(Courtesy) This is based on a true conference call story on the weirdness of pitching and managing creative projects.Not as weird as conference calls themselves.
The movie ‘Lives of others’ was brilliant in its depiction
of life in East Germany under the watchful eyes of Stasi, the dreaded and
repressive state police. These guys collected information about people whom
they suspected of having anti-state (or ‘pro decadent West’) leanings in an
almost obsessive compulsive way. Every aspect of the ‘suspect’s’ life was
covered. At the height of Cold War, Stasi probably spied on more than a third
of the population and collected astonishing amounts of information and data about them. But none of the information and data could prevent this from
happening.
Emotion trumps data, any day. And emotions cannot be
predicted. Behaviour, linked to emotions, even more so.
But brands don’t seem to believe in this. They are going to
town with their ‘investments’ in big data and analytics. They probably see in
data and analytics the answer to all the problems the brand is facing, a holy
grail. Data is something absolute and finite. It gives the marketer a sense of
control, a sense of being ‘scientific’ in their decision making. It also helps
them justify any decision, more often than not, the wrong one. And their favorite
game, Analysis-Paralysis, gets even better with big data.
“We have jumped on the data bandwagon to such an extent that
we’ve seemingly forgotten how normal human beings respond to stuff.
Instead of using the findings and learning’s of data to
create stories that have emotional value and meaning to our audience, we are
now seeing more and more ads that basically regurgitate the data as the actual
message.”
The tech industry which made big data fashionable has also
been a victim to its distracting powers.
One of the most loved brands of the dotcom era Yahoo is now
on life support. One of the reasons for this sorry plight was their
over-fascination with big data (and analytics) through their investment in Hadoop. This obsession with data meant that their attention was diverted from
doing what is fundamental to their business – creating a wonderful user
experience.
Google, the tech giant, prides itself on data-based decision
making as one of its cornerstone of its strategy. Can someone explain to me why then are they tripping almost everywhere except in their bread and butter,
Search? Be it the buyout of Motorola or their ‘Facebook’ obsession product
Google Plus, Google seems to be losing their mojo. I hope they do not wind up
like Yahoo.
Therefore, it is not surprising to see comments like the one
below on a recently held conference on big data involving the usual suspects.
All the data in the world won't fix the (banner) ad nobody sees Global Brands Talk Big Data, Big Problems shar.es/cvfUj via @adweek — Tarik Sedky (@tariksed) October 22, 2012
Lastly, one of the biggest names in the telecom world
continues to sink faster than a guy with cement shoes in water while their
investments in big data and analytics continues to grow. The only solution to
their plight is ‘Change’, beginning with the management. But then data and
analytics cannot help in that. It requires something that is rarely used these
days. It is called common sense.
The gear shift is pushed higher. The throttle is pressed hard.
The car leaps and zips along a beautiful highway. The car swerves dramatically a full 360
degree. The car screeches to a halt. Steve McQueen steps out of the car.
This car.
BTW, I was kidding. About Steve McQueen.
Seriously, if ever there was a lemon it is the car above. No
amount of dramatic television spots will move this beyond a taxi-wallah’s
favorite.
I have not singled out this brand for special treatment. This
malaise of ‘stupid’ hyperbole cuts across brands and the evidence is there for
all to see, on television and online. I must also admit that I have been part
of such work. I must also admit that in all the instances, the client was told
of the ‘stupidity’ of such an approach. But then, we were clobbered with logic,
stats and the ultimate crutch of marketers, research. We had to quietly relent.
Call it mid-life crisis or burn-out or whatever, I am increasingly
finding it difficult to be part of such an exercise. It is to my mind a case of 'good money
behind bad money'.
Is there a way to call the crap on this kind of marketing
and advertising?
Why don't marketers and agencies realize that there is merit in being honest and real? The creative
possibilities are far more interesting with such an approach. The believability
and empathy is also likely to be more. I am not saying no to hyperbole. But
hyperbole for a product/service that is at best a ‘turkey’ should be avoided.
I recently read a charming post by an UX expert that beautifully
captured this thought. Here are some gems from the post.
“Our best chance for establishing trust with our users is to
be honest. After all, trust inspires confidence. And it’s confidence—not just a
knowledge of differences—that compels decision-making.
Perhaps we should stop fixating on what makes us different
and, instead, acknowledge the real aspects of who we are, what we do, and why
people choose us.
We often overlook our own assets because they’re real. Real
things aren’t flashy, polished, or perfect. That’s often what makes them an
asset in the first place.”
Finally, there can be no better validation of this approach
than from The Master. Recognize this?
The headline is a summation of what George Lois, considered one of the greatest art directors and 'the original mad man', had to say about ideas.
