Business Thoughts
project global generation enlightened update
Mar 6th
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
Here is what I hope to do that will “echo in eternity.”
Project Global Generation.
I have updated project global generation, about 75+ pages of it, with sources including TED, The Economist, Time Magazine, multiple foreign education programs (including Singapore & Korea), PewResearch, UNESCO and additional research studies … all as best I can.
www.projectglobalgeneration.com
I would have had to rewrite complete posts if I wanted to eliminate all redundancy (and … sigh … I was not up to the task) so most articles were updated to insure they had the most up-to-date thoughts.
Why update now? Time magazine had two recent articles on web based education.
“… hopes that the internet can improve teaching may at last be bearing fruit” – Time Magazine (Flipping the Classroom) 9/17
“… many people now believe that the internet can make a real difference educating children.” – Time Magazine (The Great Schools Revolution) 9/17
Maybe I am not as nuts as I thought I was (at least with regard to this idea).
Since 2008 or 9 I have been writing about Project Global Generation – a web based global children’s education initiative (and I am probably done because re-reading everything I am not sure I can write anything new or prove why it is a good idea and it is the time to do it).
Most people thought the idea was nuts … okay … they just thought (a) teaching via web was not going to be effective <in school hands on teaching was best> and (2) it wasn’t practical to implement <they couldn’t envision how it could actually happen>.
Maybe some people don’t think it’s that nuts anymore.
Regardless. I still believe it is a good idea.
If you want everything from strategy underpinnings, rationale, specific tactics, implementation plan of action and real costs, the project global generation website has it all.
Read it if you are interested.
Forward it to anyone you believe would be interested in it.
And.
If this isn’t your thing … please … at minimum … be interested in kid’s education.
Someday we will be dependent on them.
So. Care now.
And.
If you elect to visit the site here is what you will find. Here is the table of contents:
- About Project Global Generation
The welcome to the site and why I created this idea/initiative.
- Table of contents and summary
If you read only one thing this would be it. Right here (this post is the contents/summary). A cliff notes version of everything you can find on the site.
- 1. global generation: dawn of enlightened individuality (the global generation)
using a variety of sources I outline what I believe the generation after the Millennials, called The Global Generation, will look like attitudinally and how they ‘fit’ in the cycle of generations.
- 1a. The global generation student: about their abilities & attitude
using a Fischler study and the Singapore Ministry of Education I try and overcome some misperceptions about the abilities and attitudes of a younger generation of students
- 2. global generation: a look at millennials (and why they are not the global generation)
in this post I take a deeper dive into why I believe the Millennials will end up facilitating the Global Generation opportunity and not be the generation that will impact education & enlightened conflict directly.
- 3. global generation: sociology & the internet platform
there are some inherent sociological benefits to a we based education initiative and in this post I outline them.
- 4. global generation: developing critical thinking skills
in this post I outline how the Global generation, facilitated by a web based program, will be the greatest critical thinking generation we have seen.
- 5. global generation: education messaging underpinnings
in this article I outline the specifics of what makes up the educational aspects (and what does not).
- 6. global generation: learning by lurking
in addition to the sociological benefits as outlined in GG 3 we have seen some possible improvements a web based model can offer to learning/education.
- 7. global generation: tactics & implementation
after outlining the thinking behind the initiative in this post I outline the specific tactics & costs.
- 8. global generation: the role of the web (versus existing education systems)
in this post I outline the benefits of using a web based model for education trying to explain why flipping the existing education model is better and more practical for the future generations
- global generation 9: measuring the initiative impact (attitudinally and global attendance)
now that I have outlined the thinking behind the program, the specific tactics & costs to implement I suggest measurement objectives and will also using the most recent UNESCO global education report I outline how the initiative will assist in reaching the UN Millennium goals.
- 10. global generation: more on impact – conflict & enlightenment
Using an article from The Economist I outline how the initiative impacts value systems
- 11. global generation: implementing a conflict prevention program
I compare the initiative against other existing global initiatives to outline how this initiative will be more effective than most other programs because it affects ongoing behavior as a ‘preventative’ initiative rather than a ‘intervention’ type program
- 12. global generation: not too close a link to human rights
I outline my thoughts that this initiative is an education program and not a Human rights program and part of its challenge is to not judge different cultural/governmental/religious systems but rather through education there is a high potential for a stronger tolerance of different views as the generation moves into adulthood.
Some additional conclusion thoughts:
- global generation finds a voice
A number of well known celebrities have stepped forward to discuss the importance of improving education globally. In this article I highlight the “free your mind” award and spectacularly articulated award speech from an unlikely source – Jared Leto of 30 Seconds to Mars
- Thomas Jefferson on Ignorance and Enlightened Conflict
using some Thomas Jefferson thoughts I leave you with some more philosophical ‘bigger picture’ things to ponder.
- me and my thoughts on conflict & people
just some last thoughts … because this is all about enlightened conflict anyway …
That’s it.
Oh. Why do I care?
“What we do in life echoes in eternity.”
products of our youth
Mar 2nd
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
So.
I often wonder why people do the things they do. Oh. And stress. How they deal with stress. In work life or personal life. Because stress certainly brings out the extremes in people.
For some reason, lately, I have seen a number of situations in work and outside of work which have made me scratch my head.
Stress is an odd thing. It makes seemingly rational people do some quite irrational things (or exhibit some short term irrational behavior). To be fair … stress also can bring out the best in some people.
Anyway.
Me being me … I watch not only because I am curious but also because I think effective leadership is often significantly defined by how you deal with stress. Because stress situations are “judgment” times. Moments when things happen … or they don’t happen … and are scrutinized within the moment … and from a distance. Leaders should think about this shit. Because I often believe leaders forget that they are always watched … always … as an example of how to do or not do things.
And I often believe leaders forget their actions beget a culture or work environment.
And while I believe parents <who are leaders in their own world> NEVER forget this (that their actions beget a culture) I do believe stress short circuits this understanding and they do some irrational shit (which, I hate to break the news to us adults, is not solved by simply going back and trying to correct it … because the impact of that irrational behavior triggers a deep imprint in a child’s rational mind … and forever stored – to forever haunt not only us adults but their own behavior at some point).
Anyway.
Suffice it to say simplistically that leaders and parents actions beget “how to act rules of the road” for others as the road winds its way toward some horizon. And it behooves us to remember that <unfortunately we need to remember that 24/7>.
