This Week in Strategy: When you're down by the sea and an eel bites your knee, that's a moray

Hi Strat Pack,

A lot going on this week so I didn't have the normal amount of time to dig up the normal amount of fun links for you. However, I am currently obsessed with Queen Elizabeth II firing a British L85 battle rifle in Surrey, England. 1993 Specifically the comments are gold. Also. No ear protection? Why? Because when your employment is contingent on divine right, you don't need any goddamn ear protection.

Also check out this interview from It's Nice That: From dentist to designer, Ryan Haskins on his “borderline annoying” sushi rebrand. I'm really digging this maximalist design. It's big, loud, and from what I've read - accurately captures the brand. I'm into it. Looks like a lot of collage-type graffiti I've been seeing on subway ads. Which I also like.

Alright, stop messing around trying to figure out why I didn't give you more in the upfront this week, let's jump right in.

The one thing to read this week

1) A Public Service Announcement to Every Client: Your Approach to Pitching is Destroying Creativity [Little Black Book]

Creativity comes at a cost. Somebody has to pay for it. Would someone mind telling procurement teams that? Elaborate pitches seem to be becoming the standard of the industry. Not only that, a pitch with more than five agencies competing is quite normal. And not only THAT, a pitch that costs the agency in excess of $100k in resource and / or cost, pretty normal too.

This should not be normal.

Pitches do not simulate the client-agency relationship. No client can test chemistry simultaneously with five or more agencies and quite often with their professional pitch teams. Not the team that’s going to eventually work on the brand.

The sheer amount of work going up for pitch at the moment speaks of a wider issue. Pitches, and the following procurement process, are things that eat up profit margin. They degenerate agencies to a level where they are no longer raising and saving the brand – just assisting. The trust and cooperation have been replaced by doubts and obedience.

If you win you celebrate for one night, and realise you just used $100k worth of resources that you're not going to get back. According to stats, that relationship is going to last three years. You celebrate knowing it won’t generate profit, especially not after procurement has stepped in.

To me, it’s total insanity. It is insanity to expect the best people giving it their best effort and achieving the best results if you pay them the cheapest possible price.

Building a brand is a long-term job. To constantly switch direction and partner, is not productive for agencies and it's not productive for brands.

I have loved seeing Wieden+Kennedy’s ’Dream Crazy’ work for Nike featuring Colin Kaepernick take home Grands Prix in Outdoor and in the new Sport Lions category at Cannes Lions this year. Not just because the work is brilliant – and it is – but because it irrevocably demonstrates the power of the relationship between client and agency. The power of sticking to the brand essence, of relationships built on mutual trust, of creating a brand story that is rooted and fundamental to the core and success of the business.

There is a brilliant quote from Seth Godin who said that if Nike launched a hotel, you’d have a pretty clear idea of what that hotel would look like. But if Hyatt created a sneaker, if could look like ANYTHING. Because Nike owns a brand, and Hyatt owns real estate.

That’s what long-term relationships and brand building create. And what annual pitches and procurement-led reviews eat away before the relationship has even started.

2) Cheap. The most expensive way of doing business. [George Tannenbaum - Ad Aged]

We’re about 20 years into the ‘Digital Revolution,’ and so far all of the things that have been revolutionized have gotten worse, not better.

In advertising, to be stupidly and exaggeratedly reductive, digital has since it’s very outset, given clients and agencies an excuse to be cheap. The “digital” story has been that since we can target people effectively, speak to them directly (with no waste) and incite conversations about brands as easy as falling off a Cheeto (“Honey, I had the most-amazing plastic wrap experience today as I was putting away a leftover slice of avocado) we could do the whole marketing communications thing on the cheap.

Let’s think about brands we like that we think about that we feel good about that actually seem to be doing well where it matters to do well, not at Cannes, but in the market.

  • KFC. To my mind, KFC was all but dead a few years ago. Today, at least from the outside looking in (and a superficial Alta Vista search) sales seem to have rebounded from a many-years’ slump.

  • Apple. Ostensibly Apple could be the most hated company in the world. But we like them—and permit them to charge us $39 for a $2 cord that grows obsolete every two years or so.

