Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Comment, Creativity, Differentiation, Effectiveness, Marketing, Marketing Fail
When I last went to Cannes, I was inundated with ads from data/tech companies saying how they could get better results.
The problem was the ads were so bad, that you were left thinking ‘they may know data, but they sure as shit don’t know anything about people’.
But there’s another sort of ‘data-based’ ad that is just as bad.
Because while this group do know how to talk to humans, they sure as shit don’t know data.
Have a look at this …
Or this …
Oh the cliche …
The wonderful, joyful cliche.
That thing people say is a cliche “because it’s true”.
And while perception may appear reality, it’s not is it? Not always.
Not all men are crap at fixing things.
Not all people lie to their partner about the price they paid for things.
Not all people are just shit.
And while I am sure the people behind it think it’s just a bit of fun.
And while I accept there may be an element of truth to some of what they say.
It’s just the modern day equivalent of those ads we look at now with shock and contempt.
I get we live in competitive times.
I understand the importance of standing out.
But data that doesn’t relate to humans and cliches that just undermines them don’t do anyone any good. They just – as these ads demonstrate – create the illusion of value.
Rishi Sunak, the potential Tory leader, has laid out a three-point plan to transform education in the UK – including that statement in the photo above.
Yep, he wants to ‘phase out university degrees that do not improve students’ earning potential’.
What the absolute fuck?
Apart from the fact the easiest way to transform education is to actually invest in schools and teachers across the country rather than continue to see anything other than private education as a wasted expense – mainly because they all went to private schools so have a misguided and warped view of what teaching, learning and intelligence actually is or can be – can you imagine what their idea of subjects worthy of a degree actually are?
There will be no arts. [Waste of money]
No history. [Except about Britain, presumably]
No languages. [As it supports Brexit and immigration]
The only thing we’ll see are subjects related to business, maths and maybe law.
I cannot tell you how angry I got reading his ‘plans’.
Those degrees he hates, aren’t worthless. They’re life.
They’re what helps stops society fall down a blackhole of endless repetition, mediocrity and middle-management.
A production line of duplicate attitudes, approaches, values and experiences.
Not only that, those degrees that ‘do not improve earning potential’ contribute far more to the economy than he knows or wants to admit … even with their best efforts of killing it.
Like those gun lobbyists in America whose attitude towards stopping ‘gun attacks’ is to either give more guns out to people or make schools buy bullet proof rooms… not forgetting those pricks who have decided woman can/can’t choose what is right for their own bodies … Sunak and the rest of his Tory scum seem to think the best way to help a generation they’ve actively and purposefully robbed of hope through deliberate acts of underfunding, denial and obstacles is to tell them what they should find valuable and what they should do for the rest of their life.
10 years ago I wrote a post about a Dad who wrote a letter to his son about his impending liberal arts education.
I suggest every Tory – and parent – should read it, even if they will never understand it.
We all want the best for our kids.
We all know education is a vital part of that.
But it blows my mind that so many people – including those in power – fail to understand the better the education we give to all – not just the privileged – the better the chances people, communities and the country as a whole will have to prosper.
Or said another way …
Education can help a nation achieve what all politicians say they are there to make happen.
Which highlights that Tories don’t actually want that to happen. They just want it to happen for people like them. Rich people. Rich, white people.
But here’s the thing, private education does not automatically guarantee smart people come out the other side. Yes, they have more advantage and opportunity … which they would pretty much have anyway given they generally come from affluent families … but there is plenty of evidence to suggest many create more myopic, self-focused and damaged individuals.
And here’s the thing …
In a world that is increasingly encouraging, valuing and producing the same thing over and over again, we need to remember the arts aren’t worthless to society and economies … they create the value in the known and reveal the opportunities in the things Rishi and mob would never see on their own.
Fuck the Tories.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Cunning, Devious Strategy, Education, Otis
Despite using examples that probably featured perspectives that were the opposite of every MBA case study they had read, it all went pretty well.
I got a bunch of questions and even received some lovely notes from people in attendance.
But the reality is, I kind of ensured that the end would be remembered better than the beginning.
You see Otis saw me writing my talk and asked if he was in it.
So I added this as the last slide.
Which means regardless what went on before, the ending was always going to be perfect.
#Strategy
Filed under: Advertising, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Culture, Insight, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Planning, Point Of View, Relevance, Resonance
Recently I saw this …
Quite a headline eh?
Amazingly, it wasn’t from the Sunday Sport ‘newspaper’ … though it was from The Daily Mail, so it’s kind of the same thing.
And while it makes for entertaining reading – unless you’re the vicar in question or the Henry Hoover – it did make me think about how rubbish his attempt at persuasion.
Now to be fair, being found with your penis in a vacuum cleaner while wearing stockings would test the limits of any act of persuasion, but even so … it’s just rubbish isn’t it?
You don’t believe it.
You don’t consider it.
You are not in the least moved by it.
And that’s kind of what I feel about a lot of the ads I see these days.
They say stuff but they don’t make you think, feel or react to any of it.
No persuasion … just a rather rubbish demand that you now go and do something or the insane ramblings of an 18 year old French philosophy student. In their first year.
I swear a big reason for this is the lack of actual interest in knowing culture.
A narrowcast attitude of either assuming people blindly love you and wait on your every word or only showing an interest in how people use your product. And nothing else.
An egotistical assumption audiences don’t need to be encouraged to consider why you may be beneficial to their life or the belief people are thick as pig shit and so need to be instructed in detail what to do with you.