So. All that said.
As with thinking about most things like this … it creates a little self reflection. Not naval gazing type reflection but rather ‘why I act the way I do’ type reflection. And just to be clear it isn’t naval gazing in terms of self understanding but rather learning & understanding to reflect upon leadership, or how I act, in times of stress.
I guess, in particular, I am looking specifically at leadership as a parent (although I am not one) and leadership in terms of people who follow your lead (so I put this self reflection exercise down as one that can help me as I teach high school students and such). But I imagine it won’t hurt in the workplace either.
Inevitably this type of reflection slips back to one’s youth. Yup. Childhood.
Because whether we like it or not … we are products of our youth.
For it is in childhood that the majority of our attitudes and behaviors took root. No … to be clear … I do not believe we ‘become our parents’ as we get older. I believe we become products of our youth (of which significant portions are certainly impacted by our parents – or any significant adult exposure) but it is more experiences, and experiential, and the imprints those experiences have left upon us. Some good. Some bad. But they are there. They direct our instinctual behavior. Sure. They can be ‘over-rided’ with some thought but many times, because they are instinctual, we don’t even think about over-riding them.
Regardless.
It pays to step back and look. Understanding the “reason why I do things” may not change anything you actually do. But it may change how you THINK about what you do. Worthwhile effort? Shit. I don’t know. I know I think so. I believe it is always healthy to peel back the layers and recognize the “why I do” aspect. And sometimes, just sometimes, the exercise may actually change what you do. And that’s gotta be a good thing, right? (he says hopefully)
Anyway.
I am going to tell you some stuff about me growing up and I am NOT suggesting any of my parent readers don’t know how to parent your child or anything. This is simply telling you stuff and, if it is relevant or useful, use it.
So.
My parents worried about my grades a lot, incessantly as a matter of fact, and whether I was going to “live up to my abilities.” Apparently I had “tested well” as a child and both my parents also had education expectations. That was okay (and I do believe it is okay as a general rule).
But they also had preparation/studying expectations.
And that included a lot of ongoing pressure and nagging and unrelenting point of view on how it had to be done in order to be successful.
First.
Because they stressed and put pressure on every single testing event (especially the more important ones) … I stressed.
And I would purposefully study less and appear to casually prepare … not because I wanted to piss them off (although they certainly did on occasion and absolutely would get very very frustrated) or do poorly but rather because it was my way of decreasing my own stress and clearing my head on stuff.
Over time I actually learned how to manage what I needed to do to succeed … as well as what I needed to do to get myself out of the parental (leadership) stress zone.
But my “self program to succeed” had some repercussions … during preparation I would sometimes look ‘not as smart’ (even though I found a lot of it boring and didn’t really feel like investing a lot of energy on things I didn’t think I would have to work that hard on to do well on) and it would stress my parents out … and … well … unfortunately the doom loop continued. They stressed … put stress on me … I did what I needed to do to defuse my stress so I could succeed … and they got stressed because of that.
So I was a stressed out kid. Geez. Just typing it stressed me out.
But I would continue to get good grades. Which for some unfortunate reasons did not decrease stress within the process itself.
Second.
The problem. When I DIDN’T get good grades <an A> invariably they would then ‘ramp up’ the stress of ‘you didn’t prepare well’ … ‘you should have studied more’ … ‘you need to care more’ … and that was a different doom loop.
And a difficult doom loop because no matter how smart I was I wasn’t going to get straight A’s (well. that’s not true. I would imagine if I had really cared to do so I may have had a shot at it). This particular doom loop is a sonuvabitch … because it is a self fulfilling loop, i.e., everyone doesn’t max out every time therefore, in the end, the exceptions (the non-A’s) dictate the loop.
So any non-A’s seemed to feed their focus on the exception rather than the rule. And that was additional stress.
Third.
When I finally got old enough … I tried cutting the doom loop by dealing with it (surprisingly my father did okay with it but my mother was relentless with regard to pressuring to ‘do it the only way she believed it should be done’). I finally told them when they got all over my ass “look. Let me do it my way. If I don’t do well then I will do it your way. But until then can you just shut up and let me do it my way?”
This was quasi-successful.
What I mean by that … is see #2, the exception rule, all over again.
If you aren’t 100% successful doing it this way than the one, or two, exceptions become the proof points for failure of system.
Fourth.
My solution (warped as it may have been). Because everything had to be done my parents’ way (education and studying wise) I would figure out a way to do about 50% of what they wanted (and go out of my way to show them I was doing so). Invest maybe 30% of my time doing it the way I wanted. And used the free 20% to actually do things I wanted to do (which had nothing to do with grades or studying).
The math didn’t work but it was my solution. The math? Unfortunately even if you are good you never get 100% right. So no matter how you slice the %’s my parents were unhappy about school and studying and stressing out over tests and homework and whatever so that in the end <sticking with the math> over 50% of all the time with me and school.
(that was an algebraic perspective on a stress situation … never to be found in any school book)
If you didn’t follow it suffice it to say that over 50% of the time my parents were all over my ass just on education <all the other stuff is a completely different post>.
I say all this for a couple of reasons:
- because I get asked about teaching and unlocking kids thinking potential a lot by parents.
And whenever parents ask me about teaching kids and working with kids I almost always open up with “just because you think a way is the best way it may not be the best way for your child.”
Invariably they ask “so how do I know the best way?”
And I say “you don’t.”
But I do suggest that what matters is ‘if the way you are 100% positive is the way to do it is not getting the results you are positive you should be getting … then rather than get frustrated maybe try a different way.’ In other words … your 100% positive ain’t 100% right.
Now.
I know that sounds simplistic but oftentimes the most obvious simple solution is also oftentimes the most difficult to do.
Second.
Why does it really matter?
We are a product of your youth.
- It means we can also take those same memories and start generalizing them to similar or future situations, with the unhappy result that we become increasingly fearful and avoid events, people or activities we perceive as threatening to our emotional well-being.
This is a fact (proven by research as it is)
It turns out that fear and anxiety can also be learned and passed on to future generations. According to Livingston (2009), children who grow up with parents who show a lot of anxiety or apprehensiveness, or who convey an exaggerated sense of the world as a dangerous place, are themselves more likely to develop unreasonable fears as they grow up.
It becomes easy to see how quickly successive generations within a family could experience generalized anxieties and fears but might not make the link as to how they came to be more anxious than their peers.