  • Nike. $200 sneakers made by Asian children-neo-slaves in autocratic and stifling sweatshops with bad lighting. Yet we like them.

All three of these success stories—success in both reputation and sales—are contingent on two things. First, outstanding creative that differentiates and breaks through the clutter. Creative that gets noticed, talked about and into the “culture.” Second, all three examples above run work that's big and important. Their advertising is expensively produced and they run in on premium channels. In short: they do good work. And put money behind it.

Now, shifting gears again. Let’s think about two brands (or three depending on your math) that have decided you can do things on the cheap.

First, has to be Pepsi. Pepsi used to make great commercials. Great commercials that ran on big events like the Super Bowl.

According to Money magazine, in the last decade (when Pepsi dramatically shifted away from advertising to social media) Coke's market share has risen from 17.3% to 17.8%, while Pepsi's has dropped from 10.3% to 8.4%, according to Beverage Digest. In 2016, soda was a $81 billion market in the US. So losing two points as Pepsi did, if my math is right, adds up to losing about $1.6 billion in sales.

Avi Dan in Forbes, and a big story in the Times yesterday talked about the woes of the recently merged Kraft Heinz crap-fest. Thousands of employees have been fired—or “efficiency-ized.” And worse, to my mind, marketing spend has been eviscerated. Consequently sales (which are meant to respond to marketing spend) have plummeted. As has the combined company’s share price. Dan put it this way:

A mania for austerity is now in full swing. Many companies, especially consumer goods companies cut back on advertising in the last decade. Procter & Gamble eliminated $2 billion in marketing costs…General Mills scaled back ad and media expenses to $575 million in fiscal 2018 from $869 million in 2014.

Kraft Heinz shares have been in free fall, over 30% in one day last week…Kraft Heinz spent 2.4% of sales on worldwide advertising in 2017, a lower percentage than either H.J. Heinz or Kraft spent when they were stand-alone companies. That 2017 ad budget of $629 million was 39% below the combined spending of Kraft and Heinz in 2014, the year before they merged.

As an industry, once again, we are acting on what we want to believe, not on what is reality in the market. If you’re a plastic wrap or a pickle or a snack cracker, you fall out of peoples’ consciousness if you aren’t in front of them in a big way. Why? Because people don’t really care. You have to make them care about you.

You have to be creative. You have to spend money. You have to keep at it.

There are no short-cuts. You can't cheap out. You can't afford not to spend the money.

3) I Took the Anna Wintour Creative Leadership MasterClass So You Don't Have To [Greg Hahn - Muse by Clio]

At first, the idea of Anna Wintour teaching a leadership skills class might seem a bit like Vin Diesel teaching driver's ed. Theirs is a style that does not work for everyone. After all, there are support groups for people who have worked for her. Her employees call her Nuclear Wintour.

However, Ms. Wintour is a strong, successful, powerful creative force who's been at the top of her game for decades. So, I suspected there was something to learn from this class.

Here are some things I found relevant:

  • On feedback, make it fast and make it direct. Her version of direct might be a little much for most people, but for a creative director the underlying advice is paramount. When people leave your creative review, they want to know two things: 1) where they stand on a piece of work, and 2) what to do next. Don't be vague.

  • Act as if no one is telling you "no." Push. As a creative leader, you need to give people the freedom to explore. Foster an environment where people are encouraged to break the rules or obey them in ways that no one has ever thought of before.

  • Go with the "wrong" solution. It's usually the idea everyone shudders at that's the most interesting. Go with the choice that makes you feel something. And sometimes that something is uncomfortable. Have you seen the Met Gala?

  • You are nothing without your team. Give your teams room to grow. Don't micromanage. Be sure to always give the credit. And always accept all the blame.

Overall, the most valuable thing a leader can learn from Anna Wintour is that people want to work for people who make them better.

Sometimes that means it's going to get uncomfortable. As a leader you are going to have to push people. You never want to be the kind of boss over whom people win Oscars for portraying your cruelty. But especially for new creative leaders, don't be afraid to be direct and to make people work harder.

I believe you can still do this with benevolence. The key is respect. Make it about the work and the common goal of getting to better. People will welcome the push if they understand why.

