Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Agency Culture, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Complicity, Corporate Evil, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect
This is a month or so old, but I am finding it impossible to get out of my mind.
Like a car crash. Which this is.
Have a look at this.
What you’re seeing is part of a research report a company put out recently in NZ.
Look at it. Look!
This is where a bunch of ‘for profit’ research companies are these days … spouting ambiguous rubbish that [I assume] they believe is insight gold.
What makes it worse is some companies will no doubt have read this … been amazed by it … and then paid them handsomely for more of this … resulting in everyone [and I mean everyone, bar the company flogging it] losing.
Not just losing in the present, but in the future.
Which begs the question, how bad/ignorant/blinkered/out-of-touch are some organisations that they’re ‘informed’ by this? Worse … how bad/ignorant/blinkered/out-of-touch are some organisations that they’re satisfied with this level of superficiality?
For me, this sort of thing is an act of social criminality.
Actually, that’s not harsh enough, it’s an act of commercial criminality.
And the reason people are getting away with it is because too many companies have leadership who value ‘scalable convenient answers’ rather than truth, context and real commercial understanding. Only wanting news that paints them and their plans in the most positive light, regardless of what the reality may be. In other words, they seek ‘information’ that feeds and/or reinforces their God-complex … and far too many companies are happy to oblige because it’s an extremely profitable business approach for them.
But even this isn’t enough for some, with many now aspiring to become their clients strategic consultancy … meaning the work they do is as much about their future as their clients … and that’s why I’m so grateful for the researchers and research companies who believe in the craft, role and truth of the discipline.
The people who want to reveal rather than package-up.
Who see people as more than just walking wallets.
Who understand nuance rather than the optimisisation of efficiency
[to maximise their own profitability].
Who look for the why, not just the what.
Who are more interesting in exploring truth than flogging their ‘proprietary system’ … which more often than not, involves using bots and AI that are – to paraphrase Top Gun – are writing cheques reality can’t cash.
In other words, I’m grateful for people/companies like Ruby Pseudo, ON ROAD and a few others who play up to a standard not down to a convenience.
Research is important as hell, but only if it’s good research and there’s far too much out there being peddled that falls far short of that standard. And that’s why the discipline – and us, as an industry as a whole – need to expect more, demand more and most importantly, respect real stuff more. Because witnessing mediocrity is one thing, but when we let it undermine what we do – and can do – is another thing altogether.
Filed under: Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Crap Products In History, Culture, ECommerce, Jill, Kickstarter, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Technology
Over the years I’ve bought a lot on Kickstarter.
I say bought … but the reality is there’s a shitload of stuff I never received.
And then there’s the stuff that I did get, that I wish I hadn’t.
That said, I have to acknowledge their unprecedented ability to hype the mundane up to fever pitch. It really is quite extraordinary, given I’ve gone back time and time again, despite enduring endless indifferent experiences.
But maybe I’m over that now.
Or maybe they’re just running out of ‘hype fuel’ because recently I saw something that made me laugh out loud rather than reach for my credit card.
To be honest, it’s been coming …
First there was the watch that claimed to be rebel engineering.
Then the phone attachment that supposedly gave you something fast-approaching infinite zoom.
But now they have entered a new world of insanity, even though I acknowledge this one is arguably much more sensible than either of those ‘trophies of stupidity’.
It’s this …
Yep, a portable dishwasher.
Does anyone ever need a portable dishwasher?
I understand a small dishwasher, but a portable one?
My gut would say no, but I know for a fact there’s some people [read: my wife] who hates the idea of washing dishes so much, she would probably see this as an act of humanity.
So let’s say I accept there may be an audience out there for a micro, portable dishwasher.
However what I cannot accept is – based on the photo they have used – there’s an audience who would want to buy a micro, portable dishwasher to then take to their local pub. More importantly, I don’t know why anyone would need to take a micro, portable dishwasher to their local pub unless they purposely forget their watch/purse/phone and need to work off the drinks and underwhelming bar snacks they consumed.
But the way the Kickstarter folk have written the headline seems to suggest they think it may be the next craze. The new ‘dog in a handbag’ or overpriced, oversized water bottle. Something you take with you at all times to show your peers your ‘status’ or in case you fancy washing your cup, saucer or – judging by the size of the machine – spork.