So you end up with bullshit like:
Future is an attitude for Audi or Cure Housebarrassment for Wicks Kitchens … which are so stupid/blatant you start to think saying undiagnosed diabetes led you to stick your penis in a hoover while wearing stockings is at least an attempt to make an attempt at persuasion.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, Cannes, China, Colenso, Comment, Confidence, Consultants, Content, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Devious Strategy, Differentiation, Distinction, ECommerce, Effectiveness, Honesty, Innovation, Insight, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Metallica, New Zealand, Perspective, Planners, Relationships, Relevance, Research, Resonance, Strategy, Wieden+Kennedy
There’s so many agencies, consultancies and self-appointed guru’s out there who talk about how to be successful at business.
They all have their models, eco-systems, philosophies and proof points.
And yet so few have ever done it for themselves.
They’ve chosen to ‘succeed’ under the safety-net of anothers money, reputation or effort.
That doesn’t mean what they do or think doesn’t have value – of course it does – but it also doesn’t mean their viewpoint is the only one worth counting.
And yet, every single bloody day, that’s how it is presented.
Recently someone wrote a piece on how they had used their proprietary research methodology on a Cannes winning TV ad and declared it would not deliver sustainable growth for the brand in question.
Putting aside the fact they were judging work that had won a creativity award rather than an effectiveness one … the thing I found funny was their confidence in proclaiming their view was the ultimate view.
I am not doubting their smarts.
I am not doubting their data.
But I am doubting their breadth of business appreciation.
And yet somehow, the voices of a few have positioned themselves as the be-all and end-all of effectiveness.
Don’t follow us and you fail.
Don’t follow us and your brand will lose.
Don’t follow us and you will be labeled foolish.
Now I am not denying these people do have a lot of experience and lessons we can learn from, but they’re not infallible.
But that’s how the industry approaches them.
Lording them like they are Yoda’s of the future.
But they’re not.
Don’t get me wrong, they are very good at evaluating effectiveness from a particular perspective and set of behaviours. Offering advice that can be hugely important in the decision making process.
But there’s a whole host of brands and business that have adopted totally different models and achieved ‘effectiveness and success’ that leaves others far behind.
Incredible sustainable success.
From Liquid Death to SKP-S to Gentle Monster to Vollebak to Metallica to name but a few.
Oh I know what some will say …
“They’re niche” … “they’re young” … “they’re not that successful”.
And to those people I would say maybe you don’t know what you’re talking about … because in just that list, it includes the biggest selling brand on Amazon, the fastest selling brand in their category on earth and the second most successful American band in history.
But there were two things that really brought the issue of mindset narrowcasting to me …
The first was the launch of a book that was basically about creating future customer desire for your brand/business.
Now there’s nothing wrong with that … but no shit Sherlock.
Has the market got so short-sighted and insular that the idea of doing things that also drive your future value and desirability become a revelation?
It’s literally the most basic entrepreneur mindset, and yet it was presented like it was Newton discovering the laws of gravity.
This person is super smart.
They’ve done a lot of good stuff.
But it just feels the actions of some in the industry are driven by the fetishisation of icon status … even though, ironically, what it does is highlight their experience may be narrower than they realise.
But at least the book had good stuff in there.
Stuff that could help people with some of the basics.
A desire to look forward rather than get lost in the optimisation circle-jerk.
This next one was a whole lot worse.
Recently an ex-employer of mine went to see a current client of mine.
Specifically the founder and CEO.
Apparently they went in to tell him he was missing out on a whole host of business and they could help him get more.
They then proceeded to present a massive document on how they would do it.
He looked at them and told them it was very interesting but they were wrong.
He told them their premise was based on a business approach he doesn’t follow or believe in.
A business approach that didn’t reflect the industry he was in, only the industry they were in.
He then informed them he had the most profitable store on the planet and so while he appreciated their time, he had faith in his approach and it was serving him well.
But it gets better.
As they were leaving – and I’ve been told this is true by someone who was apparently there – the person showing them out informed them their boss had a personal net worth of US$36 billion and based on their companies current share price, that meant he was more valuable than their entire group.
Was it an asshole thing to do?
Yep.
Do I absolutely love it?
Oh yeah.
Will I get in trouble for telling this?
Errrrrm, probably.
My point is the industry has decided ‘effectiveness’ can only be achieved and measured in one way and any deviation from that is immediately discounted or considered ‘flawed’.
Often by people who have never actually built a world leading business themselves.
Again, I am not dismissing the importance of what is being said, it’s HUGELY important – which is why I’m proud we won the Cannes/Warc effectiveness Grand Prix – but, and it’s a huge one, if we think that’s the only model and only use that one ‘model’, then we are literally adopting a single approach to solve every one of our clients every problems.
One.
That’s insane.
Not just because it’s stupid but because if everyone adopts the same approach, then impact will be influenced far more by spend and distribution that strategy.
Please note I am absolutely not saying we should burn the models or philosophies or systems that have proven their value to drive business. No. Absolutely not. I’m just saying we shouldn’t be praying at the feet of them … especially when many are simply focused on creating steady impact rather than spectacular.
Yes, I know ‘spectacular’ has a lifespan – which is why innovation is so important – but so many brands out there either aim for the middle … reinforced by processes, protocols and rules defined as ‘best practice’ by people in a particular industry … or they bake-in ‘limitation’ into their potential because they’ve blindly adopted rules they never challenge or explore from other industries or entrepreneurs.
At the end of the day, if a brand like Liquid Death can become the biggest selling water brand on Amazon because they found a way to make men actually want to drink water through a model and approach that is not only radically different to what so many of the industry experts say is ‘the only way’ … but is the opposite of it … then your brand may be inhibiting itself by following a model designed to make you fit in with it, rather than redefine how it fits in with you.