Posts tagged "communication"

This is a version of an article submitted to Pharmaceutical Marketing this week. Having been delightfully asked by the guys at PM for a thought piece on the future of agencies. Post submission –  I find myself being all a little A-level, that feeling when you have just submitted an essay and you wait eagerly for a C+. Anyway have a look at it early;

“My approach to this article is symbolic of much of the way client service business has evolved.  Life’s got full on, busy, juggling drive and discussion. I am desperately keen not to write a piece that’s another repetition – you know the world according to X approach, beginning with a story about how  a pause for thought has been remarkable, leading to a ‘cut and paste’ about globalisation, silos and some boxes and arrows.  To deviate from this course seems quite risky and frankly I don’t want to seem an idiot in front of you.  I don’t want to be the “you’re that guy, the idiot from hive”. My task is to secure succinct biting observation that truly connects.  A couple of scene setters firstly, I have never written a thought piece for a magazine before and only have 6 hours until flight BA185 lands in New Jersey and I have to file this copy. This pressurised environment is further aided when the small world we work in came crashing down on me.  Either side of me on this luckiest of flights are two potential clients. Both of whom I know, and each one is dead keen to read and review this as it’s written.  It’s being termed ‘helping out’.

“The traditional role of sage, always ends in a stuffing” is a phrase I wish my mother said, unfortunately she is from New Maldon so rarely quotable. With this in mind I imagine you having read loads of these. I imagine you’re sitting there, laptop and docking station, lanyard, and mock-ups scattered round a cubicle. Cesar like, thumb ready to be down-ended, at the faintest sign of a hastily written article.

Anyway I have hundreds of words to write all from 10F and two eager editors either side of me. How should  the agency evolve?

The death of the silo

It’s in no doubt that times have changed massively.  I have been lucky enough to work across all the usual silos in both big and small agencies.  I cannot help but think that we all in healthcare have supported and perpetrated a myth. From the agency side the silo simply doesn’t exist in the way many would have you believe. Whether by audience or discipline, the uniqueness and homogenous nature of advertising, medical education, PR is a fallacy. All agencies cross each other when it comes to many of the core activities required by a modern client. I am not talking about getting an ad man to run an advisory board or the PR lead to come up with an ad concept, but in the more grey activities. The communications business has diversified massively since the 1950s and continues to do so. Next time you have an all agency meeting ask who should be best placed to do the patient pack or a speaker meeting direct mailer. Or if you are having a particularly tough day wave the budget busting 100 page monograph artwork and watch the solid nature of silos in action as all clamber for this margin busting cherry of a project. The plain fact is that our silos are converging, with a few distinct specialized projects owned by a specific silo. This post silo confusion where all expect to be able to do everything should be a pretty rough time for all.  Perhaps we all can expect to merge – becoming healthcare communications agencies. Masters of nothing; all offering the same menu of services, competing on price. The onus is on us to realise this and find ways of driving differentiation between us.

The monograph meeting game leads nicely to the need for agencies to understand our businesses better. We in the past have not been very good at it. The rise of procurement and what seems like a new breed of operations director has been brilliant at forcing us to know where we make our money, to transparently cost our business and move away from licked finger and prevailing wind estimations. This is still forcing many to a new sense of honesty to what the business actually is. Our margin should be delivered through selling time, whether that be for thinking, doing or managing processes. Procurement have rightly prevented us from becoming shopkeepers and marking up pass through costs, but still loads needs to be done to professionalise our sources of income. Artwork is now a commoditised service, and for many a great source of income, with some agencies deriving as much as 50% of their margin from this. Is that really right? An output that’s so vulnerable being so crucial? It makes you worry for the business. It’s time for agencies to start transparently outsourcing artwork, operating tiered costing models  and developing  capabilities across the world to reduce down these costs. Enabling clients to do more, with the same budgets and get the value they demand.

Agencies are a diverse bunch ranging from the enveloping borg of the networks to the boutique creative shops.  The need to reengineer the model that we all have grown used to is dead clear. Pyramid shaped agencies that are run by few, with masses of junior implementers have to evolve. Agencies that specialise in knowing audiences need to listen to their clients more. Time and time again we hear from agency changers that they need senior people day to day. Implementation is a given, (you get fired for screwing it up, but not hired for it) but strategic support and decision making mid implementation can no longer be considered second class to the yearly brand plan day.  It’s a pretty straightforward conclusion that if you consider strategy mobile, and it needing to evolve alongside the environment then partners to this evolution need to be present, to support and evolve in real time.  The big kids are needed on, and not just in the business. The current agency approach most adopt drives the best strategists and most senior talent up and inward looking, spending an increasing amount of time managing the business.  Reporting up to the holding company, sorting out operations, succession planning, staff development all moving the most valuable players away from the coal face.

Loads of other industries face this challenge. When you describe the typical agency approach to a partner at a law firm they laugh at you, and rightly so. In the legal world partners are the blood of the business and kept freed up to face clients and drive value 90% of their time. These partners are supported by teams but lead the relationship. Learning is done internally, the machine is set up to front the most valuable, look after the rising stars and discard those who are not going to make this grade. Its food for thought perhaps that there are no B teams amongst the big 5.

The rise of digital has been the cause for dozens of slides delivered to loads of marketeers. Web 2.0, augmented reality, avatars, virtual this and that, ad infinitum. Our digital world and the increasing sophistication of our audiences will force agencies to start to consider digital not as a channel or (at its very worse) a production function, but as glue for everything we deliver. Consumer closeness, tracking and ROI all are facilitated by this rush for 0s and 1s. But we need platforms and integration not things. Those agencies that are going to be mega are going to be the ones who see digital for what it is – a seamless place to embed all activities and facilitate community. The world of digital is moving so fast that risk is inherent in its delivery, as producers of digital the risk must start to be taken in house at agencies. It’s the agencies job to push the boundaries not just borrow what Skittles are doing. Next time you see a presentation touting channel genius ask the biggie question of your crew in this storm; “In this ever changing world of digital innovation how much do you spend on R&D?” If the answer is nothing then you are already behind. Your agency should be sharing risk to deliver their margin and your ROI.

Increasingly our clients are alone. Head count pressure and the change to the model all have produced a new type of brand leader.  Too often under huge pressure, under supported and at risk. The clients we know and love are the ones that know this and want not just stuff done but help and partnership. As the need to differentiate brands theoretically grows we will find that so will the ways we understand problems, and develop solutions.  Move away from off the shelf solutions forces agencies to change and be more open, not have all the solutions, and be happy to open up their teams to work alongside clients to understand and co-create. This is a big ask for an industry that often has pretended that their ideation process is a black box of inspiration and genius – rather that good people slogging hard, and building and idea from humble beginnings. This is so true with more complex projects that result from pseudo briefings, and client/agency development teams working on prototypes for testing with audiences.

I am sure much of the above has been expected. It seems really clear that we need to evolve our model, man up in terms of transparency and define what business we are in. Most importantly for me is that I see great clients, good agency talent striving to do good work, often despite the model they work in. For me the ultimate aim is for agencies to be seen as Trusted Partners, on the inside, rather than service providers on the out. Anything that gets in the way of this simple aim should either be questioned or set alight.

With 20 minutes to land and for the skippers amongst you. In a small bag of macadamia nuts the future of agencies is as the follows; create your own silo, move the pyramid to an hour glass, insist on working with clients not for them, put you best front of house and keep them, fire your B team, jettison the commoditised business, show all how you make your money and be prepared for co-creativity.”

Fingers crossed it gets published.

In marketing and management literature, the space in time when a customer and provider of a product meet is often called the service encounter. This encounter in the world of cars forced BMW to take servicing back into the fold. Desperate to get back an interaction that was far from Ultimate. And it contributed massively to Apple and Nike forming stores that were all encompassing controllable experiences.

With the service encounter increasingly front of mind for us, and in the past viewed as out of our remit, we seem to be spending a load of time understanding the many forms that interaction takes. The insight is being derived from mock-up consultations, anthropology style participant observation, even the more traditional scenarios and advisory boards.

With this geography now within the marketeers remit, it seems ever expanding. Interaction mapping within healthcare is loads more complicated especially in chronic disease treatments. Which prove a minefield of sub optimal interactions interrupting the brand experience.

It all proving interesting stuff. Expert/HCP marketing as an extension of consumer strategy – whatever next!

Travelling back this afternoon from meeting to run through pre pitch questions created an unexpected connection.

The pitch deals with a delicate area; pediatric medicine, specifically the care of someone’s baby during a pretty terrible time. We discussed to great and interesting lengths the amount of work that had been done to define audience understanding, and a set of language and terms with which the campaign can rest on. The importance of tone, terminology and permission was pretty front of mind.  The brief requires us to be delicate with the way we approach this. Take our time and get it right. Test everything, consider partnership the only way. Tone down the direct.