It wasn't Anna Wintour who said it, but I think she'd agree: Allowing someone to be mediocre is the cruelest form of kind.

Now, somebody get me my f*cking coffee.

4) The Advantage Of Harnessing Consumer Creativity [Branding Strategy insider]

Watching TV or spending a week on a sandy beach is relaxing, but not fulfilling. Neither experience is involving, nor will we feel entertained and relaxed for any longer than a few hours, if not minutes after it ends. We find fulfillment in creating and discovering new art, which is no longer the exclusivity of elitist galleries catering to a few well-heeled, overly-educated, individuals. Indeed, art has become more accessible and is now omnipresent in our daily life and through social media. Here in lies an opportunity for brands.

For Marcus Engman, former head of design for IKEA, creativity is the main currency of today’s world, propelled by social media. “It is not about imposing the designer’s creativity on people but about letting the user design the object themselves. Lego bricks themselves are not much to talk about. What is meaningful is what people can create with these bricks. Also, people usually don’t get rid of their Lego bricks because of the value and meaning they carry. For consumers and marketers alike, “being creative means being curious,” says Marcus. “It is the starting point for any good design, communication, or advertising. Curious, creative people ask you about you and don’t talk about themselves.”

Visual literacy is a term used to describe our ability to think, perceive, learn, and communicate with images as well as participating in visual practices using images. It shows our ability to create visual statements to express ourselves and our ability to interpret visual messages.

There are several ways in which brands can leverage visual literacy: They can allow consumers to create and interpret messages, statements, and visual images. The “Paul Smith’s Pink Wall” is famous in Los Angeles and all over social media. Everyday, dozens of fashionistas come by the Los Angeles store on Melrose Avenue to take a pose before the wall. As you can see for yourself on Instagram at #paulsmithpinkwall, many of these pictures are real works of art.

NIKEiD provides another example by enabling customers to customize their sneakers extensively. Shoppers can add logos on the midsole and the lateral tip of the shoe, customize the “swoosh” from twelve different colors along with the base, heel, and even laces of the sneakers. They can dramatize and perform their brand myths and stories through visuals.

Design-leg brands can help consumers express themselves through a range of products from prints, to kitchenware, luggage, stationary, kitchen utensils, and even cars. Their designs combine visual elements such as textures, lines, dots, shape, directions, scales, form, and space to provide consumers with a collection of visual tools that convey balance, harmony, contrast, or variety. Brands can also provide consumers with detailed instructions on how to design their homes and interiors or assemble outfits.

5) Quick Hits: A few articles that are concise, important, interesting, impactful, and I'm not going to write long descriptions for them.

  • Search your feelings [Scott Galloway - No Mercy No Malice] This would be the one thing to read this week if I could summarize it. But I can't so it's down here. "They started out benign, a group committed to peace and prosperity in the galaxy. Slowly, they aggregated power and, wanting to maintain that power, turned to the dark side. They built a weapon 900km in diameter, staffed by hundreds of thousands of personnel and robots. Of course I’m talking about the DS-1 Orbital Battle Station commanded by Governor Tarkin — and also Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft."

  • Strategies behind the 10 best creative works [Julian Cole] Succinct summaries of the 10 best strategy papers from the last couple of years in Julian's opinion. A must read for all strategists.

  • A Study of 597 Logos Shows Which Kind Is Most Effective [Harvard Business Review] The design characteristics of logos can considerably impact consumer behavior and brand performance. Research demonstrates (albeit with certain qualifications and under certain conditions), descriptive logos more favorably impact consumers’ brand perceptions than nondescriptive ones, and are more likely to improve brand performance. A descriptive logo is a logo that includes textual or visual design elements (or a combination of the two) that clearly communicate the type of product or service a brand is marketing. For instance, the logo of Burger King and that of the New York Islanders (a sports franchise) are descriptive.

