Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Consultants, Content, Context, Creativity, Culture, Insight, Resonance, Respect, Rick Rubin, RulesOfRubin

A while back, I wrote a post about Rick Rubin and his brilliance at making the complex, simple.
I talked about how this was in diametrically opposed to the way many agencies and consultancies operate.
But – to really ram home the difference – Rick isn’t simply a master of simplification, he uses it to unlock the creative potential and authenticity of the people he works with.
He has helped more artists attain a highly desirable, distinctive and definitive role in culture than probably all the agencies and consultancies put together.
That’s not to say agencies and consultancies can’t do that or haven’t done that, but the ones who have done it well … the ones who have ignited fandom rather than just participation … is very, very small.
Anyway, that post – and a subsequent project with the Chili’s – took me down a Rick Rubin rabbit hole and over the weeks, I’ve posted his quotes with what my interpretation of what it means for the ad industry.
The work.
The environment.
The clients.
The more I spend going down the Rick rabbit hole, the more it feels his viewpoint encapsulates all the different things I’ve learnt, seen or experienced from others. Where every single element is built around one, simple goal.
To make the best work you could imagine.
We all have a role to play in achieving this.
It’s more than just down to the talent who actually creates the final work. It’s the people, the environment and the paymasters who all play an integral role to achieving that goal.
So for the next couple of weeks, I’m just going to talk about some of the Rules Of Rick … because if you’re going to learn the rules of creativity from anyone, then the person who has helped the most diverse group of artists and musicians become culturally and commercially successful is probably the one you want to hear it from.
They start tomorrow.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Management, Marketing, Martin Weigel, Planners, Planning, Point Of View, WeigelCampbell, Wieden+Kennedy

So I survived and no one died. Yet.
Yesterday was wonderful.
Everyone was so nice to me, which means they don’t really know me.
Anyway, while I’ll be talking a lot about Colenso and New Zealand in the future, today I want to talk about something else.
A while back, the amazing Martin Weigel wrote an absolutely brilliant post about the importance of language in strategy.
Except it wasn’t just about the language you use in your work, but how you use it.
How you ensure you are writing a strategy that has colour, movement, clarity and provocation.
I’m doing it a disservice as it is basically a masterclass – as all Mr Martin’s brilliant posts are – on how to write strategy, with the end result being you not only have a greater understanding for how to do it, but a greater respect for doing it.
The craft.
The consideration.
The way to take people to a place they can see and feel and want to fuck with.
However, as brilliant as it is, I’ve heard some say, “it’s all obvious”.
And while there is an argument for that – because what Martin says isn’t a revolution on how to approach strategy, simply a focus on how to do it well – the reality is there’s a big difference between knowing the theory and actually doing it.
Which leads to my issue.
Our industry is filled with planners who talk about how to make world class creativity, but have never made any.
That doesn’t mean they don’t have a right to talk about it, but it does mean they don’t have a right to act like experts about it.
But they do.
And while I am not suggesting these people aren’t good at many other things and ‘world class creativity’ is about as subjective as you can get … in the area of actual making work that has defined brands in culture, I think if you looked at the reel Mr Weigel can put forward, it would be better than most agencies could present.
But here’s the thing …
World Class creativity isn’t specifically about work that has run across the globe.
Nor is it about work that is for a global brand … though, it should be noted, he has done this and done it brilliantly which is often far harder to achieve than work for a smaller client with far less politics.
It is simply about the actual work.
Not the theory of it.
The actual work and how it changed the way culture looked at the brand and how the brands fortune changed because of it.
Not one or the other.
Both.
That he has done this at the highest level and – arguably – on the most consistent level of any planner on the planet, means people who are looking to belittle it because ‘it’s obvious’ or because ‘he works at Wieden+Kennedy’ are idiots.
Maybe you can get to this level because of luck – especially if you’re male and white – but you definitely can’t stay there because of it.
Especially at Wieden.
What this piece of brilliance Martin gave us was an act of generosity.
Something designed to help the individual be better so that the overall work can be better.
Making work that fights indifference.
Making work that has a point of view.
Making work that we can all be proud of making.
So to all those who truly care about the work, follow the people who actually make it at the highest standards, because anything is easy for the person who never has done it.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Confidence, Consultants, Craft, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Cunning, Innovation, Insight, Money, Relevance, Resonance, Technology

