What the advertising industry has in common with my hairdresser

I had my haircut today. (I’m very happy with it, thanks for asking.)  It was cut by a man with faintly ridiculous hair.

His hair was dyed, very badly. It was at least a couple of shades too dark, particularly for a man with thinning hair. It was also fashioned in a quite dramatic style, again designed to distract from the thinness of the raw materials. It seemed the strategy was to adopt a style of such confidence that it would disguise the fact that the hair itself wasn’t quite up to the task.  It seemed rather like the last-ditch battle strategy of sending what few men you have out of the trenches and over the top, hopefully confusing the enemy into believing that such a display of bravado must mean that there are hundreds more men where they came from.

And as he cut my hair I became more and more focused on his hair.  It wasn’t so ridiculous that it would attract a second glance in the street. It was just the fact that you have heightened expectations of a hairdresser’s hair. You place it under that much more scrutiny simply because of what they do.

Which is an issue I think we in the advertising industry really struggle with.  We’re professional communicators with a disappointing tendency to communicate really badly on our own behalf.

If you’ve worked in the industry you’ll be familiar with the common examples. The bloated, trite press releases announcing client wins or losses.  The belated announcements to clients that key staff are leaving only days before they actually depart (despite the agency having known for months).  The fatuous, clumsy language we insist on inventing to describe our proprietary planning processes and to populate our creative rationales.

We’re not, arguably, that much worse than other industries. Lawyers seem also to revel in insular language, architects are equally fond of self-promotion through client appointment and technology companies are, by reputation, not the best at managing HR-related announcements.

But the issue is that we’re subject to greater scrutiny.  We’re in the business of communication, so there’s much more interest in how well we do that ourselves.  And slip-ups that wouldn’t warrant a mention from any other industry look just plain amateur from us.

This isn’t quite the same thing as the old favourite about plumbers having leaking pipes and builders having holes in their floor.  Because unless you make a visit to your builder or plumber’s house, you’d never know this.

But how we communicate is plain for all to see.  We judge our builder based on the work done for other people. But our clients can, and do, judge us based on the work we do for ourselves.

Which is what makes me uncomfortable about how the industry handled the TVNZ commission issue.  The end result in some ways isn’t really the point.  How we managed the communication of an industry POV around it is.  It seemed we tried to establish a position that retaining 20% commission was vital, either because there were a tier of smaller agencies that would struggle to survive because that commission represented their only form of revenue, or that that level of commission was necessary to ensure that a New Zealand industry could afford to retain the kind of talent that allows it to do great work, and hold its envied position as a country with a creative reputation that far outweighs its market heft.  But by the end we’d turned it either into an issue that possibly didn’t really matter to the big agencies, possibly was a long overdue change to an outdated remuneration arrangement or possibly was just an attempt to prop up excessive salaries in an indulged, out-of-touch industry.

The commission issue was one on which our clients were very focused. They looked to understand our perspective and how, alongside them, we would manage the issue. They saw us in action, our communication’s skills in the spotlight and we appeared rather clumsy.  It’s not that the points we started out wanting to make weren’t valid, it’s just that we didn’t do a great job of communicating with the clarity and consistency that we advocate for our clients.

And just as an ill-considered hairstyle undermines the credibility of a hairdresser, so an ill-communicated point of view undermines the credibility of a communications’ industry.

To subscribe to this blog, please click here

More mildly amusing words

Still no answer as to what name is given to the new word created when a new letter(s) is added to an existing word to create an entirely new meaning. Any suggestions?

Resignate

To leave an organisation or a job for reasons that everyone can relate to.

Maorinated

The process through which a group of public service employees attend a cultural sensitivity course that results in not much more than them answering the phone with a cheery ‘Kia Ora’.

Don’t worry Bob. Google’s got your back.

Love these two new Gmail features, developed to help avoid small, but significant, email cockups.

The first feature helps you avoid sending an email to someone whose name is similar to someone you actually wanted to email.  The second helps make sure that you don’t leave a person off a list of people you often email.

I’ve done both in the last couple of days. Sent a brief to a group of people in the agency….and a guy I once bought a suit from.  Then sent a meeting request to a group I meet with every few weeks…..but missed one person off the list.

The ‘Got the wrong Bob’ feature double-checks that you’ve entered the right address based on groups of people you’ve emailed previously.  So if your tailor suddenly shows up amongst a group of staff email addresses, you get a prompt to check you’ve got it right.

And the ‘Don’t forget Bob’ feature prompts you if there’s an address missing from a group of people you regularly email together.

