So, my thought for the day, or should that be week, year, infinity is link communication (and ideas) to business performance. Communications are paid for out of profit (or if you get it wrong, loss), so demand to know what has worked and what hasn’t. If nothing else, in today’s lean times it may just be easier to hang onto your budget if you can prove that past activity has benefited the brand.

The letter informs his parents that, at 3 st 13 lb and 4ft tall, Bailey Russell is dangerously overweight.

Bailey’s size looks ‘normal’ to me, so I went to nhschoices.com to check out the child BMI calculator. Online, the NHS places Bailey in a healthy weight category (90^th centile).  There is no numerical reference range given for child BMI. However, further down the page, a colour chart places an arrow for Bailey firmly in the ‘overweight’ area.

Computers and humans do get confused, but Bailey’s mum is outraged. We don’t need this kind of thing in our judicious society, she says.

Should we blame the NHS for being too bolshy in the first place? Note that in 2005, the WHO put the obese population at 1.6 billion people. In 2015 – just ten years later – this is set to top 2.3 billion.

The science of weight is very tricky. Bailey’s story reveals a problem that no government health department in the world has managed to solve. Amid all the finger pointing, there is no proper system for measuring overweight.  We carry on using Body Mass Index even though we know that it often does not correlate with the amount of body fat and the risks to health.

Heart disease and diabetes are the world’s most expensive non-infectious diseases.  If we are going to make a difference, it has to be in finding better ways to measure the problem – methods adapted for different populations of adults and children.

As importantly, leaders need to admit to the public that the best experts in the world have trouble assessing overweight from the outside.This needn’t give people an excuse to ignore clinical norms in weight-related health risks. Rather, it should inspire us to do some independent thinking – asking ourselves if our bodies reflect the healthiest, happiest choices we can make.

With this in mind I was fascinated to come across people who consider ads not necessarily art, but culturally worthwhile. We build pieces of communication in such as way often we forget their wider importance once they are out of the door, the process of development being often so painful, denial and memory loss are part of the coping mechanism. (If I was braver and not a man, I would draw a lengthier connection between ad conception and childbirth and the rush of endorphins erasing pain memory and await the Comments with equal amounts of guts and fear).

The study of advertising as part of culture is established. A Google minute provides loads of thesis’s exploring the relationships between cultural dimensions and characteristics of advertisements. Dozens of theoretical frameworks have been developed covering identity, individualism-collectivism, femininity-masculinity, industrialization and even parental responsibilities. All getting (for me) more interesting when put to practical use explaining technique, characterization, appearances and portrayals of people. Loads of these research tomes feature statistical analysis that make the creative product look positively scientific rather than a result of its context.

With this geeky bubbling I have been enjoying visiting the Ghostsigns project, a collaborative national effort to capture, collate, discuss and archive all remaining examples of hand painted wall advertising across the UK. Ghostsigns are the typically faded remains of advertising that was once painted by hand onto the brickwork of buildings. If you live in London or New York  I am pretty sure you walk by a few every day.

This made me wondered whether in 50 years people will be collecting up digital communications as part of a similar project. Then the US Library of Congress announced that it will be acquiring the entire archive of Twitter messages back through March 2006. In the same way that diaries and private journals started to be considered legitimate cultural data sources in the later part of the last century it seems that this is considered an “unprecedented opportunity for discovering patterns of social interaction” This is big!

*With apologies to Bob Dylan. I saw Bob at Hop Farm Festival last weekend. He was not very good but the title is still a big one to steal.

That’s how I felt after 2 hours hearing from the gurus of Facebook and Google. They have changed our world and they will continue to do so. Search and social media. Without them brands and their web-presence are increasingly irrelevant.

Facebook’s mission is to give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected.

The power of this mission is extraordinary. The passion of those that work there is contagious. There are 400 million active users. Returning regularly. Sharing their favourite things with those they know.  Did you know that your propensity to click on an article or join a group if you know that one of your friends has, is multiplied around 80 times? The joy of “Your friend likes this”. And it’s free! Community networks and social media are more enormous and more powerful than any media that has gone before. Social media can turn a marketing monologue into a consumer dialogue. It can give a brand talkability, shareability. Ignore it and miss out.

