Filed under: Advertising, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Culture, Insight, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Planning, Point Of View, Relevance, Resonance
Recently I saw this …
Quite a headline eh?
Amazingly, it wasn’t from the Sunday Sport ‘newspaper’ … though it was from The Daily Mail, so it’s kind of the same thing.
And while it makes for entertaining reading – unless you’re the vicar in question or the Henry Hoover – it did make me think about how rubbish his attempt at persuasion.
Now to be fair, being found with your penis in a vacuum cleaner while wearing stockings would test the limits of any act of persuasion, but even so … it’s just rubbish isn’t it?
You don’t believe it.
You don’t consider it.
You are not in the least moved by it.
And that’s kind of what I feel about a lot of the ads I see these days.
They say stuff but they don’t make you think, feel or react to any of it.
No persuasion … just a rather rubbish demand that you now go and do something or the insane ramblings of an 18 year old French philosophy student. In their first year.
I swear a big reason for this is the lack of actual interest in knowing culture.
A narrowcast attitude of either assuming people blindly love you and wait on your every word or only showing an interest in how people use your product. And nothing else.
An egotistical assumption audiences don’t need to be encouraged to consider why you may be beneficial to their life or the belief people are thick as pig shit and so need to be instructed in detail what to do with you.
So you end up with bullshit like:
Future is an attitude for Audi or Cure Housebarrassment for Wicks Kitchens … which are so stupid/blatant you start to think saying undiagnosed diabetes led you to stick your penis in a hoover while wearing stockings is at least an attempt to make an attempt at persuasion.
Filed under: Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Cats, China, Comment, Culture, Martin Weigel, Paula, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Revenge
As it is the first of August, I thought I’d change the tone of the posts from the rather heavy ones of July to something a bit more ‘light’.
Which is why today I’m writing about cats.
As you know, I love those feline sods.
Specifically my feline sod … Rosie.
The things I’ve done for her.
Taken her around the World.
Got an import licence in China so we could get her her favourite treats.
Built custom ‘penthouse cat houses’ for her, so she could enjoy the outdoors in safety.
Got a company to make a bloody stuffed toy version of her for us.
In fact, it’s so realistic a client once thought she was stuck on a wardrobe during a zoom call.
And what do I get in return?
Complaints.
Demands.
Distain.
And a distinct lack of love or emotion.
Oh I know she loves me really.
Not as much as we love her, obvs … but there is affection there. Deep down.
However I recently saw something that not only summed her up, but summed all cats up which perfectly explains why some people hate them, and why some – like me – are at their mercy, will and command.
If humans treated humans this way, it would be considered an abusive relationship.
But cats powers of manipulation has managed to reframe that as ‘personality’.
Seriously, if you want to know the art of strategy, forget the Weigel’s, Bloodworth’s, Ritson’s and Collin’s and just study cats.
They’re bastards. But they’re brilliant bastards … as demonstrated by this photo that, for me, is the best encapsulation of cattidude you will ever see.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Business, Comment, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Fashion, Honesty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Relevance, Resonance
So the cosmetic empire, Revlon, has gone bankrupt.
It’s a brand I remember from my youth with their big ads featuring big stars selling big statements.
But like Woolworths of old [how’s that for a linkage] they thought that was enough.
They thought they were enough.
But tastes change.
Evolve.
Hell, in just the past few years we’ve seen all manner of movements in the cosmetics space … from the nude look to the pastel and playful, both leveraged by brands like Maybelline and Glossier.
And then there’s Fenty …
Who came in and offered a foundation that had varieties specifically for African American skin as well as white – which shouldn’t be a surprise until you realise that until then, all major cosmetic companies excluded African American skin and expected them to use a foundation designed for white customers.
Seriously, what the fuck.
Of course, the success of Fenty saw many of the big players try to follow suit … but when actively you’ve ignored millions for 60+ years, you’re not going to convince them you suddenly care.
Which comes back to Revlon.
Who forgot the way you build a brand is not by communicating yourself over and over again, but doing things that earn loyalty.
Or at least prove you are working for it.