Anyway.
Store it away. This is probably not useful but I wanted to share.
I know I was sometimes seemingly unfocused and bored. Sometimes I was … and sometimes it was just my way of dealing with everything else around me.
As an adult this now shows up during moments of stress.
I am so calm it almost seems like I am unfocused and bored to others.
It is just my way of keeping everything clear in my head so I CAN perform.
Look at yourself today.
I promise you, yes, promise you … you are a product of your youth.
Yeah.
I admit that I have certainly fought my way through some “product of youth aspects” and change not only my behavior but my attitudes (yes … they are linked) but other things are simply my coping mechanisms to be successful (and keep my head from exploding … which is a bad thing by the way).
Quirks?
Possibly.
Truths of youth? Sure.
you don’t know jack
Mar 1st
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
Every once in a while you actually receive a sales driven email that is worth a shit.
I received one from The Futures Company (it used to be called Yankelovich and please don’t ask me why they change their name).
They called it the “you don’t know Jack <about multicultural marketplace> quiz.”
And, you know, I don’t know jackshit about the multicultural marketplace.
And I bet you don’t either.
Regardless.
Take the quiz.
Here it is:
How much do your know about the Multicultural Marketplace?
The Futures Company challenges you to find out exactly how much you know (or don’t know) about the multicultural marketplace.
social media ain’t antisocial
Feb 16th
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
Because I was in a recent business meeting where we were discussing social media and I was surrounded by a bunch of old farts (of which I am also) who were blathering about kids texting too much, how twitter is killing reading and basically all that old person garbage about how the internet is crumbling the foundation of civilization I thought I would write a quick factoid article on how social media is anything but anti social.
I am usually pretty harsh on the whole social media thing. Mainly because I don’t believe most social ‘tools’ (facebook, twitter, etc.) were created for marketing. They were … well … created to be social hubs not marketing hubs. But marketing people, being marketing people, came along and said “wow, how can I take advantage of that?”
Anyway.
Let me spend a couple of minutes on social as social hubs.
Because they do NOT diminish reading skills (by texting & such), or diminish social skills (conversation & talking) nor do they enhance marketing (for the most part).
Some factoids.
PewInternet research has shown that social relationship and sense of community are NOT diminishing but rather growing … and growing n non traditional ways. Simplistically instead of a tighter cocoon of friends there are now truly social networks … expanded groups of like-minded people (and there can be very obscure ‘like-minds’ but no less passionate & interesting) can be brought together regardless of geography. Social relationships now have no boundaries. Doesn’t mean they are any less meaningful in fact they can be empowering. Those who felt ‘alone’ … unlike others … are now empowered to find ‘others’ an, in fact, are quite pleased to find many others. Social relationships are being empowered. Let me close this section with this … PewInternetResearch: “Our research shows face-to-face time between teenagers hasn’t changed over the past five years. Technology has simply added another layer on top.
PewInternet research also shows that the internet has actually positively affected core ties and significant ties (definition: core ties identified as close/intimate relationships and significant ties as people to whom one is somewhat closely connected). Internet enables more contact (quantity) than ever before. The quantity translates into stronger, deeper ties with cores and significants.
PewInternet research reflects that 32% of respondents say that internet engagement has increased the size of their face to face network. Only 3% said it decreased them. Overall internet users have somewhat larger face-to-face social networks than non-users.
Research has shown the internet has strengthened church and fraternal organization involvement rather than diminish them (this is an indicator of social involvement).
Ah.
And texting.
Pewinternet research has found that more frequent texting actually encourages more face-to-face time. In addition research shows it is not about the quantity of texting but rather texting takes more careful crafting that telephone/face-to-face as well as texting more often happens at night/home therefore people share more intimate feelings.
3 out of 10 teens say “they are more honest when they talk with friends online.”
PewInternet research also indicates the internet doesn’t create false selves (and the predators are a miniscule minority … similar to the face-to-face predators who hide as Sandusky-like neighbors) but rather helps people bring out their true selves. Social scientists have suggested that “one can share one’s inner beliefs and emotional reactions with much less fear of disapproval and sanction.”
Oh (because it is topical and, oddly, among all the garbage about the degeneration of our youth caused by the internet social revolution actually came up).
Internet does not create social revolutionaries. The internet just means that anyone can have a voice. But the internet is as fragmented, no, more fragmented than cable tv.
Do you know every station you have available? Have you ever even watched every channel? <answer: no> Internet is the same. Just because someone has a voice doesn’t mean someone will hear it.
Yes. On occasion something can gain critical mass.
And, yes, that is what people call ‘viral.’
But in the scheme of things they are few and far between. What the internet does do is permit likeminded people gather. And if there are enough likeminded people who gather … and they become some derivative of a critical mass … that still isn’t a revolution … it is simply a voice loud enough to be heard.
Oh. And that voice has to say something meaningful & relevant.
Internet doesn’t (and cannot) create things from a void but rather it gives voice to those things that need to be said (and a LOT of things that don’t need to be said).
Suffice it to say with the internet that the good will be good, the bad will be bad and everyone can take a place in either the good or the bad line.
<note: marketers should read the social revolution section, insert marketing for social revolution and take a moment and ponder>
Lastly.
Reading.
Conventional wisdom suggests that YouTube, videogames, cable TV and iPods have turned us away from the written word. All these new fangled innovations have replaced paper and longhand letters only to shrink reading & writing into bite-sized status updates, text messages & colloquial emailing (or so the theories abound).
Conventional wisdom, in this case, is wrong.
A large-scale study by the University of California at San Diego and other research universities revealed what some of us have long suspected: We’re reading far more words than we used to as we adopt new technologies. “Reading, which was in decline due to the growth of television, tripled from 1980 to 2008, because it is the overwhelmingly preferred way to receive words on the Internet,” found a University of California at San Diego study.
Take a look at Facebook. It clearly shows we’re writing more than we used to. Take a look at the blogosphere … the young generation has more opportunities to write and read than ever before. And write and read in response to other writing and things they see.
<note: we adults also have the opportunity to interact with their reading & writing if we choose to>
That’s it.
After listening to a bunch of old farts babbling away about the good ole days (and taking a look in the mirror to be sure while I may look like then I wasn’t sounding like them) I thought would write this.
as one social scientist stated in a Guardian article: “Step back. The telephone, the car, the television – they all, in their time, changed the way teens relate to each other, and to other people, quite radically. And how did their parents respond? With the same kind of wailing and gnashing of teeth we’re doing now. These technologies change lives, absolutely. But it’s a generational thing.”
