The Musings Of An Opinionated Sod [Help Me Grow!]


2023: Trends …

A few weeks ago, I posted this on Twitter …

Quite a lot of people liked it for one reason …

It’s kinda true.

For all the shit people throw at the younger generation for chasing the next shiny thing, the same can be said for business.

Worse. In my experience, the younger generations are far more committed to what they think is the right thing and stick with it, even in the face of other things coming up.

OK, so there may be some subjects where they are quick to switch, but it’s not the stuff that costs tens of thousands of people their livelihood just because someone at the top wants to look like they have their finger on the pulse.

Seriously, the way some companies behave is like watching a massive game of Hot Or Not … just with billions of dollars riding on every decision.

Once upon a time, a planning colleague – Rodi – once said the biggest problem with business is they remain interested but never want to commit.

He was – as usual – bang on.

And while there are many schools-of-thought that suggest that because of the speed of change ‘those who commit, lose’ … they’re really missing the point.

Because while you have to know what is happening and shifting, it’s only those who commit to what they believe in who can create something that leads culture to them … rather than continually chasing where they’re going.

It doesn’t mean it will always work out, but we know the alternative achieves that even less.

Comments Off on 2023: Trends …


Is There Anything As Fast As Someone On LinkedIn Declaring Their Expertise On Their Ability To Monetise, Explain And Define An Emerging Technology Despite Them Never Having Worked In Tech Or Done Something That Defined Any Tech?

I’m all for people expressing their opinion.

I’m all for people being excited about things they see as having great possibilities.

I’m all for people trying to find new ways to evolve, grow and make money.

But come on …

It’s getting to the point where Linkedin should be renamed Disneyland given how much fiction and fantasy are going on.

What’s worse is among all the ‘consultants’ and ‘new business development people’ claiming expertise, are a bunch of strategists.

Now I know as a discipline we think we have the answer to everything … but we don’t.

Fuck, even the people who are developing the technology, don’t.

But what bothers me is the reason behind why so many people are claiming expertise.

OK, so I know some have a real understanding of the technology and its possible implications. And in that, I include certain strategists – we all know who those brilliant people are.

And I also appreciate some mistakenly believe that because they’ve used ChatGPT, they think they now know everything about the technology.

But others – and this is potentially the majority of them – are doing it because they see it as a chance to personally gain from it.

In essence, their perspective is that as long as a subject matter is highly topical and others – especially companies – don’t know about it, then they can profit from it because they can say anything because no one will know enough to tell them they’re wrong.

You can tell who this group are because they’re the one’s who are either the loudest to declare their knowledge or the first to say they had identified the trend … despite never doing anything with their ‘expertise’ or because of their ‘vision’.

Putting aside how this sort of behaviour can damage the reputation of real experts, disciplines and entire industries … the issue I have is how it is often justified as hustle culture.

I’ve written my issue with hustle culture in the past, but the fact is, this isn’t hustling … it’s grifting and the impact of it is not just damaging people and companies, but it killing the potential of technology before it has a chance to find it’s real possibility.

I appreciate this is quite a heavy post from what was just a piss-take image of Homer … but the best comedy is always based on a truth we often like to deny.

Comments Off on Is There Anything As Fast As Someone On LinkedIn Declaring Their Expertise On Their Ability To Monetise, Explain And Define An Emerging Technology Despite Them Never Having Worked In Tech Or Done Something That Defined Any Tech?


Why We Need To Remember You Can Be Relevant As Hell And Still Be Boring As Fuck …

In April, I have been asked to speak at a conference in Croatia.

Croatia! What a country … I cannot bloody wait.

I know … I know … I can hear you all from here, screaming ‘another holiday freebie’. And while I accept this is a terrible misjudgement on their part, does the fact I have to take 3 planes over 24 hours to get there from NZ make you feel any differently?

No … didn’t think so. Doesn’t for me to be honest.