So many companies forget that. Either spending millions on what they want to say or ‘innovating’ with things that are what they want people to care about, rather than the things people care about.
It’s amazing how many brands fall for this.
But then, ego has that effect on people.
Causing them to place boundaries and blinkers around the comments that scream what people want you to do better at. What they want you to change.
But instead, companies choose to maximise short-term opportunities, rather than build things for the future. I get it … it costs a lot and there’s the argument it risks a lot.
Except it doesn’t cost or risk anything near what happens if you don’t do it.
And playing catch up never works because when you finally follow suit, you find out the others have already moved on.
Even the companies that promise ‘disruption’ never really go all in.
Often just focusing on one element the establishment do wrong rather than reimagining how they could completely evolve an entire category.
Function over benefits.
Product over brand.
That said, there are some out there who do it right.
Not just in the ‘cool’ categories, but in things like finance, health and paint.
Yes, paint!!!
Doing things where it shows they are truly watching and listening to culture.
Not just in what they want, but what is affecting who they are.
Once upon a time this was the norm. Now it’s all about promoting the condiments rather than focusing on the steak.
And while that can work in the short-term … giving you a few PR headlines you can leverage in the press … the brands who count succeed because they perpetually evolve culture – or evolve with the leading edge of it – rather than just keep them where they already are.
Filed under: Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, China, Chinese Culture, Colenso, Comment, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Emotion, EvilGenius, Focus Groups, Insight, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mischief, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Point Of View, Prejudice, Relationships, Relevance, Research, Resonance, Strategy, Wieden+Kennedy
I’ve written about this subject before, but one of the biggest issues I think is facing marketing strategy these days is the obsession with corporate logic.
The quest to create frameworks and messaging that ultimates dictates and demands order, consistency and control. Not to help clients build the brand, but to help clients feel safe and comfortable.
And while that may all sound great in theory, the reality is – as the owner of the store with the horn discovered – that it often backfires magnificently.
Because great strategy isn’t logical, its logic born from the ability to make sense of the ridiculousness of reality.
Whether that is amateur artists buying a Mona Lisa painting when they really want the frame or
And the beauty of that is it liberates the possibilities of creativity …
Whether that is an actor who lets the paparazzi see them every night to avoid being photographed by them to the Chinese Government adding a mini ‘scratch card’ on till receipts to get customers to ask for it so it forces the seller to put it through the till and the government can ensure they get their tax through to a beer that is an act of love.
I’ve been talking about the power of devious strategy for years … and while I’m not claiming it is anything extraordinary, when you compare it to what so many think passes for good – I’d choose it any day of the week.
Not just because it leads to better work, but because creative ridiculousness is becoming a far more powerful way to drive commercial effectiveness than corporate-appeasing, logic.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, Cannes, China, Colenso, Comment, Confidence, Consultants, Content, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Devious Strategy, Differentiation, Distinction, ECommerce, Effectiveness, Honesty, Innovation, Insight, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Metallica, New Zealand, Perspective, Planners, Relationships, Relevance, Research, Resonance, Strategy, Wieden+Kennedy
There’s so many agencies, consultancies and self-appointed guru’s out there who talk about how to be successful at business.
They all have their models, eco-systems, philosophies and proof points.
And yet so few have ever done it for themselves.
They’ve chosen to ‘succeed’ under the safety-net of anothers money, reputation or effort.
That doesn’t mean what they do or think doesn’t have value – of course it does – but it also doesn’t mean their viewpoint is the only one worth counting.
And yet, every single bloody day, that’s how it is presented.
Recently someone wrote a piece on how they had used their proprietary research methodology on a Cannes winning TV ad and declared it would not deliver sustainable growth for the brand in question.
Putting aside the fact they were judging work that had won a creativity award rather than an effectiveness one … the thing I found funny was their confidence in proclaiming their view was the ultimate view.
I am not doubting their smarts.
I am not doubting their data.
But I am doubting their breadth of business appreciation.
And yet somehow, the voices of a few have positioned themselves as the be-all and end-all of effectiveness.
Don’t follow us and you fail.
Don’t follow us and your brand will lose.
Don’t follow us and you will be labeled foolish.
