.
The reality is we need some sort of foundation of information to make choices and decisions and research – when done well, like everything in life – is a universally established way to achieve that BUT … and it’s a big but … the definitive and delusional nature of how our industry talks borders on bonkers.
I get we don’t like risk.
I get what we do is bloody expensive.
I get there are big implications on getting things wrong.
But nothing – and I mean nothing – can be guaranteed and yet so much of the business acts like it can be, conveniently choosing to ignore the landfill of failings from organisations who have researched every part of everything they do for in every aspect of their life.
Sure, it can increase the odds of success … like advertising.
Sure, it is better than not doing anything at all … like advertising.
But everyone acting like whatever they are going to do is ‘a dead cert’ is an act of commercial complicity and co-dependency that borders on Comms Stockholm Syndrome.
A long time ago, when I was maybe a bit more of a menace, a media agency told a client – with me in the room – that they could guarantee they’d HIT their sales target if a particular amount was invested.
I asked, “but you don’t know what the idea is yet and surely that has a role in the level of impact and/or investment that needs to be made?” … to which they said their ‘proprietary data’ gave them the commercial insight that helped their clients achieve their goals.
So back at the office – pissed off – I sent them an email saying this was the work.
Obviously, it did not go down well, but then neither did their ‘strategy’ of just throwing money at the wall until they hit the magic number.
Again, I appreciate we all need information to base choices and decisions on, but we’re getting way too generalistic, simplistic and egotistic in our approaches and methodologies – which is why the sooner we remember how hard it is for us to change any part of who we are, the sooner we may start accepting it takes far more than a business goal … a focus group commentary … a marketing methodology or an ad to get people to even consider doing what you want them to do and so maybe – just maybe – it will encourage us all to start playing up to a new standards rather than down to complicit convenience.
But I wouldn’t hold your breath, which is why I finish this rant with a post that I saw recently I also loved – albeit with ‘paraphrased interpretation’.
Thankfully not everyone is like this.
As proven by the fact, they tend to be the ones behind the stuff we all wish we were behind.
Or as my friend said recently, ‘they’re the ones who play to create change, not communicate everything exactly the same’.
Oh, I feel better for that. Thank you for [not] reading, hahaha.
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.