Midst this thought, the 4pm train back to Paddington was besieged with school kids heading back home and the proximity of my thoughts and  the similarity of carriage d sprung forth. Everyone around me was enveloped in what was almost a foreign language. It makes me feel old to admit this, (I have an Iphone you know!) but the terminology, slang and banter pushed home a thought. That regardless of audience wrapped around each group is always complex knit of terms, behaviours and permissions that tend to need unpicking prior to outsiders diving in a starting a conversation.

I learnt a couple of new terms that I shall be peppering into conversations with ‘88’ (our newest account member, who happens to have been born about the same time as I was drinking Thunderbird in Rock Park with Claire Argle from Pilton).

The delightful ‘Madgic’ (sic) emphasis on the Madonna, meaning; far from delightful and used by a slutty Gem to describe “double science and citizenship” to Carmine who recounted a fine tale when she ‘did blazer’. Doing blazer referred to when you had hit year 12, went to grab your phone out of your blazer pocket only to realise that you were now in year 12 and wear ‘ohm clothes’, not school uniform. A simple mistake, showing how ‘11’ you still were.

Totally delightful. My  lesson in respecting your audience all on the 4pm from Maidenhead. I am off to sew leather patches on my elbows.

PS. It best not to type ‘Year 12 school girls’ and many other similar terms into Google in the pursuit of images for your blog.

Take a look at this, it’s a parody of a brand with iconic status and iconic ads, from a brand that couldn’t be more different. Its new media meets old in a style all so familiar (that in itself is extraordinary). Brave to do, beautiful in its craft and a minute of your time. I don’t know whether it was commissioned by them or not, but suspect the fact I received this virally suggests it will help both brands. Hope you like it.

 A stumbled across Hugh Macleod’s gapingvoid blog whilst looking for a book for a client’s Christmas presents. Hugh is a cut through illustrator specialising in cube grenades – little anarchic illustrations for businesses.

It features a lovely list for those of us who want to be more creative, in art, in business, whatever.

1. Ignore everybody.

2. The idea doesn’t have to be big. It just has to be yours.

3. Put the hours in.

4. If your biz plan depends on you suddenly being “discovered” by some big shot, your plan will probably fail.

5. You are responsible for your own experience.

6. Everyone is born creative; everyone is given a box of crayons in kinder garten.

7. Keep your day job.

8. Companies that squelch creativity can no longer compete with companies that champion creativity.

9. Everybody has their own private Mount Everest they were put on this earth to climb.

10. The more talented somebody is, the less they need the props.

11. Don’t try to stand out from the crowd; avoid crowds altogether.

12. If you accept the pain, it cannot hurt you.

13. Never compare your inside with somebody else’s outside.

14. Dying young is overrated.

15. The most important thing a creative person can learn professionally is where to draw the red line that separates what you are willing to do, and what you are not.

16. The world is changing.

17. Merit can be bought. Passion can’t.

18. Avoid the Water cooler Gang.

19. Sing in your own voice.

20. The choice of media is irrelevant.

21. Selling out is harder than it looks.

22. Nobody cares. Do it for your self.

23. Worrying about “Commercial vs. Artistic” is a complete waste of time.

24. Don’t worry about fin ding inspiration. It comes eventually.

25. You have to find your own schtick.

26. Write from the heart.

27. The best way to get approval is not to need it.

28. Power is never given. Power is taken.

29. Whatever choice you make, The Devil gets his due even tually.

30. The hardest part of being creative is getting used to it.

31. Remain frugal.

32. Allow your work to age with you.

33. Being Poor Sucks.

34. Beware of turning hobbies into jobs.

35. Savor obscurity while it lasts.

36. Start blogging.

37. Meaning Scales, People Don’t.

37. When your dreams become reality, they are no longer your dreams.

I might paste this into my NY resolutions. Beats the hell out of “go back to the gym”.

I have been contemplating a pitch Shep’ and I did last week  that for a first-time-for-us covered ‘prosumption’ as part of an approach to develop digital understanding and better resources.

In is woolliest form prosumption is useful when we are developing materials for a sub group of consumers when you just can’t follow the traditional; write/art direct/code/build, test, review and rebuild approach. Whether than be for time or budget reasons.

Prosumption is the mixing of  consumer and the producer to produce a new hybrid – the Prosumer. In what (another new word for me this week) I now know to be a portmanteau – a blend of two words and their meaning.

Reading around what I thought was a new internet thing. I find it’s almost as old as Ian, and much older than I am. In 1972, Marshall McLuhan and Barrington Nevitt suggested that technology would drive the consumer to become a producer (‘democratisation of media’ -  I hear Gemma (AD at AMV) shout). In the 1980 book, the term was coined by a futurologist named  Alvin Toffler who predicted this coming together.

The approach results in individuals working together blurring the barriers, between need for something and capability to provide it.

The conclusion of much of this work is that once mass market saturation and standardisation have brought us all happi(ish)ness, the market evolves  to initiate a process of mass customization. Giving consumers exactly what’s wanted with the assumption that this delivers a risk free relationship and a guaranteed happy customer.

Pretty interesting? It does make you think that once we all have perfectly tailored good, where will we go next? Ultimate rebellion should see us go full circle and start buying goods at George at ASDA perhaps?

Anyway fairly standardised fingers are crossed here. We hear Wednesday this week.

PS. I am really trying to avoid puns in headlines. Really sorry.

This week has been one of trains, literally I’ve been to Hull and back. Via Colchester. In fact I am on one now – Peterborough is whizzing by my window.

When I get a week with more than a days worth of travel I make sure I have my bag (the new and awesomely well designed Eastpak Pacer available at their delightful Carnaby St. store) packed with a business read.

This week What Would Google Do? Has been my company. I think Google is probably one of only a few organisations we could seriously ask this question of, without answering; ‘be smug and self satisfied’. Its changed business, moved the rules of market places, and I hate the word but I think a paradigm has shifted. Ahhhhhhh!

Anyways, the book looks at the economy, demand and supply and the whole long tail economics thing that we are all familiar with. But the section that shouted out at me was a statement that has prompted something I think we might try.

Jeff Jarvis, author of WWGD, and made famous for Dell Hell, says that in this world of interconnected customers- kill your ad agency. We produce ads, so get your hands off that door knob and cancel the cab. I think Jarvis is referring to the behemoths, the ‘advertising is at the heart of what we do’, 30 sec TVC are the only love guys, you know square glasses and a 7^th floor pool filled with  moccachoccachino.

With this blood on your hands, he suggests re-engineering the model, (please remember to wash bloodied hands prior to handling models) and making customer service the only focus. He shouts at us to consider this the new marketing. For us to strive for the best and let the interconnected market place champion this awesome service. Let the buzz create and drive your brand. In a market where interconnectness is a bit wonky – then I guess you could encourage it. This is what got me thinking.

It’s a good read, I barely remember Doncaster, and it made me wonder whether we could create a way for our clients to assess us publically, after every job, so that we could share the real us, the experience,  and move away from the powerpoint us. Perhaps it could grow and all agencies could be part of this showing the experience of working with them.

I would love a point of view from anyone who uses agencies out there. Is this feasible? Would it be worthwhile? Could agencies bin their ad spends, and rely on a platform of service visibility?

PS. Want a real example of  this new interconnected world? Now this blog has been published, search for ‘Eastpak pacer’. I’m there – bigging it up  Google P1, 6 down. No need for an ad – just a quality product, provided faultlessly with me and my opinion. How cool is that as a demo?

Just finished reading Rob Walkers book Buying In: The Secret Dialogue Between What We Buy and Who We Are that delves into the attitudes of the global consumer in the age of plenty, and, didn’t making us look at all good.

This amphetamine paced tour of senseless consumption spans Viking cookers to custom high-tops.  And along the way  walk I been introduced to a diverse cast of characters like Red bull entrepreneur Dietrich Mateschitz, and an assortment of white guys without any discernable urban credibility who’ve managed to build clothing empires around hip-hop and street culture, and even viral marketers who pretend to be customers, proselytizing to others about the merits of products (and apparently not always disclosing their affiliations).

By presenting both uber-consumers and the professionals who deal with trying to sell us the stuff to fill our endless appetites, or the holes in our souls, Walker indirectly addresses what he coins the “pretty good” problem: What distinguishes a product when assembly lines or underpaid third-world workers can make even the cheapest products “pretty good?” Since quality really isn’t much of a criterion any more, there must be other signifiers, and that’s where our subconscious steps in.

Walker’s key point echoes many in the intangible brand benefit camp often written about in the planning world. Most of us have been inundated with advertising for our whole lives, so on some level we know that we’re being sold … which is why some hipster crowds gathered around PBR (a cheap red neck beer – cheers Google) precisely because they weren’t being given the hard sell. So if somebody cracks open a can now, knowing that the trend is played out, what does that act of consumer disobedience say about them? Now that PBR is so “yesterday,” shouldn’t that make it cool again? If a hipster cracks open a can in the forest and there’s no one around to hear it, are they still being cool?” It all gets pretty meta.

And that’s Walkers thesis. He coins his own portmanteau for the way that advertisers can take advantage of that and calls it “murketing.” Murketing, then is that nexus between murkiness and marketing where buyers can project their own desires or aspirations on to the products that they buy. In examining the psychological motivations that drive this rampant consumerism, Walker references some of the best psychologists and researchers on the subject, including Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, who’s Flow should be required reading for anyone with an interest in being happy and who’s The Meaning of Things happens to be a little more topical.

