Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand, Business, Collaboration, Confidence, Content, Context, Contribution, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, Empathy, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Music, Point Of View, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Strategy, Stubborness

As many of you know, over the past 8 years, I’ve found myself working with a number of artists/musicians/bands on a whole bunch of projects.
The Black Keys.
Red Hot Chili Peppers.
Journey.
Metallica.
Muse.
Massive Attack.
Some have been one-offs assignments … some have been more long-term collaborations … some have been direct with the artists … some have been via their managers/record labels/third parties … but overall, bar the RHCP/Kiedis ‘experiment’, they’ve all been creatively challenging, fascinating, and fulfilling.
Now to be honest, there are many things I love about working with artists, however a couple of the things I love most are the questions they ask and the attitude they have towards what they want to do.
Their questions are never with an underlying agenda. Of course, I don’t doubt they’re capable of doing that … but I’ve never personally experienced it. Yet. Hahaha.
Personally, all I’ve ever heard are questions expressed with a genuine sense of curiosity behind them … a real desire and willingness to explore something that’s in their head and on their mind.
But more than that, there’s an openness to hearing what you think in response.
A willingness to discuss, debate and talk it out.

I think I’ve written about the first time I did a project for one artist who, frankly, hated what I’d done. Actually, hate is probably not a big enough word for how much they loathed it.
Not because it was wrong, but it was wrong for them in terms of their specific values, beliefs and approach to what they did.
Anyway, at the end of the meeting – thinking they were going to tell me this wasn’t working and we were going to ‘part ways’ – I asked, “so what should we do next?”
You can imagine my surprise when they responded with: “Well, now you’ve heard why we don’t like it, we assume you’ll take that into account with whatever you suggest we should do in your updated reccomendation .”
I was stunned. Not just by how they answered, but the impact their response had on me.
Because while they had made it very clear they didn’t like what I’d done, they made sure I understood their comment was purely in relation to the specific task I’d done rather than a judgement on my overall ability or approach. In fact they went further than that … through their choice of words, they actively showed their belief and support in who I am, what I do and what I could do for them that they may otherwise not be able to see or pull off.
Now let’s face it, it could have been so different.
We’re talking rockstars here, so its not hard to imagine that they could …
Dictate what I had to do.
Demand how I had to do it.
Dismiss my involvement and opinion.
… after all, we see clients try and pull that shit every single day. But instead, they let me walk away from a pretty bad meeting feeling confident, encouraged, inspired and ambitious.
For someone who has been doing this job for a very long time, I can tell you that meeting was up there with the very best experiences I’ve ever had with the very best clients I’ve ever worked with.
A sense of shared transparency, responsibility, ambition, expectation, standards and support.
And it’s a sense that has continued to this day, even though there’s been some more awful meetings in-between, haha.
But that’s not the point of this post …

You see I’ve recently started working with another artist.
An incredibly successful solo musician. A singers, singer – so to speak.
Anyway, I was involved in a meeting with them recently where they were discussing an opportunity, they’d been presented … and watching their thought-process as they decided whether they wanted to do it was amazing.
Halfway through the conversation, they said: “I don’t care if the audience are bored, I want to make sure I’m doing something that doesn’t bore me”.
Now I get that on face value, that can sound incredibly arrogant … but that isn’t the tone they said it in, nor was it what they meant.
What they were saying was they needed to find a way to make what they were being asked to do, interesting for themselves, because otherwise they could not work out why anyone would find what they did interesting.
In many ways, they could just turn up and people would be thrilled, but that’s not their approach, attitude or standard.
Of course, part of this explains why they are where they are … but it was a beautiful thing to witness.
Where so many brands seem to have an attitude of ‘minimum viable satisfaction’ [MVS], here was someone who felt praise was only worthy if they knew they’d done something they felt had been truly valuable to them too.
Not for ego.
Not for arrogance.
But for growth, fulfilment and expression.
Imagine if companies adopted that same attitude in what they did.
Some absolutely do. Most, sadly don’t.
Seeing effort as an obstacle rather than a door to incredible rewards.
Not just financial, but personal.
And while money makes the world go round, the key thing I’ve learned from the artists I’ve worked with is if you play repeat, you satisfy everyone but yourself.
Then you don’t even satisfy them either.
And that’s why for all the processes, systems, models and marketing practices being peddled and pushed, the foundation for a fulfilled future is being open to challenging yourself, rather than always playing to where you’re comfortable.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Content, Context, Craft, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, Empathy, Music, Queen, Resonance

Of all the terms banded about by the creative industry … craft is one that is spoken about a lot.
For many people, they interpret this in terms of executional quality and without doubt, that is a part of it, but it is so much more.
In fact, craft starts at the thinking phase … before a single thing has been defined or committed to paper.
I’ve written a lot about craft over the years, but I recently read something that for me, is a wonderful expression of its role and power.
Now, I get there’s going to be a lot of moaning when you see what my example is – or, should I say, – who my example of craft is coming from. But hang in there. Please.
Are you ready?
OK, so it comes from Queen’s Brian May.
I know … I know … but there’s a reason for this.
You see he was recently asked about the lyrics to one of his songs called ’39.
This song appeared on their 1975 album, ‘A Night At The Opera’ and it is a song about space travel through different dimensions.
For haters of Queen, just description probably justifies all your loathing … but there is method in the madness.
You see Brian May has a PHD in astrophysics.
And while he gained that qualification in 2007, the reality is he was a leading researcher in the field prior to joining Queen.
In fact the only reason he didn’t gain his PHD back in the 1970’s is because the band took off and so his studies stopped.
But even then, his love of astrophysics was a key part of who he was – especially the relationship it had with the dimension of time – which is maybe one of the key influences behind this song.
To understand the rest of this post, you should hear it … paying particular interest to the lyrics. So click here.
Did you do it?
Did you bollocks.
OK, then just click here to read the lyrics.
Did you do that?
Hmmmmn, OK … I believe you even if no one else will.
The point of this is because Brian May was recently asked about the story of the song and his reply is fascinating.
Fascinating in terms of where and how song writers get their inspiration …


