Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Context, Creativity, Culture, Drugs, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail
I know if you’re in the publishing field, times are tough.
I know that you have to resort to attention grabbing tactics to get readers.
But recently Adage – one of our industries most well-known media outlets – did something that was as equally ill-conceived as the time Campaign put Nigel Farage’s shit-eating grin on the cover of their magazine.
What am I talking about? This.
Talk about clickbait.
Blatant, unashamed, clickbait.
And I say that because the actual article was more about what some ‘experts’ were suggesting is happening rather than what the headline was screaming for all its worth.
But that’s not the real issue.
Nor is it the talking about cannabis microdosing … putting aside the fact [1] it’s illegal in some countries and [2] there’s medical evidence to suggest cannabis can have terrible consequences on certain individuals … accepting it is a minority and there are also many benefits, including medical.
Look, I don’t care what people choose of their own freewill – unless, of course, it directly affects the wellbeing of those around them.
I don’t judge, question or degrade those decisions.
My problem is an international industry magazine purposefully chose a headline that communicates if your work environment is causing extreme stress because of the intense pressure being placed on you … then it is on you to deal with it.
YOU.
I literally don’t give a shit if the article was talking about people microdosing, coffee drinking or baked bean eating … they should not be placing the burden of responsibility on the employee, they should be challenging the behaviour, expectations and actions of the company they are working for.
It’s hard enough to attract and retain talent in this industry as it is, without having our industry magazine telling the world, ‘it is a stressful job and it’s on you to deal with it’.
We all make mistakes. I hope they learn from this one.
For their sake. For our sake. For the future of the industries sake.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Crap Campaigns In History, Creativity, Culture, Football, Marketing, Marketing Fail
The celebrity endorsement.
Favoured by brands who have nothing interesting to say.
Or by companies who want to look more important than they are.
Of course they’re exceptions.
NIKE for example … because at least their choices are directly connected to the category they operate in, which is more than can be said for Clooney and Nespresso. Or the new entrant. Another handsome, old, white male actor – who, according to his ex-wife – may have domestic abuse issues to answer for.
Maybe that’s why Brad Pitt agreed to do one of the worst ads I’ve seen in a long time. To pay for any legal trial … whereas at least Clooney does it to raise the money for the films he personally wants to make.
In the old days, celebs went to Japan to top up their pension – safe in the knowledge that no one would see their stuff. Then the internet happened and not only could everyone see the rubbish they’d do for a big pay day, they realised they could do it now in their home country given everyone had seen their willingness to sell their credibility for cash.
Which leads to this …
Neymar.
For a financial investment firm.
If that isn’t weird enough, they’ve weirdly made Neymar look like he’s the financial advisor.
What the fuck?
Are they suggesting he is so rich he can give people expert financial advice?
If they are, is his advice, “become a professional footballer for PSG”.
Or is something else …
Is he paid so badly he’s had to get a second job selling financial advice?
That would at least make some sense as Neymar HAS BEEN FOUND GUILTY OF TAX AVOIDANCE!!!
Yeah, this financial company decided that the best celebratory endorser they could use to promote their company internationally was a convicted tax dodger.
Did no one think about that?
Did no one question what that would say about them?
Did they think that because Qatar – where QNB is based – don’t charge personal tax, it means Neymar’s crime basically doesn’t exist?
Did no one ask why were they photographing the football star as if he was a financial advisor?
Nope.
And was that because they were starstruck?
Or was it because they didn’t think about it?
Or care?
Or think anyone else would care?
Or was it all of the above … because let’s face it, there’s enough examples to show many investment firms don’t give a damn about rules, customers or tax obligations … so maybe using Neymar was the most truthful and inspired choice they could make.
How nice of QNB to make it so much easier for the authorities to find people exploiting the financial rules for personal gain, because now all they have to do is ask one question:
“Do you use QNB?”
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Imagination, Innovation, Insight, Loyalty, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Point Of View, Relevance, Resonance, Technology
As funny as the photo above is, the reality is it’s still a better brand experience than much of what passes for good brand experience these days.
Hell, if I was shopping there and saw that sign, it would make me smile, which is more than a lot of brands and their experience strategies achieve.
I’ve said it before but too many companies mistake basic interaction as brand experience. Or worse, think that by simply removing friction from the purchase process, they’re building a good brand experience.
Seriously, how boring and self-centred must their lives be to think that?
If done well, brand experience can be a huge thing.
And by well, I don’t mean making bad, average – or creating a consistent base-line standard across the company – I mean making the things that actually matter to audiences, personal and valuable … or focusing on the key things audiences think you actually do well and pushing that so the experience can become something that is almost seminal so people want to share, repeat and shout about.
I wrote about this a while ago [here and here, for example] … but it still blows my mind how many companies and agencies approach experience in terms of not getting left behind when they should be seeing it as an opportunity to move ahead … a chance to leave their competition looking slow, rather than themselves.
And before people say this approach would cost more money, it doesn’t. Or it doesn’t have to. It’s all about defining the experience you want to create.
Given a badly placed store sign next to some condoms gave me a better brand experience than so many of the systems, processes and strategies brand experience promotes, it’s safe to say the discipline may need to start understanding what people give a shit about rather than what they wish they did.
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.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand Suicide, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creativity, Culture, Customer Service, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect
Just like HR is often about protecting management from their people rather than the other way around, the same can be said for customer service.
Of course, no one says that, but there’s far too many examples of companies stating the importance of their customers, and then using their customer service department to completely undermine them.
As I’ve written before, real customer service is demonstrated when things are bad, not good.
Let’s be honest, when a company can spot a sale, the full charm-offensive is on display.But when things go bad … oh, that’s when the truth is often revealed.
The irony is that this is the exact moment you can create a level of loyalty that can last a lifetime.
I’ve talked about the time VW came good after my brand new Golf GTI had the gearbox collapse and the turbo blow up … and I’ve found another example of a brand making something bad, a little bit better simply because they looked at things from their customers perspective and acted accordingly.
Isn’t that amazing?
Considerate. Compassionate. Personal. Helpful. Generous.
At the worst of times, a company has found a way to not just solve a problem – but help relieve some of the pain, that wasn’t even of their own making.
If a pet food company can do that – with their relatively low priced product – then any company should be able to. But many don’t. Not because their staff don’t want to, but their bosses won’t let them.
Years ago I worked with a consultant called Geoff Burch.
He was a beautiful maniac.
What made him great was he challenged management to live up to their responsibilities – both to their companies reputation and their employees ability to be successful.
We were working on an Italian car brand together and at the client briefing, the CEO said the call centre staff were offering too many benefits to appease dissatisfied customers.
Geoff asked why they were dissatisfied and the response was their were reliability problems.
Quick as a flash, he replied:
“Maybe you need to realise your responsibility to your employees is more than just a desk, a roof and a paycheck, but making a product that is fit for purpose. I can’t help a company who wants to blame others for the faults they have created and protect”
It was incredible.
And while there was a very awkward atmosphere in the room after that outburst, the CEO – after what seemed like a lifetime – acknowledged he was right.
To be fair, it helped that Geoff had an incredible reputation, but he wasn’t saying anything truly revolutionary, he was simply saying ‘reputation is based on what you do, not what you say’.
And while that should be plainly obvious, it’s amazing how few companies still don’t get that. The companies who think making a few dollars more today is more valuable than a lost customer tomorrow.
Seriously, the way some companies operate, it’s like a bloody ponzi scheme.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting you should ‘spend your way’ into customers hearts.
This is simply about valuing your customers perspective rather than purely seeing the World through your own.
Which is, unsurprisingly, the true definition of customer service.