In my words? There is nothing anti social about what is happening in the social media world.
when down is up
Feb 13th
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
Ok.
Some times I believe economists and marketing people take the same voodoo math classes (assuming they actually take math). What do mean? Somehow through voodoo math they can both show everyone that down is up. No shit. Really. Down isn’t down … it is really up (if only my bank balance could implement that math). ![]()
Examples.
Unemployment is down this month (but its still up versus a year ago).
Sales are down (but it’s up versus the rest of the category).
WTF.
So let me stick with business.
Let’s be clear.
When is down, well, up?
(Answer to that question)
NEVER.
Down is down.
Down is bad.
Down is never the objective.
If i hear one more time “… well Mr. Giraffeney, it’s a tough economy right now. The category is trending downward at 11%, but we are only down 5%. So we are doing well in a tough category. In fact … <insert pregnant pause here> … we are actually up when you look it that way.”
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm …
(Mr. Giraffeney after a minute or so) “So our sales are down … but not really down? I love it!”
What a load of bullshit.
To me negative is down.
And bad (because it isn’t up).
To be fair it is easy to talk your way into the down but not really down rabbit hole of economic unreality (in fact … I say hanging my head sheepishly … I have done it myself years ago).
It is extremely easy to justify ‘down but not down’ by saying if people aren’t spending, it must be ok that they are not spending with us. And that if times are tight than that must be the reason they don’t value our brand as much (or any brand).
Anyway.
It may be easy to fall into this double speak but it is bullshit.
Here is something to chew on.
Business is out there. People are buying stuff. and there are plenty of people buying stuff.
Yeah. Even today.
Plenty of companies are gaining market share and there are a boatload of profitable companies (flush with cash by the way). And there are a lot of companies with increased sales.
We have an extremely robustly sized eceonomy out there my friends.
I say all this because it can be easy to justify doing what you are doing a variety of ways … and saying down isn’t really down is a way a lot of people do so.
Stop. Just stop.
Up is attainable.
You may just have to be a little smarter to get it.
“Smarter” almost always resides in appealing to consumer needs without losing sight of the fact you have to make money … profit. You cannot (and should not) discount your way to success. That path is a very slippery slope not only from consumer attitudes perspective (defining how they value you) but it is also puts a massive strain on profitability (which impacts the organization like a bad ripple effect).
You have to be smart and insightful with how you talk with people you want to buy your stuff. Maybe you need to seek a new role, or a differently defined role, that is more vital and easier for consumers to rationalize. And, god forbid, tell the truth & have something worth paying for.
Here is a fact.
People will spend against need – real or perceived.
They also search for value, but that doesn’t mean people will not spend premiums for quality. Or spend more money for a perceived need (which is actually a “want” instead if I was going to be technical with myself).
Look at SUVs, Starbucks, Apple and Whole Foods markets.
All doing quite well thank you very much.
This is simply finding growth under pressure.
Persistent sales stagnation is most likely a reflection of how people perceive needing what you have to offer more likely than it is “the economy.”
(sorry to burst anyone’s excuse bubble with that).
Businesses need to face the fact that the economy’s growth is going to be minimal at best …with the risk of another sharp downturn very real … and quit whining and go out and find a way to grow.
Businesses must not stop their quest for growth even in ‘bad times’ nor should they stop their quest under the guise that ‘well we were down .. but not really.’
Here is one thing I can promise you about growth companies.
In every case, there are a group of people (and I mean both business side people and advertising/marketing agency people) behind that company & brand that see things not just as they are, but as they could be.
And then they go out and get it.
No excuses.
So.
I guess I wrote this to warn people about people who stand up and say “we had a good year … we are not down as much as everyone else or the category.”
Down is never up.
And, by the way, up is attainable.
Even today.
here an insight, there an insight, where an insight?
Feb 9th
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
So.
Every once in awhile in the ad/marketing business we talk about “what’s the insight that will help us create the big idea?”
Ok.
Not every once in awhile.
Actually ad nausea.
So often your head hurts.
In fact it may be the reason why people in the industry drink as often as they do.
Wow. I wonder if that is an insight.
Anyway.
Here is an insight to the aggravating people always asking for “an” insight.
There are product insights.
Company insights.
Consumer (or user) insights.
There are category insights for gods sake.
Insights are all around us (I wanted to use a gnat analogy but that could be construed as sarcastic).
Here an insight, there an insight, everywhere an insight (I believe that is a nursery rhyme insight reference).
In the end … a really good insight in marketing/brand management/product development/whatever development … marries the product and consumer needs.
Here is an insight.
Consumers don’t care about products or brands. All they care about is outcomes and results. Let’s , for simplistic sake, suggest that is “need.”
Some marketing insight guru described a consumer insight as “penetration into the target’s collective subconscious to unearth a link between untapped attitudes and behaviors to discover a deep-seated truth that reveals important needs/values the brand can exploit to connect with the target to impact attitudes and behaviors.”
That insight definition made my head hurt.
Especially the “exploiting” part.
But.
I do like the ‘deep seated truth‘ part.
Regardless. Suffice it to say the guru meant “an insight into need.”
<oops. Too simple>
Anyway.
There is no one insight.
And rarely is an insight more than just a window of opportunity (only to be replaced by another “insight” at another time).
The only thing that stays the same? That truth part.
Because the frickin’ truth is that if you want to change something in a consumer mindset (attitude) leading to purchase/usage (behavior) which benefits the brand (sales) … focus on some outcome/result.
Yeah … yeah … yeah … that ‘outcome’ may be a Maslow type outcome (self-worth, appearance, esteem, actualization, etc.) but that is outcome for god’s sake … not some mumbo jumbo on a voodoo thing I want to penetrate and exploit.
It is something real to a person. And if it is real … it is a truth. And if it is a truth it cannot be exploited … it can only be something that can be ‘met.’
And, by the way, if you happen to wrangle up an insightful truth (and make it through the mumbo jumbo marketing maze internally and externally) it really can impact what you do:
- Product design: how it looks and what it says on shelf or wherever you sell it. Why? Well. Now we can talk about exploiting. Because if you DID make it through the maze I can guarantee you are the exception to the rule … most of your competitors didn’t … therefore you can exploit their failure to do so (marketing gurus call this “weakness”).