Google = Search.

A concept that the global population is very used to. But, the future of search is making the past look antiquated. It’s mobile and almost human in nature reflecting voice, eyes, skin and location by using speaker, camera, touch-screen and GPS to replace the Google search bar.

“Not being top of search in Google is like the modern day equivalent of being out of stock.”  This comment came from one of the most senior marketers at one of the top pharmaceutical companies. And it really stuck in my mind. How often has search been the last thing on the list?

So what can we learn from all this? A lot. Search and Social Media – If no one can find your brand and no one likes your brand, your brand has a problem. But on the plus side, the opportunities these create are endless. Thank you Google and Facebook for changing the world and making it a better and more connected place.

I can understand this portrayal of what we do as airy-fairy-nonsense. Last night I tried to explain branding to our old IT guy Tony, who errs on the side of functional to say the least.  He just wasn’t convinced. Despite wearing Nike, carrying blackberry, and swearing by Persil, outside The Blue Posts it became apparent that I was never going to convince him on any decision making other that rational. It was the source of some frustration and much cider. But then he loves Carling because its tastes better than any other lager. (A belief I am still staggered by)

Returning to the bankers, it’s possible the view of the man in the (city) street is of the Gucci loafer wearing, Hoxton types, designing for an hour a day in-between their table fussball games that they really object to. I think also it’s the thought of a group of individuals earning  ”footballer wages” (sic), miles always from any market forces that further angered these guys. These guys just didn’t get what it’s all for. Yet when you speak to them about ads – these seem to be a result of some higher power – that clearly has never been near to a fussball tournament or infantile hand shake.

We need to dissect the elements of creativity, how a piece works, which elements are working  which need work. Assessing ideas requires words borrowed from an emotive/artistic dictionary. Which is why a collection of (daft) terms surrounds us and why often this collection of terms makes very little sense to the un-initiated.  We are immersed in tone, value, emotion, function, all elements of an idea that does something to its viewers. Perhaps this is “not the sort of thing anyone believes for a nanosecond in the real world”. but it’s a reality of our life we need the words to do the job.  I have a feeling that these are totally important to us, it’s their public outings that tend to persuade non – industry bods that what we do is just nonsense. Looking around the 5,000 member Facebook group – “Don’t tell my mum I’m in advertising – she thinks I play piano in a brothel” perhaps sums it up. A good indication of the shame those in our industry feel. Perhaps?  Perhaps not?

Why we shy away from just telling it like it is I don’t really know. Basically all that stuff we talk is for one real aim – to better connect in some way with an audience. The creation of an idea is about savings, it’s budgetary. Really it is.  Whether you are a planner, creative or suit, the business is about efficiency. We just seem reticent to tell others that by doing it this way we connect cheaper. We find ways of developing  relationships with audiences and brands that would otherwise cost more. Agree or disagree, I am not sure why the industry continues to be scared of this – hire us we will save you money seems a blinding recessionary position.

Simple as that.

Ps. No rhyming slang has been used in this blog.

I was fortunate enough to have been on the UK launch team for Viagra, and we were desperate to ensure that it was promoted ethically and was given enough space to be taken seriously – as a product that met a genuine patient need. One that impacted on the lives of millions of people.

The press went mad, “sex drug” shouted from every red top. Knee jerk Health Secretary Frank Dobson’s fears about rampant demand introduced restrictions, which clamped down treatment provision resulting in only 17% of those men who would benefit getting a prescription. GPs were told to restrict their prescribing to one pill per week. All driven by fears that the NHS would be swamped by demands for the new drug.

It’s all seems ages ago and now strange to think of a Health Secretary wanting to dictate the sex lives of their citizens. ‘Once a week Dobing’ was laughed at by many, but still acceptable.