Lovely. An unexpected solution to a problem I didn’t really know could be solved.

More mildly amusing words

More in the ongoing series of the mildly amusing new words that can be created by adding/changing a letter in an existing word. (Does anyone know what the name for this is? Surely someone must have coined something?)

Thurd

The sound made by an uncommonly large faecal deposit hitting the ground

Goobble

Using the internet to find a place to have lunch

Social media might just save Marketing. But not for the reason we think.

All those who have bemoaned the status that marketing is accorded in most large organisations should take heart.  Our saviour might well be upon us.

It will be enormously ironic if it proves to be true, but my bet is that social media may yet see Marketing invited back to the boardroom table.

Why? Because the boardroom table respects those things that can either deliver great success or cause great harm.  For years Marketing hasn’t seemed to deliver much potential for either. Most Boards were highly sceptical of what value marketing could deliver (certainly when compared to more operational functions). And, in a logical corollary, they didn’t really fear what damage could be done if Marketing got something wrong.

They also didn’t really buy the argument that Marketing ‘owned’ the consumer.  Either because they didn’t see the need for the consumer to be at the heart of their business, or, more likely, because they felt that some combination of sales, retail, corporate affairs etc was just as capable of representing the consumer view.

We in the broader Marketing fraternity have found this frustrating and not a little insulting.  We tried very hard to argue that we knew exactly what we were doing, ours being a professional, regimented discipline, with proven success factors delivering strong return.  But (with apologies for being both simplistic and judgemental) we tended to fall down when called on to prove this, betrayed by our meaningless language and superficial analysis.

Our panic has increased as we’ve confronted a new digital world. We’ve seen our audience wrenched away, our traditional creative strengths made less relevant and, most frighteningly of all, the rise of social media with its democratisation of opinion, free sharing of points of view and returning of power to the people.

But this is actually what might save us.  Because social media is dangerous.  It has a power that every Board should be afraid of.  Its ability to galvanise people is remarkable, and its ability to galvanise people around an issue that can threaten any business needs to be respected.

And at the same time social media represents enormous opportunity, for it galvanises people around a positive issue just as effectively as a negative one.  It allows people to share in a great service initiative just as much as a botched one.

But while its unfortunate, the truth is that for most businesses fear dominates.  Fear forces decisions much more readily than opportunity, and my suspicion is that most businesses fear social media.   Which is where our opportunity lies.

Social media is Marketing’s responsibility (not entirely Marketing’s, obviously, but for the moment we’re the ones most likely to be taking the lead). And social media cements again the need for every businesses to have the consumer at its heart. Which is exactly where they, and we as Marketers, should be.

It will be ironic. Social media has been enormously unsettling for Marketers.  We don’t understand it yet and, if you’re of my vintage, it challenges much of what you’ve spent a career advocating.  But social media will revolutionise how businesses behave.  And it’s very likely to be fear of social media, the thing we marketers don’t really understand, that will see Marketing invited back to the boardroom table.

Once we’re there, hopefully we can help people see the opportunity too.

Brilliant Estee Lauder promo

I’ve spent the week battling both a cold and a rampant sense of negativity.  I’m conscious that’s one of the risks of this blogging lark (the negativity more than the malady). It’s so easy to focus on the negative – unfortunately it seems to be more prevalent, and it’s certainly easier to write about.

Which is why I was so heartened by this.  Just a great, great idea.

esteelauder100709big

Estee Lauder has started a promotion (unfortunately only in the US, ladies) that provides makeovers. Having had your makeover you have your photo taken by an on-site professional photographer.  The photo is specifically shot to be used as a profile photo for your Facebook page, blog, or whatever social media world you choose to inhabit.

Brilliant.

I love that this sends such a great empathetic signal.  The profile photo is to this generation what the driver’s license mugshot was to the last.  It’s got big impact for such a small photo.

I love that they’ve taken something they do anyway (makeovers) and added significant value by giving them a more specific purpose (profile shots). 

I love that it deals with the frustration that must be inevitable at the end of most makeovers – you look great, but unless you travel with an entourage, you’ve got no one to share that moment with. 

And I love that the ‘branding’ is an Estee Lauder backdrop to the shot.  They will know that anyone with a passing interest in technology will be able to remove this backdrop easily enough. But my guess is that most people won’t.  Because it feels like a fair and reasonable exchange.  You get to present your best self to the world and the brand that creates that opportunity gets some exposure.  That seems pretty fair.