Now this conference is apparently a big deal with some very big names appearing so when they asked what I would be talking about, I thought it best to honour the occasion while representing my abilities, which is why I told them this:

There are many ways I could describe this talk. I could say it’s an investigation into why so many brands fail to connect to audiences despite having more data, research and marketing investment than at any point in history. Or I could take a more controversial path with ‘What if the tools and processes of modern marketing are wrong?’ And while both of those questions will feature within this talk, the real narrative is if you want to be culturally, commercially and creatively powerful … please stop being so bloody boring.

And to double down on that premise, here is slide 2 from the upcoming preso …

While I fully appreciate this seems like I’m not taking things seriously, I am.

Very seriously.

Because the industry seems to only have 2 settings: serious or stupid.

Or said another way, purpose filled or sponsored comedy.

And while they can both work in the right context – and with real talent creating it – it’s all got so expected that it wins by relentless repetition, rather that intrigue and interest.

At least with agencies like Mischief – who I adore – they are painfully aware of who they are, what they do and how they do it.

They’re less ad agency of brand communications, and more meme agency of the internet. And they do it so, so well.

But even they run the risk of their approach ending up being expected. A bit like brands who ‘hijack culture’ … which has now got so common, you have to ask if it is hijacking anything.

Thank god in Mischief’s case they have the brilliant and irrepressible Greg Hahn at their helm – someone who not only is phenomenally creative, but also can read and play with the pulse of culture – so just when things get expected, he takes people somewhere new and interesting.

Or said another way, he kills boring before boring takes hold.

But the reality is what Mischief do is not new.

There are many brands – even industries – who have been doing this sort of thing for decades.

Fashion. Gaming. Hell, even certain TV shows have been doing it.

[Albeit, to different degrees]

And they do it in ways that builds their brands role and position in culture more than just gaining a moment of space for it to be seen and discussed in culture. [That sounds like a diss, it’s not meant to … it’s just my bad writing because Mischief already have achieved more than companies who have been around a century]

The real issue is that in our desperate need to be validated by business, we’ve forgotten what business we’re in.

Because to use creativity just for short-term sales goals robs creativity of it’s true commercial value and power for brands, products, tools and services.

To be intriguing … enticing … interesting and inviting.

Because as the title of this post, stolen from my beloved Martin Weigel so perfectly states …

“You can be relevant as hell and still be boring as fuck.”

Comments Off on Why We Need To Remember You Can Be Relevant As Hell And Still Be Boring As Fuck …


Media And Marketing Is So Lost, They Don’t Even Care What They Say Any More …

The media – and marketing – have perpetuated all manner of stereotypes over the years.

They spend enormous amounts of time and money painting psychological beliefs into society so they can profit from others shortcomings or vulnerabilities.

They don’t care if it destroys lives, to them that’s just canon fodder in the quest of riches, so everything is justifiable.

Which explains why we see so many things being labelled by the media and marketing industries … because it’s the perfect way to achieve mass social psychological manipulation.

You name it and they’ll have given a name to it.

Superfast.

Superfoods.

Superhair.

Supersoup

They’ll use a label to sell anything … from kale to self-help books to gender roles.

And while that is a fucking horrible way to behave, there is one thing that is pretty impressive and that’s their ability to not just never stop doing it … but to never stop inventing new bullshit labels to fuck with people.

Take a look at this …

A CEO body?

A fucking CEO body?

What does that even mean?

Do all CEO’s share a particular physical format?

I mean, I know Elon and Jeff went from dweeb to muscle mountains, but I’ve still met a bunch of CEO’s with very different body shapes to them.

Also, what sort of CEO are they talking about?

A CEO of a big company? A start-up company? A fast-food company?

Do they lead 3 employees or 33,000 employees?

Are they heading up a profitable company or a crypto disaster?

Do they write thought leader pieces on Linkedin or are they living in a social media blackhole?

And why are you only showing a man?

A white man.

Is it because you think only white men can become a CEO?

Have you inadvertently just explained the real reason behind corporate racism, prejudice and the glass ceiling all in one go?

And while I’m at it, can you explain what you mean by the term ‘midlife’ in your headline?

What is that?

Is it a specific number?

Is it 30?

What about 40?

I bet it’s a mid-number like 45 or something … just to mess with us.