- Marketing communication: this is obvious … but easier than you think (assuming you have made it to a ‘deep seated truth’) … why is it so much easier? Well.
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm <I am thinking not humming>… because you have an opportunity to … well … speak the truth. Ok. It’s harder than you think despite that fact. Because even if you make it to this point (having identified the truth) a shitload of people will panic … they will want to dress the truth up in Lady Gaga like clothing trying to make the truth look ‘sexy’ (or more appealing). Why? Because sometimes people think the truth is too bland and needs to be spiced up. Marketing gurus make you think this way because they want to call his truth thing something like “an untapped compelling belief”. Yeah. Right. Marketing bullshit. Run away. As fast as you can.
So. This is easy if you are around people who accept that it is easy.
Ok. Next.
A lot of good insights are wasted. Not just because the window of opportunity closes while you dither around with whether the insight is really an insight or whether it is sexy enough … but because even with a good, or even mediocre, insight it gets wasted because then no one wants to identify who the insight should be communicated to.
Huh?
Yup.
It can be a real head scratcher but let’s say you find a nifty insight against a specific group … and then all of a sudden some genius stands up and says “tell everyone that … maybe they just didn’t know ‘x’ and we need to tell them … because … well … your presentation was great … and we should tell everyone the truth.”
In marketing layman’s terms this is some spineless jellyfish who doesn’t want to agree on a targeting choice but rather go to some broad audience (this is the infamous shotgun versus rifle battle).
Suffice it to say if most CMOs/Marketing/Agency decision makers were generals their armies would be carrying around shotguns and not rifles.
I think the Cosa Nostra called them “luparas” (lupara is an Italian word used to refer to a sawn-off shotgun traditionally associated with Cosa Nostra. The shortened barrel of a lupara lend itself to easier concealment and the lack of choke contributes to a wider spread of shot when the weapon is fired).
Well.
This is sounding more and more like the Valentine’s Day Massacre so maybe it is appropriate.
And it all starts so innocently.
“We need an insight.”
And it sounds simple … align purchaser need, an insight, and customer benefit and you can typically have a great opportunity to identify a good marketing idea.
Maybe it is simple because, once again, success revolves around the truth.
And maybe it is so frickin’ hard because, well, once again, it revolves around the truth.
In the end?
I end up discussing the mafia and shooting myself with a Lupara.
friends, feedback, influencing & a new economy
Feb 7th
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
My thoughts on this topic were inspired by a trendwatching’s briefing called “The F-Factor.”
Their briefing (another excellent one by the way) discusses focuses how the impact of influencers’ on purchasing has increased because of the web (and the dynamics associated with the web).
By the way. Trendwatching has another excellent briefing called Crowd Clout from about 2007 or so which makes essentially the same point.
I am going to try and put my spin on their insights by talking a little about the past (the evolution of this whole influencer explosion) and the future (how it is creating a new economic model).
Let me begin by saying despite the advent of “social media & social marketing” that consumer decision-making has always been personal and social.
The truth is that consumer decision-making has always been about seeking feedback, leaning on what friends say and seeking ‘influencers’ thoughts … all of which influence the ultimate purpose.
This was true even before the media (or people seeking to create some ‘buzz’) added the word “social” to the marketing world. Yes. Even the marketing dinosaurs knew decision making ultimately had a significant social aspect.
What do I mean?
People talked amongst themselves.
People talked to their neighbors about home services.
People talked to relatives or friends about more personal decisions.
People reached out to trusted advisers (doctors for medical, veterinarians for pet stuff, dermatologists for skin stuff … well … you get the picture).
People talked and discussed.
In fact The Economist just did a great article on how Martin Luther built the entire Protestant faith off of ‘buzz.’
(boy … that is social media working at levels they could typically only dream of these days)
The difficulty we face in the current “what is buzzworthy” world we live in today is that it wasn’t called social back then therefore we seem to struggle in finding ‘successful past case studies’ (or at least ones that someone will pay attention to). In the “old” days … people simply sought out ‘experts’ (I use the term loosely … let’s assume the definition here is “someone who probably knows more than I do and can inform my decision making process”) to make a better decision.
Before social media you could always count on the following two factoids with regard to who influenced a purchase the most.
“Who do you speak with about making a purchase?”
1. Family. 1a. Friends. (you could flipflop or call it a tie pretty much all the time)
But something HAS changed.
The internet has changed our worldview on friends (and influencers).
“Our definition of friends has changed because of Facebook, and Twitter, where quantity as opposed to quality is now almost a mantra”.
Rick Murray, President, Digital Edelman Digitas
Well.
I don’t know that I totally agree with Rick from Digitas.
Oddly while social networks do increase quantity research has shown three key things (to indicate that quality is tagging along with the quantity characteristic):
1. A Pew Internet research study shows that internet has actually strengthened and expanded existing social roles of churches and fraternal organizations. Therefore the quantity has simply strengthened existing quality.
2. the same research showed that more frequent communications via text actually ENCOURAGES the desire to spend more face-to face time
3. the research also shows that texting requires more careful crafting than a telephone or face-to-face communications and 3 out of 10 teens say “that they are more honest with friends when they talk online” therefore quality is the underlying foundation among all this “random quantity” discussion.
Next.
And while we often talk about how internet is influencing people we need to be careful with the ‘influencing’ word.
Research shows that the web can assist in education but ultimately the final influencer remains one and the same as the past.
The most tangible example I have at my fingertips of this notion is the most recent 2011 NPD Group Aftermarket Consumer Outlook Study:
Q: “Where would you go to learn how to do repairs on your vehicle?”
- Friend/Family 57%
- Vehicle Repair Manual 46%
- Mechanic 42%
- Internet 42%
- Store Personnel 16% (yikes)
Basically a Mechanic is AS influential as the Internet in this decision.
One word thought here. Wow.
So.
The main point here is that a consumer now has access and is aware of more people (true friends as well as web based friends) and can have more frequent communication due to the digital revolution. Yet. Social media is simply the fact that the traditional benefits of an acquaintance network (personal or professional) and friendships can be more expansively realized than before.
The other truth is that products today are at the mercy of crowds of friends. Crowds providing unsolicited feedback and influencing hordes of consumers making decisions on a daily basis.
Yes.
