Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand Suicide, Consultants, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Marketing, Marketing Fail
Once upon a time, there was an ad for John West – a canned food company – that said:
“It’s the fish that John West rejects that makes John West the best”.
And at our recent talk at Cannes, I quoted this from the brilliant Janis Joplin.
And yet, when I look at my industry – an industry that is quick to call out the failings of clients – we’re not really living up to that.
Now of course I appreciate we are in economically challenging times.
And I also appreciate money makes the World go round.
But the decline of our industries power and influence was going on long before this and one of the reasons was because we chased money more than standards.
Or said another way, we sold the value of creativity and cultural understanding for the illusion of importance and association.
On one hand I get it …
As an industry, we have always been paid a fraction of what some others have got, despite – arguably – doing a lot more, or at the very least, the same amount.
But our desire to be seen as a ‘corporate insider’ has destroyed our value as a ‘corporate outsider’.
Where we have the clarity to see where society is going and what they’re valuing. Where we have the objectivity to understand what are the real issues, not what companies wish them to be. Where we have the creativity to know how to connect to people in ways they may actually give a shit about.
But more and more, we are walking away from this.
Complicity is valued more than questions.
Acquiescence is valued more than a point of view.
Toxic positivity is valued more than honesty and transparency.
Now don’t get me wrong, there’s a reason for all this …
Some of our own making, some of clients making.
But for all our talk of believing in creativity … how many really are demonstrating it?
What makes it worse is the creative talent out there is arguably better than at any point in our history.
And that’s why this is not some ‘rose-tinted-looking-backwards’ bullshit – especially as there was a whole host of shit that went on back then – this is a ‘what the hell do we value’ rant.
Once upon a time I was having a bit of a hard time at work.
A lot of it was because of the issues I’ve just written.
I went home and told Jill what was going on and what I was being told when I asked questions … to which she said something that has stuck with me.
“There’s always a reason why they’re not going to do something”.
She was right.
She still is.
Despite being in the incredibly fortunate position to work with highly successful creative people who reside outside of this industry, I still love this industry.
More than that, I still believe in what this industry can do and create.
Hell, it has given me a life that is beyond anything I could have ever imagined for myself.
In fact, almost everything that is in my life is because of what
But right now it seems we’re better at talking good things than doing good things.
And so when things get worse – not just for us, but those who use/dictate to us – we better not complain about who is eating our lunch, because quite frankly, we are doing it, and have been doing it, to ourselves.
Making decisions of convenience not of standards and excitement.
A circle jerk of blinkered and blind complicity.
The good news not everyone is like this.
The even better news is it’s not too late for us all to change.
But the muscle memory may be too old for some to remember. Or worse, care.
Don’t let the financial crisis be another excuse for apathy. That didn’t get us in this mess.
We did.
We all did.
Filed under: Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Context, Creativity, Culture, Insight, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Planners, Planning, Point Of View, Positioning
… but I love this chart.
Like all good conspiracy theories, there’s definitely enough to make you think it could be true. And it could be. Maybe not entirely, but definitely an influence … because the smartphone has become the modern day cigarette … where any moment of pause is a moment to scroll and I can’t think of any moment of pause like queuing up at a supermarket till.
I love this sort of thing.
Yes, I appreciate some are utter bollocks, but when they hit – they really hit.
Like the guy I met who started a TV shopping channel … who told me his goal was to ensure his channels were never anymore than 3 channels aways from sports, because he knew during breaks in the game, men would flick up or down 3 channels from where they were. He then ensured the products being sold during these times were sport/male relevant, which he said gave him a disproportionate opportunity to drive incremental sales.
Was he right?
He thought he was … and given he became a billionaire, there’s a good reason to believe him. Or at least not dismiss him out of hand.
Insight is getting a bad reputation these days. I get it … a lot of what is passed for insight, isn’t. Plus there’s rarely one insight that drives the whole business and it’s very rare to find something unique that others can’t claim. [Though there’s always the option to use them in a way that’s different to how others have interpreted them … which far too often, is literal translation]
But that doesn’t mean we should just dismiss the value of them … because when you do find them, the impact they can have on understanding or igniting a creative point of view is far more powerful than all the eco-systems, models and processes put together.
So here’s to the insight.
Rare, but worth pursuing or at the very least, remain open to them …
As long as you don’t fall for intellectual fiction or conveneient generalisation.
Filed under: Advertising, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand, Crap Products In History, Creativity, Culture, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Tiffany
So recently I saw this from Tiffany …
It costs US$3500.
Now don’t get me wrong, I appreciate Tiffany are trying to shed the ‘Breakfast At Tiffany’s’ stereotype … and I’m all for brands exploring and experimenting … but this feels so wrong.
An attempt to be cool without understanding what is cool.
The equivalent of a Goldman Sachs CEO thinking they’re a DJ and because they’re rich, people just nod at them. Oh yes, we have that too don’t we. Ha.
The problem classic luxury brands have is its street culture driving the luxury category – especially in fashion – not the other way around and most definitely not in this sort of overt and contrived way.
Sure some classic luxury brands have managed to do this, but they’ve done it with more deliberate, committed and authentic acts and associations, not just some random drops in scale categories.
Will the Tiffany ball sell?
Of course and some will say that’s all that matters … but the real question is at what cost?
It all feels like Ducati a few years ago when they sold their name to everything. Including a USB drive.
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate a fast USB transfer rate as much as the next sad bastard, but the only thing a Ducati USB said about you was you were a next level twat.