But it gets worse, because they then say ‘saving you time to make more joy’.
What the absolute fuck?!
Apart from that being literally the laziest ‘selling proposition’ in the known universe, I’ll tell you what saves you more time to make more joy … going to the local fucking pub to eat so you don’t have any washing up to do.
What the hell are Kickstarter thinking?
Are they thinking?
Do they care anymore.
Well, as much as I’d like to say ‘no, they’re not’ … it seems that accusation should be pointed at their customers rather than them, because the company behind the ‘social dishwasher’ have raised $1,186,891,682 from Kickstarter projects.
$1,186,891,682!!!
OK, so that is over 4367 products, but still, that’s disturbingly impressive.
But not as impressive as me being able to show Jill this news and look fiscally responsible in comparison to the tens of thousands of people who have dropped their cash on shit like this.
And this is coming from someone who has bough robot balls, a shitload of robot dogs and a windmill.
Result!!!
So a huge thank you to Kickstarter and Jellop Products … you may be exploiting the fuck out of the stupid, but you’ve made me realise I’m less stupid than I feared.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Context, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Embarrassing Moments, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Perspective, Point Of View
I don’t struggle for things that fuck me off, but what is currently top of the charts on my personal ‘shit parade’ is people who talk in definitive and absolute terms.
Actually I need to be more specific. I mean the people who talk in definitive and absolute terms that blatantly attempt to elevate their position by putting others down via some pseudo-intellectual or utterly subjective horseshit.
It’s happening more and more, especially on – surprise, surprise – Linkedin.
And while I’m all about having a point-of-view, it only has value if you have an appreciation of what others think or do. So you have some real context to evaluate your viewpoint. And it would be even better if you also had some actual experience in the area – or on the issue – you’re being condescending about. Not ‘in theory’. Not ‘by association’. Not some ‘short-term, low-level’ employment experience from 20 years ago. Actual experience. So – you know – you can show you have an actual idea what the fuck you’re talking about, including what it takes to actually make these things happen and who is complicit when it doesn’t on an on-going basis.
Because nothing screams egotistical, blinkered, privileged, arrogant asshole – desperate-for-attention-or-notoriety – than saying “This is shit as is anyone who disagrees with me”.
Topped off by then ignoring, deleting or blocking anyone who dares challenge their view, even if they are well placed to have a perspective and are expressing it with respect and politeness.
It’s like they’re the bastard love child of Andrew Tate and a shock-jock talkback radio host. Immediately dismissing anything that doesn’t suit their narrative but throwing praise on anyone or anything that acknowledges it. Even better if it specifically acknowledges them. By name.
The thing is, these people have smarts. They’re not stupid. But their ego refuses to accept or acknowledge any other possible way of thinking or working. So when someone or something achieves a level of success that sustainably outstrips their approach, they either attack or try to claim some sort of ownership of the success. A bit like all those people who suddenly updated their Linkedin profiles to say they were NFT/Metaverse/AI experts.
It’s pretty incredible to be honest.
Which is why I find it kinda-ironic some of the worst offenders seem to be those who reside – or are associated with – academia. Not all of course, just the ones who seem to think that because they’re highly qualified in one area, they are qualified to speak about all areas.
Which is why, whenever I see these men [and it’s typically men] peacocking on social media, it reminds me of Lucille Ball’s brilliant quote. A quote I made into a sticker that I’ve given to members of my planning teams for decades.
A sticker permanently stuck on the front of my laptop …
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Design, Differentiation, Innovation, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Packaging, Perspective, Positioning, Pride, Purpose, Reputation, Respect, Steve Jobs, Technology, Values
I’ve written a lot about the bullshit of brand purpose.
Or should I say the hijacking of purpose by marketing departments and agencies.
Far too often, we see companies where their ‘purpose’ has no day-to-day impact on the operations or decisions they make beyond pushing their marketing messages and promotions. For these orgs, purpose is positioned simply as ‘something we hope might change’ rather than actively doing stuff that actively pushes it.
As they say in the UK, “the truth of the pudding is in the eating”, and a lot of corporate brand purpose tastes like bullshit.
That doesn’t mean the concept of purpose is entirely wrong.
Oh no.
However the reality is true brand purpose is born rather than manufactured – especially by a marketing department – so for every Patagonia, there’s a Unilever … which is why I find the easiest way to see who is talking truth versus shite is simply by exploring how much inconvenience they’ll accept and embrace.