This is the “F-Factor:”
It is the expanding scenario of consumers increasingly tapping into their networks of friends, fans, and followers to discover, discuss and purchase goods and services, in ever-more sophisticated ways. (source: trendwatching.com)
The F-Factor is a real part of people’s lives because it provides real value. Value in that it offers a purchase decision making opportunity that is more efficient, more relevant, and more interesting and provides more “depth/breadth” than before. In the past consumers either had to spend endless time and effort on trying to discover the best of the best, or had to rely on sources that were distant, unknown or untrusted, and therefore potentially unreliable or irrelevant.
Now the six degrees of separation (at least in the influencer world) has shrunk significantly to a “no degree of separation” influencer world (this entire phenomena is inherently changing the trust value equation).
So.
Trendwatching does a nice job of identifying five ways that the F-FACTOR can influence consumer-buying behavior:
1. F-DISCOVERY: How consumers discover new products and services by relying on their social networks (Friends).
2. F-RATED: How consumers will increasingly (and automatically) receive targeted ratings, recommendations and reviews from their social networks. (by the way … this is creating an entirely new industry of something called ‘curated consumption’ where non-experts become distributors of expert like information).
3. F-FEEDBACK: How consumers can ask their friends and followers to improve and validate their buying decisions.
4. F-TOGETHER: How shopping is becoming increasingly social, even when consumers and their peers are not physically together. (in other words, the web permits consumers to share real time information and feedback and opportunities … and this is like a pebble in a pond syndrome where relevance & interest creates ripples difficult to quantify when it works).
5. F-ME: How consumers’ social networks are literally turned into products and services (curated consumption at its best).
This is one of those situations where the internet has unequivocally changed the dimensions of existing attitudes & behaviors. Simplistically the web has put the old F-Factor on steroids. I say it that way to point out that the web has not created anything new (attitude wise) but rather has encouraged a desired behavior to new boundaries.
The internet has also expanded an interesting existing consumer aspect to this entire “influencer” situation.
It is expanding the entire trend of putting consumers to work (whether they recognize it or not).
Think about his for a second.
This trend existed before the web. The easiest early example of this was in the fast food industry. For example the consumer of the fast food restaurant is also to some degree an actual producer of the meal.
- Among other things, diners are expected to serve as their own waiters carrying their meals to their tables or back to their cars, sandwich makers (by adding fixings like tomatoes, lettuce, and onions in some chains), salad makers (by creating their own salads at the salad bar), and bus persons (by disposing of their own debris after the meal is finished).
This trend has existed for some time.
Putting consumers to work gained momentum with companies/brands after the birth of the fast food restaurant and has expanded to other industries:
- Being a gas attendant by pumping your own gas
- Serving as a bank teller at the ATM machine
- Working as the checkout cashier at the supermarket by scanning one’s own food, bagging it, and paying for it by credit card
- Being a ticketing agent by using electronic kiosks to check in at the airport
- Serving as an entertainment guide by co-creating a variety of experiences such as moving oneself through Disney World and its attractions
- Performing traditional medical professional services by using do-it-yourself medical technologies (e.g., blood pressure monitors, blood glucose monitors, pregnancy tests) that allow patients to perform their own medical tasks
- Being a caller on a call-in radio show
- Being part of a Reality TV show
And now the web has enabled brands (or is it consumer empowerment like everyone suggests) to put consumers to work in a wide range of sometimes subtle and less material ways (this is where the F Factor truly comes into play).
Once again.
Think about that.
Much of what happens (and is created) online is generated by the user. Today’s web experience is often being defined by users producing content (individually as well as collaboratively). It wasn’t that way in the beginning when most of what existed on the original web was provider-generated but lately there has been an explosion of “consumers doing the work.”
Some examples of how the internet is putting consumers to work:
- Wikipedia – where users generate articles and continually edit, update, and comment on them
- Facebook, MySpace, and other social networking websites – where users create profiles composed of videos, photos, and text, interact with one another, and build communities
- Second Life – where users create the characters, communities, and the entire virtual environment
- Blogs – where the commentary is produced by the consumer
- eBay – where users are their own selling agent & shipper
- YouTube and Flickr – where mostly amateurs upload and download videos and photographs
- Craigslist – where consumers (mostly) create the market
- Amazon – where consumers do all the work involved in ordering products and write the reviews. (in addition users’ buying habits and site navigation are documented to recommend products)
- Yelp! – where users create an online city guide by ranking, reviewing and discussing various locations and activities in their area
- The GeoWeb, which consists of online maps where, increasingly, users are creating and augmenting content with Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo tools. In fact. Google Maps users can fix errors; add the locations of businesses; upload photos; link Wikipedia articles to, and blog about their experiences with, or reviews of, places on the map.
And that’s not all.
Start thinking about the new “location awareness” tools, often used in conjunction with ‘smart’ cell phones with GPS technology, which allow users to track where they are at any given moment and upload this information to websites such as Facebook, Twitter or one’s blog (Google Latitude, Yahoo’s Fire Eagle and Loopt mobile phone application).
Sure.
This type of consumer involvement in consumption was certainly not invented by the internet, but given the massive involvement in popular online sites, it can be argued that it is currently both the most prevalent location of this new type of consumption (consumer) purchase model … and it is certainly the most important facilitator as a means of consumption.
Bottom line.
It can be argued that the web is influencing an entirely new consumption model.
A new economic model (as I so succinctly suggested upfront).
This leads me to my big finish.
Friends, feedback and influencers is bigger than simply the web or how brands can compete in this transparent world (where putting consumers to work doesn’t mean they are an employee).
The F Factor is impacting America & capitalism (forget about the whole brand and branding discussion … this is much bigger than that).
Capitalism itself will be transformed, perhaps radically, in this F-Factor world we live in. Several thoughts lead me to this conclusion.
First. The inability of companies (brands) to control consumers in the way, and to the extent, that they have been able to control consumers in the past. Due to increased transparency there is a greater resistance to the incursions of obvious capitalism (e.g. efforts to gain greater control and greater profits).
This does not bode well for the companies dabbling in Facebook & twitter & social marketing who are doing so with the intent to “influence or guide purchase behavior.”
Second. It is difficult to think of today’s consumer, mentally & attitudinally, as being exploited in the same ways as before. The whole idea of exploitation is contradicted by, among other things, the fact that today’s consumers seem to enjoy, even love, their involvement and what they are doing and are willing to devote long hours to it … for no pay.