The conclusion is that objects are only as totemic as we let them be. Walker even begins to hint at what might be a really interesting corollary, but it is left largely unexplored. For us, as product and communications guys, if we’re pondering the future, one must wonder what sort of value we can add to society.

In a potential post-consumer future, where we’ve harnessed algae to transform sunlight into electricity and where every home has a rapid prototype machine that uses organic compounds, how will we define wealth? Suddenly when everyone has access to flawless and pristine stuff, it’s that scuffed up and worn armchair that has real value. Because even though I may love my sleek modernist furniture in ways that might not quite be healthy, if my house was burning down I’d rescue the painting I found in a junk shop.

Ian rocked into the office this morning, fresh from a PM magazine all agencies round table shindig with a number of agency leaders, MDs etc.

These mornings are a feast of fun for us in the office, a usually calm, collected and considered Ian, can barely contain his overnight simmer. He positively is busting for a chat, and Jas and I can almost feel him ready to boil over.

Anyone who encounters Ian will know it’s pretty hard to get a rise out of him (I can lay claim to managing to do this almost once – in an incident, involving my 6^th Nokia N95 in 2 weeks and a pint of cider. Although Vodafone’s dismal approach to customer service is co-culprit)

This need for an outburst lasted all through our first-thing-Friday People meeting until he could take it no longer. No AOB? BANG. The topic of this rare eruption?  Innovation, advertising agencies, the nature of conceptual creativity i.e. the ability to do a different more connective ad, versus innovation – the ability to provide solutions our clients are not expecting. Jas shouted INCOMING and we all hit the deck.

What stuck me – is the clear struggle Ian was having with wanting desperately for the industry, or more specifically agencies to grow up and evolve and stop boring each other with tales of clients, late adoption blah, blah (anyone still awake?), With the pleasure he was getting from seeing innovation being falsely encapsulated by an obsession with the ad, what goes into an A4 page, and whether illustrative style, or a bloody banner can be seen as ground breakingly progressive. blah blah blah.

I think what we were viewing can encapsulated by the term Schadenfreude. In fact I know it is because I have just spent ten minutes on Google trying to spell it. I was eventually able to confirm this is the case and that the term definitely isn’t German for pork chop.

I think one could argue that Communications holding companies buy ‘established innovation’ i.e change that’s margin friendly. Be that agencies that show high levels of creativity, an unusual regional speciality, or  integration model. It certainly was the case with the three I have been under (although I can only speak for healthcare). Their model is set up to buy novel agencies at the top of their game, and make sure that they keep doing what they are good at, never deviating too far from a formula that got them purchased. No risks and certainly no investment without return.

I was told that the agency world’s approach to innovation was ‘bloody stupid’ by a clever  guy, Craig, I often sit  next to at the  Company of Cutlers in Sheffield. He put it a bit like this; his world; the stainless steel industry is split into revenue from commoditized and specialist products. And all the players in the market know this. (To me it’s a bit like artwork, design, traffic and the sexier agency products services). They know that the commodity business is always under margin pressure and threat (when was the last time a page of artwork cost £400?). And they know that the specialist products migrate to becoming the commodised ones (conceptual writers at medical writer rates).

Sheffield steels answer to this reality is to set up R&D, cap the maximum margin and devote the remaining resource to innovation, partner with academia and the great and the good to push constantly what drives ultimate value – providing services and products that are first to market. Find ‘unused to’ products that meet existing needs but do so either more efficiently or in better way.

Given this I couldn’t figure out why agencies don’t have R&D. Why don’t they someone tasked with research, with finding new ways of solving established problems.

Is it because 20% margin and 4 out of 5 on the annual review is fine, and innovation requires investment and less short term returns?

Post the PM digital awards last night what I really needed was a dark warm room, a duvet and to be entertained. Fortunately part of this was possible, unfortunately only after having to go to Brighton to hunt down insights into Nurses/virology/technology for 9am. The skedaddle back to Town for 3pm proved all a bit of a blur.

This entertainment came in the form of an afternoon with Paul Smith, sharing his views on inspiration, business, customer satisfaction and being polite. Equipped with wild gesticulations, vivid facial expressions, and a bit of dancing he provided a total inspiration for us. It was hard not to be enthralled by him and totally hit the mark – a perfect replacement for what could have been an afternoon of Murder she wrote.

Paul built his archetypal British label on a foundation of playfulness, an impeccable eye and a steely business sense. Since setting up his first shop with wife Pauline Denyer in 1970 – he’s been knighted, had his own exhibition and owns 230 ‘individual’ stores worldwide. But more than any of this, he proved to be a total gentleman, true to himself, and elegant in his honesty. Classically quirky to the core.

His views on globalization, homogenization, and characterless multinational organisations were bluntly put. He willed us to strive for character and difference, to not just repeat what is successful, and role it out country to country but to strive to build on that success, to challenge it, or risk becoming yesterday.

His views on success and happiness were nicely encapsulated in him recommending we all ask ourselves “what’s the point of you”, defining what we love doing, and doing it. No more complicated than that.  Awesome.

Thursday saw us in Manchester launching a biggie campaign to help patients discuss treatments with healthcare teams, solve problems with therapy and understand their treatments better.

We took an art gallery in Manchester’s trendy side and mounted an exhibition showing the issues at hand, the thinking behind the campaign, its development and the execution of some of the work of which we are so proud.

Catherine, who was responsible for one of the best briefs we have seen, was our curator for the evening, introducing how the collateral fits into the world. It’s a totally proud moment when you see your work being presented so fantastically, it brought a tear to my eye.

The show travels to three other venues, where it will be rolled out to community groups, opinion leaders, charities and internally.

It was a resounding success despite the usual courier mishaps, lost packages, countless hours hanging and discarded Dewalt batteries we closed the launch with rounds of applause, a real sense of purpose.

The morning saw us discuss with much mirth Jas dropping a 6ft high flower arrangement an hour before the kick-off! How we all laughed.

When we started, 4 of us sat in the big room we now find cramped and jammed. We often catch one of us casting a gaze from the photocopier beaming with pride at the people we have and the culture we have built.

As mentioned in a previous blog we move next month, in the mean-time we have more people than desks, and its changing the way we work. Our laptops are becoming our place of business and the location is too often, (for me anyway) Flat White in Brewer Street, a client’s office, a random desk  or even the kitchen table at home.

We are finding our mobile devices are defining how efficiently we work. The availability of bandwidth is trumping office space. We’re all becoming digital nomads. No longer tethered to Ethernet cables but free to work in whatever space we can get hold of or whatever space free our minds most.

The area we work in – Soho is geared for this. Everywhere has Wi-Fi, every table has a laptop, a latte and a nomad. Yesterday saw me grab a table for an hour proposal writing , co-create a tender document with a partner agency in Chiswick, join Kate on a conference call to chat through a web project, and Skype our  illustrators in Kolkata  who are running tight on a deadline due to their freak weather conditions.  How mad is that? All from a wooden table with the best coffee in London.

Walking past a pub on the way home yesterday evening I spied my old creative director supping a pint. 10 minutes later the old days were back; him, me, lager and discussion. He is talented as hell – scarily so, sharp to the point and fiercely no-nonsense talking. He makes me wish I was more instinctive.

We got talking about briefing and about how we need to reframe expectations of briefs to be more understandable; to drive to what is special, where the stand out come from, and what’s its going to do for you.

4 (or is could have been 5) in we stumbled upon the conclusion that a good metaphor is the job market. In many cases, a brand like a candidate competes to become occupied, it competes against other candidates, it needs to be relevant to the role specified, to have experience and stand out amongst a crowd.

We thought this was amazing. Writing this on this very bright morning  having woken up in my clothes it seems to make sense but it’s not as brilliant as it was at 1 am – but it’s tidy.

Digging around for free multimedia content I found this charming little healthcare story. Produced in 1948 by Halas and Batchelor  an animation company founded by John Halas and his wife Joy Batchelor two pretty inspirational people. The company started small and grew to be the largest and most influential animation studio in Western Europe. From small beginnings in 1940, they made over 2000 films and earned an international reputation for fine animation extending the medium to explain complex ideas with clarity and humour.

8 1/2 minutes seems crazily long now given our obsession with the 30 sec TVC and the interuptive nature of much or our marketing. But watching this the charm, execution and humour grabbed me way and beyond my usual attention span. It’s pretty interesting to see that COI communications seems to have taken a backward step when it comes to explaining change to the man in the street.

All ‘new’ industries strive for legitimacy, a movement that is often accompanied by an entire lexicon of terminology and process. For a long time we have been developing terminology and processes that seek to formulate an approach, clarify our position and differentiate our offer. The world of  demand chains,  brand onions and disruption is one that all clients and agencies occupy.

Case in point is the numerous phrases that describe essentially the same thing — brand essence. Some networks have gone so far as to trademark their terms and the processes they use for determination. End result = terminology galore and as much process explanation as strategic clarification.