This just feels like the perfect promo – it demonstrates great empathy for the audience, it delivers huge value for participants and it turns a giveaway into something so much more meaningful.

Brilliant.

Christmas gifts for the technology enthusiast in your life

I love these.  All available from Meninos. A real Twitter birdhouse, iPhone icon coasters, and my personal favourite, a doormat.

birdhouse

 

coasters

unlock__33604

Evaborate

I’ve always enjoyed those word game things in which you change or add a letter to a word to give it a new meaning.  I’ve started seeing them everywhere.  Please suggest your own. A prize, of my choosing, to the winner.  I volunteer:

Evaborate

When you make a pointless comment in a meeting, then watch your credibility disappear as you try and expand on the point, in the process demonstrating that you knew nothing about what was being discussed to begin with.

TEDxAuckland

I was lucky enough to attend TEDx Auckland last week.

The most impressive element of the event was that it happened.  For that we have Richard Hollingum to thank.  He decided to do it and somehow just got it done. Plenty of people helped and many gave money. But they had to have something to help with and something to give money to, which is entirely down to Richard.

Many of the speakers were great.  I learnt that for most organisations the competition comes from within. I learnt that I need to understand the difference between Commitment and Attachment. I learnt that the human ear is a perfect microcosm of the human body.  And I learnt that because everyone’s been educated everyone thinks they know how to be a teacher.

From Richard Avery and Scott Gilmour I received a timely reminder that I’ve not really done much with my life. But I also learnt that it doesn’t take an extraordinary person to do something remarkable, just a great idea and a willingness to try.

Which is really what I most enjoyed about the event.  There was a great sense of possibility that came from spending time with speakers who have done great things and an audience that aspires to.  It was the community I enjoyed as much as the content.

So with thanks to Richard and all those who made it possible, I look forward to the next gathering, not just to be able to attend another TED event, but to have perhaps got a step closer to feeling I might do something that’s TED worthy.

I’m sorry. I know nothing about Tourette’s.

Weirdly, I’ve been getting a few people arriving at my blog based on a couple of completely flippant references I’ve made to Tourette’s (here and here). It seems that as a result my blog was listed on a site that shares information about the condition.

I don’t know anything about Tourette’s, as will be immediately obvious to anyone who has arrived at my blog. Instead, like the much of the population, I’m guilty of referencing a serious condition in the interests of being mildly amusing.

And I do feel bad that someone might arrive here looking for genuine insight and be offended that actually I’ve just been making light.

But in thinking about it I guess I’m also concerned that if I do offend someone they might get abusive and the last group of people you want to invite abuse from is people with Tourette’s. Because you’d have to assume they’ve got mad skills.

I imagine it being like those stories you hear of people who have amazing abilities that seldom get called upon. Like the guy I read about who had both a photographic memory for faces and an amazing ability to produce fine pencil sketches. He just desperately wanted to be the only witness to a significant crime (ideally a bank robbery) so that not only would he be able to describe the perpetrator in remarkable detail, but he would also be able to draw the perfect identikit profile within minutes. He always dreamed that because of his amazing talents and speedy response a notorious criminal would be caught and as the man responsible for said capture he’d be celebrated by all and interviewed on TV. It never happened for him and, fate being what it is, it’s quite possible that it was precisely because he was blessed with this rare combination of talents that he was never actually present at any significant criminal event. (This would be a happy story if not for the fact that the disappointment at never being able to exhibit his talents in the way he wished actually drove him to a life of crime in his later years. Such was his frustration that he took to robbing banks in the retirement area in which he lived, just so he could at least play some role in the criminal scenario he’d so often imagined. The great irony is that he was caught when his image was captured on a security camera, the ultimate indignity for a man of his talents.)

Anyway, I was speculating that it might be similar for someone with Tourette’s. The affliction delivers a very specific capacity for language that is seldom called for, but one which delivers a certain natural advantage when it come to delivering abuse. They’d be like abuse-ninjas, poised, waiting to strike, and then along comes me, treating the syndrome in a completely flippant manner, and it’s the perfectly justifiable abuse opportunity they’ve been waiting for.  Which makes me a little afraid.

Or maybe it would be exactly the opposite. Maybe it would be one of those weird twists (like the people who have stutters that disappear when they sing) and that if you have Tourette’s and you launch into abuse you actually completely lose the swearing and come over all prim. You have this awesome repertoire of swearing and just at the point when it would actually be of benefit you completely lose the power to summon it. That would suck.

Anyway, I’ll let you know either way when the abuse starts flying.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 158 other followers