Third. The emergence of a whole new economic model to conduct business because of the internet. Traditional capitalism is dependent on the notion of the exchange of money for goods and services and profits are made in those exchanges. However, little or no money changes hands between the users and the owners of many websites (for instance, users do not pay Facebook or Twitter to use the services).
For one thing there is the unwillingness of corporations and other organizations to pay for work done by these new web based influencers. This is compounded by the fact the new consumer increasingly prefer, and are able, to pay little or nothing for that which they consume on the internet (news, blogs, social networking sites, and so on).
Think about this as part of a new economic model.
Friends … family … influencers … or extended employees?
Yikes.
That will raise some hackles.
Yeah. Think about it.
What I have outlined is contrary to what Humphreys & Grayson (2009) argued that when corporations are involved this type of consumerism is simply the creation of “temporary employees” and thus does not indicate a fundamental change in capitalism.
However I contend that entire business models based around these new consumer types (the so called “temporary employees”) who are unpaid and given the product for free indicates the possibility of a new form of capitalism.
Now.
If you are a business and you are reading this, think about the implications.
All these “friends” providing feedback (unasked for or asked for) and influencing gazillions of attitudes (which generate some type of behavior) are your employees (paid or not).
They are your associates.
They are an extension of all those people who come in every morning, drink your own bad coffee and use the internet inappropriately during business hours in your office.
When you look at them that way would you choose to treat them differently?
Do things differently?
Think about your “social media” plans differently?
Even sit down with strategic planning and think about your business model differently?
I will help out here.
The answer to all of those questions should be “yes.”
The web is a powerful powerful facilitator of influence & business.
You may elect to call it “friends & feedback quantity” architecture but I suggest if you want to be successful you think about it as a “quality” mechanism which can impact a new economic model.
Intimidating? Possibly.
But if you don’t think of it that way you will probably influence no one and end up on the slippery slope of irrelevance (with no friends).
never interrupt the enemy
Jan 31st
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
“Never interrupt the enemy when he is making a mistake.” - Napoleon Bonaparte
This is a follow up to yesterday’s “when you start to suck, stop.”
Well. Because that one was focused on your suckedness and this is focused on someone else’s suckedness.
Simplistically. If your enemy is starting to suck … don’t interrupt.
Once again, similar to knowing when to stop being difficult, it is difficult to stop from … well … stopping someone, even an enemy, when they are sucking.
Most people see it as an opportunity to shine and cannot wait to show that they don’t suck.
So … this is about patience … oh … and, actually, lack of ego.
Let me go to the ego thing first.
We all like to look & sound smart (or skilled at something). “Opportunity to shine” is how I put it earlier. As soon as someone starts sucking we inherently see the opportunity to show we don’t suck. And we want to rush in as quickly as possible to make the ‘I don’t suck’ statement (or make the point that would confirm to everyone around us that we don’t).
It’s difficult but …. wait. Yep. Wait. Rest your ego for a second (or a minute or whatever).
Your ego will have its opportunity.
Why wait (i.e., “won’t I miss my opportunity”)?
Well. Oftentimes timing is key because if you don’t rush, and pick the time correctly you get an added plus (beyond the non-suckedness) … people will also judge your character.
Oh. And earn some respect.
Trust me. Everyone else in the room knows the other person is sucking. They also know you are not pointing it out (or making the other person look foolish).
Look. Invariably your actions and words are compared to ‘your enemy.’ And it becomes a reflection of who you are as a person from a character perspective. And people recognize that. And they store it away for the future (because everyone knows they will suck at some point and they would prefer to be working/being with someone who is not going to leap at the opportunity to point it out).
So. That is the ego part.
Next. Patience?
Often we are in a rush to “do something” where patience is called for. Setting character to the side … I would like to remind people that mistakes are often like quicksand (corollary to sucking). Not always but sometimes.
Regardless. Patience simply means let your enemy make as many and as much of a mistake as he/she is willing to make. Don’t interrupt the possible depth & breadth of the mistake.
Patience permits you to assess the best opportunity … do you just sit back and let your enemy drown in the quicksand (always a viable option) or at some point when the depth & breadth has been maximized (short of going under) you reach out and pull everyone out of the suckedness zone.
You win either way.
And you don’t have the win opportunity if you aren’t patient.
Napoleon was absolutely a master at permitting his enemy to suck for as long as it took to maximize his opportunity.
Never interrupt your enemy when he/she is making a mistake.
Much much harder to do then you think.
Much much easier to do the more practice you have.
knowing when to stop
Jan 30th
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
“when you start to suck, stop” – Kristen Hersh
So.
This is so explanatory it needs no explanation.
However.
What I would suggest to everyone is that, in general, people don’t stop when they start to suck.
And they don’t for one of two reasons:
- They are oblivious to their sucking.
- They recognize their suckedness and begin to do whatever it takes to rise above sucking (only to find out that sucking is like quicksand)
Let’s go to # 1 first. Oblivious to sucking.
Unfortunately life doesn’t have stop signs (or any signs for that matter) with regard to sucking. Nor is there a manual you can read. You can pretty much only hope for one of 2 things … either over time you start to recognize your own signs of suckedness or you happen to have a really good friend/co-worker who has a special sign they give you to tell you that you suck (or are starting to suck).
Knowing when you start to suck is difficult. Really difficult.
I think it is easier to recognize when you aren’t sucking. So what I typically tell people is that when you know you are going good … and on a roll … as quickly as you can find a “period” point. I mean a stopping point (usually characterized by the fact you need to stop talking to actually breathe) … and … well … you stop.
Now.
That may be as difficult as stopping when you suck (maybe harder because it is natural to want the goodness (non-suckedness) to go for as long as possible. But. Stop on a high note. Trust me. If someone really likes it they will ask for more. If they don’t … well … you did great. You didn’t suck.
The corollary factoid?
Well. If you enter into the suck zone and you stop … well … I can guarantee they won’t ask for more.
It all sounds confusing doesn’t it?
It is.
Especially now as we move to #2.
This is where you actually realize you suck … and then begin paddling as hard as you can to get out of the suck zone.
Oops.
Sucking is like quicksand. The harder you work to stop sucking the further you get sucked down into suckedness.
But, once again, it is natural to try and want to end on a high note so you work to get there. This is human nature to try and get yourself out of trouble once you recognize you are in trouble (insert suck for trouble at any point)
And you shouldn’t.