But – to link back to the point of the post – fascinating in terms of how this crafted how he specifically wrote the lyrics …

How amazing is that?
I love how he explains why the tenses are mixed up in his lyrics.
How it is integral to the idea he had for the song.
How it is an example of craft in motion.
Sure, there’ll be some pricks who will claim its ‘post rationalized justification’, but that’s because they are confusing their ego with their ability.
Because here’s the thing with craft …
In many ways it is not immediately obvious to the recipient … they may not engage with it in the detail and care that went into it. They probably encounter it as a singular, all-encompassing experience. But to the creator, everything will mean something. Not in terms of ‘contrived, focus-group instruction and manipulation, but in terms of ensuring their creativity is crafted to represent their idea in its purest, most honest form. All the while embracing – and valuing – that the recipient may interpret and connect to the work in different ways than intended. Taking it to somewhere new, different and personal.
It’s a beautiful and generous act and why one of the most important questions I ask in any initial creative meeting is ‘what’s the story behind your story?’.
I don’t mean that in terms of them reiterating the brief or conveying some ‘insight’ they’ve defined to answer/justify their solution … but the journey they have been on in terms of inspiration, consideration or history that has led them or shaped what they are going to show.
Mainly because at this stage of proceedings, it’s got less to do with ‘answering’ the brief, but understanding how they see it.
A glimpse into where it could go, rather than what it currently is.
It’s why we need to remember craft isn’t something to wrap an idea in, it’s what informs the entire expression of the idea.
Because even if people don’t recognise it, they will probably feel it … even if they can’t explain why.
And that is the power of creativity … something we need to protect, especially from those who try to present it or define it like its engineering and their master mechanics. Which is ironic, given they’ve never created anything with it.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Egovertising, Empathy, Honesty, Leadership, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Professionalism, Provocative, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect
A few weeks ago, I saw this post from the CEO/Founder of Liquid Death …

Putting aside that another bunch of kids somewhere in the US had done a similar thing with my ol’ mate Rick Astley … Mike at Liquid Death’s admiration for what they did kinda explains why I like hiring people who have done interesting stuff rather than those who just know interesting stuff. Even more so when the interesting stuff they spout is something someone else actually did or said.
Don’t get me wrong … opinions, considerations and evaluations have an important role to play in the industry, but if you haven’t actually made any actual work worthy of note, then the question is ‘do you really understand what it takes?’
The challenges.
The decisions.
The choices.
The craft.
The reality is anything is easy if you’ve never done it or have to do it … which is why those who try – even if they fail – will likely have more interesting perspectives than those who just express from a pedestal or vacuum.
It’s why I find so many of those newsletters being flogged on Linkedin amusing … because many are written by people who are not associated with any work of note. Or any work for that matter. And so while they are absolutely entitled to their opinion, it is just that – an opinion with a bit of context rather than the ‘undeniable fact’ they like present themselves as having.
To a much lesser degree, the same could be said about certain marketing practice experts who love to suggest they have all the answers and yet have also never actually made – or built – something of significance. Unless you count their own publicity machines.
OK, I know I’m being a condescending bastard. And the reality is I don’t mean it as much as I’ve made it sound.
[At least where the marketing practice experts are concerned anyway. Or some of them, ha]
But here’s the thing …
Do you know what else is massively condescending?
Listening to people who have never actually made anything of note putting down the credibility, expertise and knowledge of those who have … just so they can raise their own profile and ego.
Shockjocking for the clicks.
Shameless in their desire for the attention.
One minute claiming a discipline is dead … and then next minute, flogging their own ‘system’ that’s basically the same discipline they said was caput. But with added over-inflated academic value and self-congratulations for personal pleasure and good measure. Or associating themselves with famous work because they were employed – albeit for 2 seconds – at the company who originally made it. Despite not working on it or even being within 1000 feet of it. But still offering tips on how to make it like they are the CEO of said brand.
OK Rob, calm-the-fuck-down.
B-R-E-E-E-E-E-E-A-T-H-E-E-E-E-E-E.
OK, I feel a bit better now.
Look, I’m not saying there isn’t value in what they think and do – there is. Or at least with many of them. But the way they dismiss the work and value of those who literally create the stuff they claim to be an experts in – despite having never made it at that level, or in some cases, at all – is pretty shit.
And do you know what the great irony of all this is?
The reason there’s so much bad work out there is because of them. Because these ‘hypeists’ have succeeded in getting senior execs to believe their opinion is more valuable than the people who have actually been there, done that and keep doing it.
So instead of listening to those with the real experience, they are choosing to follow those who talk loudly from their self-built pedestal.
Where they talk and shout about why they are right.
Talk and shout about what they say is good work.
Talk and shout about why only their process is the one to follow.
Despite the fact – at best – they’ve never made the work they reference or – at worst – have never made any work at all. Certainly not at anything approaching the level their ego plays at.
So sure, I’m probably being a condescending asshole, but then so are the people who casually dismiss the value of those brave enough to put their ideas out into the world to be judged by people who don’t even know how to create it, let alone actually make it.
You don’t have to like it. But you should acknowledge you’ve also never done it.