"I don’t think I create anything. I’m really serious — I discover the ideas.
If you understand how to think… If you have a background of graphic art, and you are a sports fan, and you’re literate, and you’re interested in politics, and you love opera, and ballet’s not bad either, and if you understand people… and you understand language, and you understand that product, and you understand the competitive products… and you put that all together in about ten minutes — the idea’s there."
Be open to experiences and you are likely to come up with interesting ideas. Learn it from masters like George Lois.
"Get every single detail perfect and limit the number of details". Priceless.
I am a big fan of Jack Dorsey. He is a visionary and a great leader. He has what it takes to create discontinuities in the market. Little wonder that he is compared to Steve Jobs (that is unfair to both of them, is my opinion). Little wonder that developers and designers want to work with him. And if you want to know more about him, check this and this.
I feel vindicated for having written this piece about chaos earlier.
I cannot but wonder why agencies are so chaos(and risk) averse when they are supposed to be a creative environment helping solve client's problems? Everything is buttoned down into a neat process with very little leeway for interesting creative expression. This also true of most organizations.
But then, is there a formula for chaos that will hopefully result in amazing creative work? In many ways formula and chaos are antithesis of each other. Therefore, do not expect a formula. Instead create an environment that will foster risk taking and adventure. This might result in the kind of chaos that will enable some amazing work to emerge.
In recent times, I have been fascinated with Valve. Their model of no bosses, no delegation, no commands should have meant collapse of the company. Instead, it is probably an interesting approach to creating chaos and great products. It has created for sure one of the hottest software companies in the world.
"The greatest fulfillment is when you do something good for others"
I would urge you to see this talk by Simon Sinek for NYC Creative Mornings. The greed and do-not-care attitude of management that plagues most organizations (and society) has a domino's effect that seems to be relentless. In this talk Simon Sinek gives the example of the US Marines on how to build self-confidence and a winning team. Everything he says has been extolled in our scriptures - the Upanishads in particular. But then who cares for our scriptures when our role-models are those who seem to be right out of a reality TV show and 24x7 news.BTW, is there a difference between the two?
If only the client stretched the deadline a bit for you to develop that germ of an idea buzzing in your head. Sounds familiar? Been there often? Eh?
Fret not anymore. Help is at hand.
Share the video above and you might actually get the client to relax the deadline a bit. And if the deadline is relaxed, I hope you are able to be as creative as the kids in the video.
“I am to provide the public with beneficial shocks.” - Hitchcock
I love the term ‘beneficial shocks’. Wasn’t that the case in the brilliantly plotted moment seen above? In true Hitchcock style, there was unexpectedness and drama that magnified the tension for the unsuspecting victims (and audience). The tension was released by bottles of beer…er…the brand. A brand moment brand managers would die for.
BTW, I might be wrong about Hitchcock. Could it have been Woody Allen who scripted this?
The beautiful thought above is credited to Paul Arden.
Wouldn’t the world be a better place if people practiced the
above thought? The predictable and banal approach to all aspects of our lives - government policies, business, marketing, brand campaigns - are as a result of our aversion to taking risks. The world needs creative solutions to overcome challenges that seem to be cropping up at every corner.
But then, isn’t it asking for a bit too much from this
world?
We worship at the altar of success and all its trappings, especially the
material kind. One cannot afford to be seen as
being wrong. Therefore, folks in the government or in the corporate world or in
their personal lives resort to CYA (Cover Your A*se).
The result - “the other
guy is to blame”. Some hapless soul is made the fall-guy and everyone returns home happy while renewing a new cycle of the same mistake.
I love this poster. Rule number 4 resonates a lot with me these days. There very few places in this world (and more so in India) that knows how to make 'work into play'. I hope one day I am able to create a place that puts this simple rule into practice...er...play.
Pixar is what every creative organisation should aspire to become. Not only are their films critically acclaimed but are also mega-commercial successes. In the interview above you get to know the reason why. It is all about leadership and culture. This simple interview covers lot of territory and is at once fascinating and insightful.
For example, take managing ‘creative types’.
In an agency you can see some of the so-called-creative types strutting about like a peacock-on-heat throwing tantrums and in general making life miserable for everyone. Management is completely paralyzed into inaction not knowing how to deal with them. The result is that such behaviour becomes cancerous vitiating the entire atmosphere.
At Pixar, the creative process is viewed as a group effort. While there is room for creative eccentricities, they do not let it affect group dynamics. They simply fire the creative person even though he might be the best. Following is the transcript about that from the interview.