Stop.
A little suckedness will be recognized as just that … a little. And most people will overlook the little for whatever made up ‘the most.’ But. A lot of suckedness? It’s … well … a lot. And difficult to overlook or ignore.
Anyway.
Kristen is a musician … but she said something relevant to anyone at any time.
It’s her quote but I would change a couple of things to create some advice.
“When you think (even an inkling) you are starting to suck, stop.”
The corollary?
“When you think it is going good, stop.”
But.
I guess truly the best thought in the end is just where I started … “when you start to suck, stop.”
confessions of an ad man
Jan 29th
Posted by Bruce in Business Thoughts
Well.
Maybe its because I get to talk with a lot of teen/20somethings or maybe its because all my friends are cynical bastards … but I seem to defend the advertising business a lot.
And maybe because of that I thought I should take a moment and share some truths.![]()
Because the business (for the majority) is not made up of liars, hucksters, clowns, alcoholics and smarmy assholes.
And mostly we try and tell the truth to businesses and consumers. I say mostly because I admit that there are some moments inside an agency where one of the minority (from the above aforementioned majority) find a voice (most typically with regard to new business) and says things that send a shiver up my ethical spine.
Regardless.
Some truth (I imagine this is just an abbreviated list of truths of which we could add many many more if I were to think about it more).
Advertising is not always about just selling stuff.
Advertising isn’t just a catalyst for buying (or convincing someone to buy) … it is a catalyst for how people see things, think about things and, sometimes, actually do things. I heard Spike Lee once say .. “I feel a responsibility for everything I create <because millions will see it>.” Advertising may be the most powerful thing out there to affect people. We know we are in a business but we also know we impact people significantly more than the sales numbers ever reflect. We in the business never forget this (albeit it may look like we have on occasion). Ok. Let’s just say that the people in advertising who really ‘get it’ never forget this.
That said …
Yes. Creativity is about results & awards (or recognition).
We understand what we do makes an impact … and should be measured by some type of results. On the other hand … because it is creativity we like some creative validation that you didn’t just have to throw mud against the wall to make something stick. The truth is that advertising people thrive on both. And we have to because sometimes bad advertising can generate results. And people get fooled by just looking at sales results (and not examining the results in terms of what people actually think … because that impacts future behavior). Good advertising can generate better results (and better long term impressions). And awards help better delineate between the crappy advertising that shows results and good advertising that shows results.
We like results & recognition. And we like people talking about it … speaking of which …
Social media is actually not that social.
We care about social media. Probably more than most business owners actually do. Many businesses create an illusion of ‘social’ but in reality maintain a relatively non-social business model (as defined in traditional social terms). So. The truth? The term social media has taken on galactic size proportions standing for everything … and nothing. Here is the truth. Most social media vehicles are simply information disseminators. They aren’t social. They permit people and businesses to narcissistically spew forth ad nausea about themselves. What makes the web different is that there is an OPPORTUNITY to respond. If you take part in responding … well … it still isn’t social … it has simply become a dialogue (sort of). It only becomes social when there is some interaction like talking with someone at a party. Trust me on this one … in most cases it remains at stage one (the spewing part). For the most part the current social world is a monologue.
Oh. Just like TV.
Now. This doesn’t diminish the importance of social media and the future … it’s just that the good agencies keep perspective and actually recommend what is going to be the best for a clients’ business.
Ok. Back to TV.
Television is not dead.
One TV ad on American Idol can reach more teens then a PitBull tweet. And make a bigger impression (because you have those funny moving picture thingies).
Anyway. As long as tv executives keep their heads out of their asses often enough to actually produce programs people will watch … there will be TV ads. And as long as there is TV advertising there will be a maddening mix of insightfully educating entertaining executions and pedantic pedestrian drivel waste of :30 seconds.
Why is that? ….
We don’t know what works (for sure).
Sure. There are some basic principles that can insure your advertising will be in the “good” portion of the gene pool but, in the end, setting research aside … people are fickle and clients (in general) find it difficult to make the hard choices (because they prefer to ‘please’ rather than ‘prod’ the mind) needed so that the advertising actually has enough sharp edges on it to stand out. I will say this … give a good advertising agency (not a hack agency) one year to do whatever they believed was the best thing to do and I would bet over 80%+ of everything they did would be good (people like it) and effective (creates results).
Anyway. We are probably like songwriters. We write songs and we know some are better than others when we write them. We also kind of recognize when we write a hit – on the off chance when we write something like that – but you can never be sure until it is actually out there for all to hear & see.
And we do care what people think …
We do care about clients (most of them).
There is nothing better than knowing you have created something people like and generates results in partnership with a client you respect.
Nothing.
The only advertising people who have no/little respect for their clients or nothing good/nice to say about their clients (most typical comment is “they just aren’t that smart”) aren’t good advertising people. And you don’t want to work with them anyway.
And we do care about the people who buy the stuff too, but …
The consumer is not the king/queen.
Sorry to burst everyone’s bubble but if they were (kings & queens) they could demand anything they wanted and businesses would go out of business chasing their fleeting whims.
Here is the truth. A sale is a partnership between the seller & the buyer. At its best it is a marriagelike relationship. In either case … things are balanced … with one not significantly more important than the other. And why is this important? Well. With balance there is trust. And that is the basis for any long term brand or business proposition. Treat them like a king/queen? Yikes. At some point they will believe they are one and … well … treat the company like a serf (that is bad by the way).
Speaking of how people are treated …
Creative people always have a thread of insecurity (or fear).
If people want to wonder why creative people (or agency people in general) do wacky things … well … try this on for size. Remember what it felt like the first time you were in love and decided to say it out loud? You were scared shitless it wouldn’t be reciprocated. Or, worse, someone would just laugh. Well. That’s life in advertising on a daily basis. Creative ideas and ads and thoughts are emotionally, typically insightful, parts of our soul we elected to have the kahones to share with the public. In the end no client is the enemy, the consumer isn’t the enemy … fear is the enemy. Understand that and you understand the people in the business.
Ok.
I am sure I missed some other truths, but those are probably the biggies.
Good advertising people don’t lie. Either by omission or in actual ‘untruths.’ And they actually have the clients’ business interest in mind with almost everything they do … because when a client is successful, even if an agency may not get credit, they almost never get fired.
That’s the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth (at least for today).