Recently I saw an interesting example of a brand who not just embraced inconvenience, but demanded it.
An example which I imagine caused all manner of friction and tension throughout the company.
And yet, when you think about who the company were and – more importantly – who they wanted to become, you see it as absolute commitment to their beliefs and ambitions.
Take a look at this …
Now I appreciate some would read that and only see the problems … the costs … the disruptions … the impact on productivity … the C-Suite ‘bullying’. But they’re probably the same people who think purpose is about ‘wrapping paper’ rather than beliefs and actions … which is why I kinda-love this.
I love how much they were pushing it and how they pushed it.
It was important to them.
Not for virtue signaling, not for corporate complicity – though I accept there’s a bit of that – but mainly because a company can’t talk about technology, creativity and the future while asking your very own colleagues to embrace the cheap, the convenient and the conformist.
Just to be clear, this is VERY different to companies who mandate processes.
That’s about control and adherence.
A desire to keep things as they are rather than what they could be.
And to me, that’s the difference between those who ‘talk’ purpose and those whose actions are a byproduct of it.
Every day in every way.
Because as the old trope goes, it’s only a principal if it costs you something and the reality is – like strategy – too many talk a good game but will flip the moment they think they could make/save a bit more cash.
Apple may have a lot of problems, but fundamentally, they mean what they say and show it in their actions – both in the spotlight, but also in the shadows … where very few people will ever see – as exemplified by Jobs famous ‘paint behind the fence‘ quote.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brands, British, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creative Development, Creativity, Distinction, Family, Fast Food, Innovation, Luxury, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mum & Dad, My Childhood
When I think of the ads I saw when I was growing up, there are so many for categories I just don’t see – or don’t see much – any more.
Cream Cakes.
Carpet Stores.
Digital Watches.
Stranger Danger Campaigns.
Maybe they’re still happening and I don’t know it because I don’t watch much TV … but given I work in the industry and I don’t hear about them – let alone see them – it does feel they are campaigns of a bygone age.
But of all these category of ads, one that is burned into my mind is Smash.
Smash was a mashed potato brand.
It came in a packet and by adding boiling water and stiring vigourously, you’d get masses of creamy mash.
The original ‘fast food’.
This approach to food prep was space-age technology back in the day … which is why the ads featured alien robots who were so impressed with the technological advancement that Smash represented, they chose not to invade Earth because they felt they couldn’t compete with our innovation, despite the fact the humans they had been secretly watching were – to put it lightly – thick as shit, given their traditional choice for mashing spuds.
I know. I know … sounds bonkers doesn’t it, so have a look at this early ad to see what I mean:
OK, so it was bonkers.
But as you can tell, it was all most definitely tongue in cheek, however – as demonstrated by the fact I am writing about them decades later – the alien robots soon became iconic in British society.
Still are in fact. At least for people of a certain age.
But despite this – and despite being 54 years of age – I’ve never eaten Smash.
Not knowingly, at least.
Not because I don’t like it or don’t like the idea of it … but because my parents never allowed it in the house.
Just to be clear, it wasn’t because they were against such manufactured ‘convenience’ food – we used to eat Angel Delight for fucks sake – but because compared to boiling some spuds and mashing them, it was too expensive.
I say all this because recently I walked past a Prada store and saw this.
Now I am sure they didn’t intend to create the ‘luxury version’ of the Smash alien robots, but they’ve created the luxury version of the Smash alien robots!!!
And while this decision could open a lot of conversations about a lot of different subjects – from the changing definition of luxury, the influence of nostalgia, generational creativity and the overall decline in the quest for originality – the biggest thing it did for me was prove my parents were right in believing SMASH is an expensive indulgence for people who want to short-cut their way to satisfaction rather than earning it.
Or something like that. Probably without the judgement on the character, motivations and aspirations of those who would bung it on their evening meal plate.
Still would give my left arm to eat some.
Which is why Prada would probably be disappointed to learn that their ‘robots’ have made hungrier to eat SMASH mashed potato than to buy and wear their clothes. Or worse … anyone seen wearing a Prada coat can be called a ‘Jacket Potato’.
In terms of branding disasters, that has to be up there with these classic [bull]shitshows.