I am a big believer in putting as few boundaries around creativity as possible.
That doesn’t mean it can ignore the problem it is trying to solve.
I just think the focus should be on solving a clearly defined problem rather than piling on a bunch of additional ‘mandatories’ that are often for no other reason than satisfying someone’s ego within the organisation.
The main reason for my view is because I know when creativity is given the freedom to solve problems, it can do it in the most imaginative and powerful of ways. In my opinion, too many companies are dictating the solution they want from their agencies – which not only means they are robbing themselves of the possibilities creative people could add to their business, they need to take some of the blame in terms of the lack of traction so many of their ads have in culture.
However, as we all know, when it comes to being able to save a client money – they suddenly become far more open to changing their behaviour. The digital and data industries have profited from this approach more than most – and while some of the things they have done are phenomenal, a lot is quite simply, flawed thinking … designed to drive short-term growth at the cost of long term profit.
Please understand, I am not saying digital and data are flawed. I’m saying many of the things digital and data agencies are doing is. From D2C models that are ore about driving commoditisation than distinctive brand value, to CX practices that are often designed to reduce transactional friction than reinforce brand experience through to user-journeys … which are sold as fact but are designed for mass convenience.
I’m not saying there’s not great value in this … when done well, the impact on brand and business can be huge. But too much isn’t done well. Sold as transformative but executed in productised form.
But I digress
You see I recently read a piece about some incredible lateral thinking.
Where creativity didn’t just overcome a huge obstacle that was eagerly embraced by clients with an open mind, but created an outcome that was better than they ever thought possible.
A few years ago, the US Air Force was facing huge budget cuts.
Their technology was out-of-date and the cost to update would place huge pressure on all the other things that needed investment.
Rather than sacrifice, they explored other ways to solve their challenge.
To cut a long story short, they discovered the answer was a SONY Playstation.
1760 Playstation 3’s to be precise.
1760 Playstation 3’s the came together to build the most powerful supercomputer in the entire US Department of Defense.More than that, it was the 33rd most powerful supercomputer in the world.
At the time, it’s performance was unparalleled … able to perform 500 million mathematical operations in one second and analyse over a billion pixels in one minute. Because of this, the Air Force used it to process high-resolution satellite images, identify unclear objects in space and deepen their research into artificial intelligence.
At the time, the Playstation 3 cost about $400 each.
The cost of buying approximately 2000 of the machines meant the entire project was approximately $2 million … which was between 5-10% of the price of a regular supercomputer of similar capability.
Of course to pull this off required a lot of incredibly talented engineers and computer programmers – not to mention open minded senior officers – but the reality was the end result was something that actually advanced their capabilities.
Not an optimised solution.
Not a short-term benefit at a longer term cost solution.
But something better than they had before at a price that enabled them to do the other things they wished to invest in.
So much of what we do is impacted by systems and processes that are designed to validate remuneration.
There’s value in that.
But when it ends up killing possibilities of effectiveness and value … simply because it doesn’t fit into their pre-determined evaluation criteria of an organisation, then you have to ask who is really mad.
The people who can see ways around the impossible, or the ones who want to stop them.


Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, Empathy, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Point Of View, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Rick Rubin, RulesOfRubin
Great work. It’s a term used by so many but – let’s be honest – there’s not huge amounts of it about.
Of course there’s some … work that literally takes your breath away … but in the main, it’s all a bit beige and blah.
But what’s interesting is who people are blaming for this situation.
Often it’s the ad agencies who cop all the abuse.
Claims of being … out of touch, selfish and arrogant, more focused on what they want than their client needs.
But frankly, all this feels a bit too convenient because the people and organisations shouting the abuse the loudest happen to be the people and organisations who are directly competing for the same budgets.
Hmmmmn, I wonder if that undermines their credibility a little?
Throw in they’re often more focused on optimising than progressing and make work that either says whatever the client wants to say – regardless of how tone deaf that may be in culture – or just talk at people with buzzwords and data points that have no value, resonance or humanity towards the audience they are trying to engage … then you start to realise this is more a shitty strategy, than a future of marketing play.
Don’t get me wrong, I think agencies have to take a significant amount of the blame for the situation they find themselves in …
Too many have sold creativity down the river.
Charge for the process they undertake rather than work.
Seek to beliked by clients rather than respected.
Focus on creating generalised answers not unique problems.
Underpay, undervalue and under-appeal to the best of the best – existing or new.
… but even then, it’s only some of the blame, not all.
And the reason for this is great work is a team sport.
Everyone plays a part.
Not everyone – to use a football analogy – will be the striker, but they’re all necessary to score the goal.
But too often, we’re in situations where it’s not played that way.
Where too many wanting the authority but none of the responsibility.
Taking the credit but rejecting the blame.
Handing out dour instruction but expecting amazing results. Even though they don’t even know what amazing is, because either they’re context is small or they simply think everything they do is great so it doesn’t matter what they say.
Hence they’re the ones who criticise the agency for not delivering.
They’re the one’s questioning their commitment and passion.
They’re the ones running to data and management consultants to subject society to communication that in cultural landfill, not cultural stimulus.
And that’s why Rick’s quote is so good.
Because it acknowledges the inclusive responsibility to making something great.
From literally how you deliver the brief – let alone the actual brief – to how you support, encourage and give feedback to the people you want to do the best work of their life to help you have the best time of your life.
Because the reality is, if you’re not excited about doing something great, why the fuck do you think anyone else will be?