Spending some time on holiday last week – I revisited Kotler (it was this or be left with a book about a girl in love with a complex man she couldn’t love in the world within which she had to live and her struggle to make do with an empty life with a simple but good man who provided everything he could but not enough for her to be happy) – a comparitively magnificent book on marketing that I first brought to enlighten me when I first came into the industry. It’s a dry read and although wanders into the theoretical it’s pretty refreshing in its lack of terms.

I like Kotler’s steadfast use of the term Unique Selling Proposition (in my mind a potential forerunner of brand essence), a concept developed and named by Rosser Reeves of Ted Bates & Company. A 50 year old term that has stood the test of time and been universally adopted. Some argue that with the advent of product parity it has evolved into the Emotional Selling Proposition. ESP is certainly a concept much closer to our common understanding of “brand essence,” as its focus is on the brand’s intangible differentiator. Although I find it hard to believe that me-too products are a recent phenomenon I think that the ‘U’ still stands up whether that be a feature led ‘portability’ or due to some emotional unmet need like ‘popularity’. Either way to be unique emotionally or functionally is still to be different.

This book seems to either have been penned prior to or has ignored the multitude of copyrighted verbs describing the logical processes for develop brands by agencies needing with some irony, you guessed it – a USP. I would love to see each agencies model worked through with their own brand – please someone in procurement construct this legend! Two birds (process understanding & agency offer) with 1 stone. Please, please, discounted please.

Reviewing the alternatives to Rosser’s, here is a collection of words and phrases used to describe what is unique about a brand:  Brand Essence, Brand Soul, Brand Heart, Brand Mantra, Brand Promise, Signature Strength, Core Strength, Core Attribute, Brand Description, Brand Differentiator, Brand Uniqueness, Brand Individuality, Brand Meaning, Brand’s Central Nature, Brand Proposition…

Any more?

 As usual Tom Fishburne’s nailed the process here.

Ps. A note to purists: I admit that there may be shades of difference between some of these terms. You could make a case that brand personality and brand promise, for example, mean two completely different things. My point is that the differences are largely semantical and do little to advance the clarity of the branding process.

On Wednesday, Kieran and I went to see the BP ‘Classified’ exhibition at the Tate Britain. Two things stood out for me and really got me thinking. 

The first was an oil painting by Gillian Carnegie. Using only black paint she’s created an amazing picture of trees, which seems to have more texture and atmosphere than a coloured painting would have had.

But what made her decide to do it in just black?

The second was a collection of sculptures by Jake and Dinos Chapman. At first glance they look like traditional aborigine sculptures, but when you look closer there are numerous references to McDonalds. It’s a comment on our lack of understanding and appreciation of the culture that this type of art originates from, and also on our own culture, and the predominance of huge commercial organisations such as Maccy D’s.

Again, it’s such a clever idea, but what made them think of it?

At Hive, our business is built on doing things differently, thinking in a different way. But it’s all too easy to get stuck thinking ‘differently’ – and then different becomes the same. The challenge is to keep finding the inspiration to think outside an ever-changing box.

Every now and then we head out to see an individual talk about some mildly relevant subject. Last night – saw us be invited to Super Contemporary and a few hours with Wayne Hemingway – talking to 50 of us about design, inspiration, and life.

The Design Museum has joined forces with Beefeater 24, to bring a series of talks and gin to celebrate the fearlessly progressive spirit of London’s greatest creative minds, past and present. We were lucky enough to be invited along. Read more about Wayne here.  

Wayne was pretty insistent that us in the creative world;

1.  Stick to our guns and hold on to our principles despite the risk of missing out on short term cash. Do what you want to do, not what you need to do. 
2. Know our customer as well as we can. Research them, be with them, and understand them. For God’s sakes don’t hide in the office. See the white of their eyes. 
3. Understand that environments need to be built that fosters creativity. Gives space to make mistakes. Let the kids do it their way. Expect anyone to be able to do anything, give them the freedom to conclude themselves.
4. Champion the evolution. Humans instinctively want something better. They know when they are making do, OK is not a natural human state. But only very few ‘intolerants’ make a difference and change it. So be one.

At no time did regulatory, PI, sales aids or brand planning feature. But the 2 hours was so valuable and a real delight. How can this be beaten? Well – the next one sees us with Paul Smith. We have a couple of tickets spare – shout if you want to come along –  beapart@hivehealth.com.

A study conducted by a team of researchers at King’s College London has revealed that public understanding of basic anatomy is extremely poor, and has not improved in 40 years.

The researchers asked more than 700 people to look at outlines of both a male and female body and identify which of several shaded areas was a particular organ. The results are shocking. Less than half the respondents could correctly place the heart, while under one-third could place the lungs in their correct location. Interestingly, even those respondents for whom the organ had a relevance performed poorly – for example, more than half of those with renal problems did not correctly identify the location of the kidneys. These findings don’t exactly fit with the picture of the modern, tech-savvy, informed patient that lives in my head.

The researchers also said their findings raise concerns about doctor-patient communication. No shit. Try having a meaningful conversation with a quantum physicist about string theory, without knowing what strings are or where they live. I tried. It’s difficult. Especially when drunk.

And, with the introduction of patient choice in healthcare, concerns about health illiteracy are only become graver. Should Joe Public, who doesn’t know his prostate from his pancreas, really be at the helm when it comes to his healthcare? Would you let me, a copywriter, service your car? Didn’t think so.

This, by the way, is not an argument against patient choice. But, let’s get realistic. The patient needs advice, information and support before being able to take on the role of ‘healthcare chooser’. Or, at the very least, lessons in basic anatomy.

Something both exciting and unique happened to me in 1991…….

I bought my first 12 inc record album. The band was called The Prodigy and the album was called Experience and I had managed to purchase a limited edition white sleeve special. The slick minimalist style of the cover contrasted vastly with the atmospheric colouring and transient use of typography within the inner sleeve. The music was an array of cutting edge sounds and lyrics mixed with mesmerising beats and a unique series of piano keys. Fast forward 18 years and the band are once again proving that they see design as an essential ingredient in expressing their music.

The use of animated graphics in the new video for Warriors Dance  is truly magical and inspiring….

When you kick off a new business you end up with responsibilities for office services that you would rather do without. In the early days, due to my inability to say no to the rep I landed stationery. Those who I worked for at Shire Health International will know the hilarity of this – I have come full circle – I am sure next week will see me run out and put coins in metres for account directors!

In the less busy days of early last year I grabbed every order of paper, pens, and flipcharts as an indication that we were growing like mad. In the more recent days we all order from our desktops preventing me from any clear sign of growth. Alas I am only left with the P&L and feel from the office on our progress!

My paper guys of choice were Viking – always on time, always in stock, cheap as any and returns were near effortless. A valued if commoditised supplier, products that did what they did and communication that focused on stock lines and deals.

Then out of the blue came an email from Nigel, Viking’s Online Community Manager with an invite to climb aboard a platform on which all of their customers interact, discuss and share ideas on how they and the stationery industry as a whole can get better.

Like most I haven’t aired everything I have felt on stationery. Starting up has been a busy time and stationery although important is pretty low down the list (except when we run out of recycled laser paper during a pitch). Items on this website – span recommendations for ‘Start-up’ kits for new businesses, conference packages, more automatic ordering systems and alternative approaches to pricing.

Kicking these ideas into the business is a team of back office ‘Idealists’ whose job is to investigate the most popular ideas and report back on them on the site and I hope push them into the business.

For a supplier of commodities I thought this was at least a progressive move, a potential pragmatic source of innovation and at most a potential brilliant business driver. See what you think here.

I saw something this morning in The Guardian (Monday’s media day – stereotype me!). It seems that many in the TV world are struggling to build shows/brands that can spread across the range of media channels that exist today.

Stephen Armstrong’s article highlights emotional charged teen drama Skins as a successful example. He states that in these times of hardship the need to create successful media brands that deliver more than one programme, spur numerous spins offs across the multi-media landscape has never been more acute. Despite a complete change in cast and writers audience loyalty has remained, viewer contribute to stories, costumes, download the unsigned soundtrack, upload their tunes and even write scripts that are then filmed as webisodes. The shows co-creator Brian Elsley puts this ongoing channel neutral success down to staying close to their audience, being careful when selecting storylines and never letting their audience feel that they are alone.

We tend to be OK stretching our brands across media – admittedly in a less competitive world that entertainment. But this all sounded relevant to our world, especially when we are planning franchise offerings, extensions and channel planning.

PS – thanks to Ian for the headline his best to date

It’s been interesting watching the unfolding pandemic and the approach taken by the DoH.

We have just won a HIV portfolio pitch and I am getting up to speed with patient comms, and its hard not to contrast this with how HIV/AIDs were dealt with in the early days.  Although a different kettle of fish the approach to communications has evolved thank God and much has been written on the development of the campaign and its subsequent panic and confusion.  

