(a male view of the Valentine’s situation having also accumulated a zillion research data points over multiple beer events discussing everything but Valentine’s Day)
All this talk about Valentine’s Day being created by Hallmark, the myth behind St. Valentine … a massacre for god’s sake.
Confusing.
Well … maybe confusing to some but I have put some strategic thought to this whole concept.
Because the thought behind it is really very simple.
Basically we men are idiots <that is the theorem underpinning>.
Therefore Valentine’s Day plays an important role in a “stimulus-response” type model for men.
The day is a valuable stimulus to stop us from thinking solely with our dumb stick and with some random portion of our brain that isn’t being used for sports, work, alcohol, oogling <not ogling … there is a difference>, mindless daydreaming or sleeping.
Below you will see a diagram that outlines how we think without Valentine’s day and then with Valentine’s day.
(click on the image for a larger, somewhat more legible version)
As you see.
Valentine’s Day is not something created by Hallmark.
Nor is it stupid.
It is an important event with a use benefiting men <kind of like the Super Bowl and March Madness but not as important>.
Strategically Valentine’s Day makes sense to the existence of men <and possibly romance but in a non linear way>.
The strategic foundation is so simple and clearly good it is a worthwhile read for anyone in business. Whether you actually use the disruption methodology or not the idea of positioning in a way to create disruption (and therefore being distinct) is a powerful concept.
Drawing from experiences as the founder and chair of a global advertising agency, Dru gives us this practical, refreshing approach to thinking about advertising, positioning a business in the marketplace and … well … thinking in general.
His compelling concept of “disruption” is a three-step reasoning process for creating a set of new visions for successful growth.
Dru first explores how firms can get in a rut with their advertising strategies.
He then offers hundreds of examples of advertising in Europe, the United States, and Japan to explore cultural differences and government rules and regulations about advertising. Dru’s last section provides more detail and looks toward the future.
Rich with examples, this timely book is recommended for advertising-agency and marketing professionals as well as for corporate executives, consultants, and advanced students and academicians.
I have written on a variety of issues with regard to running a business and effective organizations (Running a Business Part 1 and Part 2, Collaboration & Consensus Part 1 & Part 2).
But I came across this video which discusses “the surprising science of motivation.”
It is a long video (18+ minutes) and Daniel Pink, the presenter, is a little practiced on occasion in his delivery but the information is nice. There were two things in the video which I appreciated.
One I had felt but had never been able to confirm.
The other I already knew but hadn’t written about yet.
1. Motivation Incentives.
Maybe it’s because I have worked with several advertising agency owners who wanted to run their agencies like manufacturing plants, but this issue has been near and dear to my heart for quite awhile. The video talks about “carrot and stick” motivational techniques and crap like that.
He uses some nice simple illustrations and some fact based conclusions for why the typical ways we try to motivate each other fail in business today.
A Daniel Pink Quote:
“There’s a mismatch between what science knows and business does.”
Possibly because most of the organizations I have either consulted for or worked at have been more “idea driven” versus “product output” organizations I have always believed (maybe more a feeling) that financial based reward models sucked. Daniel finally gave me some facts (from studies):
“Once the task called for even rudimentary cognitive skills a larger reward led to poorer performance.”
“As long as task involved only mechanical skills, bonuses worked, i.e., higher pay = better performance.”
Halleluiah.
That isn’t to say people in a cognitive driven business shouldn’t be fairly compensated; it simply states that rewarding financially to increase productivity is not the most effective path.
So if it isn’t financial rewards, what does help productivity?
2. Constructed Autonomy.
This is all about self direction within a solid construct of vision and company ‘direction.’ This is something I have believed to be an effective characteristic of effective organizations for some time. It is most likely embodied within larger franchise organizations (in some form or fashion) but it is easier to see it in those organizations because they are obviously fragmented and local autonomy works within some “rules” construct.
So.
The video.
In addition to talking about motivating employee behavior he also talks about creating an environment for productivity. I wrote about this in Organizational Alignment.
But.
He reminded me when he discusses the idea of autonomy about what I call “constructed autonomy” environments (yup. I do love contradictions).
I used the whole Constructed Autonomy idea in a consulting presentation in early spring (with a source reference) as I discussed organizational alignment and creating the most effective organization.
I apologize but for the life of me I cannot dig up the source for that autonomy business idea but I believe there was a big European based study on organizational behavior that talks about it (if I can find that presentation on some thumb drive I will source it).