Come on, don’t keep it to yourself. Is there a standard ‘midlife’ no one told me about.

You can tell me. I know at 52 I’ve likely passed it, but I’d still like to know.

Finally – and I really don’t want to be picky here – but why are you telling everyone what the 16 foods ALL men should be eating are?.

Is it CEO food?

Don’t CEO’s eat fancy and expensive stuff?

And if all men eat it, does that mean all men will become CEO’s?

How will that happen? Are there enough CEO jobs to go round to make that happen?

And what about the women who are CEO’s? Do they eat that food as well? Is that how they got to the top … they ate like a man and had a body like a man?

I’m so confused.

In fact the only thing that’s clear to me is how you’re using marketing labelling bullshit to add even more expectation and judgement on people’s lives just so you can attempt to profit even more from making society question how they are supposed to look and live.

All this coming from The Times newspaper.

The fucking Times!!!

Once the pinnacle of journalism and standards, now a peddler of utter horseshit.

Even more so when you think what their CEO’s body is like …

Maybe I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure no one would want to look like that, let alone be like that.

And if The Times think they do, it may help explain why their readership keeps falling.

Dickheads.

Oh I really enjoyed writing that.

Comments Off on Media And Marketing Is So Lost, They Don’t Even Care What They Say Any More …


Why Business Needs To Be More Seinfeld …

I was never a fan of Seinfeld.

Then I’ve never been much of a fan of Jerry Seinfeld either.

I always found him a bit of condescending, self-righteous prick.

Oh I get he is smart.

His observational skills are almost unparalleled.

But you can be a genius and still be an asshole. Step on down Elon Musk.

However recently I read something Jerry said that made me dislike him less.

Not simply because he didn’t know who McKinsey were, but because of what he highlighted is the problem with them. Or more specifically, the problem companies who use them, have.

Now don’t get me wrong, I appreciate this paints Jerry as a control freak.

And I also acknowledge that many companies hire McKinsey because they think the challenge they face is hard – rather than easy.

But what I do like about what he says is he won’t outsource his responsibility.

Sure, he could trust those around him more … and sure, his words smack of egomaniac … but to be fair to him, the product he sells is himself – his personality, his character, his humour – so it makes perfect sense he is obsessive about what goes out under his name because he cares deeply about his reputation, values and his quality control.

And that’s a major problem these days.

Too many don’t.

Oh they’ll say they do.

They’ll run internal and external communication that reinforce they do.

But then they’ll go and outsource their responsibilities and decisions to ‘for profit’ external organisations. Either because they don’t want the pressure … the issue is beyond their abilities … or they want someone to blame if things go wrong.

And the issue with this is the external organisation who are now responsible for answering this challenge, often do it with little to no consideration of who they’re doing it for.

How their clients look at the world.

The nuances and quirks that define who the company is and how they act.

So they provide a solution that does exactly what has been asked of them and nothing more.

Solutions agnostic of client values, beyond some superficial characteristics.

And this has resulted in a world filled with identikit functional solutions. Solutions that answer the issue, but at the cost of commoditisation. And all because senior people – who are paid handsomely to be responsible for their organisations wellbeing and growth – decided to outsource their responsibility to another organisation, even though they know they will never care as much about them as they should care about themselves.

Of course not everyone is like this.

Some are as committed and obsessive about how they do things as what they do.

But there are far too many who look for quick wins.

Easy answers.

Less pressure or responsibility.

Which is why I have always thought whether you are a shareholder or an employee, knowing how much the most senior people understand, value and protect the standards, nuance and quirks of the company they represent – not simply the balance sheet – acts as a good indicator you’re with a company who respects the value of their own value.

Not simply in terms of profit.

Nor in reputation.

But in the standards and values that drives all they do and create.

Which is my way of saying that while I still think Jerry Seinfeld is a bit of a dick, I now respect him for knowing where his responsibilities lie.

To both himself, his future and his fans.

Now if only there were more companies and brands who lived by the same mantra.

Comments Off on Why Business Needs To Be More Seinfeld …