As our pandemic appears not to be living up to our initial fears its been a fascinating time to review the communications issued and the civilized approach that has been taken. Even our press, not known for their calm nature with a health story, seems to have calmed down and now tow the line when it comes to panic reduction.  With the exception of Sky News who still go live to every suspected cold in Guatemala.

I like the TV ad , I think its cooked well and does information provision in a simple way to-the-point way. Although I do find the ‘your all going down’  line a little unhelpful. The mailer that popped through the door a few days ago, alongside the leaflet given out at Angel Tube this morning and much of what I have seen on TV spokesman is integrated. The channels are pretty aligned around one strategy – we need to keep the population focused on their role. It’s given me something to do rather than worry. Although the rep in me does cry out for campaign branded tissue giveaways.

Is this is the equivalent of a nice cup of tea post bombshell? A task for us to concentrate on instead of getting all chicken liken. When I view the early iceberg/don’t die of ignorance/AIDS campaign they just confuse and scare me. They smack of a group of people who didn’t  know what to do, so they packed away their leadership and shared their panic with the nation.

Of course sneezing into tissues is a big part of reducing down the transmission of flu but given the loads of other methods  of transference could this be a finger in an ever gushing dyke. Does this mean that panic control has been prioritized over disease control? Regardless –  its been successful and bloody interesting.

Currently doing the rounds is a bizarre document, supposedly produced by the Arnell Group during their recent redesign of the Pepsi logo. It employs complex SCIENCE to justify the logo’s redesign, including (but not limited to): the Golden Ratio, the Earth’s geodynamo, magnetic fields and magnetic dynamics, the analysis of multiple perspectives, and colour theory. Oh, and somehow the relativity of space and time are involved.

Every page of this document is more ridiculous than the last, culminating with an explanation of a process whereby Pepsi’s new logo will manifest its own gravitational pull (see above). Incredible. Some argue the document is authentic, others that it’s a hoax. I think it’s an extremely successful viral marketing campaign, run by the Arnell Group on behalf of Pepsi. Probably.

This might be a good time to mention that the new logo is basically the same as the old one, except that it now looks a bit more like a lopsided grin.

As Helen and I drove down the M6 in the rain yesterday, something struck me…..

In 1996, I travelled – I had no email, no mobile phone – my family got a postcard every couple of weeks

In 1997, I started at university – they gave us a clunky email that resembled an MS-DOS screen – we thought it was great

In 2000, I did a PGCE – for the first time I used the internet for research – my paper on health education for behaviour change was largely in debt to online publications

Here we are in 2009, not a huge number of years later, and Helen and I were driving down the M6 after meeting the Head of the Pharmacy School at Keele University. What he showed us was mind blowing!

They have developed the virtual patient – an avatar called Shirley who walks up to the pharmacy counter, coughs, snuffles and waits for you to start the conversation. Depending on what you, as the pharmacist, chose to say or do, Shirley will respond. The prototype is using text input, but the future masterpiece version will use voice recognition.  It’s ingenious and totally captivating!

The consultation scenario that Shirley demonstrates is based on a decision tree algorithm – an interlinking set of questions, answers and decision points that dictate what Shirley will say and do. These algorithms are incredibly complex to build, we know, because we have just completed our first set for the alli launch that has been used to train pharmacists across the land. We’re very proud of the work we’ve done so far, but I can’t help wanting to take scenario training to the next level.

Having hit the brand planning season, with flipcharts and by post-it notes a weekly occurrence I met with a strategist mate who suggested with much mirth that informed dictatorship is by far and away the best way of coming up with battle plans.

He is a military strategist, quotes Von Clausewitz  a lot, and never had to work in primary care – so I am sure he doesn’t know what tough is!

These conversations always get me thinking, our terminology is military, our challenges (resources, prioritisation, superiority) pretty similar, perhaps we have something in common. In his world having non-strategists risk being the rate limiting step to your campaign success is a fear well founded. The use of strategic development time to drive interdepartmental buy-in made him visibly nervous, and prompted him to suggest we should settle on a good old game of Rock, Paper, Scissors when approaching “strategy by consensus”.

His tips were as follows;
1. Play paper first. Rookies tend to lead with rock, so paper is the safest opener. (A savvy opponent will try the same, causing a tie.) If you win, claim victory; if not, start the next throw right away, because of course it’s two out of three.
2. Exploit copycats. Casual players often switch to the object that just beat them. You can encourage them to do this by shouting, “Paper wins!” when you defeat their rock. Then throw scissors on the next round.
3. Watch for doubles. People rarely throw the same hand three times in a row; if they play scissors twice, your next move is paper. Also, keep up the pace so they have less time to think and instead fall into patterns.

So that’s all solved then!

Children with chronic disease often fail to adhere to prescribed treatment regimens, especially self-administered treatments. This is a significant challenge to overcome. Several cognitive and motivational processes are thought to influence adherence, including: (i) knowledge about the therapy and its relationship to health; (ii) perceptions of one’s ability to influence health outcomes (perceived control); and (iii) confidence in one’s ability to meet the demands of treatment and recovery (self-efficacy). This is true of both children and adults, although the specific barriers to adherence most likely differ depending on age. Children-specific interventions to improve adherence, in my experience, fail to engage. And engagement is a necessary component of effectiveness.
Therefore, I was pleasantly surprised when I stumbled across Re-Mission, a computer game designed to improve adherence to self-administered chemotherapy in children with cancer. In the game, players control a tiny robot, called ‘Roxxi’ (strangely attractive, see picture) within the body of a young cancer patient – the objective is to ensure that the virtual patients engage in self-care behaviours, such as taking oral chemotherapy to combat the cancer cells, taking antibiotics to fight infection, using relaxation techniques to reduce stress, and eating food to gain energy. The game is very playable, and there’s something intrinsically therapeutic about blasting the crap out of a malignant cancer cell, even for me

I know what the cynical among you are thinking, because I thought it to. Gimmick. And that’s why I was especially pleased to learn that Re-Mission had been evaluated in a peer-reviewed journal, and that the evaluation is positive. The conclusion? “The video-game intervention significantly improved treatment adherence and indicators of cancer-related self-efficacy and knowledge in adolescents and young adults who were undergoing cancer therapy. The findings support current efforts to develop effective video-game interventions for education and training in health care.“

I recently attended a webinar on the barriers faced by organisations and communications teams to internal engagement and was really interested in the differences and similarities between internal communications and marketing.  

In the internal comms world there exists a common frustration with the disciplines lack of ability to get serious attention and ongoing commitment, especially when compared with its revenue generating cousin. A situation that was not expected to improve with the impending financial crisis, and its subsequent pressure to decrease ‘non-essential’ spending.

What also struck me as interesting was that when we discussed communications some of what we take for granted in the marketing world is not adopted within internal comms. Marketing tend to build a foundation for any activities on understanding our audience, their perspective, what they believe. All of which can be much easier when we are removed by the mere fact that we are ‘not one of them’. It seemed to me that viewing the internal audience as ‘one of us’ can tend to skew the approach one takes when communicating with them. This was discussed in depth by the attendees, with the majority considering this to be a challenge that the discipline needs to grapple with.

Despite this, so much is shared between the disciplines. The idea that communication professionals are integral to achieving the organisations goals is certainly common, as is the constant efforts to convert too-often tactical activities into strategic activities and is the need to get the balance right between leadership expectations and communicators’ ability to deliver.

It was a fascinating webinar, and really good to spend some time interacting with a brilliant, diverse group of internal comms bods, I for one was delighted to see audiences/beliefs being pushed to the forefront.

Today is National Poetry Day, which aims to explore the relevance of verse in modern-day life. We love this poem by Elspeth Murray, which echoes our frustration at the complexity, jargon, irrelevance and clutter that litters much of communication today. Elspeth wrote the poem for the launch of the cancer information reference group SCAN (South East Scotland Cancer Network) in January 2006, which has been trying to improve the quality and speed of services for people with cancer. © Elspeth Murray.

This week saw us pushing the boundaries on training (reps, pharmacists, other HCPs etc). When dealing with a new client, we grappled once again with the limitations of paper-based training or the ‘usual’ ShockWave Flash. Both are fun and interactive, we explained, but struggle when you have anything that requires more than a simple question and check box answer.

With this client, it’s not an option financially to bring everyone in for a conference or a regional meeting series. So we brought in some of our technology friends and got thinking. What emerged, and what we are proposing, builds upon what geeks know as gaming and us marketeers know as just plain cool.

While our version is still in development, I discovered that Virtual Worst Case Scenarios are being used to great success already. They are gameware-like programmes increasingly used to train emergency medical staff in the US. In one worst case, a freight train derails near a heavily populated train station and releases cyanide into the air. Victims pour from the station and the player – as medical commander – must set up a triage area and sort through the patients as quickly as possible, making sure proper treatment is administered. It’s been very successful at making participants develop real time decision-making skills, under realistic and pressured conditions. It forces the participant to act on their feet, make snappy value judgements and succeed in the chaos that ensues.

Can you imagine how far this kind of thing could go in our industry? And all without ketchup and actors…

Kieran wrote a post a couple of months ago called “If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got”. This phrase keeps coming back to me. I have just read another post by Bill Taylor at Harvard Business review which expresses very eloquently the thing that was hounding me.