The category perceptions changed, and ED was forced into the sunlight. Now discussed and treated  in a very different world. Walking in Soho with Debbie I spied this photo, a demonstration that perceptions change, but somewhere some of your audience remains intransient.  How things have moved on!

Despite what you may have been told – idea generation is far from a formal thing – miles from a black box of inspiration, realization or genius. It’s just bloody hard work and very scary. It’s late nights and nervous presentations; checking sanity alongside evolution, scrapping the dull, the inflexible, smoothing the rough and moulding the soft. Its a craft.

At its best it’s all of us hands dirty, at its worse its one of us, sheets of A3 and buckets loads of Coke, weeping into our pencil cases.

Client requirements, agency briefing, wrangling positioning, all have their place in this process, but mostly it’s down to intolerant alliance, a few of us bouncing brains and nurturing waffle.

This drive to idea tends to stop by a few service stations;

Please wait will we connect you…

Our requirement for the idea to connect with its audience is challenging. Subjectivity, culture, and just plain personalities always get in the way. “I know it when you see it”, is a pretty standard approach. But connection tends to be a different thing, healthy doses of empathy and often audience hugging are needed.Seeking connection reminds me of a stand up gig the other day. A female comedian expressing naïve mystery about her husband’s excessive use of Original Source Mint & Tea Tree shampoo. Leaving half the audience completely mystified and the other half aching with connection. Genius. A true connection, no where near big enough for one of our tasks – but a pretty good demonstration?

We seek whoppers

Once we have stumbled across a  wrapper for a brand, its task and audience understanding it all gets a little bit more practical. How can it work in a sales conversation, ad land, could it stretch enough to be experiential, what about a direct mail campaign. A huge expectation from something we often struggle to define. We know it’s wrong when it fails to live in these channels but are often not sure how right it needs to be – or what amount of forcing the idea is allowed before its bin fodder.

Nice and tight

Despite needing to stretch and connect the damn thing also needs to be compact enough to be a saleable, rather than a sprawl of desperation to meet the previous two. This is thesaurus land for many, finding encompassing words to reduce down the flabbiness, and its often this stage that benefits from the creative team honing it as part of the creative process. Encapsulation in visual concept can at times save our bacon.

Finally when something presents itself, and checks the above criteria you allow yourself a moment to exhale. In the meantime the next mountain appears on the horizon; how to make this big thing live in the here and now. Its ridiculous – like having a baby, marvelling for 2 seconds and expecting it to start fitting the kitchen –  the little fella keeps swallowing all the Allen keys.

It’s a far from  linear journey and this week has seen us arrive at a place that we should have started from more than once.

I am sure there are a few more  idea assessments and I am going to endeavor to give this a little more time, and perhaps stop distracting myself from my wodge of A3 paper and scribbles I have in front of me.

Brand induction materials are normally not known to be the most fascinating of documents. Yet are pretty bread and butter stuff for us here, whether writing them or following their guidance.

I have been reviewing the standard approach to these documents for a pitch coming up on Friday and alongside this forming some ideas about some internal training on branding for us bees. Whilst researching away I stumbled across a stack of materials that I thought were pretty cool.

Those of you who are familiar with the puckerisation of cooking in the last 12 years will know Jamie’s rise from chef, to restaurateur to social benefactor charity man. It’s been a fascinating diversification from TV personality into product, into full fledged global phenomenon. As a case study it could be  great to teach, and even easier when you can review the collateral that accompanies the structure of the Jamie offer. I thought it was pretty interesting.  Have a look and see what you think

I saw this poster a little while ago at Maidenhead Station, took a photo to remind me to hunt around and I have finally got around to exploring more.

The associated film is a hard hitting view on Motor Neurone Disease,  has been banned from TV despite being one of the best eye openers I have seen. It seem a terrible shame when the reality of a disease is shelved for the public good.

Alongside this film and poster  the featured sufferer Sarah Ezekiel has a site showing life post diagnosis and provided me with a great example both of human spirit and inspiration.

“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.