Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Confidence, Consultants, Content, Creativity, Culture, Digital, Fake Attitude, Innovation, Management, Perspective, Planners, Point Of View, Professionalism, Relevance, Resonance, Respect
I used to think it took a lot of hard work to be simple.
A lot of thinking.
Evaluating.
Sharpening.
Changing.
But maybe I was wrong because I literally cannot imagine how much time it took to create this:
It’s a masterclass in nonsensical.
A blueprint for showing a company who doesn’t know what they actually do.
A celebration of the buzzword bingo bullshit that permeates so many organisations.
Basically, imposters talking to imposters with words they’ve so bastardised the meaning of, that you’d be hard pressed to recognise their original definition if you were left alone with them in a bar overnight with only a dictionary for company.
The verbal equivalent of Mickey Rourke.
Or Lara Flynn Boyle.
Hence now …
Innovation means ‘we’ve made something average a little bit better’.
Revolution means ‘we’ve never done this before though others have’.
Experience means ‘we offer our customers boring and average’.
Transformation means ‘we’ve caught up to everyone else’.
[hence ‘digital transformation’ is simply code for, ‘not being left so far behind’ as opposed – as many in the industry also like to position it – as reinventing the whole category]
And while adland is the cause of a lot of this bullshit, the consultancies – or worse, the wannabe-consultancies – are taking it to a whole new level. Continually creating nonsensical language and definitions in an attempt to feel intellectually superior to those around them. Believing this sort of language acts as a sort-of ‘code’ that helps identify other delusionists, wannabe’s and/or victims … so they can revel and reward themselves with their Emperors New Clothes bullshit.
Until they can’t.
What is particularly amusing is these companies still celebrate the old adage of ‘quality over quantity’ … even though they show up with a level of excessive vulgarity that would put Donald Trump to shame.
Talking in plain English – or plain any language – is not a bad thing.
If anything, it is the most powerful.
Not just because it is easier to communicate and relate to.
Nor because it shows you can identify the core problem that needs addressing.
But because it captures something my old man used to say to all his young lawyers:
“If you want to show how intelligent you are, you’re not that intelligent”.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand Suicide, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Corporate Evil, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Distinction, Imagination, Innovation, Insight, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Relevance, Resonance, Talent
I still remember buying a movie soundtrack only to discover none of the songs had actually featured in the movie.
When I looked at the cover, I saw “songs inspired by the movie” … in other words, the film company couldn’t get the rights to release the actual music, so they got some two-bit band to write some nondescript music supposedly after watching the film.
It wasn’t as bad as those albums where they got a covers band to sing a well known song – rather than the actual artist – but it was close.
The reason I say this is that I’m seeing a bunch of ‘write-ups’ of ads that seem to adopt the same position.
“Inspired by”.
“Influenced”
“Reinterpreted”.
Now there’s nothing really wrong with this … it’s something that’s been done by all manner of industries for centuries … however while there’s a common belief that ‘genius steals’, the counter to this is ‘lazy borrows’.
I know … I know … I’m being deliberately assholey, but the beauty of our industry is when we allow creatives the freedom to create.
To allow their crazy minds to take us all to crazy intriguing places.
But instead … thanks to budgets, timelines, dictatorial research, corporate fear, layers of management – and countless other things – we don’t.
Which is why we see so many pieces of work that are replications of a film, a meme, a song, a TikTok idea … basically a version of an album of popular songs that haven’t been played by any of the original artists.
Our industry is capable of brilliant things.
But we’ve sold creativity down the river in a bid to make things easier for people who don’t even value the power of creativity.
Nothing smacks of madness as much as that.
Meanwhile, culture leads change of behaviour, attitudes and choices through its endless energy to explore and express.
So while being inspired is one thing, duplicating is another and when certain brands expect people to spend hundreds or thousands on their products, it blows my mind they want to under-invest in the way they actually present themselves in their communication.
Oh they won’t see it that way.
They’ll talk about the celebrity they hired to front the campaign.
Or the music they licensed.
But underneath it all, they’ll they’re taking shortcuts.
They’ll kid themselves it’s working with charts on optimisation or efficiencies … but the reality is they’re trying to work out how long they’ve got before it all falls apart, because the difference between leading and chasing is not about spend, it’s about attitude.
Or said another way …
You either make music or you’re just a cover band.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Colenso, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Innovation, Insight, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Metallica, New Zealand, Point Of View, Positioning, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Uncommon, Wieden+Kennedy
I was talking to a couple of mates recently.