My “twist” on the Autonomy thing was to tie it to a tightly constructed organizational vision. To me it’s all about giving employees within the organization lots of freedom within a well defined construct (not a box but rather a guiding star they can always locate).
Ok.
Maybe not lots of freedom but enough freedom on some key things (whatever they may be that is relevant to that particular organization).
Ok.
So here’s the deal with Autonomy.
Every time I have used the word “autonomy” to an organizational owner, President, Sr. VP, whatever…their faces pale, hands grip the table a little harder, they may even gasp a little and their voices quiver slightly with fear.
Autonomy means lack of control.
Autonomy means I need to trust my employees.
Autonomy means “so then what do I do”? (sorry, had to throw that last one in).
But autonomy on the ground:
permits a slight level of localization (if that is relevant to an organization)
certainly creates a higher level of responsiveness (good for customer satisfaction)
actually is a good idea/innovation generator (as long as you have a feedback mechanism)
automatically creates a higher level of energy within an organization
builds a happier organization because it creates a stronger sense of ownership & responsibility
It takes a strong leader with a clearly articulated vision to make autonomy work within an organization (if you don’t, then autonomy simply fragments an organization by permitting pieces to go flying off in every direction aimlessly).
So.
That’s the “Constructed” portion of it. In my Running a Business Part 2 I described this as one end of the bookends. A clearly articulated vision, mission, okay … what ‘the organization is going to be good at’. And ruthlessly good at.
If that is provided as the “North Star,” then Autonomy always knows what direction to steer toward. And because of that North Star, autonomous groups can wander slightly but have an opportunity to course correct (
which, by the way, is also a good evaluation mechanism for employees).
There you go.
A nice video sparking some clarification on my part.
I have always believed the moment you own a contradiction is the moment you capture an emotional and intellectual awareness.
I encountered one on Tuesday.
Letting go and holding on.
That was the day my 15 year old dog died. That morning I was ready to let go and wanted to hold on.
Walking into the vet with my dog’s head resting on my shoulder I had already said goodbye alone at home. I was ready to let go.
And yet.
When I laid him down on his towel at the vet I asked for a couple minutes more.
I wanted to hold on. What I chose to do was scratch him behind his ear and say goodbye. I know he couldn’t feel it. It was more for me then it was for him. But. It was my last time to hold on to him before I let go.
I talk with them about what it takes to be successful in a career (and life).
My favorite topic to discuss is “character.”
I describe it as a fork in the road. Okay. A shitload of forks in the road.
A moment, or moments, where you have a choice which helps define who you will be moving forward in life.
I ceratainly never mean to suggest I know “the right path” … all I mean I that we all have choices to do “the right thing” or “the wrong thing” and those types of decisions go a long way to defining “once and for all who you are.”
The other thing I happen to mention which I oddly enough learned in the advertising world … each moment matters.
If you find an excuse to not do what is best one moment … well … the next moment is even easier to not do the right thing -… and then the next thing you know you are on the slippery slope and you cannot get off.
Anyway.
This is a Life truth. And don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
I try to donate a couple days of my time every year to the high school I graduated from as well as accept as many other opportunities to teach kids as I am able to fit into my schedule. Many people ask what I teach (and I will tell you below) but frankly it doesn’t really matter that much. High school teachers are typically so overworked and time challenged, if you can absorb even some of their daily commitment, you are helping. In addition, the kids love access to some non-teacher, real world access to break up their school life.
But. Specific topics I have presented and discussed in school:
Ethics in communication
Ethics in business.
Entrepreneurship (or starting your own business)
Effective presenting – presentations
Evaluating ideas
What history can teach us about today
It’s ok if you don’t know what you want to be when you grow up
Collecting moments (or learning from people and experiences)
Listening and responding
What it takes to succeed
But I have also helped with history, social studies, business and English (although my grammar is spotty at best).
There are two reasons I do this as often as I can (you find your own reasons). One is selfish. One is less selfish.
1. Selfishly the experience hones my presentation and listening/responding skills. High school kids have incredibly short attention spans. There is no continuity or linearness to the line of questions you receive. Questions range from incredibly insightful to seemingly pedantic (but often there is a not so obvious insightful thought buried in the question to be mined and explored). They make me better. And selfishly I use them to become better.
2. Non selfishly … well … kids don’t know what they don’t know and, fortunately, most know that. And they are sponges for information at this age. Even the most cynical in the back row has something he/she wants to know. Teachers do the best they can (and they do a great job) but even they are sponges for additional information and perspective. I love teaching (but I am fairly confident I couldn’t do what our teachers do). So. If I can be a relief pitcher for a couple of innings so the starter can keep their arm fresh then I am willing to play that role. And hopefully some kid comes out of the room that day with a slightly more hopeful look at the world around them.