Bill refers to the concept of “Vuja De”. Credited by Bill to George Carlin, it seeks to explain the need for a different approach. Déjà vu is something we all encounter and are fascinated by; even in film The Matrix attempted to explain it. But in a business context, déjà vu is the dragging sense that we’ve been here before. How often do briefs ask the same thing over and over again? How often do we look to point out small differences that for prescribers, or more importantly patients, make little or no difference.

The art of competing in this increasingly complex, increasingly pressured healthcare environment requires us to be braver about how and what we are asking. More importantly, we need to refresh the ways in which we answer key questions. To stand apart we must be brave enough to be apart. We must approach the same problems with completely different ideas, taking inspiration not from what has gone before, but from what has not. As Proust says “the real act of discovery consists not in finding new lands, but in seeing with new eyes”. Looking at the same thing from a completely different point of view – hence “vuja de”.

We need to look outside our restrictions and ask what we should do, rather than what we can do. To our minds this means it’s about “who should we talk to?” rather than “who are we allowed to talk to?” As Kieran says, this sort of thing brings risk, but aren’t the risks higher if you keep running with the pack?

It had been a few months since we worked with a client running a competitor Wargaming session. Finishing one this week reminded us of a great way to get a team of multidisciplined experts aligned and agreed for a common purpose.

Wargaming can achieve a number of different outcomes. There is a conversion of data and information (e.g. on market or competitors) into actionable intelligence that adds real quality to the strategic planning process. It also delivers a result that could not be arrived at by any individual present alone. It demands collaboration and a fresh perspective. Role playing brings colleagues closer together, juggling insights and skills. It’s a productive day’s work for the whole team.

You can achieve a lot in a planned and well-paced day. Spending the morning getting under the skin of your foe, planning their launch, and agreeing the likely story to the market can not only be fun, but really sharpens the mind in preparation for the afternoon. That’s when you plan your defence and the activities you can do to protect your equity.

And another thing: wargaming provides your agency with an opportunity to show you creativity that’s not restricted to an A4 page.

Something seems to come over us when we write an ad brief, my planner friend reminded me this morning. It’s the way we do our best to cram everything about the product/condition/patient into one ad. We forget completely how we as consumers interact with ads; forget that below-the-line materials are on this earth only to communicate the underlying support for the product story.

I had a quick browse of OK! yesterday afternoon (dermatology research). The ads in there are graphic and simple. Their feel and message happened to me automatically, without conscious decision. Clarins just stepped right on in there. Bang, I was Gucci’d. But that’s a good thing. I didn’t have to waste time and delve into reams of body copy to know what it is these brands were trying to say to me. The same thing they were saying in their first, second, 500^th print ad. One-dimensional, loud and clear. Intent – a quick reminder of high-end status. (Plus a little eye candy for the logo lover.)

We’d hardly dream of addressing healthcare professionals this way, because we seem to feel we need a myriad of reasons to excuse ourselves. The disease area needs innovating, here’s why, here’s how we help, here’s the whole deal in microscopic detail. Certainly, HCPs need this information – but a brand ad just can’t and shouldn’t carry all of it. Instead, we must communicate quickly the offer/ position in the one elegant wrapper of a creative idea or perhaps like Gucci, a proud identity. To keep our messages simple we can use a separate, successive approach – that’s why we often roll things out in campaigns.

However, healthcare is a major area of research and advancement and that’s why drugs and services are constantly turning over. Research shows that a small amount of inner detail is appreciated by HCPs, so we have room for a couple of clear sentences in our work. OK, our clients are not Gucci, but we can still learn from such brands. Manufacturing processes kept to the label, leather ageing techniques communicated in store, deals kept to a business-to-business environment, and endorsement happens via PR. The ad is left to communicate the feel of the brand as simply and elegantly as possible. Isn’t what really sticks in our heads the stuff we don’t have to think about too much?

To build upon this and make it relevant to our proposition here at Hive. Using the ad to communicate an element of the story, and the whole mix to contribute to a bigger idea which exists outside and above that of the ad concept seems to us to be a better way, and should provide not just a brand feel but a story and richness that contributes to a truer more in depth relationship.

When trading becomes challenging, businesses of all sizes generally have two choices. First, cut cost in line with reduced revenue and wait for better times to come (and hope they do before the money runs out). Second, invest to become more competitive and attractive under the new market conditions. Design provides limited advantage in the first scenario, but is essential to the second, as are foresight and bravery.

Change is a good thing! I can’t deny that I enjoy a certain comfort zone within my professional and non-professional lives. Doing something I know and the sense of familiarity I get from that gives me a security which I find both appealing and comforting. However the problem is that security and comfort generally become boring with a significant lack of enthusiasm.

I guess this is the reason that I chose to live and study out of London for 3 years and thereafter set off travelling for 15 months. Exciting these adventures certainly were but they brought challenges too. I learnt that being able to adapt and adjust to new environments/situations (broadening one’s horizons, etc) is one of the most important skills a person can posses. Big rewards often carry an element of risk – and let’s face it, risk is never boring!

Design can be risky when there is time and money at stake. But in today’s world, it is only through creativity and exploration that people can better themselves and their work. So don’t be afraid to bring brand new ideas to the table -if you want to get better than you’ve already got.

‘What we say matters little compared to how we say it, no matter what medium we use to convey the words. To communicate with influence it is important that we are able to use language that engages the hearts and minds of our listeners.’

Sue Knight (NLP at work, 2^nd Edition) here explains the importance of influence in any kind of communication. When it comes to advertising, I’d have to disagree that the subject matter is of little consequence – after all, the message is why we open our mouths in the first place, and deserves to be carefully strategised and crafted. It’s obvious though that talking in a truly engaging way is an art form. In everyday life, charisma comes more naturally to some than others; in business we strive for it.

How do we get people to listen? The simple answer is to use the right language – not just clear and concise language, but the same language as our audience. I don’t mean English, Spanish or Italian, but fact that we need to aim for immediate understanding.

We all know what it’s like to venture into the doctor’s, smell that overpowering medicinal aroma and sit in a sticky leather seat – and then divulge all your ‘private information’ to help the Doctor to find out what on earth is wrong. He or she listens; the medical mind takes over and envisages the physiological processes, what reactions are taking place and what pharmacotherapy could be used. He or she needs to translate this into a way that I, the patient, can understand, relating to my personal knowledge of the body.

Having a Pharmacology degree, it’s not too challenging to express myself in medical language, so that doctors can usually tell me quite quickly what is wrong and what could be done. But if I keep very silent – perhaps like many other patients – I see a difference in how I am spoken to and what is said.

My point is that communication is a tricky thing and that’s why we invest heavily in order to get it right. We need skills and experience to explain both technically and promotionally how things work and who could benefit. That is the only way the consumer- doctor, patient etc. – can retrieve enough information to drive their decision on whether to buy or not to buy, to use or not to use, the product.

So POM to P switches are 25 years old, but for me everything changed in 2002 with the publication of the list by a RPSGB led working group of potential candidates for reclassification from POM to P. At the time there was talk of an avalanche of switches coming through the system, the industry got itself all expectant, the pharmacy profession was nervously excited and everyone prepared themselves for the new era.

So what happened? Despite all the positive hype, it hasn’t quite worked out as hoped for, either for the industry or the profession. Certainly the avalanche never arrived, and I doubt now it ever will.

I think if you asked industry executives, hand on heart, has switching been commercially successful, so far most would admit it hasn’t. If we believe POM to P has a role to play in the future of treatment management, and that pharmacy has a key role to play in diagnosing and managing conditions – both of which I passionately believe in – we really need pharmacists to start proving that they believe it too.

I have no doubt that for a host of conditions and ailments, the best place to treat and manage (and even diagnose) is in the pharmacy. Some 30 per cent of GP consultations are for minor or self-limiting conditions, most of which are in areas that pharmacists are either well or sometimes better equipped to deal with.

Couple this with the fact that our healthcare system has disenfranchised so many people and that vast tracts of patients/consumers are increasingly looking to their high street clinician – the pharmacist. One begins to wonder how it could go wrong.

I run a communications agency and over the years I’ve worked on a host of switches. I’ve spent a great deal of time talking to pharmacists about their role, their attitudes to conditions and treatments, and most importantly how they interact with their customers.

We develop training and tools to support pharmacy knowledge, and to help create a positive dialogue with customers around a condition or treatment. We also spend a great deal of time talking to the pharmaceutical industry about how to support pharmacy – so I do see things from both the industry’s as well as the profession’s side.

As far as the industry is concerned, innovation drives growth. Generic proliferation and own-brand competition mean that you can’t sit still. POM to P switching provides a huge area for innovation. It’s a ready-made pipeline of proven products for key conditions and it can breathe extended life into brands coming off patent.

With the new community pharmacy contracts and the evolution of pharmacists into service providers, the case to move more chronic care into pharmacy is compelling. Diagnose simple and even not-so-simple conditions, and the management of complex conditions follows closely behind. Whether pharmacists acknowledges it or not, the industry believes that the high street has a vital role to play in the future health management of the nation.