Both of them are a couple of incredibly talented, highly regarded, multi-award winning creatives and they were asking me what it was like working in NZ.
As we were chatting we came to a revelation about what was causing the decline in advertising standards.
This is a topic that has been debated a lot over the years with a myriad of possible causes. But with the experience I have seen in NZ – plus the experience I have working directly with a number of famous bands and billionaires – we realised there was actually an underlying cause that trumped all other considerations.
It’s not digital.
It’s not consultants.
It’s not holding companies.
It’s not eco-systems or playbooks.
It’s not the wild inflation of strategists.
It’s not cost.
It’s not effectiveness.
It’s not in-house alternatives.
It’s not direct-to-consumers.
It’s not data.
It’s not rational messaging.
It’s the layers within companies.
The multitude of people everything has to go through and be approved by.
Might be on the client side.
Might be on the agency side.
Might be on both sides … but each layer is like a mini-focus group where ‘success’ is when the representative of that particular layer feels something can then be passed on to the next person in their group without it making them look foolish for their decision or choice.
And as the work passes each layer, the work gets diluted or chipped away until the ultimate decision maker gets to see something that is a pale shadow of what was originally intended.
An object that is a trophy to self preservation rather than potency and truth.
And as companies and agencies have grown in their complexity, the work has faced more layers and opinions. Doesn’t matter if you’re independent or part of the most networked agency/company in the history of networked agency/companies … the decline of creative standards is down to the number of organisational layers that now exists within companies.
And why has this happened?
Well, part of it is because of complexity, but the main part is because companies have got into this mad position where the only way they can grant a significant payrise is if the person is promoted.
So we’re in this mad situation where we have increased layers, headcount and complexity simply because we have viewed money as something commensurate with promotion rather than quality.
Now I appreciate you could argue promotion is a sign of quality – but I don’t think that’s right.
Being good at something doesn’t automatically mean you will be good at something more senior. Hell, there’s a lot of people who don’t even want to do something else. They just want to do what they love and they’re happy at.
I remember at Wieden where – for one mad minute – they thought I’d make a good MD.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
They didn’t come to their senses even when I told them I wasn’t even the MD of cynic … and that was a company I actually founded.
I didn’t want to be an MD.
I wasn’t interested in being an MD.
I just wanted to do what I loved and was good at.
And while they finally came to their senses [good call, Luhr, as usual] the reality is a lot of companies have a bunch of layers simply because they needed to promote someone to justify a payrise.
And before you know it, every task has to go through multitudes of layers … where most are designed to dull an idea rather than sharpen it.
While I don’t know this for a fact, I would guess the companies or agencies who are doing the most interesting work … the stuff that attracts culture rather than chases them down then beats them into submission … are the ones where they deal with the ultimate decision maker.
We get to do a lot of that in NZ.
I definitely get to do that with Metallica, Gentle Monster and the GTA team.
And the difference is huge.
Because while some of these clients are genuinely exceptional – especially when I’m talking to the founders of the organisations because that gives them a level of power and authority most other clients could never hope to get – I imagine a lot of the others are no different to the clients everyone who reads this blog deals with in London or New York or Tokyo everyday.
It’s just the big difference is instead of work having to appease the comments and judgement of 20 different people, it only has to agree with 4 … so the idea that gets made resembles the idea on the table to a much greater extent.
So next time you have a client that talks about wanting great work, don’t talk to them in terms of what processes, systems or people you can add to the mix, talk about what both parties need to take away.
Because if you want the work to be potent, kill the layers of filtration.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand Suicide, Colenso, Confidence, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Distinction, Egovertising, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Fake Attitude, Honesty, Imagination, Innovation, Insight, Management, Marketing Fail, Packaging, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Positioning, Relevance, Resonance, Rick Rubin, RulesOfRubin, Standards, Uncommon, WeigelCampbell, Wieden+Kennedy
I don’t understand what some people are thinking.
We have got to a point where ‘the idea’ is seemingly regarded as a superficial bit of nonsense.
A wrapper for marketing.
Something as interchangeable as a phone cover.
For some utterly imbecilic reason, ‘the idea’ is now seen as optional – a potential distraction to purpose, eco-systems, frameworks and anything else designed to elevate an idea rather than be the idea.
No wonder our industry is in such a state.
Not only have we sold the value of creativity down the river, we now have a business model based on selling condiments rather than meals.