Lastly.
I teach as many high school classes as I can because I think kids today should be as prepared for the real world as possible. I talk with them about what it takes to be successful in a career (and life). One thing I discuss is “character.” I describe it as a fork in the road. A moment, or moments, where you have a choice which helps define who you will be moving forward in life. I don’t mean to suggest I know “the right path” all I mean I that we all have choices to do “the right thing” or “the wrong thing” and those types of decisions go a long way to defining “once and for all who you are.” The other thing I happen to mention which I oddly enough learned in the advertising world…each moment matters. If you find an excuse to not do what is best one moment the next moment is even easier to not do the right thing – and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
Go do it.
I guarantee you will be more tired at the end of the day than you have in a very very long time. But you will also feel better than you have in a very very long time.
Vendor relationships are always tricky … a vendor is hired for an expertise and yet the ‘hirer’ mentally wants a … well … vendor.
This means most Client/Agency/Service Supplier relationships are a balancing act.
The best relationships represent a combination of two experts constantly challenging each other, finding times when each is, respectfully, right or wrong, and throw in a good dose of actually liking each other. But typically before you get to the relationship part you have to consummate a deal.
It is because of this I call this “the art of the deal” (see the upcoming Client Agency Relationships Part 2: the Art of the Relationships for a relationship point of view) because, philosophically, how you strike ‘the deal’ often dictates what becomes the ultimate client/agency relationship.
In other words, often the success of that relationship is dictated by how well the initial deal was struck.
As for who is responsible for making a good deal?
Well, while I have seen Client/Agency relationships sour because of either party, I would suggest that agencies more often than not are most culpable for failures and bear the brunt of the responsibility in establishing the deal. Having sat down in dozens of meetings between an agency and a prospective client I have seen the good and the bad unfold not only as the deal is being consummated but also after the meeting as the deal unfolds. I have seen how agency people rush towards the finish line saying anything that needs to be said to get there.
And I have seen the expressions on the faces of the people back at the agency when they have seen what promises have been made to make the deal.
And, bottom line, I have seen that I don’t want to go through that disappointment when facing my own people.
It is very simple if you stick to your guns. I suggest there are six critical steps to sealing a good deal (and having a hope of a successful relationship).
Let’s call this what it takes to stand up and feel good about shaking hands on the deal as the contract is ready to get signed.
1. Alignment of Expectations:
Nothing is worse than if either side of the partnership (or dealmakers) is expecting something the other partner is not prepared to do, or even worse, cannot do.
2. Communicate:
Alignment means both parties need to communicate. This means clearly articulating expectations and capabilities to meet expectations.
Am I meeting your needs?
Am I meeting your expectations?
Both sides asking questions. Both sides talking to each other. Sometimes it is a dialogue. Sometimes it is simply asking the correct questions. But each of those options includes speaking versus silence.
3. Honesty:
Good communication requires honesty. Honesty with yourself first and foremost, i.e., can I honestly say we are doing a good job? And, of course, “I need to be honest now or it could continue to build up into big trouble.” Honest discussion on the good and the bad. It’s easy to talk about the good stuff, more difficult on the hard things. ‘Fess up honestly in all cases and you earn trust.
4. Respect:
Honesty is typically best when there is mutual respect. Respect speaks for itself. We all feel good when respected.
5. Compensation:
If you have the 1st four right (alignment, communicate, honesty, respect) then the money discussion becomes easier, not easy, but certainly easier.
It’s a value equation. Agencies need to feel like they are being fairly compensated for actions. Clients need to believe they are receiving valuable activity/action. And there needs to be an alignment on this value equation or it becomes a battle of nickels & dimes and instead of talking business you are constantly talking about money (and that is bad).
6. Chemistry:
Finally, it always helps if you like each other. It doesn’t have to be ‘best friends’ but if each party respects and likes each other than there is at least a fighting chance to make it through the tough times as well as truly enjoying/celebrating the good times. “Double the joys and halve the griefs” as it has been said.
Conclusion:
That is what makes a great deal between a Client and an Agency/Service Supplier.
I know, it sounds simple, but it is harder than it looks. The sight of the finish line makes people do and say funny things (and it can certainly create amnesia with regard to knowing the “right thing to do”).
Agencies want to make the deal (and that desire can blind you to some things).