  • You should be able to articulate your idea (the answer) in a line. [Praveen Vaidyanathan - LinkedIn] It's an image so, uh, click through

  • This Tweet from Rob Estreitinho [Twitter] Just learned about Brandolini’s law: “The amount of energy needed to refute bullsh*t is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.” (If you're not following Rob, you should really start)

  • Why It Took Lay’s 2 Years to Redesign a Bag of Potato Chips [Ad Week] So this article frames the two year process as a good thing (involving stakeholders at every stage of the process, etc) but also like, this is why DTC is eating incumbents' lunch. Graphics for a BAG should not take 2 years to design. Ever

6) Department of Great Work

  • Volvo is asking people to share selfies of themselves wearing seat-belts [AdAge] The Selfie For Safety initiative is a new project by Forsman & Bodenfors asks drivers to take a selfie with their safety belt on, in a safely parked car. The pictures will be analyzed by Volvo Cars’ safety department, and the results and learnings will be shared with the rest of the automotive industry. It's part of their Equal Vehicles for All initiative, which aims to build a digital library sharing safety data such as the fact that women are more likely to be injured in accidents.

  • Columbia Journalism Review destroyed front pages of major newspapers to highlight climate change [AdAge] In the lead-up to today’s global climate strike, the Columbia Journalism Review is pushing media publications to increase their coverage of climate change and the damaging effects of severe weather around the world. The art series features stark treatments of major newspapers representing the dangers each publication’s city faces. By TBWA\Chiat\Day New York

  • The Muppets reunite with the help of Facebook's Portal [The Drum] To be clear, the Facebook Portal is a horrifically creepy product that includes far-field microphones and image recognition software so it can track you as you move around your house. But friends of the show know I love the Muppets, and frankly I think they did an adorably good job in this commercial. From Anomaly.

  • DDB NZ Shows Kiwis the Power of 5G for New Spot for Vodafone [Little Black Book] To mark the launch of Vodaphone's New Zealand 5G network, they teamed up with DDB New Zealand to create Huxley, a powerful film demonstrating the incredible everyday possibilities this transformative technology will help New Zealanders to realise. You might say it's a tad long, but please keep in mind that commercials are just longer in that part of the world. As someone who works on 5G, it's refreshing to see a beautiful, and emotional, reason for me to give a shit about this technology.

  • Disneybucks [Instagram] Ursula Doughty draws some Disney and Pixar characters in the shape and style of the Starbucks logo. The results are delightful

7) Platform Updates

  • Snapchat reportedly has “Project Voldemort” dossier on Facebook’s bad behavior [ArsTechnica] Snap, parent company of Snapchat, kept a dossier "for years" detailing Facebook's attempts to thwart it, sources told The Wall Street Journal. The file, dubbed "Project Voldemort" after the just-doesn't-know-when-to-stay-dead villain of Harry Potter fame, "chronicled Facebook's moves that threatened to undermine Snap's business."

  • Majority of NFL fans watched opening week games via streaming, apps [Mobile Marketer] For the opening week of the NFL season, 58% of surveyed adult viewers reported watching at least one game via a paid streaming service or app, and more than one-quarter viewed games on at least two streaming sites or apps

  • Roku's new tool measures incremental reach across OTT, TV ads [MarketingDive] Roku launched a new marketing analytics tool that allows brands to track the daily demographic reach and frequency for ads across over-the-top and linear TV. The tool taps into the identities of Roku's 30.5 million active accounts and merges those insights with Innovid's OTT ad serving data on 75 million households. Verizon is in the alpha program for the tool, which is being tested by several Innovid and Roku clients. The expectation is that it will broaden its reach beyond the Roku platform to all of OTT.

  • Facebook Invites People and Businesses to Play [Facebook for Business] Following the adoption of poll sticker for Instagram Stories ads that rolled out earlier this year, Facebook are now bringing video poll ads to Facebook mobile Feed, globally available this month. In our early findings, we’re seeing poll ads in Feed drive increased brand awareness and conversions. For example, in 5 out of 9 brand lift studies, we observed poll ads increased brand awareness compared to video ads.

  • New ways to reach shoppers with Shop the Look ads, global Catalogs and dynamic business profiles [Pinterest] New features include "Shop the Look" ads, a new collections format for mobile, New Business Profiles: now with video and Shop tab, and more

As always, the full archive is available here. Was this email forwarded to you? Want to start getting this on a weekly basis? All I need is your email, everything else is optional.Thanks for sticking around as always. See you next week!

Jordan Weil