There is no doubt that the pharmaceutical industry produces fantastic support for pharmacy. The quality of support that exists for POM to P switches keeps getting better and better. The extent of investment in pharmacy for launches is now greater than I’ve ever seen. And it’s not unrecognised. Pharmacists acknowledge it openly. So why is it so difficult to get lift-off with a new POM-P medicine?

We acknowledge that the industry believes in pharmacy, but I believe, more importantly, that consumers believe in pharmacy too. So who is missing from this picture?

In truth, no one. Industry, consumers and the profession are passionately committed to an extended role for pharmacists. So it’s a perfect storm then? Sadly not. Because whilst the profession is supportive, there is a latent caution that affects launches so overtly that it brings to question whether switching is a viable long-term option.

From conversations with pharmacists this new world seems exciting, but quite daunting too. Diagnosis, long-term management, counselling, guidance, advice… all words that to a greater or lesser degree create nervousness. This new way has an impact on the way pharmacists operate – much more front of counter, the visible face in the store, more time intensive. So who sorts out the prescriptions? Who does the things that keep pharmacists so busy normally? Are they really able to diagnose? It’s a brand new world, and for many a scary one.

In reality switches should be the ideal conduit for this transition. The regulatory framework around switching is rigorous, designed to protect all, often to the detriment of efficacy. The products switched invariably fulfil a clear consumer need, and driving new people into pharmacy for new solutions should be good for all.

Consumers are open. They too like innovation, they want better treatments, to be able to quickly fix problems, get an appointment on their terms.

Sure it’s true that they are not yet used to more complex discussions with pharmacists. They feel a bit uncomfortable, unsure – but that’s easy enough to fix, isn’t it? Professionals, on the high street, ready to put people at ease? Perhaps the truth is that pharmacists aren’t used to these sorts of discussions either or just scared to have them.

The traditional role of symptom management will never disappear, but with the competitive environment the industry operates in being unsustainable without innovation, the truth is that without pharmacy engaging with POM to P switching and supporting it as a category, the industry will have to change tack. It cannot afford for innovation to go unrewarded in terms of sales.

This brings me to a final conundrum. I regularly hear cynicism from the profession that POM to P switches are just a route to GSL, and that pharmacists are being ‘used’. There is a truth that brands switched from P to GSL see improved sales performance, but for me it’s just a natural extension of life cycle.

An established brand with a profile for broader access, one that doesn’t need the time commitment from pharmacists, should be GSL. It’s not some conspiracy; it’s just a business reality. I worry that if pharmacy does not start to properly support POM to P switches, their cynical worrying becomes a self- fulfilling prophecy.

Pharmacists must demonstrate that they believe they are the rightful place for condition treatment and management to exist. This is so important, because once this true partnership is in place, the value of the consultation and improved experience for consumers will not only enhance their view of pharmacy as a solution, it will radically change the industry’s view. Why switch to GSL a brand where the role of a pharmacist is so intrinsic to the consumer’s experience?

This post also features in this months Pharmacy Magazine supplement reviewing 25 years of POM to P.

A Cambridge University academic is leading a call to dispense with medical jargon in favour of everyday language. Dr Melinda Lyons claims in the Lancet that patients can get dangerously confused by unfamiliar and similar-sounding terms (intra vs inter; hypo vs hyper), particularly in stressful and noisy situations.

This is something to be grateful for, because it’s more proof that healthcare is becoming more patient-focused. While not without its challenges, communication built on the needs and expectations of the end user is clearly the way forward. Dr Lyons’ work, and the fact her research featured in the morning Metro, reminds us that everyone has a stake and a growing interest in what happens in the healthcare world.

But it also reminds us that people aren’t the same. Words that are necessary to one person may patronise another. At Hive we play our part by first understanding who the end user is. Only then can we get the dialogue right between that person and the person looking after them. We do this by letting the HCP know more about who’s in front of them.

It’s a subtle thing, joining the dots between different mentalities and creating proper engagement, but it’s not new in marketing. Without the correct delicacy however, you get a fumbling disaster which tries too hard and fails.

So, between the patronising and the ancient Greek, lies a tone of voice that resonates. Finding it is a beautiful thing.

Recently we have been working on a brief to improve the provision of information to people with massive mobility and dexterity challenges. We needed to communicate the product, how to use it in a way that is really useful, and most importantly why the choice has been made for them to be on this therapy.

Our initial discussions revealed that beyond who they might be and what they have been diagnosed with, little solid research in terms of their feelings or how they live with the disease was known. As a consequence we needed to get to grips with the patients, not only in terms of information requirements but also their idiosyncrasies and physical disabilities.

We wanted to use an approach that we have come to know as ‘Accessible Design’. This approach is huge with car designers in Japan, who need to feel how the rapidly aging population of Japan experience their cars. As young, progressive designers, they don’t have a problem getting into a car, adjusting seats, twiddling knobs – but the end user might. To combat this mismatch between audience and output Nissan invented the old-suit, an outfit which simulates the effects of aging. Strap it on and you’ll immediately feel stiffer, heavier, less able to balance, and the included goggles will make it harder to see. And its works – their design teams know, empathise and design better for an audience they do not relate to physically.

It’s obvious how this relates to the work we do. Patient materials are too often overlooked as bits of collateral that ticks the patient communication box but mean little to the actual user. While we create more relevant content for our audiences, really getting to grips with the problems they face and the questions they have, it’s essential to package this content appropriately. While product manufacturers make sure their goods are easily accessed, we must produce healthcare information in such a way as to be easily consumed.

Our conversations with patients and professionals unearthed difficulties we’d never have dreamed of (door knobs, envelopes, ring pulls, Velcro, shiny surfaces, stockings etc). Following an accessible design approach proved hilarious and humbling. With no Nissan suit budget in place, we had to get creative and find ways of ‘restricting ourselves’ based on the patient insights we had. Enter ski gloves, mittens, industrial strength elastic bands, bags on hands and training weights on arms. We played, we learned, we were astounded. The result is a range of materials that have been thoroughly tested as ‘end usable’. Alongside a better understanding of what they need and want to know we have solved the problems of this audience in a more relevant way, for a brand that can only benefit from this approach.

This project has been a real learning curve for us. We have looked at real end user requirements, translated this into design and content objectives, and injected these into our tactical material briefs. We have also gained useful insight into what it’s like to live a tiny period of time with a disability that impacts so much.

As far as we are aware this is the first time an accessible design approach has been used by a communications agency and that makes us totally happy. It’s an approach that is now an intrinsic part of our materials generation process.

Bizarreness reared it six eared head last week, when hordes of photographers and art fans descended on Savemain pharmacy in Essex Road, Islington, after Banksy painted a large mural on the wall depicting three children pledging allegiance to a flagpole with a Tesco plastic bag flying from it. As a fan of the artist, a person fascinated with HCPs, and this being my local pharmacy I felt I had to go and have a look. Speaking to Anand the pharmacist at the family-run business, he said: “We are a little bit surprised at all the fuss – it’s certainly not something we see every day. We had no idea, we just came into work on Monday morning and there it was. Hopefully no-one will do anything to damage it. It would be nice if it helped business.” His uncle Raj hilariously added that “they were considering whether to sell it”

The Islington Gazette has subsequently carried a comment from a spokesman for Tesco, who have a store in Essex Road, who said: “If this proves to be genuine and all indications are it is, then we’re flattered to have been thought of by one of the UK’s foremost contemporary artists. However, we’re not art critics and will leave it to individuals to decide on its poignancy.

Have they missed that this is clearly Banksy’s comment on the demise of the independent pharmacy?

In the Rx marketing process, healthcare professionals have long been viewed as the biggest kids in the room, the holders of the power. Our first need was to have them on board, understanding and agreeing with our key messages, weighing up the facts and writing scripts like mad. Get the gate open – step back and watch the newly medicated sheep trot through. Understand the HCP, connect with their emotions and functional requirements and bang, product launched, sales incoming, off we go.

In these less bullish days (fewer new products, more chronic care, empowered patients), a new challenge has knocked on our door. Driving depth of use, and not just breadth, is an urgent requirement. It’s no longer enough to get a prescription written. We need to ensure that the sufferers have some part to play – complying, understanding, loyalty, enjoyment.

But as we shift towards end user strategy, we cannot lose sight of the HCP role. We need to acknowledge that instead of guarding the gate, the professional is becoming part of the medicine experience for the end user. This new dynamic means different ways of insight delving, tactical delivery etc.

We would be daft not to review how other industries have made this transition, especially other industries with gatekeepers as part of their brand journey. There isn’t a direct equivalent for the healthcare professional in industries such as automotive/computer/banking, but a lot of our challenges have been faced by these groups. In other words, these professionals are rarely or never responsible for public safety, but they also contribute to the brand experience for that most important player – the end user.

BMW invests hugely in understanding its end user. Only then does it understand its store environment, and then its independent sales advisors. In reconciling these insights, the showroom scene becomes a piece of the brand experience set up to gain loyalty from the customer.