Now I am not denying these people do have a lot of experience and lessons we can learn from, but they’re not infallible.
But that’s how the industry approaches them.
Lording them like they are Yoda’s of the future.
But they’re not.
Don’t get me wrong, they are very good at evaluating effectiveness from a particular perspective and set of behaviours. Offering advice that can be hugely important in the decision making process.
But there’s a whole host of brands and business that have adopted totally different models and achieved ‘effectiveness and success’ that leaves others far behind.
Incredible sustainable success.
From Liquid Death to SKP-S to Gentle Monster to Vollebak to Metallica to name but a few.
Oh I know what some will say …
“They’re niche” … “they’re young” … “they’re not that successful”.
And to those people I would say maybe you don’t know what you’re talking about … because in just that list, it includes the biggest selling brand on Amazon, the fastest selling brand in their category on earth and the second most successful American band in history.
But there were two things that really brought the issue of mindset narrowcasting to me …
The first was the launch of a book that was basically about creating future customer desire for your brand/business.
Now there’s nothing wrong with that … but no shit Sherlock.
Has the market got so short-sighted and insular that the idea of doing things that also drive your future value and desirability become a revelation?
It’s literally the most basic entrepreneur mindset, and yet it was presented like it was Newton discovering the laws of gravity.
This person is super smart.
They’ve done a lot of good stuff.
But it just feels the actions of some in the industry are driven by the fetishisation of icon status … even though, ironically, what it does is highlight their experience may be narrower than they realise.
But at least the book had good stuff in there.
Stuff that could help people with some of the basics.
A desire to look forward rather than get lost in the optimisation circle-jerk.
This next one was a whole lot worse.
Recently an ex-employer of mine went to see a current client of mine.
Specifically the founder and CEO.
Apparently they went in to tell him he was missing out on a whole host of business and they could help him get more.
They then proceeded to present a massive document on how they would do it.
He looked at them and told them it was very interesting but they were wrong.
He told them their premise was based on a business approach he doesn’t follow or believe in.
A business approach that didn’t reflect the industry he was in, only the industry they were in.
He then informed them he had the most profitable store on the planet and so while he appreciated their time, he had faith in his approach and it was serving him well.
But it gets better.
As they were leaving – and I’ve been told this is true by someone who was apparently there – the person showing them out informed them their boss had a personal net worth of US$36 billion and based on their companies current share price, that meant he was more valuable than their entire group.
Was it an asshole thing to do?
Yep.
Do I absolutely love it?
Oh yeah.
Will I get in trouble for telling this?
Errrrrm, probably.
My point is the industry has decided ‘effectiveness’ can only be achieved and measured in one way and any deviation from that is immediately discounted or considered ‘flawed’.
Often by people who have never actually built a world leading business themselves.
Again, I am not dismissing the importance of what is being said, it’s HUGELY important – which is why I’m proud we won the Cannes/Warc effectiveness Grand Prix – but, and it’s a huge one, if we think that’s the only model and only use that one ‘model’, then we are literally adopting a single approach to solve every one of our clients every problems.
One.
That’s insane.
Not just because it’s stupid but because if everyone adopts the same approach, then impact will be influenced far more by spend and distribution that strategy.
Please note I am absolutely not saying we should burn the models or philosophies or systems that have proven their value to drive business. No. Absolutely not. I’m just saying we shouldn’t be praying at the feet of them … especially when many are simply focused on creating steady impact rather than spectacular.
Yes, I know ‘spectacular’ has a lifespan – which is why innovation is so important – but so many brands out there either aim for the middle … reinforced by processes, protocols and rules defined as ‘best practice’ by people in a particular industry … or they bake-in ‘limitation’ into their potential because they’ve blindly adopted rules they never challenge or explore from other industries or entrepreneurs.
At the end of the day, if a brand like Liquid Death can become the biggest selling water brand on Amazon because they found a way to make men actually want to drink water through a model and approach that is not only radically different to what so many of the industry experts say is ‘the only way’ … but is the opposite of it … then your brand may be inhibiting itself by following a model designed to make you fit in with it, rather than redefine how it fits in with you.