This post isn’t about dismissing the different and the new.
There’s value in a lot of them – despite the fact most of them aren’t new, just in possession of a new name.
This is actually about being stubborn with the priorities …
Because an idea isn’t wrapping, it’s the fucking present.
Have a good weekend … we have Monday off here, so see you Tuesday.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Awards, Brand Suicide, Cannes, Colenso, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Crap Campaigns In History, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Distinction, Embarrassing Moments, Innovation, Insight, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Relevance, Resonance, Technology
Being old, I’ve done more than my fair share of judging awards.
I enjoy it.
Yes it’s a major investment in terms of time, but when you come across an absolutely devastatingly good submission, it’s worth every second.
However it is also fair to say that over the years, there have been some real painful experiences. Either in terms of average papers being seemingly entered into every category in a bid to increase the odds of winning something or papers that have such a strong scent of scam, even Ray Charles can see how suspect they are. [Sorry Mr Charles]
I always laugh when I come across those. Specially at the agencies submitting them … because while they obviously think they are geniuses – or the judges are idiots – the reality is they’re wrong on both counts.
But here’s the thing, people can slag off awards all they like, but they matter.
For Colenso for example, they’re important.
We’re a small agency on the other side of the planet and being able to show our creativity and effectiveness is vitally important to keep demonstrating our validity to attract global clients.
But – and it’s a big but – it only works if its real.
And that only works if all the winners around it are also real.
Now I appreciate that different clients have different needs and budgets.
I appreciate different markets have different cultural traits, behaviours and media.
I absolutely appreciate some entries use a language that is not their native tongue.
And I think that is all brilliant – though I also think none-native English speakers are at an immediate disadvantage and the award organisers should be looking at ways to change that.
However, if you need to write 8456738585463 words to explain your problem or your idea or your insight or your results … you’re not helping yourself.
Nor are you if you are using the pandemic as your strategies main adversary – often followed up with the words, ‘how do we grow in an era of the new normal?’.
Of course I am not doubting the pandemic has caused havoc among categories of business all over the world. It’s definitely happened to me too. But if we don’t explain what the challenge is – how it has affected behaviour or values or distribution or competition or anything other than it ‘made things more difficult’ … then it’s as lazy as the time I judged the Effies in the US when Trump came to power and the opening line of 85% of all submissions was:
How do we bring a nation divided together?
[My fave was when a whisky brand used that as their creative challenge. HAHAHAHA]
I take the judging seriously because I want the awards to be valued.
I want the awards to be valued because I want the industry to be valued.
And I want the industry to be valued because I want clients to win, creativity to win and the people coming up behind me to have a chance of taking us all to better and more interesting places that we’re at right now.
And I believe they can if we don’t fuck up the chance for them.
I get awards are nice to have.
I get they can drive business and payrises.
But if we keep allowing bullshit a chance to shine – and let’s face it, we have time and time again – then all we’re doing is fucking ourselves over.
I’m fine with failure.
In fact I’m very, very comfortable with it.
Especially when it’s because someone has tried to do something audacious for all the right reasons … because even if it doesn’t come off, it’s opened the door to other things we may never have imagined. There’s even real commercial value to that.
But when agencies create, hijack or exploit problems to just serve their own means – then fuck them. Maybe – just maybe – if they did it at a scale that could make a real difference, you’d be prone to encourage it. But when it’s done to achieve just what is needed to let the creators win an award … then frankly, the organisers and judges have a moral obligation to call it out.
Asia gets a bad wrap for this. And over the years that has been deserved, but I can tell you no market is immune. Hell, I’ve even seen some in NZ recently – or one in particular – and what made it worse was it wasn’t even any good.
But as rubbish as that example was, at least it didn’t stoop to the levels we have seen previously.
Let’s remember it’s only 4 years ago an agency WON MAJOR AWARDS for an app they said could help save refugees on boats by tracking them in the sea … only for them to then claim – when later called out – that the app was in beta testing hence the information being sent back to users was not real.
Amazingly ignoring the fact they didn’t say that in any of their entry submissions and if they had, they wouldn’t have been eligible for the awards they entered in the first place.
Creativity can do amazing things.
Advertising can do amazing things.
But we fuck it up when we put the superficial on the podium.
Of course, this is not just an agency problem. Clients are also part of this. Because if they let agencies do what they are great at rather than treating them as a subservient production partner … maybe we’d not just see more interesting work, but even more interesting and valuable brands.