I was lucky enough to sit next to a biggie at First Direct at dinner recently. With this service offer, their telephonists are the main touch point for consumers, their position is of unusually high responsibility within the brand journey. The satisfaction and loyalty of First Direct customers in general suggests that other companies could do well to infuse their call centre staff with new levels of responsiveness.

These two examples, and countless others, are strongly relevant to the healthcare model. They can help us learn how to respond to this turning environment, as we stand besides an open gate and really get to know those sheep.

Healthcare is a complex world to work in, whether we sell products or services. On top of our day to day business, we’re struck by reams of science, mode of actions, molecular specs, and more.

The result is that in healthcare, we are surrounded by distractions. When we’re asked to explain what it is we do, we get immediately sidetracked into describing stuff that is really besides the point. To be fair, there are times when we have to pass the time; fill in gaps in conversation. Perhaps this is why this kind of pointless talk has been described as “elevator speech”, or the more stylish “martini monologue”.

But sometimes it invades boardrooms, too. We lose sight of our brand as “the moral of our story” when we plan our communications. Or maybe we understand our brand in our own heads, but fail to produce a short, consistent description when asked. We prepare in the wrong ways, getting tangled in details when it’s really not necessary.

How do we get to that core of what it is we do? By asking yourself one question: why it is that we (or our service) can meet customer’s needs better than anyone else. If you can find a way to verbalise this to a stranger in a lift or a brand director over lunch, you’re practising engagement. That brand story will find its way into communications materials too – the places that you build on with key messages, that complicated MOA diagram, and so on.

Martini anyone?

There’s a really interesting new theory circulating called transmedia planning. A quick background: transmedia storytelling was a trend identified by the cultural academic Henry Jenkins, where entertainment brands used different media streams to tell pieces of a story or plot. Transmedia planning was born when a number of strategists, including Faris Yakob, adapted Jenkins’ theory for the marketing world.

TMP places control in the users’ hands by asking us to “Allow your audience to assemble your brand story”. It’s an interesting evolution of 360° marketing where one idea is expressed uniformly by multiple channels. TMP allows ideas (or parts of ideas) to reach consumers from a slightly different point of view, but deliver consistent value and meaning around a brand.

Hive’s business plan adopts a transmedia approach in the context of the important changes happening in healthcare. You don’t have to have read our recent blog comments to know that informed, or partially informed, patients are increasingly the norm. Growing access to different information sources gives patients more control over their treatment. The web allows communities to form and discuss treatment and results. Consumers are showing they need more than shallow promises and that’s where TMP fits the bill.

We have to remember though that the transmedia concept evolved in an unconstrained consumer world. In its purest form, TMP can’t apply directly to prescription brands because of the necessary limitations on patient communications. However, prescription drug users still form communities to share experiences about treatment, particularly those with chronic conditions. Using a transmedia approach here involves setting up the dialogue between prescriber and patient, but acknowledging that some of the dialogue and beliefs around the brand may also be acquired from less informed sources. The reality for patients/consumers is, the relative weight of advice sourced online vs the prescriber is not always as you would imagine.

Building relationships in any industry is about engagement with people. In the healthcare mainstream, the critical commitment may still be the prescriber’s. But it’s vital to remember that the prescriber is not the person experiencing the brand in a hands-on manner. Its time our communication to professionals and patients alike began to reflect that.

I have been ‘doing’ billable healthcare digital for 14 years. In the beginning there were video presentations, online Q&A sessions and clinical summary downloads; more recently, a wealth of Flash-enabled tools. To date it’s been pretty easy to repurpose content or repackage it as a digital thing and sell it as exactly that – a thing, a tactical item, a separate channel for delivering traditional content. “A better mousetrap” as Ian would say.

The digital gold rush has produced an interesting response in the healthcare agency world. First, we have learned to bolt Shockwave Flash capability onto an existing production function. We expanded our in-house capability to do this, or outsourced to those talented Shockwave Flash savvy freelancers/e-lancers available locally or globally.

The second reaction is more radical. Agencies have been set up to focus purely on the digital channel, merging a healthcare marketing background with the ability to talk to internal and external audiences entirely through online means.

We’re responding to the rise of what we know as web 2.0 (every evolution must be named!). The success of brands such as Google, Facebook, eBay, YouTube have forced the agency world to find ways of incorporating the Web 2.0 experience into our healthcare approach. It appears no longer acceptable to consider “digital” as remote from the strategic process, interactive paper that crops up when useful. We must use its real advantages: to assist brands not only with functional delivery, but emotional answers and even a service offer.

It strikes me that an uptake of “real digital” in healthcare, and the correct use of its communication opportunities, calls for agencies to evolve and not necessarily clients. For years I sat with numerous agencies and moaned about the slow adoption of digital in healthcare. Over time I started to see how the digital evolution meant an entirely new strategic process. Forget the production bolt-ons, our work now is a total re-think from the earliest stages of brand planning. That’s when we will see brand values such as ‘community building’ being agreed on and more importantly, delivered.

I came back from a meeting yesterday to find that our big pink sofa had finally arrived. Naturally, this was a sign to put the kettle on and get comfy. Naturally, we got round to talking about what makes prescription brands “engage” with people.

Engagement stretches from a transient coupling of user and product to a loyal relationship rich in mutual benefits. This depends on how much emotional value is delivered. The most successful brands in the world, like Apple, appeal to our most highly evolved values. Healthcare brands with a life-changing reputation (Seretide, Herceptin) come closest to this.

Most Rx brands however, don’t inspire much in end users. We take them for short term relief, or because the doctor/pharmacist said so, and never develop more than a functional relationship with them. Medicine is not something we buy because we want to.

But even though we’re largely indifferent, we can still forge long-term commitments with treatments because “we probably should”. Millions stick with a daily hypertensive because their physician has confirmed that their lifestyle hasn’t done them many favours. Changing brands only happens thus, when the doctor sees fit. There’s no dialogue going on here, but while there is forced engagement, does it really matter? We believe it does matter.

As preventative medicine becomes more of a priority, competition will drive prescription brands into more emotionally accessible areas. Certainly they will have to compete for prescriber loyalty.

For patients, new ways of engaging might go further than driving revenue. Putting a friendlier face on those boring old blood pressure pills might make people more adherent to their medication and perhaps think about taking more control of their health in other ways.

This, made by Michael Wesch is probably the best way to describe the revolution that communication is undergoing. For too long linear development has created a well trodden path for communications evolution. This shows you what we feel. The world isn’t changing, it has already changed. Take a look and let us know what you think.

A few years ago, the rest of this consultation would have been relatively straightforward. I would ask some questions, run a couple of tests, recommend a treatment and the patient would feel reassured. Nowadays however, it tends to go rather differently.The patient will, more than likely, have already been on various websites looking for a diagnosis. They may also have looked into the different treatments available, even compiled a folder of information for discussion. They want and expect to be actively involved in their diagnosis and treatment plan. And if they aren’t completely satisfied with my opinion, they’ll get someone else’s. In short, “trust me, I’m a doctor” no longer holds much water.

Never before have patients been so well informed, so involved and influential in their healthcare. With a finger on the public pulse, the government is planning for personal healthcare budgets so that each patient can choose their hospital, consultant and treatment. Since I graduated 10 years ago, the face of medicine has become almost unrecognisable. It’s more like going shopping than to the doctor.

How does this make us healthcare professionals feel? I’ll be honest; a little mixed. The quality of information available to patients varies enormously and can sometimes do more to confuse than to clarify the situation. On the other hand it’s likely that a patient who feels invested and in control of their wellbeing will live a healthier lifestyle and engage with the required treatment. Isn’t that the aim?

Whatever the implications, the NHS claims to hold the needs and wishes of the patient at its core. This makes sense ethically and politically. The question is, why are healthcare communications agencies still servicing healthcare professionals before satisfying the public interest?

We were interested in the Consistency over coherence debate recently posted on adliterate.com, which questions the importance of identity-driven communication. Should a brand repeat itself for the sake of recognisability?

Convention in healthcare communications says yes. HCPs lack time – the mental link must happen, and quickly. Consistency also makes sense when global visibility outranks the needs of diverse markets. Waning production budgets make this a fact of our industry.

Clearly we need to retain some consistency in our creative work, but brands can also capitalise on the much bigger premise of coherence. That means staying true to your message first, thus having more freedom in its execution. This brings meaning to brands – your materials and tactics don’t just strike a chord because they look the same, they resonate because they mean the same.

It works because your big idea becomes more than the sum of its parts. When we talk to doctors, why not be that much braver – who says they can’t put two and two together after all?

The real benefits of coherence lie in consumer marketing. New media has a lot to do with patient power. As people search wider for answers in healthcare, so we gain new ways to reach them. Our brand becomes a stream of conversations that evolves along with the community around it. Take a step back and you see how big and relevant the picture has become.

Agencies must face facts – the definition of integration has moved on. Let’s commit to bigger, braver thinking in healthcare with coherent strategies that everyone can profit from.