"[At Pixar] there is very high tolerance for eccentricity, very creative, and to the point where some are strange… but there are a small number of people who are socially dysfunctional [and] very creative – we get rid of them. If we don’t have a healthy group then it isn’t going to work. There is this illusion that this person is creative and has all this stuff, well the fact is there are literally thousands of ideas involved in putting something like this together. And the notion of ideas as this singular thing is a fundamental flaw. There are so many ideas that what you need is that group behaving creatively. And the person with the vision I think is unique, there are very few people who have that vision.. but if they are not drawing the best out of people then they will fail.
We will support the leader for as long and as hard as we can, but the thing we can not overcome is if they have lost the crew. It’s when the crew says we are not following that person. We say we are director led, which implies they make all the final decisions, [but] what it means to us is the director has to lead.. and the way we can tell when they are not leading is if people say ‘we are not following’."
He attributes the quote in the cartoon to Mark Earls, another great mind - 'I think it embarrasses the grown-ups: a lot of folk think business is some separate rational sphere of activity, in which maths, analytics and rational thinking prevail (whether it’s in customers’ or employees’ minds). "Creativity" makes things personal – makes you put your balls on the line. It cuts through the crap of “strategy” and all that pseudoscience that we hide behind.'
Hugh goes onto say - ‘To survive in the future, we're ALL going to have to get more creative- not just the boys in the black polo sweaters, but every last one of us, regardless of job title.’
It is indeed a very powerful and valid prediction, more so when it comes from an incredibly creative person like Hugh.
Meanwhile, I urge you to subscribe to his daily cartoons for your morning dose of awesomeness. It is one of my dreams to buy at least one of his cartoons. Er...let me figure out how to get the money for that first.
I read this wonderful article yesterday on the idea behind the designs of India’s iconic monuments. The article starts off with Chandigarh, a beautiful city designed by Le Corbusier.
When the city of Chandigarh and its legislative assembly buildings were built, the architecture cast in concrete was very different from the Parliament and other legislative houses built before in India. It looked neither like a palace nor a temple, the two traditional archetypes that served as a model to represent power or ‘culture'. Chandigarh's lexicon of forms was new. Not everyone liked it.
Dismissing the scepticism, Nehru, who ardently supported it, said, “Some like it, and some dislike it… You may squirm at the impact, but it has made you think.”
Nehru, being the Prime Minister, fortunately had the final say and it resulted in one of the finest cities of the world being created. It is another thing that in the ensuing decades we have done our damndest best to reduce it to the chaotic depths of other Indian cities.
More importantly, great ideas will always generate extreme views (and buzz). It will make a lot of people uncomfortable. Therefore, one’s got to be ballsy enough to take a decision in its favor.
It was close to midnight. The agency was abuzz with frenetic activity for an important presentation in the morning. The client was a large MNC with an extremely tough marketing head. The agency had failed couple of times before in trying to sell their campaign ideas. The agency team was at their wits end. My boss had rounded up the entire team to discuss the presentation strategy. He was trying to develop a ‘rationale’ for each of the creative idea in front of us. Being the junior-most at that time, I was perplexed at the contrived explanations that the team members were coming up with. It was a whole lot of bull-crap. I was not alone in thinking that way.
The consequences suffered at the presentation could have been a little less painful had we carried a jar of Vaseline. We paid the price of bullshit overshadowing the creative and therefore becoming the point of debate. It is critical not to fall into this trap and important to sell the creative, not the bullshit. This is the problem with ‘rationale’. It is a logical or process driven explanation of a product (creative) that triggers an asymmetric, non-linear process within the mind. One is on a slippery and dangerous ground with it as clients can easily identify with logic.
Sometimes I wonder what Michelangelo’s pitch to the Vatican was when he shared his idea for the Sistine Chapel. Or for that matter that of the architect of Taj Mahal. Did he, for instance, tell the Emperor that the four minarets represented the eternal hard-on he had for his beloved?
I suspect there has always been an element of bullshit that is used to sell creative. It will always be that way. Eminent designer Michael Bierut in this brilliant and candid post explains why. The post has its LoL moments one of which I have copied below.
Every once in a while, however, there is satisfaction to be had when design bullshit attains the level of art. I remember working years ago with a challenging client who kept rejecting brochure designs for a Francophile real estate development because they "weren't French enough." I had no idea what French graphic design was supposed to look like but came up with an approach using Empire, a typeface designed by Milwaukee-born Morris Fuller Benton in 1937, and showed it to my boss, Massimo Vignelli. "That will work," he said, his eyes narrowing.
At the presentation, Massimo unveiled the new font choice with a flourish. "As you see," he said, "in this new design, we're using a typeface called Ahm-peere."
I was about to correct him when I realized he was using the French pronunciation of Empire.
The client bought it.
Now is the time for the million dollar question. What if the bullshit becomes the creative, which is the case most of the time?