So.
In the end?
Take a deep breath when you are getting ready to cross the finish line and ask yourself do you really want to win. Ask yourself honestly are you clear on all six criteria. And ask yourself the hard question even if it is at the last minute – did you really want to run this particular race and was it really the right race for you?
“Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.”
–
Matsuo Basho
===============
Well.
It sometimes seems like a fine line between being doomed to repeat past mistakes … and actually learning from history.
And I say that as a history nut and someone who loves anything to do with the past.
Well.
Except maybe just doing what was done in the past.
Anyway.
As I have said I am a collector of moments and I imagine this is just another facet of that warped personal characteristic. When I saw this quote I finally figured out how to explain what I saw in studying the past.
There are so many people in the business world (and government) who seem very focused on ignoring history. They almost seem to actively decide to repeat behavior … assuming, I imagine, that it will inevitably generate the desired response. I assume that is based on some warped version of “practice makes perfect” or possibly “we will just do it better than they did.”
All I can say for sure is that blind ignorance leads to stupidity.
And maybe what is worse is this is conscious choiceful ignorance.
And, harshly, it seems like it incorporates even a little lazy.
But … bottom line … it is silly stupidity because with a little curiosity you can better understand that people in the past were pretty smart.
They often sought the same things we do now.
And while the path they chose may not have gotten them there there is value in walking the path to see what they saw.
To be clear.
You do not have to do what they did … simply see what they saw.
That, in itself, is learning … well … that is … if you choose to see it.
Note: This is the first of a two-part piece that I wrote early last year for my agency and clients about marketing in a recession. Look for part 2 in the coming days.
==================
The current environment is one that cannot be ignored.
We are in a recession.
People, businesses and consumers, have less discretionary money. Businesses will be cutting back on expenses and marketing departments will have to do more with less. This means that business goals will still be there and more challenging to meet and Marketing departments will have to do it with less money. This white paper outlines some thoughts on how marketers can be a little smarter with their money to position themselves to be successful in the marketplace.
Let’s begin by talking about what is happening in the marketplace. And why maybe some of the past recession rules may not apply moving forward in 2009.
Comparing the 2008-2009 recession to past recessions
This generation hasn’t faced this scenario before. In fact, not many adults who dealt with this scenario in the 1930’s remain (to maybe guide us). Yes. I am suggesting we cannot compare recent recession learning and need to go back to the Great Depression for learning.
In a traditional recession people are worried about losing jobs as companies cut back to face the economic challenges. In the current scenario the entire financial infrastructure seems to be breaking down – globally.
Boy, that sounds like the Depression era doesn’t it? Entire companies, brands as they may be, which have been in existence through generations are crumbling. Icons of stability are not only looking less stable they are ceasing to exist.
The difference between now and recent recession periods in the consumer’s mind can be summarized – “I am worried about losing my job versus even if I do all of these things right and keep my job can I still make it.”
Don’t be surprised when people shift into a full survival mode. And not just low and middle income people but even large wealth groups.
In this kind of environment it may seem silly to talk about marketing or protecting your brand. But these topics are relevant to business success and the economy in general. The economy machine will continue to run on strong functional products and services being marketed to people. ‘Fluff’ products and services-products and services surviving more on image than performance and ‘fluff’ marketing-will not survive.
Discretionary versus non-discretionary category marketing
The marketing rules of the game are going to vary between discretionary and non-discretionary categories. People will treat marketing messages for “items I need” and “items I want” with a different scorecard.
Discretionary categories, like soda, cigarettes, candy, movies, etc., will certainly be able to get away with traditional image driven campaigns. In fact, historical evidence suggests that lower cost discretionary items will prosper in difficult economic times (according to annualized increases in consumer spending in the UK 1989-91 movie revenue grew 16%, alcohol 10%, and sports & toys 6% – source: DDB “capturing opportunities in challenging times.”).
Bottom line is that in uncertain times people will still be seeking moments of indulgence or escapism. They will just be more thoughtful and low cost indulgent moments will prosper.
It is in non-discretionary-like categories where things will get challenging. Branding campaigns, soft image driven look & feel, in non-discretionary categories will be bad. Very bad. They will be seen as the actions of uncaring, “fat” companies. (see recent example of automotive CEO’s flying first class to Washington DC meeting). Campaigns need not be pedantic but they should err on the side of being more overt in their messaging of benefits and value. Companies messaging and spending cannot be perceived as wasteful but useful, not pandering but compassionate and not imagery but rather benefit-driven.