I remember interviewing Ducati owners to ask them their opinion and the people I talked to, hated it. As one rider said to me [and I’m paraphrasing as it was a long time ago] … while the brand marketing people probably thought this was a way for fans to express their loyalty, Ducati owners thought it was a way to cheapen the value of their investment.
Or said another way, winning over a new generation who only associate with the superficial while alienating those who appreciate the craft.
Now I get the Tiffany situation is slightly different – because they were getting seriously weighed down with their age – but we’re seeing this sort of thing everywhere at the moment.
Attempts at quick wins.
Superficial not substance.
Misunderstanding the difference between being needed and looking like the one in need.
Where brands – and based on something that happened this week, also people – think having what they call ‘an asset’ means they can do whatever they want with whoever they want.
It’s a new level of brand arrogance.
The era of Trump brand [mis]management.
Which means if can only be a matter of time before we see the Tiffany x Wish collab.
Oh … and before I forget, today is Sir Dr Brian May [CBE] birthday.
For a guitarist in one of the biggest selling rock bands of all time, he’s done alright hasn’t he.
Happy birthday Mr May, you’re a legend to me and countless others.
Filed under: Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Colenso, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture
So our office is being renovated which means for the last few months, we’ve been crammed into a couple of rooms while a building site envelops us.
It also means we’ve been severely impacted by space for meeting rooms which is why recently, when we had a pitch, we felt it was only appropriate to let the prospective client know that we knew that we’re in the most uncreative space on the planet.
Hence the sign above.
And you know what, we won.
OK, the work was bloody awesome … but at a time where so many clients seems to choose agencies for reasons beyond the actual work, it’s nice to know this client not only recognised the quality of the ideas put in front of them, but actually rewarded it, because there was no other bloody reason to choose us. Unless they were a building company.
Filed under: Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Business, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Craft, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Egovertising, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Strategy
Not too long ago, Campaign – in the UK – asked me for my point of view on Byron Sharp and the obsession with brand assets etc.
Specifically, they wanted to know if I felt he was hindering creativity as well as making it harder for small business to ever stand a chance of breaking through.
Now I have some issues with Mr Sharp’s character, but if I put that aside to answer the question, I said this:
First of all, I don’t think Mr Sharp wants to kill creativity.
From my perspective, he recognises its value far more than others in his position. If I’m going to talk about who is undermining the power of creativity, I’d say it can be aimed far more at the companies who outsource all their training needs to the same few individuals because it’s easier and cheaper for them to do.
God, that’s started off controversially hasn’t it?
The reality is what Mr Sharp says isn’t wrong, it’s just not the one-size-fits-all approach that so many seem to have interpreted it as.
And that highlights what the real problem is for me: conformity over possibility.
Or said another way, the modern equivalent of ‘no one got fired buying IBM’.
Look, I get it … marketing is expensive, complicated and influenced by a whole host of factors that you can’t control, so if someone say’s “this will stop you making stupid mistakes”, it’s pretty compelling.
But the reality is not making stupid mistakes doesn’t mean you are ensuring success. Worse, blindly following these rules creates a real risk you will commodify yourself … looking, talking and behaving just like everyone else. Let’s be honest, you don’t have to look too hard to see that already happening …
And that’s my problem with terms like ‘brand assets’ … they’re talked about as if you can buy them off the shelf.
Simply choose a single colour, add a logo and some category cues … then sit back and count your billions.
But people are confusing visual distinction with brand value.
Sure, being recognised in some way helps … but it only becomes an ‘asset’ if it has meaning built into it and to do that requires distinctive and deliberate acts, actions and behaviour over time.
Or said another way, you don’t ‘create’ a brand asset, things become a brand asset.
The industry is continually looking for shortcuts.
I get it … I really do … but the irony is the thing that can deliver so much of this, is the thing the industry continually tries to diminish or control.
Creativity.
At its best, creativity rewrites rules and changes the odds in your favour.
Creativity helped Liquid Death get men to want to drink water.
Creativity helped Gentle Monster become the fastest selling and growing eyewear brand across Asia.
Creativity helped Roblox go from niche player to the single most played game by kids and teens across America.
Creativity even helped Metallica use a 30 year old album to attract more fans resulting in them becoming the second most successful American band of all time.
They didn’t achieve this simply because of smart distribution of their brand assets. Nor did they achieve it by placing their logo as a watermark throughout their TV commercial [which has to be the laziest and most misguided attempt to achieve ‘attribution’]. They achieved it by allowing creativity the freedom to push forward in ways that – as a by-product – meant their voice created value in their numerous assets.
I get it’s not easy.
I get it requires real energy and openness.
But little can achieve what creativity can do when you commit to letting it loose.
My problem [and I appreciate this may just be me] is that many seem to have interpreted the words of Sharp [and others] in a way where they see creativity as simply the ‘wrapping paper’ to execute their rules and processes.
But creativity isn’t the wrapping, it’s the fucking present.
A gift that offers value to brands that goes far beyond the fulfilment of singular commercial objectives and goals.
There are countless examples of brands achieving incredible success and growth following different rules so much of the industry feel is the only way to progress.
That’s not meant as a diss to Mr Sharp, he is obviously very good – though I note he and his peers choose to not highlight that many misinterpret and misuse their guidance, which suggests there is an element of complicity and profiteering from the one-size-fits-all blandification that is happening all around us.
But even then, the real blame should be aimed at the industry for fetishising the learnings and viewpoints of the same few people, because however good they may be – and they are good – it means we’re literally choosing to narrow our own potential and future.
Don’t get me wrong, brand assets are definitely a thing. But they don’t make creativity valuable … creativity makes them an asset.